Laserfiche WebLink
r� . <br />�'� ;I , <br />� ST. P,4IJL, Mfd O NJlNNEAApLlS, MM b ST CLOUD, MM ❑ CNlPPE3NR FALLS, W! p MAD150N, lN! p <br />LAICE �UNYY,IN <br />TO: Jirxa Ericson, City af Maunds View <br />FROM: Rocky 3. �ee� �i <br />DATE: <br />� <br />� <br />Augiast �, 1997 <br />Siiverview Es�ates, City PIaaning Case 495997, S�H File IVo. �,MOUND9701.0� <br />Our rcview was 6as� on a s�t of plans received by the Cicy on July 25, i997'. The preiiminary grading aad crosaon <br />conrrol plan was dated 7/11/97. On� ieean aae submit�ed was a drainage map shqwing nc� subwatersheds to each <br />Pond• 'The map shouid iziciude roof drair�age and show those arcas tbat will flow to the garage arid thus ne�d to be <br />' drained using pumps (shvw wheze Ph� pump runo�f will disc$rarge)o <br />�ased on Lhis see of pians, rh� majo� pond in th� ccnt� of th� site appeax�s to be adequate, The ottaer two ponds need <br />further refiraem�ne. The r�ini�uurn de�th af a IVCTRP ponds is foeEr feec. The proposed pond next Co �Jie 1 story of�ce <br />building does not rneet this criteria. The p�nd located nexc to �ilver Lak� 1�oad l�as no s�parari�n bet,R,�en the inlet <br />and t�e vutlet on the sourh side of the porzd.. This wi11 cause shore cixccuiting and thus gzeatly red.uC� �ae e�$ciency <br />- ' , of Chc pond. <br />Th� site a3so �eaP1y infringes on r�e lOQ-�foot buffer around the wet�and. ?.lthough some measure have been done <br />to prote�e the werland, therc are severai hig#�I.y used iffipervious surfac� next to th� wetland. 'I'o h�ip this problern <br />at the 1 story ofFc� building parkin� lot, we would tii�e ti�e develap�r to invesrigate if C�ey ca.ti movc [he bua�din� <br />10 feet fiuther northwest. `P�71S W1II C%�3$� CWO B��I�OII2I PSIIf171�P $�IIS W�1SC� 3�IQW5 Cf1CIT1 [O CZ1Tkiili�L� [�'I� CWp <br />parkiag ax�as ciosest to the wctland. <br />The Cfty should also consider obtaining a 20 faot easement araund the d�lineated wettand.. By obeaining the <br />eas�ment, rhe City can controi iand use (�aowing, �tc) i� th� re�u�� ���r �ye would also recommend that <br />plantings b� used in the �asement which deter people fro� �oing into the area. <br />We no�ced thae on o�ze drawi,�g the cex��ai go�d has a walkway on the wetiand side. The pcoblem with this is that <br />rhe ,,rad�n� plan shows a riprap overflaw in the same lacation. The developer s�ouid correct ttiis inconsistency in <br />th� gians. <br />In order to compiet� our fanat reView,. ehe deveioper should su�a�it rhe followin�: <br />I. Dr�ina�e l�tap showing eh� propased subwatersheds to each pand and pari�ng Qaaagc. <br />Z• Address the feasibility of chan�..ng th� parking lot of the 1 story of�ice building t� reduce the imp�ct on t�� <br />wetland buffer. <br />3. Address th� feasibiIity of providang a ZO foot easement around the wetland 5o the �ty has co�trol of the <br />buffer. <br />4- Revise the grading and draina�e plans so the I story o�c� building pand laas faur feet of dept�i and the se�aior <br />housing pond will aot shart cincuit. <br />Ig you have any questians or if I ffiay b� of further s�rviee ple�se call �� at �90��42b. <br />RJKlrjk <br />�aoz <br />