Laserfiche WebLink
Amitstm <br /> Amir <br /> MEMORANDUM <br /> AST.PAUL.MN ❑ MINNEAPOLIS,MN = ST CLOUD.MN LT CHIPPEWA FALLS, WI ❑ MADISON. WI <br /> TO: Paul Harrington,Community Development Coordinator <br /> City of Mounds View <br /> FROM: Rocky J. Keehn,P.E. <br /> DATE: November 2, 1995 <br /> RE: Mounds View,Minnesota <br /> Sherri Ruf-Proposed Grading for Lot at Woodale Drive and Longview <br /> SEH No.A-MOUND9601.00 <br /> We have completed our review of the latest proposals by Sherri Ruf. Beth Nixon, one of our <br /> wetland specialist,did a brief review of the wetland delineation. I had her review the project since <br /> we had no performance history (previous review of work performed) of the delineator. My own <br /> review will concentrate on the drainage and wetland impacts of the proposal. <br /> Beth indicated that it was not a great report,but was average to below average. She felt that if SEH <br /> had final review on the delineation, further clarifications of some of the items would have been <br /> required. We both felt that since the project was small,Rice Creek's review of the delineation would <br /> be acceptable. <br /> SITE PLAN NO. 1 -(Requires the City to Sell a Portion of the Property to Sherri Ruf) <br /> From a drainage perspective, the site plan proposed in very acceptable. It maintains the existing <br /> drainage pattern of the lot. This allows for the backyards along the east side of the property to <br /> drain as they dotoday. The only area of concern is the proposed grading on the south end of the <br /> lot. Drainage from the east to the west must be maintained. I would recommend a culvert under <br /> the walkway to the park. This will assure future drainage from the east. <br /> The minimum building elevation proposed has the necessary freeboard (2-feet) above the 100-year <br /> ponding elevation of 889.9. Due to the size of the change in land use, increased runoff from the <br /> house and driveway will have no impact on the 100-year flood elevation. <br /> The proposed site is within the 100-foot buffer of the wetland. The purpose of the buffer is to <br /> protect the adjacent wetlands. If construction is permitted in the buffer area, the developer or <br /> owner would need to demonstrate that'best management practices"were being done to protect the <br /> wetland. The site as drawn does not appear to try and protect the wetland. <br /> As shown,the sodded or lawn areas would be adjacent to the wetland area. There appears not to <br /> be a natural buffer strip to prevent yard and driveway runoff from going directly into the wetland. <br /> If the owner would provide a 5 to 10-foot buffer strip of natural upland between the yard and <br />