HomeMy WebLinkAbout9.c. 19-32-SMP, 19-33-V, 19-34-RZ Request by Rebecca and Ronald Gruenes for a Rezoning and Simple Plat to create a three-lot subdivision called Deer Haven
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
City Council Regular Meeting: February 18, 2020
AGENDA ITEM: 19-32-SMP, 19-33-V, 19-34-RZ Request
by Rebecca and Ronald Gruenes for a
Rezoning and Simple Plat to create a
three-lot subdivision called Deer Haven
AGENDA SECTION: New
Business
PREPARED BY: Kyle Klatt, Senior Planner AGENDA NO. 9.c.
ATTACHMENTS: Site Location Map, Ordinance (Zoning
Map Amendment), Resolution (Plat
Approval), Resolution (Board of
Adjustments Approved), Proposed Plat,
Existing Conditions, Site Plan (proposed
lots and building pads), Wetland Notice of
Decision and Delineation Report
(Excerpt), Draft Conservation
Easements, Aerial Photograph, Coffee
Trail Map with Distances, City Engineer
Review Memorandum, Letter from John
and Diane Sleizer (2nd Letter), Planning
Commission Minutes 7/23/19 Excerpt
APPROVED BY: ELF
RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Planning Commission and Staff recommend the City
Council adopt the following motions:
1) Motion to adopt an ordinance rezoning the subject property from AG Agricultural to
RR Rural Residential;
2) Motion to approve a Simple Plat for Deer Haven subject to conditions
SUMMARY
The City Council is being asked to consider a request by Rebecca and Ronald Gruenes to subdivide an
existing 16.73 acre parcel at 3904 120th Street West into three lots within a new subdivision; Deer Haven.
As part of the subdivision request, the applicants are seeking to rezone the property from its current
designation of AG – Agriculture to RR – Rural Residential. In advance of the City Council meeting, the
Board of Appeals and Adjustments approved a variance to allow the creation of a lot that does not meet
the 200 foot minimum lot width requirement of the RR – Rural Residential zoning district. The
subdivision will create two new lots in addition to a lot that will incorporate the existing house on the
property. Staff and the Planning Commission are recommending approval of the above requests with the
conditions listed in the attached resolution of approval.
Property Owners: Rebecca and Ronald Gruenes, 3904 120th Street West
Applicant: Rebecca and Ronald Gruenes (same address)
Location: 3904 120th Street West (PID 340181017020)
Site Area in Acres: 16.73 Acres
Comprehensive Plan Designation RR – Rural Residential
Current Zoning: AG-Agriculture
Proposed Zoning: RR – Rural Residential
2
BACKGROUND
The subject property is located in the extreme northwestern portion of Rosemount roughly 1.3 miles west
of South Robert Trail along 120th Street. Rosemount’s boundary with the City of Eagan follows 120th
Street, with Lebanon Hills Regional Park located directly to the north. All of the surrounding property is
rural residential in nature, with a mixture of lots ranging in size from one to 18 acres. The applicants’
parcel is located within a grouping of lots zoned AG – Agriculture on the City’s zoning map although
none meet the minimum density of one house per 40 acres required by ordinance. The entire area is
guided for Rural Residential development, which supports an overall density of one house per five acres
(and is consistent with the density of past developments in this part of the City).
The area to be subdivided includes one parcel that is 16.73 acres in size with just under 450 feet of
frontage along 120th Street. Prior to 2003, the site was part of a larger grouping of four parcels owned by
the estate of Elizabeth Stein. In 2003, the City approved a consolidation of parcels that resulted in the
creation of the subject property as well as the neighboring parcel to the east (in this case four smaller
parcels were combined to make two larger lots). The house currently located on the property was
constructed in 1992 and is situated roughly 450 feet south of 120th Street and is not visible from the road.
A 12-foot wide gravel driveway provides access to the house, and winds through a series of wetlands,
culverts, and wooded areas before arriving at the structure.
One of the more unique aspects of this particular part of Rosemount is an abundance of lakes, wetlands,
and other water features. The City’s Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan identifies five wetlands
on the property of varying types, one of which includes an open body of water that extends into the
neighboring parcel to the east. Because there are wetlands on the site, the applicant is required to submit a
wetland delineation report identifying individual wetlands, and any plat documents must include the
boundaries of all verified wetlands. This report has been submitted and was reviewed by the local
Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) in the summer of 2019. A notice of decision concerning the property
wetlands was rendered on August 7, 2019, with a subsequent reassessment of Wetland 1 later that month
(changing the designation of Wetland 1 from a “preserve” wetland to a “manage 1” wetland”). The
included site plan and plat have been updated to reflect the results of the final wetland evaluation.
The applicants purchased the property in the fall of 2019 from the previous owner with intent of splitting
the property into three lots. In order to accomplish this subdivision, they are first requesting that the site
be rezoned from AG Agricultural to RR Rural Residential. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and the City’s future land use map which classifies this area as Rural Residential with
a maximum density of one residence per five acres. The second request necessary to allow the splitting of
the existing parcel into three lots is a variance in order to create lots that do not meet the RR district
standards for lot width and frontage on a public street. In this case, the current parcel is slightly less than
450 feet in length, which does not provide enough length for three parcels with 200 feet of frontage on
120th Street. The location of wetlands on the property and present configuration of the parcel further
restrict the ability to provide access to the site in a manner that complies with the City’s zoning
requirements.
The proposed subdivision will create three lots from the larger 16.73 acre parcel, one of which will have
the required amount of frontage along a public street while the other two will not. The largest parcel of
10.29 acres would be designed as a “flag lot” with 131 feet of frontage along 120th Street, with the stem
portion of the flag containing most of the existing driveway. The second parcel of 3.11 acres would
include the existing house and would be a land-locked parcel that would share a driveway with Lot 1. The
remaining lot of 2.51 acres would have 319 feet of frontage along 120th Street and could be served by a
new driveway from the pubic road. All lots comply with the minimum dimensional standards of the RR
district with the exception of Lots 1 and 2 which do not comply with the minimum width and street
frontage requirements. Given the width of the existing lot and location of wetlands on the property, it
3
does not appear possible to create three lots from the 16+ acre site without a variance.
Plans submitted by the applicant depict the existing conditions on the site, the proposed lot lines and plat
boundaries, and a general location for building sites on the two vacant parcels. Prior to building on the
two new parcels, the applicant will need to secure a building permit, at which time the City would review
site grading and tree removal plans. The applicant has conducted preliminary soils analysis to determine
the subtility of the site for future septic systems; however, the applicant will need to demonstrate
compliance with the City’s well and septic system design requirements prior to the issuance of a building
permit. Primary and secondary drain field areas are depicted on the attached site plan.
PLANNIG COMMISSION REPORT
The public hearing notice for the applications was published on July 11, 2019 with mailed notice to
property owners sent out on July 12, 2019. The Planning Commission/Board of Appeals and Adjustment
tabled the applications described above at its July 23, 2019 meeting after conducting a public hearing
concerning the request. The item was continued due to concerns about the access location, the width of
the access and potential impacts on the site wetlands which are detailed below. At the August 27 meeting
the Commission recommended approval of all requests. The review below focuses on Commission
discussions, actions, and follow-up from these meetings.
Public Comments – July 23, 2019
John and Diane Sleizer, 4990 120th Street, submitted a letter prior to the meeting opposed to the granting
of the variance and subdivision requests. John Sleizer spoke at the meeting, and reviewed his concerns
about the proposal with the Commission. He stated his opposition to building on the hillside adjacent to
his lot. He also commented that the variance to allow lots smaller than five acres in size was not
consistent with the rural land uses in the area. He also pointed out that a shared driveway would not be
necessary because existing easements that provide access to Coffee Trail to the south. Mr. Sleizer has
since submitted a letter in support of the application as noted later in this report.
William Meyer, 4000 120th Street, asked if the developer would be able to further subdivide the larger
parcel at some point in the future.
Planning Commission Review – July 23, 2019
The Planning Commission discussed the proposed variance, rezoning, and simple plat, and raised several
questions about the application and the subject property. These issues and questions generally focused on
the following:
• Driveway Proximity and Wetland Impacts. Commissioners questioned how much of an impact an
expanded driveway would have on the wetlands, especially if it were paved.
• Southern Access – Coffee Trail. Commissioner VanderWiel stated that she would like the applicant
to explore using the Coffee Trail cul-de-sac to provide access to the property.
• Future Subdivision. There were questions about the possibility to subdivide the larger 10-acre lot
at some point in the future.
• Southern Easement Area. The Commission noted that the survey depicts a 60-fot wide ingress
and egress easement along the southern properly line and also calls out a similar easement over the
northerly section of Coffee Trail. Commissioners asked for further information concerning these
easements.
After the July Planning Commission meeting, staff had discussions with the applicant to address the
questions from the meeting and to further revise the wetland buffering plan for the property. In response,
the applicant submitted an updated plan depicting an average buffer around each wetland meeting the
City’s requirements. The applicant also worked directly with the City’s consultants (WSB) to complete a
4
Minnesota Routine Assessment Method (MnRAM) for Wetland 1. The MnRAM was done to confirm the
classification for this wetland, which ultimately determines the amount of buffering required. In
additional, the applicant worked with WSB to document that the small wetland area southeast of the
existing home is an incidental wetland and therefore does not require any additional easement or buffering.
Staff also received a letter from Commissioner VanderWiel after the July meeting with her additional
thoughts concerning the request. In her letter, Commissioner VanderWiel noted that she had visited the
site and reviewed information concerning the property, and that based on this additional information she
does support the granting of the zoning applications.
In response to the previous questions and new information provided by the applicant, Staff provided the
following comments to the Planning Commission:
Wetland Classification/MnRAM. Staff noted that until WSB completes its work, the applicant
would not know the exact buffering requirement for Wetland 1. In order plan for the most
extreme case, the applicants updated their plans to depict a 75-foot buffer (with averaging) around
Wetland 1. With completion of the wetland reclassification, the plans have been further updated
to show a lesser buffer.
Buffering – Mitigation/Averaging. The revised wetland buffering plan shows the required
buffer around each wetland (based on the current City classifications) along with markings for the
areas to be excluded or added to the buffer in order to achieve an average buffer width meeting the
City’s minimum requirements. The potential impacts are limited to Wetlands 1 and 2, and all
mitigation areas are now connected to the wetland they are buffering.
Driveway Paving. Under the City’s rural residential zoning standards, the applicant is not
required to pave the driveway providing access to each lot. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s
plan to keep the driveway as a class-5 crushed rock surface. With the revised buffering plan, the
applicant proposes to remove the buffer from the driveway and land upslope from Wetland 1,
while keeping a buffer from the edge of the existing driveway downslope. This will allow the
applicant to provide additional room for the driveway while keeping any impacts to the opposite
side from the wetland.
Future Subdivisions. The proposed subdivision will create three lots over 16.73 acres and cannot
be further subdivided under the RR – Rural Residential zoning requirements that limit densities to
1 house per five acres in this district. The City’s Comprehensive Plan further guides this area for
rural residential development and does not plan for extensions of public services to this site.
Sothern (Coffee Trail) Access. Staff has visited the northernmost extension of Coffee Trail and
prepared the attached map depicting the total distance from the end of the cul-de-sac to the closest
building on the applicant’s site plan. Based on this analysis, Staff has found that there are several
factors that make accessing this street very problematic:
1) The northern segment of Coffee Trail is unimproved and is located directly between two
existing houses. It will not be possible to construct a private driveway through this area
without substantial impacts to the adjacent properties
2) The total distance from the end of the Coffee Trail cul-de-sac to the closest home on the site
plan is over 770 feet following a direct line. A new driveway through this area would require
extensive removal of trees and grading in order to build a driveway that meets City
requirements. Using the existing driveway to access 120th Street avoids these impacts.
3) There are two larger wetlands in the southern portions of the site, and those could be
potentially impacted by a driveway, or would result in a much longer driveway to avoid all
5
wetland impacts.
4) The City’s public works department does not support the use of public right-of-way for private
access and private driveway improvements, especially when serving more than one property.
Southerly Easement Area. The applicant has submitted language for the easement areas along
the southern portions of the property for review by Staff. These easements grant the subject
property and those on either side of it the ability to use Coffee Trail for access. This arrangement
was approved by the City through a formal easement agreement. The 60-foot-wide ingress and
egress easement appears to provide a potential access to the property to the east and was executed
in conjunction with a subdivision request that never occurred on this land. For the reasons noted
above, staff does not recommend using these easements, even though it appears that these
properties would have a legal right to use the Coffee Trail right-of-way.
Planning Commission Review – August 27, 2019
The Planning Commission reconsidered the rezoning, simple plat, and variance requests at is August 27,
2019 meeting. Staff presented an update with the additional information described above, and noted that
the City had received a new letter from John and Diane Sleizer withdrawing their objections to the Deer
Haven plat and associated requests. The updated letter is included for review by the City Council. The
Board of Appeals and Adjustments adopted a motion (unanimously) to approve a variance to allow the
creation of two lots that do not meet the minimum lot width requirements for a RR – Rural Residential
zoning district. The 10-day appeal period has passed and the variance is now officially approved. The
Commission also voted unanimously to approve the rezoning and subdivision request with modifications
to the original conditions of approval.
Post Planning Commission Meeting Update – Early 2020
Since the Planning Commission meeting, the applicants have been working to revise the easements,
driveways, and other details of their site plan based on the comments from staff and the Planning
Commission meeting and the draft conditions of approval. Some do the specific elements that have been
addressed include the following:
• The buffer area around Wetland 1 has been adjusted to to reflect its current designation as a
Manage 1 Wetland instead of a Preserve Wetland. The required buffer distance is now 50 feet.
• The driveway area has been removed from the buffer, and the buffer width has been increased
around other wetlands to achieve a minimum buffering average consistent with the City’s wetland
preservation requirements.
• Primary and secondary septic drainfield sites are now identified for each new building lot.
• The concept plan has been revised to show potential grading and driveway access to each of the
new building sites.
• The applicants’ surveyor has prepared final plat documents meeting the requirements of the
Dakota County recorder’s office.
With the updated information, some of the conditions of approval as recommended by the Planning
Commission can be eliminated or revised because they have now been addressed by the applicant. The
simple plat resolution of approval includes updated conditions of approval. Additionally, staff has drafted
the conservation easement agreement that will need to be recorded with the final plat. The applicant will
need to provide final legal descriptions for all easement areas as a condition of approval.
6
ISSUE ANALYIS
Rezoning
The applicant has requested a zoning map amendment to change the zoning of the property from AG –
Agricultural to RR – Rural Residential. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the City’s future land use
map which guides the northwestern portion of Rosemount for rural residential land uses. Upon final
adoption of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, which has recently been approved by the Met Council, the City
will be updating the zoning map to bring it into conformance with the updated plan. As part of this
review, staff is proposing to take a look at existing parcels zoned AG that are under 20 acres in size to
determine if they should also be rezoned to rural residential to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Variance Request and Standards
The subject property presents many challenges for development of any additional lots beyond the existing
home due in part to the shape and configuration of the parcel and in part to the location of wetlands
across the site. All of these factors restrict where a driveway or road could be placed. The one serving the
exiting residence currently runs through a narrow area between four wetlands and an adjoining property.
In addition, the site is heavily wooded with many larger deciduous trees, and any new home sites should be
sited to avoid tree removal as much as possible.
The maximum density allowed within a RR zoning district is one house per five acres, and the site is
capable of supporting three total residential units without exceeding this requirement. The zoning
ordinance requires platted lots of 2.5 acres in size. Although it is a relatively large property (with a depth of
over 1,200 feet south of 120th Street), the frontage along 120th Street is limited to 450 feet, which would
not allow three lots meeting the 200 foot lot width requirement. The southern boundary of the property
does touch a portion of the Coffee Trail right-of-way, but is limited to only the eastern 25 feet of this road.
It would not be possible to extend Coffee Trail to serve lots on the subject property without acquiring
additional right-of-way from the neighboring property. In addition, the applicant does not believe that an
extension of Coffee Trail is feasible at this time because the improved portion of the road is over 200 feet
from the property boundary.
Given the restrictions for providing access to the proposed lots, the applicant requested and received
variances from two specific sections of the Zoning Ordinance as follows:
• Section 11-2-7 Street Access Required. This section of code require that every building
hereafter erected shall be located on a lot having frontage on a public street.
• Section 11-4-3 RR Min Lot Requirements and Setbacks. This section of code specifies that
the minimum lot width for platted land within a RR zoning district is 200 feet.
Looking at the proposed subdivision, the approved variances allow the platting of Lot 3 without any
frontage on a public street (while meeting the width requirement) and platting of Lot 1 with a width of 130
feet, or 70 feet short of the 200 foot minimum. Access to Lot 3 (the existing home) would occur via the
existing driveway that would now be shared with and located on Lot 1.
Simple Plat
The applicant is proposing a simple plat for the subdivision, which allows the City to waive some of the
normal subdivision application requirements and to combine the preliminary and final plat review into one
action. While the proposed plat does create two new buildable parcels, the resulting rural lots will not be
served by any new public improvements (roads or public sewer and water); therefore, many of the City’s
standard plat application materials are not necessary for this subdivision.
7
The proposed lots to be created will be 2.51, 3.11, and 10.29 acres in size, two of which will share an
existing driveway while the other will access directly to 120th Street. The applicant will need to draft and
execute a shared driveway easement and agreement to ensure its availability for use by both lots.
In the future, any site improvements and permits for home construction will need to comply with the
City’s zoning regulations.
Wetlands/Conservation Easements
As noted throughout this report, the most significant issue associated with the proposed plat is the
location of several wetlands on the property. Under City and State requirements for wetlands, the
applicant must complete a wetland delineation report for the property, and all identified wetlands must be
documented on the proposed subdivision. The applicant hired Soil Investigation and Design, Inc. to
prepare this report (an excerpt of which is attached), which was reviewed by the City’s water resources
consultant. The local technical evaluation panel (TEP) has met on site to discuss the report, and the
public comment period concerning the evaluation ended on August 8th. The final results of the wetland
delineation are described in an earlier section of this report.
The attached existing conditions plan, simple plat, and site plan depict the wetlands as identified in the
wetland delineation report. Please note that one of the wetlands identified by the report (located
immediately southwest of the existing home) is considered an incidental wetland and therefore would not
be regulated under the City’s ordinances. The applicant has also grouped two of the wetlands mapped by
the City into one wetland and will be tracked as such in this memorandum.
Under its wetland management plan, the City requires easements over each wetland in addition to buffer
areas around each wetland. Furthermore, each wetland is also classified for management and protection
based on the initial evaluation conducted by the City and verified prior to development. For the subject
property, the following classifications and associated buffers will apply based on the delineation report
(theses are also mapped on the submitted plat documents):
Wetland # Classification Buffer
1 Manage 1 50 ft.
2 Manage 2 30 ft.
3 Incidental N/A
4 Manage 2 30 ft.
5 Manage 3 15 ft.
The City requires that all wetlands and buffer areas be covered by a drainage and utility easement on a plat,
and will also require a separate conservation easement over these areas as well. The attached plat and site
plans depict the boundaries of the wetlands as described in the delineation report along with drainage and
utility easements up to the required buffer line. The City does allow for buffer averaging around individual
wetlands in instances where is not possible or feasible to maintain a uniform buffer distance around the
entire wetland. Because the existing driveway extends through one of the required buffers, the applicant is
proposing to move this buffer elsewhere on the property to maintain an average around the affected
wetlands. The impacted and mitigated buffer areas are shown as the cross-hatched areas on the site plan.
Conservation easements over the buffer areas will need to be signed by the applicant and recorded with
the final plat.
Access and Driveway Issues
The driveway currently serving the existing house on the site is a single-lane road with a crushed-rock
surface that is roughly between 10 to 12 feet in width, although there is open area, non-graveled on both
sides of the drive. Although this width may be sufficient for serving a single home, staff is concerned that
the present configuration is not appropriate for use by more than one residence. In order to ensure that
8
there is sufficient room for multiple users to access two building sites and to accommodate access by
emergency and service vehicles, staff is recommending that the driveway be improved to a minimum width
of 16 feet with a clear zone (no trees, shrubs, or branches) of a least one foot on either side of the
driveway. In addition to access, the clear zone is also intended to help provide a minimal amount of space
for snow storage in the winter months. Please note that the final buffer zones around the wetlands have
been designed to accommodate a minimum of 18 feet around the driveway based on the staff
recommendation.
Public Right-of-Way Dedication
The proposed plat is adjacent to 120 Street and will therefore need to dedicate right-of-way for that
portion of the road located on the applicant’s property. The proposed 33-foot dedication will meet this
requirement. In addition, the subject property is located north of the furthest limits of the Coffee Trail
right-of-way. Although Coffee Trail is not improved all the way to the property, staff is recommending
that the applicant provide right-of-way dedication for that portion of Coffee Trail that could continue
north at some point in the future. The expected dedication for the applicants’ property is 25 feet along the
western property boundary. The City does not have any plans to construct the road in the near future, but
this dedication would help ensure that there will be options available in the future, especially as other
properties in the area are developed.
Lot Standards
The site is proposed to be rezoned to the RR – Rural Residential zoning district, which allows lots with a
minimum size of 2.5 acres if platted, and maximum overall density of one house per five acres. All three
lots will meet this minimum lot size standard, and the overall proposed density of three houses on 16.73
acres (one house per 5.77 acres) will meet the density standard. Please note that the resulting lot sizes are
exclusive of the dedicated right-of-way, which also does not change the ultimate maximum number of
allowed units for this area. While a general concept plan for the location of new houses has been
provided, the City will be able to determine compliance with all other setback and dimensional standards at
the time a building permit is submitted for each lot. Staff will determine the front yard as the lot line
facing 120th Street. The noted building pad locations do not appear to conflict with any required setbacks.
Lot Standards
Lot Area Lot Width Maximum Density
RR – Rural Residential 2.5 Acres 200 feet 1 unit/5 Acres
Current Proposed
Lot Area Lot Width Lot Area Lot Width
Lot 1, Block 1
16.73 acres 449.25 ft.
10.29 acres 130.76
Lot 2, Block 1 2.51 acres 318.90
Lot 3, Block 1 3.11 acres 353.73
The site plan has been updated to include an area that meets the minimum standards for a primary and
secondary treatment system. The applicants have stated that the have performed initial soil testing within
each area; ultimately the building sites will need to conform to all applicant standards for installation of a
new septic system.
Grading, Storm Water Management, and Tree Preservation
With only two new buildable, rural lots within the proposed subdivision, and no public road construction,
the City has not required an overall grading, erosion control, or storm water management plan for the
project. Instead, the building permit for each lot much be accompanied by a custom lot grading plan that
demonstrates compliance with the City’s grading and erosion control standards. Likewise, the City has not
required an overall tree protection and replacement plan, and will instead evaluate tree impacts with the
9
specific grading plans for each lot. The City does allow for tree removal of up to 25% of the trees on a
development site without a requirement for replacement, and given the large size of the property, the
applicant will not come close to exceeding this number. In order to preserve the rural character of the
area, removal of tress on the new building sites should be kept to the minimum necessary to construct the
house and driveway.
Drainage and Utility Easements
In addition to the easements over wetlands and buffer areas, the applicant will need to provide the
standard drainage and utility easements over the lot lines of all lots platted within the subdivision. These
easements are included on the final plat.
Development Fees
Although many of the City’s standard development fees will not apply to the proposed subdivision
because it will not be served by public water and sewer service, there are two development fees that will
apply as follows:
• Fee in Lieu of Land Dedication - $3,400 per each new lot.
• Surface Water Trunk Area Assessment for the Lebanon Hills Subwatershed Area - $3,772 per acre.
Please note that the City has applied the storm water fee to the developed portion of any subdivision and
excluded outlots and future development areas from the calculation. Although the applicants are
subdividing all of the subject property, there is a large area in the southern portion of the site that is not
directly connected to the rest of the property. Staff is recommending that only the northern portion of the
property be subject to the area assessment, with the understanding that if the southern area is ever
subdivided in the future the assessment could be applied to this property at this time. Staff is estimating
that approximately 6.5 acres of the site could be left off of the surface water trunk area and collected only
when and if this part of the property is developed.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of a Rezoning and Simple Plat request for the
Deer Haven subdivision with conditions. This recommendation is based on the information submitted by
the applicant, findings made in this report and the conditions detailed in the attached memorandums.
Dakota County, MN
Property Information
Ju ly 11 , 2019
0 875 1,750437.5 ft
0 270 540135 m
1:9,600
Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification.
City of Rosemount
Ordinance No. B-278
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE B
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT ZONING ORDINANCE
Deer Haven
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Ordinance B, adopted September 19, 1989, entitled “City of Rosemount Zoning
Ordinance,” is hereby amended to rezone property from AG – Agricultural to RR – Rural Residential
that is located south of 120th Street West and approximately one mile west of Dodd Road within the
City of Rosemount commonly known as 3904 120th Street West and legally described as follows:
All that part of the West Half of Government Lot One (1) in Section Seven (7) and of the
West Half of the Northeast Quarter in Section Eighteen (18), all in Township One hundred
fifteen (115) North, Range Nineteen (19) West, Dakota County, Minnesota described as
follows:
Commencing at the northeast corner of said West Half of Government Lot One (1)
and running thence west along the north line thereof a distance of 618.28 feet to the
point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing west along said north
line 450.00 feet; thence south and parallel to the west line of said Government Lot 1
and said Northeast Quarter a distance of 296.48 feet; thence westerly parallel with the
north line of said West Half of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 242.07 feet to the
west line of said West Half of said Northeast Quarter; thence southerly along said west
line 830.60 feet; thence easterly parallel with the north line of said West Half of the
Northeast Quarter 388.70 feet; thence southeasterly 321.43 feet along a line whose
terminus is a point on the east line of said West Half of the Northeast Quarter distant
1437.58 feet south of the northeast corner of said West Half of Government Lot 1;
thence north 1228.37 feet to the point of beginning.
Section 2. The Zoning Map of the City of Rosemount, referred to and described in said
Ordinance No. B as that certain map entitled “Zoning Map of the City of Rosemount,” shall not be
republished to show the aforesaid rezoning, but the Clerk shall appropriately mark the said zoning
map on file in the Clerk’s office for the purpose of indicating the rezoning hereinabove provided for
in this Ordinance and all of the notation references and other information shown thereon are hereby
incorporated by reference and made part of this Ordinance.
Section 3. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication
according to law.
ENACTED AND ORDAINED into an Ordinance this 18th day of February, 2020.
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
William H. Droste, Mayor
ATTEST:
Erin Fasbender, City Clerk
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2020- 30
A RESOLUTION APPROVING
A SIMPLE PLAT FOR DEER HAVEN
WHEREAS, the Planning Department received an application for approval of a Simple Plat for
Deer Haven to replat an existing 16.73-acre parcel into three parcels for property legally described as
follows:
All that part of the West Half of Government Lot One (1) in Section Seven (7) and of the West
Half of the Northeast Quarter in Section Eighteen (18), all in Township One hundred fifteen
(115) North, Range Nineteen (19) West, Dakota County, Minnesota described as follows:
Commencing at the northeast corner of said West Half of Government Lot One (1) and
running thence west along the north line thereof a distance of 618.28 feet to the point of
beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing west along said north line 450.00
feet; thence south and parallel to the west line of said Government Lot 1 and said Northeast
Quarter a distance of 296.48 feet; thence westerly parallel with the north line of said West
Half of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 242.07 feet to the west line of said West Half of
said Northeast Quarter; thence southerly along said west line 830.60 feet; thence easterly
parallel with the north line of said West Half of the Northeast Quarter 388.70 feet; thence
southeasterly 321.43 feet along a line whose terminus is a point on the east line of said West
Half of the Northeast Quarter distant 1437.58 feet south of the northeast corner of said
West Half of Government Lot 1; thence north 1228.37 feet to the point of beginning.
WHEREAS, the City of Rosemount published notice in the official newspaper concerning the
application on July 11, 2019 and mailed notice to property owners within 500 feet of the subject
property on July 12, 2019; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemount conducted a public hearing as
required by ordinance for the purpose of receiving public comment regarding the proposed Deer
Haven Simple Plat on July 23, 2019; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the application on July 23, 2019 and August 27,
2019 and found it consistent with the criteria for simple plat review outlined in the Subdivision
Ordinance; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted a motion to recommend approval of the
application for a Simple Plat on August 27, 2019.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, The Council of the City of Rosemount does
hereby approve the Deer Haven Simple Plat subject to the following conditions:
1)Conservation easements in a form acceptable to the City shall be recorded with the final plat
and shall be consistent with the wetland areas and wetland buffers as identified on the plat
and associated drawings.
2) All shared portions of the driveway serving Lots 1 and 3 shall be improved to a minimum
width of 16 feet with a one-foot clear zone on either side of the driveway.
3) All driveways shall be capable of supporting access by emergency vehicles and equipment.
4) The final plat shall include all easements as required by the City Engineer.
5) The City will require a custom grading plan prior to the construction of homes on Lots 1
and 2 along with a plan documenting any significant trees to be removed for said homes.
The removal of trees shall be minimized around each new building site.
6) The final plat and associated wetlands and wetland buffers shall comply with the Minnesota
Wetland Conservation Act Notice of Decision for the property.
7) A fee in lieu of park land dedication of $3,400 each for Lots 1 and 2 shall be paid prior to
the issuance of a building permit for each lot.
8) The applicant shall pay the required storm water trunk area assessment of $3,772 per acre
prior to recording the final plat. This assessment shall be based on a newly developed area
of 9.75 acres (with further exclusions for wetlands and ponding areas per the City’s fee
schedule). The remaining fee for the property shall be collected if the southern 6.5 acres is
ever further subdivided in the future.
9) Each lot must accommodate a sewage treatment system meeting all City requirements and
designed by a licensed septic designer.
10) A shared driveway agreement acceptable to the City for Lots 1 and 3, Block 1 shall be
executed and recorded with the property.
11) Incorporation of recommendations from the City Engineer in a review memorandum dated
July 18, 2019 relative to drainage, grading, easements, utilities, storm water management, and
other subjects covered in the review.
ADOPTED this 18th day of February, 2020 by the City Council of the City of Rosemount.
__________________________________________
William H. Droste, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Erin Fasbender, City Clerk
BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page 1
of 3
Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act
Notice of Decision
Local Government Unit (LGU)
City of Rosemount
Address
2875 145th St W
Rosemount, MN 55068
1. PROJECT INFORMATION
Applicant Name
Ron and
Rebecca
Gruenes
Project Name
Gruenes
Property Site
Date of Application
5/30/19 (Incomplete)
6/11/19 (Complete)
08/7/19 (Additional Information)
Application
Number
WET-19-004
13279-000
Attach site locator map.
Type of Decision:
Wetland Boundary or Type No-Loss Exemption
Sequencing
Replacement Plan Banking Plan
Technical Evaluation Panel Findings and Recommendation (if any):
Approve Approve with conditions Deny
The TEP reviewed the delineation on July 2, 2019 and provided comments to the delineator to include in a
revised application. The revised application was received by the City on 6/11/19 and additional information,
including Figure 2, was received on 8/7/19. The TEP had no additional comments.
2. LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT DECISION
Date of Decision: 8/9/19
Approved Approved with conditions (include below) Denied
LGU Findings and Conclusions (attach additional sheets as necessary):
For Replacement Plans using credits from the State Wetland Bank:
Ron and Rebecca Gruenes applied for a boundary/type determination for wetlands within PID 340181017020 for
a potential lot split. The following wetlands were identified:
Wetland 1 – Type 3, 5, 7 varies from deep water wetland to forested wetland.
Wetland 2 – Type 2 fresh wet meadow
Wetland 3 – Type 2 fresh wet meadow
Wetland 4 – Type 2 fresh wet meadow
Wetland 5 – Type 3 shallow marsh
The LGU approves the wetland boundaries and this decision is valid for 5 years. A MnRAM will be required for
any wetlands which are not outlined in the City’s Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan prior to final plat
approval.
BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page 2
of 3
Bank Account #
Bank Service Area
County
Credits Approved for
Withdrawal (sq. ft. or nearest
.01 acre)
Replacement Plan Approval Conditions. In addition to any conditions specified by the LGU, the
approval of a Wetland Replacement Plan is conditional upon the following:
Financial Assurance: For project-specific replacement that is not in-advance, a financial assurance
specified by the LGU must be submitted to the LGU in accordance with MN Rule 8420.0522, Subp. 9
(List amount and type in LGU Findings).
Deed Recording: For project-specific replacement, evidence must be provided to the LGU that the
BWSR “Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants” and “Consent to Replacement Wetland” forms
have been filed with the county recorder’s office in which the replacement wetland is located.
Credit Withdrawal: For replacement consisting of wetland bank credits, confirmation that BWSR
has withdrawn the credits from the state wetland bank as specified in the approved replacement plan.
Wetlands may not be impacted until all applicable conditions have been met!
LGU Authorized Signature:
Signing and mailing of this completed form to the appropriate recipients in accordance with 8420.0255,
Subp. 5 provides notice that a decision was made by the LGU under the Wetland Conservation Act as
specified above. If additional details on the decision exist, they have been provided to the landowner
and are available from the LGU upon request.
Name
Roxy Franta, WSB
Title
Environmental Scientist
Signature
Date
8/9/19
Phone Number and E-mail
763-762-2844
rfranta@wsbeng.com
THIS DECISION ONLY APPLIES TO THE MINNESOTA WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT .
Additional approvals or permits from local, state, and federal agencies may be required. Check with all
appropriate authorities before commencing work in or near wetlands.
Applicants proceed at their own risk if work authorized by this decision is started before the time period
for appeal (30 days) has expired. If this decision is reversed or revised under appeal , the applicant may be
responsible for restoring or replacing all wetland impacts.
This decision is valid for three years from the date of decision unless a longer period is advised by the TEP
and specified in this notice of decision.
BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page 3
of 3
3. APPEAL OF THIS DECISION
Pursuant to MN Rule 8420.0905, any appeal of this decision can only be commenced by mailing a petition
for appeal, including applicable fee, within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of the mailing of this Notice
to the following as indicated:
Check one:
Appeal of an LGU staff decision. Send
petition and $500 fee (if applicable) to:
Kim Lindquist
City of Rosemount
2875 145th St W
Rosemount, MN 55068
Appeal of LGU governing body decision.
Send petition and $500 filing fee to:
Executive Director
Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources
520 Lafayette Road North
St. Paul, MN 55155
4. LIST OF ADDRESSEES
SWCD TEP member: David Holmen, david.holmen@co.dakota.mn.us
BWSR TEP member: Ben Carlson, ben.carlson@state.mn.us
LGU TEP member (if different than LGU Contact): Kim Lindquist
kim.lindquist@ci.rosemount.mn.us;
DNR TEP member: Becky Horton, becky.horton@state.mn.us
DNR Regional Office (if different than DNR TEP member)
WD or WMO (if applicable): Mark Zabel, Vermillion JPO mark.zabel@co.dakota.mn.us
Applicant (notice only) and Landowner (if different) Ron and Rebecca Gruenes,
gruenes@hickorytech.net; Paul Brandt, pbrandt@soilinvestigations.us;
Members of the public who requested notice (notice only): Stephanie Smith,
Stephanie.Smith@ci.rosemount.mn.us; Brian Erickson, brian.erickson@ci.rosemount.mn.us; Andi
Moffatt, amoffatt@wsbeng.com; Byron, Jane.Byron@ci.rosemount.mn.us; Kyle Klatt,
Kyle.Klatt@ci.rosemount.mn.us
Corps of Engineers Project Manager (notice only) usace_requests_mn@usace.army.mil; Ryan
Malterud, Ryan.m.malterud@usace.army.mil
BWSR Wetland Bank Coordinator (wetland bank plan applications only)
5. MAILING INFORMATION
➢ For a list of BWSR TEP representatives: www.bwsr.state.mn.us/aboutbwsr/workareas/WCA_areas.pdf
➢ For a list of DNR TEP representatives: www.bwsr.state.mn.us/wetlands/wca/DNR_TEP_contacts.pdf
➢ Department of Natural Resources Regional Offices:
NW Region:
Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol.
Div. Ecol. Resources
2115 Birchmont Beach Rd.
NE
Bemidji, MN 56601
NE Region:
Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol.
Div. Ecol. Resources
1201 E. Hwy. 2
Grand Rapids, MN
55744
Central Region:
Reg. Env. Assess.
Ecol.
Div. Ecol. Resources
1200 Warner Road
St. Paul, MN 55106
Southern Region:
Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol.
Div. Ecol. Resources
261 Hwy. 15 South
New Ulm, MN 56073
For a map of DNR Administrative Regions, see: http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/aboutdnr/dnr_regions.pdf
➢ For a list of Corps of Project Managers: www.mvp.usace.army.mil/regulatory/default.asp?pageid=687
or send to:
US Army Corps of Engineers
St. Paul District, ATTN: OP-R
180 Fifth St. East, Suite 700
St. Paul, MN 55101-1678
BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page 4
of 3
➢ For Wetland Bank Plan applications, also send a copy of the application to:
Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources
Wetland Bank Coordinator
520 Lafayette Road North
St. Paul, MN 55155
6. ATTACHMENTS
In addition to the site locator map, list any other attachments:
Revised application and delineation report dated 8/7/19
1
Ron and Rebecca Gruenes
3904 120th Street
Rosemount, MN
Wetland Delineation Report
Prepared for
Ron and Rebecca Gruenes
3904 120th Street
Rosemount, MN
by
Soil Investigation & Design, Inc.
2809 78th Ave. N.
Brooklyn Park, MN 55444
Date: May 29, 2019
Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form February 2014 Page 3 of 11
Project Name and/or Number:
PART ONE: Applicant Information
If applicant is an entity (company, government entity, partnership, etc.), an authorized contact person must be identified. If the
applicant is using an agent (consultant, lawyer, or other third party) and has authorized them to act on their behalf , the agent’s
contact information must also be provided.
Applicant/Landowner Name: Ron and Rebecca Gruenes
Mailing Address: 3904 120th St, Rosemount
Phone:
E-mail Address: gruenes@hickorytech.net
Authorized Contact (do not complete if same as above):
Mailing Address:
Phone:
E-mail Address:
Agent Name: Paul Brandt PSS
Mailing Address: 2809 78th Ave. N Brooklyn Park, MN 55444
Phone: 651-260-3783
E-mail Address: pbrandt@soilinvestigations.us
PART TWO: Site Location Information
County: Dakota City/Township: Rosemount
Parcel ID and/or Address: 340181017020
Legal Description (Section, Township, Range): S18, T115W, R19W
Lat/Long (decimal degrees):
Attach a map showing the location of the site in relation to local streets, roads, highways.
Approximate size of site (acres) or if a linear project, length (feet): 16.73 acres
If you know that your proposal will require an individual Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, you must provide the
names and addresses of all property owners adjacent to the project site. This information may be provided by attaching a list to
your application or by using block 25 of the Application for Department of the Army permit which can be obtained at:
http://www.mvp.usace.army.mil/Portals/57/docs/regulatory/RegulatoryDocs/engform_4345_2012oct.pdf
PART THREE: General Project/Site Information
If this application is related to a delineation approval, exemption determination, jurisdictional determination, or other
correspondence submitted prior to this application then describe that here and provide the Corps of Engineers project number.
Describe the project that is being proposed, the project purpose and need, and schedule for implementation and completion. The
project description must fully describe the nature and scope of the proposed activity including a description of all project elements
that effect aquatic resources (wetland, lake, tributary, etc.) and must also include plans and cross section or profile drawings
showing the location, character, and dimensions of all proposed activities and aquatic resource impacts.
Boundary & Type determination.
Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form February 2014 Page 4 of 11
Project Name and/or Number:
PART FOUR: Aquatic Resource Impact1 Summary
If your proposed project involves a direct or indirect impact to an aquatic resource (wetland, lake, tributary, etc.) identify each
impact in the table below. Include all anticipated impacts, including those expected to be temporary. Attach an overhead view map,
aerial photo, and/or drawing showing all of the aquatic resources in the project area and the location(s) of the proposed impacts.
Label each aquatic resource on the map with a reference number or letter and identify the impacts in the following table.
Aquatic Resource
ID (as noted on
overhead view)
Aquatic
Resource Type
(wetland, lake,
tributary etc.)
Type of Impact
(fill, excavate,
drain, or
remove
vegetation)
Duration of
Impact
Permanent (P)
or Temporary
(T)1
Size of Impact2
Overall Size of
Aquatic
Resource 3
Existing Plant
Community
Type(s) in
Impact Area4
County, Major
Watershed #,
and Bank
Service Area #
of Impact Area5
None
1If impacts are temporary; enter the duration of the impacts in days next to the “T”. For example, a project with a temporary access fill that
would be removed after 220 days would be entered “T (220)”.
2Impacts less than 0.01 acre should be reported in square feet. Impacts 0.01 acre or greater should be reported as acres and rounded to the
nearest 0.01 acre. Tributary impacts must be reported in linear feet of impact and an area of impact by indicating first the linear feet of impact
along the flowline of the stream followed by the area impact in parentheses). For example, a project that impacts 50 feet of a stream that is 6
feet wide would be reported as 50 ft (300 square feet).
3This is generally only applicable if you are applying for a de minimis exemption under MN Rules 8420.0420 Subp. 8, otherwise enter “N/A”.
4Use Wetland Plants and Plant Community Types of Minnesota and Wisconsin 3rd Ed. as modified in MN Rules 8420.0405 Subp. 2.
5Refer to Major Watershed and Bank Service Area maps in MN Rules 8420.0522 Subp. 7.
If any of the above identified impacts have already occurred, identify which impacts they are and the circumstances associated
with each:
PART FIVE: Applicant Signature
Check here if you are requesting a pre-application consultation with the Corps and LGU based on the information you have
provided. Regulatory entities will not initiate a formal application review if this box is checked.
By signature below, I attest that the information in this application is complete and accurate. I further attest that I possess the
authority to undertake the work described herein.
Signature: Date: May 29, 2019
I hereby authorize to act on my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish, upon request,
supplemental information in support of this application.
1 The term “impact” as used in this joint application form is a generic term used for disclosure purposes to identify
activities that may require approval from one or more regulatory agencies. For purposes of this form it is not meant to
indicate whether or not those activities may require mitigation/replacement.
Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form February 2014 Page 5 of 11
Project Name and/or Number:
Attachment A
Request for Delineation Review, Wetland Type Determination, or
Jurisdictional Determination
By submission of the enclosed wetland delineation report, I am requesting that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District
(Corps) and/or the Wetland Conservation Act Local Government Unit (LGU) provide me with the following (check all that apply):
Wetland Type Confirmation
Delineation Concurrence. Concurrence with a delineation is a written notification from the Corps and a decision from the LGU
concurring, not concurring, or commenting on the boundaries of the aqu atic resources delineated on the property. Delineation
concurrences are generally valid for five years unless site conditions change. Under this request alone, the Corps will not a ddress
the jurisdictional status of the aquatic resources on the property, only the boundaries of the resources within the review area
(including wetlands, tributaries, lakes, etc.).
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination. A preliminary jurisdictional determination (PJD) is a non-binding written indication
from the Corps that waters, including wetlands, identified on a parcel may be waters of the United States. For purposes of
computation of impacts and compensatory mitigation requirements, a permit decision made on the basis of a PJD will treat all
waters and wetlands in the review area as if they are jurisdictional waters o f the U.S. PJDs are advisory in nature and may not be
appealed.
Approved Jurisdictional Determination. An approved jurisdictional determination (AJD) is an official Corps determination that
jurisdictional waters of the United States are either present or absent on the property. AJDs can generally be relied upon by the
affected party for five years. An AJD may be appealed through the Corps administrative appeal process.
In order for the Corps and LGU to process your request, the wetland delineation must be prep ared in accordance with the 1987
Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, any approved Regional Supplements to the 1987 Manual, and the Guidelines for
Submitting Wetland Delineations in Minnesota (2013).
http://www.mvp.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory/DelineationJDGuidance.aspx
Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form February 2014 Page 11 of 11
Technical Evaluation Panel Concurrence: Project Name and/or Number:
TEP member: Representing:
Concur with road authority’s determination of qualification for the local road wetland replacement program? Yes No
Signature: _________________________________________ Date:
TEP member: Representing:
Concur with road authority’s determination of qualification for the local road wetland replacement p rogram? Yes No
Signature: _________________________________________ Date:
TEP member: Representing:
Concur with road authority’s determination of qualification for the local road wetland replacement program? Yes No
Signature: _________________________________________ Date:
TEP member: Representing:
Concur with road authority’s determination of qualification for the local road wetland replacement p rogram? Yes No
Signature: _________________________________________ Date:
Upon approval and signature by the TEP, application must be sent to: Wetland Bank Administration
Minnesota Board of Water & Soil Resources
520 Lafayette Road North
Saint Paul, MN 55155
2
WETLAND DELINEATION SUMMARY
• The site at 3904 120th St. Rosemount, MN was inspected on May 1, 2019 for the
presence and extent of wetland.
• The NWI map showed Two wetland complexes within site boundaries these
include PEM1C/PABG/PF01A; and a PEM1A
• The entire site was inspected other wetlands exist please refer to Figure 4.
• The soil survey mapped showed Kingsley-Mahtomedi complex,
Kingsley sandy loam, Quam silt loam, Kennebec variant silt loam,
and Otterholt silt loam within site boundaries.
• The DNR Protected Waters Map showed one Protected Water(s) within site
boundaries. No number identification was listed for this body of water.
• Five wetlands were found on the site. We were retained to delineate the wetland
area(s) within site boundaries as summarized below.
Wetland
ID Circular 39 Cowardin
Wetland Plant
Community Type
(Eggers and Reed)
404 Jurisdictional
Observations
1 Type
3,5,7 PEM1C/PABG
/PF01A
Fresh Meadow
Designated protected
water
2 Type 2
PEM1A
Fresh Meadow
seasonally Flooded
None
3 Type 2
PEM1A
Fresh Meadow
seasonally Flooded
None
4 Type 2
PEM1A
Fresh Meadow
seasonally Flooded
None
3
5 Type 3
PEM1C
Fresh Meadow
seasonally Flooded
None
4
I. INTRODUCTION
The site was examined on May 1, 2019 for the presence and extent of wetland. The
approximately 16.73 acre property is located at 3904 120th St. Rosemount, MN Dakota County,
Minnesota (Figure 1), and corresponded to Dakota County PID 340181017020.
The site has one residence and one shed structure on it. The property consisted primarily of
deciduous woodland in upland portions and wetlands of varying vegetative cover in lowland
areas (Figure 2). Site topography is significant consisting of broad flat wetland areas adjacent to
slopes that can exceed 15 percent (Figure 3).
Adjacent land use was residential to the east, west and south Lebanon Hills Regional Park
Lies to the north.
METHODS
Wetlands were identified using Routine Determination methodology described in the Corps of
Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Waterways Experiment Station, 1987) and Regional
Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Northcentral and Northeast
Region Version 2.0) as required by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and the Minnesota
Wetland Conservation Act.
Wetland boundaries were identified as the upper-most extent of wetlands, which met criteria for
hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and wetland hydrology. Wetland-upland boundaries were
marked with pink pin flags.
Soils, vegetation, and hydrology were documented at representative locations along the wetland-
upland boundary. Plant species dominance was estimated based on the percent aerial or basal
coverage visually estimated within a 30-foot radius for trees and vines, 15-foot radius for the
shrub layer, and a 5-foot radius for the herbaceous layer within the community type being
sampled.
Soils were characterized to a minimum depth of 18-24 inches (unless otherwise noted) utilizing
Munsell Soil Color Charts and standard soil texturing methodology. Hydric soil indicators used
in reporting are from the NTCHS Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States (USDA
Natural Resources Conservation Service Version 7, 2010) which are commonly found in the
Midwest.
Plants were identified using standard regional plant keys. Taxonomy and indicator status of plant
species was taken from the 2014 National Wetland Plant List (Lichvar, R.W. and Kartesz, J.T.
2009. North American Digital Flora: National Wetland Plant List, version 2.4.0
(https://wetland_plants.usace.army.mil). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and
Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH, and
BONAP, Chapel Hill, NC.)
5
III. RESULTS
Review of NWI, Soils, and DNR Information
The MN DNR Revised National Wetland Inventory Map (NWI) (http://deli.dnr.state.mn.us/) one
PEM1C wetland to the northwest, one PEM1C/PEM1A wetland complex in the center of the
property, and one PEM1C wetland along the eastern property boundary (Figure 3).
The Soil Survey of Hennepin County, Minnesota (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/) showed
the following soil types within site boundaries (Figure 4).
Map unit
symbol
Map unit name Hydric Rating
279C Otterholt silt loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes 8
342B Kingsley sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes 5
342C Kingsley sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 5
344 Quam silt loam 95
896E Kingsley-Mahtomedi complex, 15 to 25 percent
slopes
0
1816 Kennebec variant silt loam 10
W Water 0
The DNR Protected Waters Map, Hennepin County (http://deli.dnr.state.mn.us/) showed one
DNR Protected Water(s) within site boundaries (Figure 5)its number is 19018500.
Wetland Determinations and Delineations
Potential wetlands were evaluated in greater detail during field observations on May 1 2019.
The site is mostly wooded with several open areas along with a residence and auxiliary
buildings.
Five wetlands were identified and delineated on the site (Figure 2). Corresponding data forms
are included as Appendix A. The following description of wetland and adjacent upland reflects
conditions observed at the time of the field visit. At that time, vegetation was actively growing
and had not yet begun to senesce. Wetland hydrology was assumed to be wetter than normal for
that date based on the 30-day rolling precipitation total (Appendix B). A survey of the wetland
boundaries will be provided after delineation review is completed.
Wetland 1 was classified with the following components Type 3,5,7 (PEM1C/PABG/PF01A)
this varies from deep water habitat to forested wetland. This wetland water level is controlled by
a culvert. The transition from wetland is well defined by the water elevation controlled by the
culvert.
Wetland 2 was classified with the following components Type 2 (PEM1A) this is a fresh
meadow but actually a drainage for wetland 1 and the outlet to this wetland water level is
controlled by a culvert. The culvert has allowed for a well defined transition from wetland to
upland.
6
Wetland 3 was classified with the following components Type 2 (PEM1A) this is a fresh
meadow. It is immediately south of the septic system drainfield. The transition is defined by the
area that cannot be mowed because of saturated soils.
Wetland 4 was classified with the following components Type 2 (PEM1A) this is a fresh
meadow. The outlet to this wetland water level is controlled by a culvert. This is a complex
wetland and includes PFO1A wetlands consisting of drainages from upland areas and another
wetland. The lower part of the wetland is well defined by the culvert. This has allowed for a
well defined transition from wetland to upland. In the upper drainage area the transition is along
the bed of the intermittent stream that drains the upper portion of this and adjacent sites.
Wetland 5 was classified with the following components Type 3 (PEM1C) this is a fresh
meadow. This is an isolated depression that supports a seasonally flooded wetland. This wetland
is isolated the boundary is defined by the change from open grassy/wet to hydrophytic shrubs to
upland species.
The delineated boundary followed a change in vegetation composition and a change in
topography. Wetlands did not correspond to NWI-mapped wetlands.
Other Areas
No other areas were shown as wetland on the NWI map, no other areas were mapped with hydric
soil by the soil survey, and no other depressional areas dominated by a hydrophytic plant
community were observed on the site.
Historic Aerial Photography
Aerial photography was obtained dating back to 1940, these photos did not show any wetland
signature in the area of wetland 3 until after the residence was constructed. It appears this
wetland was created by the grading for the home. The wetland could therefore be considered
incidental.
Please see the photos attached after the precipitation data section.
7
V. CERTIFICATION OF DELINEATION
The procedures utilized in the described delineation are based on the COE 1987 Wetland
Delineation Manual as required by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and the Minnesota
Wetland Conservation Act. Both the delineation and report were conducted in compliance with
regulatory standards in place at the time the work was completed.
All site boundaries indicated on figures within this report are approximate and do not constitute
an official survey product.
Report completed by: Paul J. Brandt PSS
Delineation completed by: Paul J. Brandt PSS
I hereby certify that this plan, document, or report was prepared by me or under my direct
supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Soil Scientist under the Laws of the state
of Minnesota.
Print Name: Paul J. Brandt PSS; Signature:
Date: May 29, 2019 License # 30007 .
July 19, 2019
8
Appendices
Figures:
Figure 1 – Site Location Map
Figure 2 – Delineated Wetlands Map
Figure 3 – Soils Map
Figure 4 - NWI Map
Figure 5 – DNR Protected Waters Map
Figure 6 – City Wetland Map
459252v1 CBR RS220-356
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
THIS INSTRUMENT is made by Ronald and Rebecca Gruenes, Husband and Wife,
Grantor, in favor of the City of Rosemount, a Minnesota municipal corporation, Grantee.
Recitals
A. Grantor is the fee owner of the following described property, which property is located in
Dakota County, Minnesota (the “Property”):
Lot 1, Block 1, Deer Haven
B. Grantor desires to grant to the Grantee an easement, according to the terms and conditions
contained herein.
Terms of Easement
1. Grant of Easement. For good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is acknowledged
by Grantor, Grantor grants and conveys to the Grantee the following easement:
A perpetual, non-exclusive easement for flowage and conservation purposes over, under,
across and through that part of the Property legally described and depicted on the
attached Exhibit A.
(the “Easement Area”).
2. Scope of Easement. Grantor, for itself and its successors and assigns, declares and
agrees that the following prohibitions shall continue in perpetuity in the Easement Area:
a. Constructing, installing or maintaining anything made by man.
b. Cutting or removing trees or other vegetation. Notwithstanding the foregoing,
trimming trees to maintain their health, removing diseased trees and removing
selected trees to allow sunlight to penetrate to limited parts of the Easement Area
may be permitted, but only when approved by the Grantee.
c. Excavating or filling within the Easement Area.
2
459252v1 CBR RS220-356
d. Applying chemicals for destruction or retardation of vegetation, unless first
approved by the Grantee.
e. Depositing of waste or debris.
f. Applying herbicides, pesticides and insecticides.
g. Applying fertilizers.
h. Conducting activities detrimental to the preservation of the scenic beauty,
vegetation and wildlife in the Easement Area.
i. Removing, damaging, destroying or defacing any monuments or markers placed
to delineate the Easement Area.
3. Grantor, for itself, its successors and assigns, grants to the Grantee the affirmative right,
but not the obligation, to do the following in the Easement Area:
a. Enhance the slope, trees, vegetation and natural habitat at no cost to the Grantor.
b. Enter upon the Easement Area at any time to enforce compliance with the terms
of this Conservation Easement.
c. Take such other action as the Grantee deems necessary or advisable in its sole
discretion to enforce compliance with the terms of this Conservation Easement.
d. Install and maintain monuments or markers delineating the Easement Area.
4. Warranty of Title. The Grantor warrants that it is the owner of the Property and has the
right, title and capacity to convey to the Grantee the Conservation Easement herein.
5. Environmental Matters. The Grantee shall not be responsible for any costs, expenses,
damages, demands, obligations, including penalties and reasonable attorney's fees, or losses
resulting from any claims, actions, suits or proceedings based upon a release or threat of release
of any hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants which may have existed on, or which
relate to, the Easement Area or Property prior to the date of this instrument.
6. Binding Effect; Enforceability. The terms and conditions of this instrument shall run
with the land and be binding on the Grantor, and Grantor’s successors and assigns. This
Conservation Easement is enforceable by the City of Rosemount acting through its City Council.
STATE DEED TAX DUE HEREON: NONE
Dated this _____ day of ______________, 2020.
GRANTOR
___________________________________
3
459252v1 CBR RS220-356
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF DAKOTA )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of
_______________________, 2020, by Ronald and Rebecca Gruenes, Husband and Wife,
Grantor.
______________________________
Notary Public
NOTARY STAMP OR SEAL
THIS INSTRUMENT DRAFTED BY:
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
470 U.S. Bank Plaza
Minneapolis, MN 55402
A-1
459252v1 CBR RS220-356
Exhibit A
Legal Description
Aerial Photograph—3904 120th Street
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
City of
RosemountCof
fee
T
r
120TH ST W
700'0 100 20050Feet70'
MEMORANDUM
To: Kyle Klatt, Senior Planner
CC: Kim Lindquist, Community Development Director
Brian Erickson, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Stacy Bodsberg, Planning & Personnel Secretary
From: Stephanie Smith, Assistant City Engineer
Date: July 23, 2019
Subject: Deer Haven Preliminary and Final Plat – Engineering Review
SUBMITTAL:
The following review comments were generated from documents prepared by Lake and Land
Surveying:
▫ Preliminary Plat (dated 4/25/2019)
GENERAL COMMENTS:
1. The applicant shall submit a plat signed by a professional engineer, licensed with the State of
Minnesota.
2. Stormwater trunk fees are due for this development within the Lebanon Hills Subwatershed
Area at $3,772 per acre.
RIGHT OF WAY AND EASEMENTS:
The proposed plat shows a 33-foot right-of-way dedication for 120th Street to match the prescriptive
right-of-way width.
3. The plat shall dedicate the western 25 feet of the site as right-of-way for an extension of
Coffee Trail to match half of the 50-foot dedication from the Oak Ridge Estates plat to the
south.
4. The plat shall dedicate perimeter D&U easements per City ordinance.
5. The applicant shall provide information on the 60-foot ingress and egress easement shown
on the southern property line. If this easement is in favor of a third party, it shall be
modified so as to prevent encumbering the Coffee Trail extension right-of-way.
6. Conservation easement shall be dedicated over the wetlands and wetland buffer areas.
7. An access easement and maintenance agreement is required between Lots 1 and 3, Block 1
over the shared driveway.
UTILITIES:
This area is outside the MUSA and does not contain City utilities.
8. The proposed new lots shall be served by private wells and septic systems. Proposed
locations of well, primary and secondary septic sites shall be shown for each lot.
DRIVEWAY:
The applicant proposes sharing the existing driveway between Lots 1 and 3, Block 1.
9. The Fire Marshal is requiring the shared portion of the driveway be a 16-foot minimum
width for emergency vehicle access.
10. All lots shall have a driveway turnaround for vehicles near the house.
GRADING & STORMWATER COMMENTS:
The applicant has not submitted proposed grading for the two new home sites that will be created
with this plat, so they will need to be evaluated with the building permit applications by the
Engineering Department.
11. New lots must meet City ordinance and requirements for grading and stormwater.
12. Grading in excess of 50 cubic yards will require a separate grading permit.
13. An erosion control and restoration plan is required for the work to widen the shared
driveway.
14. The applicant shall label the proposed lowest floor elevation and housing style (full
basement, walkout, sidewalkout, etc.). Note this may be adjusted with the Building Permit.
15. Man-made items, such as the existing driveway, are not allowed within the buffer area. Staff
recommends use of buffer averaging to achieve this.
Should you have any questions or comments regarding the items listed above, please contact me at
651-322-2015.
PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
JULY 23, 2019
PAGE 1
I. Regular Meeting
Call to Order:
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, July 23,
2019. Chair Kenninger called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. with Commissioners VanderWiel, Freeman, Reed, Rivera,
and Lundquist. Commissioner Schmisek was absent. Also in attendance were Community Development Director
Lindquist, Senior Planner Klatt, Planner Nemcek, City Engineer Smith and Recording Secretary Bodsberg.
The Pledge of Allegiance was said.
Additions to Agenda: None.
Audience Input: None.
Consent Agenda:
a. Approval of the June 25, 2019 Regular Meeting Minutes.
MOTION by Reed.
Second by VanderWiel.
Ayes: 5. Nays: 0. Kenninger abstained because she was absent for the June 25, 2019 meeting.
Wetlands Regulation Presentation by Roxy Franta, WSB Engineering
Public Hearing:
6.a. Request by Rebecca and Ronald Gruenes for a Rezoning, Simple Plat, with Variance to create a three-lot
subdivision called Deer Haven. (19-32-SMP, 19-33-V, 19-34-RZ)
Senior Planner Klatt gave a brief summary of the staff report for the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Rivera questioned what the benefit would be to rezone this specific property since the property below
will still be AG-Agricultural. Klatt stated that the properties usually keep the AG zoning until development is close and
that it would be then consistent with the Comp Plan.
Commissioner VanderWiel inquired if the shared driveway would potentially hurt the existing wetland. Klatt stated that
the driveway has been evaluated by staff. Staff is requesting that the driveway get expanded to 16 feet and this will help
ensure that the impact is limited. VanderWiel inquired how close the driveway is to the edge of the wetland. Klatt stated
it is roughly 10-15 feet. When expanded the driveway will be moved further away from the wetland.
Commissioner VanderWiel inquired why Coffee Trail is not being extended versus the property having the shared
driveway. Klatt stated that its possible to extend Coffee Trail in the future but at this time there isn’t a right-of-way to
run a city road without impacting the wetland and property. It would be difficult to do without negatively impacting the
property and wetlands. Vander Wiel questioned if that road will ever be extended in the future. Klatt stated that it
probably would not be but possibly as other properties near Coffee Trail develop.
Public Hearing opened at 7:39 pm.
Public Comments:
John Slizor, 4990 120th Street West, stated that the property has an easement along the back, the shared driveway is not
necessary and would like to see Coffee Trail extended. Mr. Slizor is concerned that the development will diminish the
rural setting that surrounds their home.
William Meyer, 4000 120th Street West, questioned if the developer could replat the L shaped section into 2 acre lots in
the future.
PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
JULY 23, 2019
PAGE 2
Ron Gruenes,48545 Shanaska Creek Road, Kasota, stated that he is the applicant and that their intentions are to move
up to Rosemount. Mr. Gruenes would like to only sell one lot and keep the other lot.
MOTION by Freeman to close the public hearing.
Second by VanderWiel.
Ayes: 6. Nays: 0. Motion Passes.
The public hearing was closed at 7:54 pm.
Additional Comments:
Kenninger inquired if there are any constraints on subdividing this land into smaller lots. Klatt stated that they are
limited to how many homes that they can put on the land.
VanderWiel stated that she would like to explore placing the access on the south of the property. She would not like to
permanently place a hard surface on the current driveway so that it would not alter the wetland that is located around the
driveway.
Rivera stated that she would also have a hard time moving forward without looking closer at the option of using the
Coffee Trail cul-de-sac to create another access point onto the property.
Community Development Director Lindquist stated that they would prefer to not place a driveway through a wetland
but the driveway is already in place and are just recommending that it gets a minor adjustment so that it has a wider
access. The south of the property was not looked at because if a driveway was placed in that area it would have to go
through 50 percent of the property just to reach the current house.
Reed stated that he would feel comfortable placing a condition about the easement on the south of the property.
Freeman stated that she is also leaning toward approval because the driveway is already in place instead of creating a
road through the entire site.
Kenninger stated that by using the current driveway it would be less in cumbersome then creating a road through the
property.
VanderWiel stated that with the information that is before her she is unable to vote on this item.
MOTION by Reed by the Planning Commission to adopt a resolution approving a variance to allow the
creation of two lots that share one driveway and that do not meet the minimum lot width requirements for an
RR-Rural Residential Zoning District.
Second by Freeman.
Ayes: 3. Nays: 3. Rivera, Lundquist, VanderWiel. Motion Denied.
MOTION by VanderWiel to table this item and bring it back to the August 27, 2019 regular meeting.
Second by Reed.
MOTION by VanderWiel to table the remaining two motions.
Second by Rivera.