Loading...
1998-11-18 WSWCD Evaluation PanelIGHT SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT • 306C Brighton Avenue Buffalo, Minnesota 55313 Telephone (612) 682-1933 682-1970 Fax (612)682-0262 Dear Local Governmental Unit (LGU) Technical Evaluation Panel member, The next regularly scheduled LGU Technical Evaluation Panel meeting is scheduled for Wednesday November 18, 1998 at 10:00 a.m. in the Committee room of the Agriculture Service Center Building. AGENDA ITEMS: 1. Approve minutes from the September 1, 1998 regular TEP meeting 2. John Varner Banking Request ,-.. 3 James Morse, Replacement plan request (Outlet Mall) City of Albertville 4. Wright County Highway Department "Wolfe Lake County State Aide Hwy 35 Project. 6. Kerry Saxton, Storm Water Ponding and Replacement Credits Policies. • 7. Wright County Parks Request for Replacement Cease and Desist Issued. If you are unable to attend this meeting, please contact me at 682-1970. Sincerely, ~~~ ,~ ~~ Mark McNamara ---- Resource Conservationist Wright SWCD • IGHT SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT 306C Brighton Avenue Buffalo, Minnesota 55313 Telephone (612) 682-1933 682-1970 Fax (612)682-0262 Minutes of the Wetland Conservation Act, Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP), Wright SWCD 306C Brighton Ave. Buffalo Minnesota September 1, 1998. Meeting was called to order 10:23 a.m. Members Absent: Pete Carlson, City Engineer City of Albertville Members Present: Keith Grow, Board Conservationist, BWSR Richard Marquette, Right of Way Agent, Wright County Highway Department Mark McNamara, Resource Conservationist, Wright SWCD Others Present: Don Jensen, Pilot Land Development (heft meeting 11:00 a.m.) Ken Powell, Westwood Professional Services, (Left meeting 11:00 a.m.) IN TES: Motion: by Marquette and seconded by Grow, to approve the minutes from the August 4, 1998 regular TEP meeting as written. • Affirmative: All in favor Opposed: None Motion carried. WETLAND pETERMINATIONS SITE-SPECIFIC: Claessen, Edward: Landowner owns a 41 acre parcel in the NW1/4 of NW1/4 Sec. 17 T.118N.-R.26W Woodland Township Wright County Minnesota. TEP member Mark McNamara provided some background information about the site. McNamara stated at the August 4th TEP meeting the TEP had certain requirements Mr. Claessen must agree to, to accept his proposed Replacement Plan.. The TEP reviewed the requirements which were part of the motion of the August 4, 1998 TEP meeting. The Motion was as follows: Motion, by Grow and seconded by Marquette, the TEP recommends allowing the new driveway to remain with the following contingencies: First Mr. Claessen must submit written proof a good faith effort was made to use the existing road. The TEP concurred either an agreement between himself and the new landowner or an affidavit signed by Mr. Claessen outlining the hardships he would encounter to use the road would be acceptable. The TEP also required Mr. Claessen submit written proof the township would not be willing to accept the driveway as a township road. If Mr. Claessen submits this. proof the TEP will allow the new driveway to stay in place and will require 3:1 replacement, 2:1 replacement via wetland creation with additional replacement via upland buffer. If Mr. Claessen refuses to submit the required documentation or refuses 3:1 replacement the TEP recommends the new road be removed. This Motion was carried unanimously. The TEP then reviewed the letters subnutted by Mr. Claessen. Mr. Claessen afidavitized the letter which he submitted originally, also the townships letter stated they would not accept this as a township road due to funding shortages, and the roads numerous design inadequacies. The TEP then concurred that Mr. Claessen had made a "good faith" and satisfied the • LGU's requirements to allow replacement. The TEP reiterated that a 3:1 replacement ratio is required to satisfy all requirements of the recommendation. • LGU TECHNICAL EVALUATION PANEL MINUTES September 1, 1998 Page 2 Jensen Don, Pilot Land Development: Developer is proposing a residential development "Karston Cave" comprised of 81 townhouses and related infrastructure. Project is located Part of NWl/4 of SWl/4 Sec. 35 T.121N.-R.24W. City of Albertville Wright County Minnesota. As described in the replacement plan application proposed wetland impacts of 24,170 square feet of type II wetland is proposed to be filled. Mr. Jensen described the project. Dan explained, the proposed access onto County State Aid Highway CSAH 37 was given pre-approval by the Wright County Highway Department. Jensen went on to explain, the county wants to minimize the number of access points onto the county roads, therefore, the existing Kadler Avenue will be abandoned and replaced by Karston Avenue. Mr. Jensen and Mr. Powell then discussed the layout of 64th Street. As proposed this road will result in the biggest wetland impacts. Jensen stated the city wanted to provide an access to CSAH 37 for any potential development on the parcel to the east. Jensen stated, the parcel to the east is undeveloped, however, the fact of the matter is this parcel is destined to be developed, Ken Powell consultant to Pilot stated, road layout was purposely planned for this location in an effort to proi~ide access to the east parcel, while at the same time limiting wetland impacts. The TEP questioned the purpose of the 841 square foot impact to basin N. Mr. Jensen explained, it was a grading issue to allow for a gradual tce off the end of the culdesac. McNamara stated, it appears you could end the culdesac sooner and avoid placing fill into this area. Jensen stated, we would prefer to grade it as planned, however, there is potential to avoid this fill. The TEP questioned whether or not the Army Corp of Engineers ACOE had been contacted to determine if excavation to basin K would be an impact and require =replacement. Both the developer and Mr. Powell replied they have been in contact with the Corp however, they have not received any guidance in regard to the Corp permit. Mr. Jensen then discussed the stormwater ponds. Jensen explained, although this parcel does not outlet to • County Ditch 9 the proposed ponds are designed to meet the 1/2 predevelopment runoff rates. Don elaborated, stating even though the city did not require 1/2 runoff rates for this development we felt it was important to design the ponds to meet this standard. The TEP then questioned the design for the stormwater pond adjacent to basin K. Jensen explained, the design is such that all runoff water be diverted away from the existing wetland and outletted into the stormwater pond. Jensen went on to explain, the existing wetland will be lowered to allow the stormwater pond to outlet into the wetland at approximately the same elevation as the designed outlet. Panel member Grow questioned the size of the watershed to the natural wetland Grow elaborated stating it appears the entire watershed is to be diverted away from the wetland which could potentially dry it up. Jensen responded saying, there is a culvert which will catch water on the west side of Kadler Avenue and direct the water into the natural wetland. Jensen stated, this watershed is approximately 20 acres. Panel member McNamara stated, it is my opinion that by excavating this pond they will intercept the groundwater and create a sterile type 5 wetland. The TEP then questioned the numerous small fills proposed near the building pads. Mr. Jensen explained these are to provide the home owners with back yards as well as allow for grading the site. Jensen went on to explain a number of these fills are due to the cities setback requirements. Jensen elaborated stating, the setbacks pinch the space in which to build therefore resulting in these minor impacts. (Mr. Jensen and Mr. Powell then left the meeting at 11:00 a.m.). The TEP then discussed the issue. The TEP had concerns with the numerous small wetland fills which will result from grading the townhouse pads. TEP member Keith Grow stated, this is a typical situation that occurs when someone tries to make a site fit their needs and not work with the sites limitations. The TEP discussed the impacts due to 64th. Street. Panel member McNamara stated, the two wetlands proposed to be impacted due to this street are of poorer quality than the wetlands to the north and south. Panel member Grow had some problems with allowing complete filling of both sites, however, he did concur that with a 2,000 square foot de minimus these areas would be degraded to a point that sequencing flexibility could be applied to these areas. The TEP then discussed; the proposed replacement plan. As proposed in the replacement plan application 28,056 square feet of new wetland credits via on-site wetland creation are being offered to satisfy 1:1 replacement. Additionally 23,400 • square feet of LGU TECHNICAL EVALUATION PANEL IvRNUTES September 1, 1998 Page 3 stormwater ponds resulting in 17,SS0 square feet of Public Value Credits are being offer to satisfy the second 1/2 of the required replacement. The TEP had major concern with allowing replacement via the stonmwater ponds. Panel member Grow stated, in my opinion the intent of the Wetland Conservation Act allows PVC credits via stormwater ponding if the stormwater ponds are constructed outside the boundary of the natural wetlands, and provide them with protection from stormwater runoff. Mr. Grow went on to say in this case the stormwater ponds especially in the instance of basin K could be considered impacts to the wetland. McNamara and Marquette concurred with Mr. Grows assessment and stated in the ACOE case they will most likely be considered impacts. The TEP then discussed the proposed replacement and agreed no credit will be allowed for the stormwater ponds therefore the project does not satisfy the 2:1 replacement requirements. Following the discussion the TEP made the following recommendation. Motion by Marquette and seconded by Grow, to allow the project proposal if the following contingencies can be satisfied: • The 841 square foot impact to basin N be eliminated • The impacts to basin K due to Block 1 Lot 2 i be eliminated • The impact due to Lot 7-8 Block 3 be eliminated by shifting the building pads north or in another manner which eliminates the impacts • Road placement remain as planned with impacts to basin O-Q remaining the same • None of the proposed replacement 7S% PVC credits via stormwater ponding will be accepted • Must comply with all replacement requirements of the Army Corp of Engineers Permits. • • All delineated wetlands and replacement wetlands must be protected via restrictive covenant, drainage easement or other form of permanent protection. Affirmative: All in favor Opposed None Motion carried. Adiournment• Motion: by Grow and Seconded by Marquette, to adjourn the meeting. Affirmative: All in favor Opposed: None Meeting was adjourned at 11:SS a.m. Approved; Committee Representative LJ •,.. WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT NOTICE FOR PROJECT APPLICATION Local Governing Unit (LGU): Wright SWCD Date: October 22, 1998 LGU Official: Mark McNamara Area Code, Telephone 612-682-1970 Address: Wright SWCD 306 C Brighton Ave Buffalo Minnesota Zip Code 55313 PROJECT DESCRIPTION • Applicants Name: James Morse, JMJ Properties Inc. Location: Part of E1/2 Sec. 35 T.121N.-R.24W. City of Albertville County: Wright Watershed name: North Fork Crow River 18 Description of Activity: Developer Proposes to construct a retail outlet shopping center on a 69.5 acre parcel located within the city of Albertville. The outlet mall will be comprised of 316,314 square feet of retail area and 7,000 square feet of restaurant area. As proposed non-exempt wetland impacts of 196,450 square .feet will occur. Wetlands of types II-III-IV-are proposed to be impacted. As proposed 1:1 replacement requirements will be satisfied by purchasing 196,450 square feet of New Wetland Credit from the mitigation bank. The second half of the required replacement will be conducted on-site via storm water ponding and the establishment of an upland buffer. A copy of the complete application can be viewed at the LGU office listed above. Persons interested in receiving mailed notice of each project within the jurisdiction of the above mentioned LGU can be put on a mailing list by contacting the LGU at the address listed above. Upon receipt of this notice persons who wish to make comments should within fifteen days mail comments to the LGU at the address listed above. Authorized L U Signature Date of nailing this notice `i` • WRIGHT SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT 306C BRIGHTON AVE BUFFALO MINNESOTA 55313 CERTIFICATE OF MAILING OF NOTICE OF WETLAND CONSERVATION APPLICATION C] The undersigned certifies that on /~: 1998 he/she mailed copies of the attached Notice of Wetland Conservation Act Application to the Addressees listed below by depositing the same in the United States Mail in the City of Buffalo, County of Wright and State of Minnesota, properly enveloped with prepaid first class postage. DATE: ~~~ z ~ 1998 -~7~. vC ,c.C c List of Addressees: James Morse, JMJ Propeties Inc. Doug Norris MN Department of Natural Resources Robert Hance MN Department of Natural Resources Keith Grow Board Conservationist Daniel Dobbert (Public) Svoboda Ecological Resources (Public) Gary Elftmann Army Corp Engineers David Lund, City Administrator, Albertville •