No preview available
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.