Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission June 7, 2000 <br />Regular Meeting Page 13 <br /> <br /> <br />better treated and accommodated. Commissioner Johnson added that this would also provide an <br />opportunity for potential wetland credits. <br /> <br />Chairperson Peterson inquired if the proposed pond would be designed with shallow banks, and <br />similar in style to the pond at the Theater project, rather than the drainage trenches utilized at <br />Mounds View Square. Community Development Director Jopke stated that this was correct. <br /> <br />Chairperson Peterson inquired if the pond would be attractive, as opposed to the utilitarian style <br />ponds that require fences. Mr. Cunningham stated that the pond would be visually attractive and <br />safe. He noted litter traps would be installed. <br /> <br />Chairperson Peterson inquired if there was significant fluctuation in the water levels of the <br />wetlands during different periods of the year. Mr. Peterson stated that at certain times in the <br />year, there was a foot or two of water in the area. <br /> <br />Chairperson Peterson inquired if the proposed drainage plans would stabilize the water levels <br />and provide additional capacity to handle a large flooding situation. Planning Associate Ericson <br />stated that there would be more control over fluctuation in the water levels, in that more of the <br />storm water would be diverted into the pond, and there would be less runoff draining directly <br />into the wetland. <br /> <br />Chairperson Peterson inquired if there could be any additional flooding as a result of this <br />proposal. Planning Associate Ericson stated no. He indicated the storm water ponds would be <br />sized according to the 100-year rainfall events, and there would be an overflow storm sewer, <br />which would automatically divert any excess volume underneath Highway 10, and into the <br />Highway 10 storm sewer system, and the pond could not reach a point where it would overflow <br />its banks. He advised that a graded above-ground outlet would be installed, which would feed <br />into the Highway 10 drainage ditch in the case of a 100-year rain event, and in addition, an <br />overflow storm sewer would be built into the drainage system. <br /> <br />Commissioner Kaden inquired if the storm sewer pipe that was proposed to run through the <br />wetlands would be located underground. <br /> <br />Planning Associate Ericson indicated the storm sewer would be required to skirt or run <br />underneath the wetlands. He stated that oftentimes, there is some standing water in the area of <br />the signs, and the storm sewer would either run through this area, or at the boundary of the <br />wetland approximately 150 to 200 feet from Highway 10, which would be a shorter distance, and <br />would disturb less of the wetland. He stated that preliminary discussions with Rice Creek <br />Watershed District indicate that this would not be a problem, and would be preferable in terms of <br />the wetland. He advised that the pipe would be located below ground, and there would be <br />minimal disruption at the time it is installed. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller inquired how soon the applicant expected to hear from Ramsey County <br />regarding the access off of Highway 10. Planning Associate Ericson stated that there was some