Loading...
6.1. SR 02-01-1993 ITEM 6. 1. SUBJECT: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL - ) ~V JANELLE SCHMITZ, ZONING ASSIST~._../~l JANUARY 27, 1993 l-/~ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST BY STEVEN SHOEMAKER/PUBLIC HEARING, CASE NO. CU 92-025 TO: FROM: DATE: APPLICANT The applicant, Steven Shoemaker (11106-190th Avenue NW) is requesting a conditional use permit to excavate a wetland area to create an open water pond in Royal Oaks Ridge. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission originally reviewed this item at the December 22, 1992, meeting and it was continued to January 26, 1993, allowing the applicant to address several concerns (including traffic, size of the pond, duration of the project, and comments from the DNR). For details, I have attached a copy of the memo dated December 16, 1992, the December 22, 1992, and the January 26, 1993, Planning Commission Minutes. . TRUCK TRAFFIC The app~icant has obtained permission from property owners Larry Morrell and George Deschenes to route truck traffic through their property to County Road 13, south of the affected property. The trucks would enter onto County Road 13, approximately 1/4 mile from its intersection with 5th Street. Staff spoke with Harvey Richner, Sherburne County Highway Department, regarding access to the County Road. Mr. Richner stated although no access permit would be required, the County would like to see the area "signed" to inform traffic of trucks entering and exiting in this location. Also, the applicant will need to comply with weight restrictions placed on County roads. It appears that a field road exists in this location, however, the applicant has indicated fill may need to be brought in to support the weight of the trucks. REVISED SITE PLAN . I have included a copy of the revised site plan for your review. Although the surface area of the pond would remain approximately 3 acres, Mr. Shoemaker has revised the site plan to reduce the estimated amount of excavated fill from 31,250 cubic yards of fill to 19,000. This was done by reducing the slopes and depth of the pond. The north 1/2 of the pond would maintain 5:1 slopes and would have an average depth of 4-5 feet. The homeowners would like to keep the area surrounding the front of the pond manicured; natural vegetation would not 720 Dodge Avenue N.W., Elk River, Minnesota 55330 (612) 441-7420 . . . CUP, Steven Shoemaker January 27, 1993 Page 2 be planted. The applicant chose to implement the DNR's recommendation of a 10:1 slope on the back portion of the pond. This area would have an average depth of 3-4 feet. An unexcavated island is planned in the middle of the south 1/2 of the pond. Staff has enclosed a brochure from the DNR regarding excavation of ponds for water fowl which gives recommendations on how to properly construct wildlife ponds. DRAINAGE At the December meeting, a few neighbors were present to express their concerns with the proposed project including what affect this excavation would have on drainage in the area, traffic concerns, noise and other disruptions to a residential area. Staff feels this proposed excavation should not have an affect on drainage in the area if certain precautions are taken. City engineer, Terry Maurer, indicated if the City Council approves a general concept for the proposed excavation, the City should require more detailed plans before excavation begins (i.e., elevations of lowest floors in the area, and existing and proposed topography). These details are necessary to ensure the drainage will not be affected and to properly inspect the work in progress. Mr. Maurer's comments are available in the attached letter dated January 20, 1993. Mr. Shoemaker is considering a clay liner on the east side to ensure the pond retains water. This may be considered fill in a wetland which would not be allowed. NOISE The City ordinance regarding excavation (Section 720) places standards on these types of activities. Hours of operation are limited from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Saturday. Maximum noise levels shall comply with the limits established by the MPCA and the EPA. Because this excavation is in a residential area, more restrictive standards may be desired. The Planning Commission is recommending work commence no earlier than 8 a.m. SAFETY The issue of safety should be addressed in an liability. The applicant has slightly altered depth to a safer level. Staff is recommending of 3-4 feet for safety reasons. effort to limit the slope and a maximum depth FUTURE EXCAVATIONS Staff recommends the City take a look at the bigger picture regarding excavation of wetlands. A study of wetlands should be conducted to determine which ones should remain untouched and which ones the City would allow to be altered. For background information, I have attached an article from the January 3, 1993, Minneapolis Star Tribune regarding wetlands in the Metropolitan area. CUP, Steven Shoemaker January 27, 1993 Page 3 . PROPERTY VALUES A couple of neighbors present at the January 26 Planning Commission meeting were concerned the pond may actually cause their property values to increase and thereby raise their taxes. RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of the general concept of this request for a conditional use permit to excavate an estimated 19,000 cubic yards of fill in a Type 3 wetland in Royal Oaks Ridge subdivision. Staff feels the concerns raised at the December Planning Commission meeting regarding traffic, safety, and neighborhood disruption have been sufficiently addressed. Should the City Council approve this request, Staff does recommend a detailed grading plan be provided by the applicant for review by Staff so details regarding drainage can be addressed. In recommending approval, Staff would like to emphasize that this is a residential area and particular attention should be given to protecting the residential nature of the area throughout the excavation project. At the January 26, 1993 meeting, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the general concept of this request with the following stipulations: . . 1. TRUCKS ENTER AND EXIT THE SITE VIA THE MORRELL AND DESCHENES PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH, ONTO COUNTY ROAD 13. WRITTEN PERMISSION IN A FORMAT APPROVED BY CITY STAFF FROM MORRELL AND DESCHENES TO USE THEIR PROPERTY BE PROVIDED TO THE CITY TO ENSURE THAT TRUCKS WILL NOT BE ROUTED THROUGH RESIDENTIAL STREETS. FURTHER, THE APPLICANT COMPLY WITH THE COUNTY REQUEST TO HAVE THE AREA "SIGNED" TO INFORM TRAFFIC OF TRUCKS ENTERING AND EXITING AND COMPLY WITH THE WEIGHT RESTRICTIONS. 2. FOR SAFETY AS WELL AS WILDLIFE PURPOSES, SLOPES SHALL NOT EXCEED 5:1 AND THE DEPTH SHALL NOT EXCEED 3-4 FEET OF WATER. THE DNR GUIDELINES OF 10:1 SLOPES, 2-3 FOOT AVERAGE DEPTH OF WATER, NATURAL VEGETATION ALONG THE PERIMETER OF THE POND, AND IRREGULAR SHORELINE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE POND. 3. NO FILL SHALL BE PLACED BACK INTO THE BOUNDARY. WETLAND 4. SLOPES ARE STABILIZED AND PLANTED WITH GROUND SUFFICIENT TO CONTAIN THE SOIL. SUCH GROUND SHALL BE TENDED AS NECESSARY UNTIL IT IS SUSTAINING. COVER COVER SELF 5. THE EXCAVATION SHOULD NOT DISRUPT DRAINAGE PATTERN FOR THE AREA. THE OVERALL . . . CUP, Steven Shoemaker January 27, 1993 Page 4 6. THE APPLICANT PROVIDE THE CITY WITH A DETAILED GRADING PLAN AS OUTLINED IN TERRY MAURER'S LETTER DATED JANUARY 20, 1993. 7. THE APPLICANT REIMBURSE THE CITY FOR THE COST OF REVIEWING AND INSPECTING THE EXCAVATION PROJECT. 8. THE APPLICANT OBTAIN THE SIGNATURES OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS FOR LOTS 8 AND 9, BLOCK 4, ROYAL OAKS RIDGE OR THESE LOTS SHALL BE EXCLUDED FROM THE REQUEST. 9. THE HOURS OF OPERATION BE RESTRICTED FROM 8 A.M. TO 7 P.M., MONDAY THROUGH SATURDAY. 10. EXCAVATION ACTIVITY SHALL BE COMPLETED WITHIN 2 YEARS OF THE DATE OF THE APPROVAL. 11. STOCKPILING OF EXCAVATED DIRT SHALL BE APPROVED BY CITY STAFF. " . . . '1--7. Elk River Planning Commission December 22, 1992 Page 5 6. Consider Conditional Use Permit Request by Larry Leitschuh/Public Hearing Janelle Schmitz, Zoning Assistant, explained the applicant, Larry Leitschuh, 9110-83rd Avenue N, Brooklyn Park, MN, is requesting a conditional use permit to operate a health facility (aerobic studio) in the Elk River Mall. The owner of the proposed facility is Janelle Swanson of Monticello. Ms. Schmitz continued: Janelle Swanson is interested in locating a health facility in the Elk River Mall at 692 Freeport Avenue. The facility would primarily be used for aerobic exercise classes. According to the Elk River Plaza PUD agreement, commercial recreational uses such as this are considered a conditional use, therefore, a conditional use permit is required. The site plan shows a new sound wall will be placed along the perimeter of the site. The proposed hours of operation are 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Because the facility is located within a shopping center, the parking requirement does not need to be addressed with this request. Staff is recommending approval of operate a health facility in following stipulation be added to proofed. the conditional use permit request to the Elk River Mall and recommends the this approval: The space be sound Chairman Nadeau opened the public hearing. There being no comments from the public, Chairman Nadeau closed the public hearing. Commissioner Spotts questioned why the planning commission had to review this request if staff could make the appropriate decision. Janelle Schmitz informed the planning commission that due to the conditional use status in this POD, planning commission action is required. Further, staff plans to work with the City attorney and the developer regarding this PUD in an effort to make it more flexible. COMMISSIONER MINTON MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A HEALTH FACILITY (AEROBIC STUDIO) IN THE ELK RIVER MALL, CASE NO. 92-026, CITING STAFF'S MEMO DATED DECEMBER 15, 1992, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING STIPULATION: 1. THE SPACE BE SOUND PROOFED. COMMISSIONER SPOTTS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. Consider A Conditional Use Permit Request. by St...n s~alcer/hbU.. ~.i.g Commissioner Spotts stated he is a property owner within the affected area and would abstain from discussion and voting on this item due to the perception of conflict of interest. Elk River Planning Commission December 22, 1992 Page 6 - Janelle Schmitz, Zoning Assistant, explained the applicant, Steven . Shoemaker, 11106-190th Avenue NW, is requesting a conditional use permit to excavate roughly 31,250 cubic yards of black dirt from a Type 3 wetland to construct an open water pond for wildlife viewing. The Soil and Water Conservation District, the Board of Water and Soil Resources, and the Army Corps of Engineers reviewed this request and reported no problems with the request. Although the proposal will not affect any public water wetlands and approval of the DNR is not required, Dale Homuth, DNR Area Hydrologist, commented that the proposed alteration should not be viewed as a wildlife habitat improvement and suggested modifications. Ms. Schmitz expressed staff's concerns with the amount of traffic generated with this proposal. Considering the amount of fill being removed, the truck traffic in a residential neighborhood would be extensive. The applicant is researching alternative routes. Ms. Schmitz reminded the planning commission of Terry Maurer's letter suggesting the streets be inspected before beginning the proposed project. Staff believes the traffic issue and related road condition issues are the primary concerns with this request. Ed Stoutenburg, 19032 Yale Circle NW, asked if the pond would alter current drainage patterns. Ms. Schmitz responded as per the City engineer, it will not improve drainage in the area however, it should not have a detrimental affect either. . Ms. Schmitz indicated staff is recommending denial of the request for a conditional use permit to excavate 31,250 cubic yards of black dirt in a Type 3 wetland. Further, staff feels this request does not meet the seven standards for a conditional use permit. Ms. Schmitz stated staff is particularly concerned with the traffic generated by the proposed use and the affect the use would have on the residential area. If the applicant were to find an alternative route for trucks to use and the plan was altered to comply with the DNR recommendations, staff would be more supportive of the request. Chairman Nadeau opened the public hearing. Stephen Hartman, 19075 Xavier Street NW, asked if this pond would affect the normal drainage flow in the area when it is constructed and several years from now. Further, can a drainage study be done to eliminate concerns of this nature. Stephen Rohlf explained the current drainage pattern of the area and replied the City engineer and the Soil and Water Conservation District did not have any particular concerns regarding drainage patterns. Ms. Schmitz recommended the planning commission and the City require soil boring tests prior to the proposed excavation. In conclusion, Mr. Hartman stated his concern regarding the traffic in his neighborhood and that he is against the proposed wetland excavation. After extensive discussion and given excavation, the planning commission until questions can be resolved and the complexity of the proposed recommended continuing this item presented more clearly. Ms. . - . . . 1 Elk River Planning Commission December 22, 1992 Page 7 Schmitz recommended Steven Shoemaker return to the commission with a new site plan with several issues resolved (truck access/alternative routes, design, and amount of fill being removed). Ms. Schmitz also requested the applicant show the gas lines on the revised site plan. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST BY STEVEN SHOEMAKER, CASE NO. CU 92-025, TO THE JANUARY 26, 1993, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO BE HELD AT THE ELK RIVER PUBLIC LIBRARY. COMMISSIONER TVEITE SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 8. Farmers Market/Bill Kennedy (Informational Item) Janelle Schmitz, Zoning Assistant, briefed the planning commission regarding a proposed Farmers Market by Bill Kennedy. The Farmers Market has been approved as a non-profit organization. The Kennedy's hope to begin operating on May 1, 1993 and remain open through the end of October. Two sites have been tentatively chosen from which to operate the Farmers Market: the downtown parking lot behind Johnson's Department Store and the Cenex location on Highway 10 and Hudson Street. The Cenex site is zoned C3 and allows produce markets, however, the downtown site is zoned C1 and does not. Also, signage issues need to be resolved: the Kennedy's indicated they wish to have a permanent sign as well as a banner at each location which would remain throughout the entire season. The Kennedy's also indicated they would like to have several off-premise directional signs. Issues related to parking should be addressed prior to the Farmers Market opening. More information regarding the layout of the proposed Farmers Market is needed. It was the would be supportive consensus of the planning commission that a Farmers Market an appropriate use in the downtown area, and they would be of an ordinance amendment to allow such a use. 9. OTHER BUSINESS Commissioner Spotts reported the City Council requested a joint City Council and Planning Commission meeting, possibly in February, 1993. Commissioner wetlands and commission. Johnson ponds requested staff in residential review City liability regarding areas and report back to the Commissioner Spotts indicated he would not be attending the Annual Meeting in January, 1993. Stephen Rohlf informed the planning commission of a recent Elk River Associates regarding a meeting January 7, 1993. will be a public meeting presenting the project to the receiving input from concerned parties. The location of will be published in the local newspaper. A copy of the given to each planning commissioner. letter from The meeting public and the meeting letter was ITEM 7 FROM: ~'''; PLAIIllING COMMISSION t<<Jlf'}' J JANELLE SCHMITZ, ZONING ~S~T0()l'Y DECEMBER 16, 1992 ~\\ TO: DATE: SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST BY STEVEN SHOEMAKER "EXCAVATION OF A WETLAND"/PUBLIC HEARING, CU 92-025 APPLICANT Steven Shoemaker, 11106-190th Avenue NW, Elk River. Property owners: Steven and Susan Shoemaker, lll06-190th Avenue NW (Lot 6, Block 4); Jack and Sharon Ellis, l1094-190th Avenue NW (Lot 7, Block 4); Dean and Joann Desmith, 11058-l90th Avenue NW (Lot 10, Block 4); Dennis and Barb Mitchell, ll042-l90th Avenue NW (Lot 11, Block 4). Lot 8 and 9, Block 4, are vacant, however, they are included with this request. 1. REQUESTED ACTION The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to excavate roughly 31,250 cubic yards of black dirt from a Type 3 wetland to construct an open water pond for wildlife viewing. ~ SITE ZONING/LAND USE Rlc, single family residential/MR, medium density residential. SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USE All directions: Rlc, single family residential/MR, density residential. medium CITY SERVICES These lots are served by City sewer and water. LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lots 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11, Block 4, Royal Oaks Ridge. A map is attached which shows the location of the affected property. BACKGROUND ~ The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit which would allow him to excavate roughly 31,250 cubic yards of black dirt from an existing wetland located in Royal Oaks Ridge. The black dirt generated would be removed from the premise and sold by the contractor. It is unclear at this time whether the black dirt would be stock piled on site until it was sold or if it would be removed immediately and sold elsewhere. The proposed pond would measure approximately 450' x 390', 720 Dodge Avenue N.W., Elk River, Minnesota 55330 (612) 441-7420 regular tandem truck can carry approximately 10 cubic yards of fill, this proposed project would involve 3,125 trucks entering and leaving Royal Oaks Ridge subdivision through residential streets. The applicant has reviewed alternative routes such as . the Morrell property (to the south), however, these may not be viable options. Staff firmly believes that in addition to the normal construction activity in Royal Oaks Ridge subdivision, 3,125 trucks in a residential area would place an undue hardship on neighboring residential properties and would ultimately affect the use and enjoYment of their property. The planning commission should also consider some of the affects of additional truck traffic on residential streets. Mr. Maurer states that the City should inspect the streets prior to the excavation project and require a cash surety in the event that the roads need repair after the project is completed. Mr. Maurer also recommended the applicant should be responsible for regular cleaning of the streets to avoid sediment entering the storm water system. Staff believes the traffic issue and related road condition issue are the primary concerns with this request. This project is not considered an ongoing mining operation according to the City ordinance, however, it is intended to last about two years. Staff feels that subjecting residents of Royal Oaks Ridge to two years of heavy truck traffic would not be appropriate. DRAINAGE Terry Maurer has reviewed drainage with this request. It is his opinion that although the project will not improve drainage in the area, it should not have a detrimental affect on it either. . SAFETY Dale Homuth, DNR, addressed several changes which he would like to see implemented if this request is approved. One of those changes involved reducing the slope to 10:1. This would make the pond safer for children playing around the pond as well as fulfill the needs of wildlife in the area. Mr. Homuth also recommended that the depth be decreased to 2-3 feet. WILDLIFE The applicant has indicated he wishes to construct an open water pond for wildlife viewing. Mr. Homuth's letter states that this type of excavation should not be considered an enhancement for wildlife purposes as many of the features of this pond are contrary to the needs of wildlife, particularly the depth and slope. Mr. Homuth states that an irregular shoreline, variable contours along the bottom of the pond, and natural vegetation along the edges of the pond should be maintained in order to make the pond useful to wildlife. . COMPREHENSIVE PLAN create traffic beyond what should be expected in a residential area. . Subparaqraph 5: Staff feels the use will be detrimental to people because of excess traffic and noise, and possibly smoke, fumes, and dust. It would be unfair to subject people in a residential area to this type of use for a period of two years. Subparaqraph 6: If the request were approved, a natural feature (the wetland) would be altered but not destroyed. Staff is not aware of other scenic or historic features in this area. Subparaqraph 7: If approved, the use would be subject to other codes including hours of operation for construction activities, soil erosion standards, slopes, etc. A mineral excavation license would not be required as the use is proposed to be completed within a 2 year time frame. RECOMMENDATION . Staff is recommending denial of the request for a conditional use permit to excavate 31,250 cubic yards of black dirt in a Type 3 wetland in the Royal Oaks Ridge subdivision. Staff feels this request does not meet the seven standards for a conditional use permit. Staff is particularly concerned with the traffic generated by the proposed use and the affect that the use would have on the residential area due to the magnitude and duration of the project. If the applicant were to find an alternative route for trucks to use and if the plan were altered to comply with the DNR recommendations which would downsize the pond and thus reduce the length of time it would take to complete the project, staff would be more supportive of the request. These changes would alleviate the concerns regarding traffic and other disruption to the residential area. Further, staff would recommend the following stipulations: 1. THE TRUCKS ALTERNATIVE STREETS. ENTER AND EXIT THE SITE FROM AN ROUTE, NOT THROUGH THE RESIDENTIAL 2. FOR SAFETY, AS WELL AS WILDLIFE PURPOSES, THE MEET THE DNR RECOMMENDATIONS OF 10 TO 1 SLOPES, AVERAGE DEPTH, MAINTAIN NATURAL VEGETATION ALONG EDGE, AND IRREGULAR SHORELINE. POND 2-3' THE 3. NO FILL BE PLACED WITHIN THE WETLAND BOUNDARY. 4. APPROVAL IS CONTINGENT ON BWSR AND SWDC COMMENTS. . 5. THE PROJECT BE DOWNSIZED IN DURATION AND SIZE TO MINIMIZE THE AFFECT OF THE OPERATION ON THE RESIDENTIAL AREA. :: i : 8 -. '. ...1..--.. co .. NO II i I"~ ave. f . i t - .Of"t .... . ~~TrnT~@tr~ ~DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PHONE NO. DMSION OF WATERS, P.O. BOX 370, ST. CLOUD, MN 56302 FILENO (612) 255-4278 December 8, 1992 I~'~~', V ~U DEe 9 tin City of Elk River Janelle Szklarski, Zoning Assist. 720 Dodge Ave. NW Elk River, MN 55330 Dear Janelle; COMMENTS ON STEVEN SHOEMAKER WETLAND EXCA V A TION PROPOSAL Thank you for sending me the plan and hearing notice for the proposed 31,000 cubic yard wetland excavation located in Royal Oaks Ridge and proposed by Steven Shoemaker. If excavated, the resulting pond would be roughly 3 acres in area and averaging five feet in depth. This proposal will not affect any public water wetlands. Therefore, approval of the DNR is not required for this project. . However, as I have noted in previous discussions with city officials. the DNR is not always in favor of this type of project. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service's National Wetland Inventory indicates that a type 3 wetland already exists at this location. Excavation of this wetland may not benefit wildlife in the area. A heavily vegetated wetland often provides more habitat for various species of wildlife than does open water. Also, the vegetated wetland often provides for better fIltration of run-off than does an open water pond. While I do not necessarily oppose this particular project, I feel that it should not be considered a wildlife habitat improvement. The real purpose of the project appears to be to either provide black dirt for the contractor or to create an open water view for several home owners. If the City decides to approve this project. I would suggest some modifications to the proposal. The shoreline slope should be made more gradual. A 10 to 1 slope is recommended by wildlife managers because it allows for a wider band of emergent aquatic vegetation and it is considered safer for children playing around the pond. The proposed 5 foot depth is excessive for wildlife habitat and much too shallow for fish habitat. More than 12 foot depths are required to have a chance of supporting fish through a Minnesota winter: Even then, aeration will probably still be required. Depths more than 2 to 3 feet are considered unnecessary for most waterfowl species. It is recommended that the pond have variable depths (see attached brochure). Finally, irregularly shaped ponds provide more attractive wildlife habitat. The shape proposed for "phase 1" is preferred. Adding the "phase 2" area will not enhance the quality of this wetland. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely; O-vC/~ Dale E. Homuth Area Hydrologist ENCLOSURE . cc: Dave Hills, Regional Hydrologist Dale Ebel, Area Conservation Officer AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ~" r.!' \-', \l F i) DEe 4.1m ~~ I., " ~. ~..... _ / f ~ ~ ~ ~ CONSULTING ENGINEERS IfIIiIr'WI Maier Stewart & Associates Inc. . December 3, 1992 File: 230~OOO~OO Ms. Janelle Szklarski Zoning Assistant City of Elk River 720 Dod~e Avenue NW Elk River, MN 55330 RE: STEVEN SHOEMAKE WETLAND EXCA V A TION Dear Ms. Szklarski: As requested, we have reviewed the information you provided relative to the Steven Shoemake request to excavate a wetland in the Royal Oaks Ridge subdivision. Based on our review, we offer the following comments: . 1. The area in question appears on the National Wetlands Inventory; therefore, it is likely a permit from the Corps of Engineers is necessary. 2. The proposal indicates approximately 31,000 cubic yards of excavated material is to be removed from the site. Assuming the typical load would be 10 cubic yards, this means there would be 3,100 truck trips in and out of a residential neighborhood. 3. The ~nnIk~tj0.f! ~n~it:~t.es. the ex('.av:t.t~d !r!2.terial would be sold as black dirt and would .& " . . . . be removed over a two year period. This leads to the question of whether it ~il1 be removed and stockpiled then sold, or only removed once it is sold. If the material is planned to be sold prior to removal, the question is where is the market for 31,000 cubic yards of black dirt the next two years. 4. If this operation is allowed, we would recommend the City inspect the roads prior to it beginning, then require a cash surety be placed to cover any damage to the roads in the area. Also, operations should not be allowed during the spring when roads are more susceptible to damage from heavy loads. Hours and days of operation should also be limited. . 1959 SLOAN PLACE, SUITE 200, Sf. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55117 612-n4-6021 9800 SHELARO PARKWAY, SUITE 102, MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55441 612-546-0432 . Equal Opportunity Employer . . . _ / P ~ ~ ~ ~ CONSULTING ~NGINEEAS IfIIIIIr"WI Maier Stewart & Associates Inc. January 20, 1993 File: 230-000-00 Ms. Janelle Schmitz City of Elk River 720 Dodge Avenue NW Elk River, MN 55330 RE: STEVEN SHOEMAKER WETLAND EXCAVATION Dear Ms. Schmitz: As requested, we have prepared this memo detailing issues we believe need to be addressed if the proposed wetland excavation is approved. We understand Mr. Shoemaker proposes to not use the City streets to remove the excavated material; therefore, the issue of damage to local streets is no longer relative. We also understand Mr. Shoemaker proposes to line a portion of the excavated pond with clay to ensure it retains water. If the proposal is approved, we would recommend the following items be required to be submitted, reviewed, and approved by staff prior to work commencing: 1. A detailed grading plan with one foot contours based on actual mean sea level datum, which details the proposed limits of excavation and grading work and also meets the requirements set in the approval process. 2. A calculation, based on the grading plan, of the total amount of material to be excavated which is within reasonable range of the requested 19,000 cubic yard amount. 3. Survey information, based on the same datum as the grading plan, which details the lowest floor elevations of all homes adjacent to the proposed pond and the elevation at the limits of the drainage easement. 4. Details of an adequate overflow structure to the pond which is a minimum of two feet below the lowest house elevation or one foot below the lowest elevation at the limits of the drainage easement, whichever is lower. 1959 SLOAN PLACE, SUITE 200, ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55117 612-n4-6021 9800 SHELARD PARKWAY, SUITE 102, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55441 612-546-0432 . Equal Opportunity Employer Ms. Janelle Schmitz January 20, 1993 Page Two 5. Written proof of the ability to access the excavation site without the use of local streets. If you have any questions regarding these issues, please call. Sincerely, MAIER STEWART & ASSOCIATES, INC. c;::,fl11t, . ~//'la~~J Terry J. Maurer, P.E. TJM:tp 000-2102.jan . . . 5-/ SLope ~ev ~.sed I Q-, .>J JJ l LpttCl:.. :OJ ~o r e f./1-'13 . . \ I '0 / / / \ I \! , / 'P / I / '\ / '~ o"rnl I yJ~Is1~ 9 o e 511 1'1/1'5 10 \ ~ \~ ~\;'v 7 '\ '\ e , '!J to P A(l.eA ' " ~" I ".,\. " '"'. " . ...s ! ~ 6 5' -'. . 2. b eflnl /'1/-rcll ELL '.5 \ l Si \.l) ~ ~ ~ ~ , '\.. I ....... J.l5...~ '\ ,. '\ '\ . ..... ~. 0 0'--. - - - .- - - .......--(l) . CF3./'I"fE.~ ~t?fA /tll~ox /&,000 cu y1)5" !JNI<. ,4~eA A(JP~6X 'DO C_IA. ytlS SRb;?-€. To 5' ,Aefiil ,AfJl'~x lit;O ~u Yj)5 A P'~oX 'C:Z 000 c:u yiJS 't;: ~::; .;; o~ . '2: ij) 0... . <> 0 0 0 0 .,. 0 '" !"' ... ~ 10 '" ll) '2: ? ... "J .. ~ I , , " " , i1~'~V II':U.V-# . 1 1 , , ? ", N.~ i [""--/35.( lie I:... - 101 . L_~g':!9J r-c;/35.C 1~:8 I\) iS~ L_~!~5.~ . a w 135,C r :~ ~ IS L 95.( r 110 l!=l 01 IS L 135.( rIll 110 ll) 0) <0 XAVIER .364,69 ". STREET N. W. .. 0, ..."J_ !S' *- - - ''f<- ~ .. ~ ,'f. r-----;j r-----' r------,' I 85.00 :1 I 95.00 I I 115.00 .: 1 II I I I" I'''' 1 I", C. 'iJ;,o;~ ; Ill) 1 Ill) ,'ro <0.:: iiil 110 I 110 . ,'.. 01 1 . I I · It: ":v 01 (..j (..j " 4"~ ':'1 Ill). II I:. _ /' . II"" - Ill) W I - I !ll): ~ 111ft' l._ 01 I ,1ft II -- -__ \ I I ----j ~ NAG E E Ai S ~ I<.- ~ lJ' ... E MEN (..j I\) lJ' r-~ ~I.23 I 3E 10."/7- : Ca,,] I'" Ill) 110 1'--- ,lI: I"'" *' Ill) 11ft' I l(..j '1- 'V t4<- '" ~ ~ . ---- \. ~ '0 ~ ,. 95.00 1/5.00 S 1325.81 EAST l.INE OF THE SW'''4 OF THE SW'''4 OF SEe.1t6 ..... ...<'\ ;~ ::t'"l '"1'"1"'" :.-0........ 0"'''1<'\111 :.- 10:'- .. :.- ~, :.- 0 '-I .. c: 'b :.- ~1I,,0'-l .., ~~ .. .. ~ .. "''''c:::>. '<l .. 'b .. ... 'b <:;:b. '" :.- '" '4 ~ '" ... ::':'-1 ;:)o"',..~::t" b' .. ::.: "I 'b 'Il C '"I'" 0: ~. 'b It:'- ""ll<i 'tI ., III ~~IOO(; .. ll. ., :,., ~"'-: ~Ift 'll. 'I) 01) ') ':> " It .. .. 'll .. 0 0 .. ~ ... ..... "0">1 III ;':'-0- ... .,0">1 .." .. .. .. "'Ill ">1 ll."" "'1)'Il">1 .. .. .. 'Il 'Q ::t ..0- III ., 'Q .. "l ;, II '<I 0 ~ ... 00:'- o III C '" 'll ll. .. .... 1.0 :u <:: c: c: '1 ...to.. ... ., 'to: 0: ~ ;::, .... ~ tr " ;, ... 'll - .~r f .... '" .. .. .. ,.., 1.Q <<:'~ ~ "ll.ll.IIl ., 0". .. tr " .. '. Ito ~lt) .. .. .. :'-\t b' ~ ... '1:l " 9 ., '-I'.:) ll."" .. 'll;' ~ ~ ..." 'tI '. (, " 'll ., ... " " ll. '" ... Cl .. ~ .. ., 0 ., ~' ..... 'b .. \I.=> :b '.Q .., "'c: ft0. It ., .. I) ..' '1:1 "'1:1 III ... :r 0" '" ~ III 1I :>- ~ ti f:') '1:l .... "'!'J r--~ 'Q ... '" Cl ., ".. ( .. .. 'll .. " ., .. ., =>.. 0 .. ~ ~~, .. .. Cl. ., ....1 " '.0 () :, r: .. " 0 .. ::r 0 r, " :::. c . Excavated Ponds for Waterfowl (. Landowners frequently ask natural resource agencies how they can improve their land for waterfowl. Specifi- cally, many people wonder if excavating ponds will help. This brochure will outline when and where dug ponds, or "dugouts", can be beneficial, and provides construc- tion guidelines for optimum waterfowl benefit. Refer to our" Ecology ofW etlands" brochure for more informa- tion. SHOULD YOU CONSIDER A DUGOUT FOR YOUR PROPERTY? Dugouts should be considered only where other wetland management options are not possible. Before you decide to excavate a pond, you should survey the site to determine if other options, such as ditch plugs, tile breaks, or dikes would work. Wetlands restored by (. .educing drainage are always preferable to dugouts. In general, dugouts should only be co~structed if there are other open-water wetlands within one-half mile. .. .------. ---::' ---...-- .~ ---:':.I~ -...,=-~. ~~. Waterfowl use dugouts primarily for courtShip and territorial sites, and must have other wetlands to fulfill feeding and brood-rearing needs. Small dug- outs (less than one-half acre) are used mostly in spring or fall migration, less so in summer. Larger dugouts will get more summer use, if they're the right depth (1.5 - 3 feet). You should not excavate a dugout in an existing wetland, especially one with open water. This can destroy the existing wetland by draining surface water off. Excavations should be outside the edge of the wetland, where the water table is still adequately high. Cattail-choked wetlands are an exception w this rule, where vegetation covers the entire surface of the wetland, and surface water is rarely present. In these cases, it may be acceptable to dig in the wetland basin, but you should still stay close to the edge. For . these projects, you will need to observe permit requirements described below and should talk to the local D NR Wildlife Manager. CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES 1. PERMITS. Wedands are protected by several laws, and a permit may be required for your project. Four government agencies regulate wedands, and should be contacted if you will be working in an existing wet- land. These agencies are: U.S. Army Corps ofEngi- neers, USDA - Agricultural Stabilization and Conser- vation Service (ASCS), the DNR Division of Waters, and your city or county zoning office or local water- shed district. Phone numbers for the first 3 agencies are given at the end of this brochure; check your local directory for the number of your local office. 2. DEPTH AND SLOPES. Waterfowl need shallow water. When filled with water, your dugout should be no more than 5 feet deep. In mid-summer, much of your dugout should be less than 3 feet in, depth. Your pond should generally have the following depths when it is full (as in spring): PCt. of Pond Water Depth at this Depth Likely Result o to 1 foot 5to15 Cattails! emergent vegetation, usually drv bv Julv. ,. . 1 to 3 teet 40 to 70 Mixed emergent vegetation and open water, dry in drought. 3 to 5 feet 25 to 40 Mosdyopen water, dry in severe drought. If you are constructing a dugout in cattail-choked wetlands, you will not be able to achieve the above depths. In these cases, the slopes of your dugout will have to be fairly steep. This is okay as these dugouts will function mosdy as territorial sites, and may not be heavily used for feeding. Maximum depth stili should not exceed 5 feet. In mineral soils, steep slopes prohibit growth of desirable vegetation, encourage erosion, and reduce waterfowl use. As much as possible, grade the slopes of your basin at a 3: 1 (steep) to 10: 1 (flat) ratio. Flatter slopes are better, which is not the same as a flat bottom. ..11/, _"', _'U' . ..111. .11" ..",.: .."..... .h. "."'1. ,.1 ~" ..t" ..\1.. \1., _\\11" ..011,. ,'H,. '\\"-, \1., .1';::. _.1,. ..".. ..1/. ,"'" ,,,,''. . .,\1... ..1/.. . .~.,u. . .If, ,,"',,_ _,II,., ..,H,.. "'\"'. .!t. ,U, .,.1I... .' .\11,. ,.i/, '\\/'" ,.\1., ."'... ..' ,I', .,all, I"'" .. "",.. :..,\1.... .,,\'\ . . '\"" .. . ,I ~ ~,'" ,"\ I,. \\Il, ':', -'\'. .,\1 Figure 1. Topographic diagram of a good basin design; . this design emphasizes shallow slopes and depths {each line represents one foot of depth}, and good shoreline features. Adjacent uplands are seeded to native grasses. . A pond bottom with variable depths (i.e., an undulat- ing bottom) is very desirable. This allows an intersper- sion of vegetation and open water which is very attractive to waterfowl. Some biologists prefer to construct dugouts with one deep side to ensure water availability and allow for viewing ofwaterfowl. Figure 1 shows an example of a good basin design ftom the perspective of slopes and depths. 3. SIZE. Waterfowl use all sizes of wedand, but usually, bigger is better. In building your pond for waterfowl you should consider a minimum size of 2500 square feet (equal to a square with 50 foot long sides). Larger, irregularly shaped ponds are preferred, however costs get quite high. 4. SHORELINE FEATURES. A pond with a shore- line which is irregular, and has many points and bays; ~ is more attractive to waterfowl than a dugout with a . straight shoreline. Plan your dugout to have as much shoreline as possible, as in figure 1. ( . 5. NUMBERAND DISTRIBUTION. Ascxpbined above, your dugout should be near an existing shallow marsh for brood-rearing purposes. If you have ad- equate space and funding, you can consider digging more than one dugout. In general, two closely-spaced small dugouts will receive more use than one larger dugour. If you construct more than one pond, space them about 100 to 300 feet apart. Ponds can be closer if tall vegetation screens the ponds from each other (breeding ducks are territorial and won't tolerate oth- ers of the same species if they can see them). 6. ISLANDS. Dugouts less than twO acres are too small to include an island. As an alternative you can use nest baskets, boxes or floating rafts for nesting. A floating log, anchored in place, provides an excellent site for waterfowl and turtle loafing. See our brochure entitled "Artificial Structures for Waterfowl." ( . 7. SPOIL. Excavating a pond means you end up with a lot of soil removed from the dugout; this is called "spoil." Spoil must be carefully dealt with to optimize waterfowl use. In peat soils and cattail-choked wet- lands, you should remove the spoil from the wetland if at all possible. Again, check with the apptopriate agencies (see list at end) to determine if you need a permit. In mineral soils, the top 6"-12" will probably be black topsoil, high in organic matter. This should be saved separately for later spreading over the excavated bot- tom. The underlying nonorganic soils (clays, sands, etc.) should be moved to an upland site and spread evenly. It is important that this material be removed from the wetland basin and not piled adjacent the dugout. The edge of the dugout should not have a discernible "rim"; that is, the slope should be continu- ous below and above the water surface, as showp in the cross-section in figure 2. Finally, all disturbed uplands and spread spoil should be seeded to native grasses for a minimum of 150 feet around the dugout. This will provide waterfowl cover, minimize weed growth, and prevent sedimentation within the basin. Providing 4 acres of upland nesting cover for each acre of wetland is best for duck produc- tion. Do not plant trees near your dugout; these serve as predator perches and dens, and will reduce water- fowl use. Use nest boxes to attract wood ducks. Remember to get any necessary permits before you starr digging! 8. FINAL TREATMENT. The clay and sand under- lying most mineral soils are very sterile and won't support plant growth. In order to establish a food chain in your dugout, you must provide :10 organic base. This can be accomplished by spreading 4" -6" of black topsoil over the eneire excavated area. This can be the topsoil you originally removed (and stockpiled) from the site when you starred digging. Another technique is to spread 2"-6" of clean upland hay over the excavated surface (wild hay can spread noxious weeds). Both can be used simultaneously. Once covered with water, either of these bases will quickly allow vegetation and insects to grow, providing the building blocks for a desirable marsh. Don't worry about planting aquatic planes in your basin - they will establish themselves naturally in time, given a suitable Site. I , 'I Feet , I. i [', ~2:~Q~:'~<(..j" . .,+'o<;:;;~(J.~Dp~'6?:o~~ 4 rOlYo..ooc>"~'c.<..;; ....'o.oOc,.,o.\:;oc::::. .. .o~. : Ilili&'I~lftq~~~~tllii~~rl.<>~".d\$k%I~,Y~jI~ilf!~1 I I I I I I ~ 0 10 20 30 40 50 Feet Figure 2. Cross-section of pond bottom showing smooth, shallow grade at waterline, and undulating bottom contours. SOME OTHER CONSIDERATIONS In general, a bulldozer or scraper is best capable of constructing ponds as they can be fairly precise in "sculpting" the landscape. A backhoe (power shovel) or excavaror can do a good job, and a dragline can produce fair resulrs. The nature of your project will likely determine ro a large degree exacdy which equipment is used. If you have a dry site, use a dozer, scraper, or backhoe. If it's a wet site, a backhoe or dragline must be used. Minimize the disturbance ro existing vegetation around your dug- out or you will encourage undesirable weed growth. Blastingwith dynamite or ammonium nitrate gives unsatisfactory results, is dangerous, and should not be used. ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE Most resource agencies discourage the use of dug ponds for waterfowl because of their high cost. However, YOll may be able to get some further technical or financial assistance. Some couney ASCS offices will cost-share construction cost~ through the Agricultural Conserva- tion Practices (ACP) program. Local SCS or Soil and Water Conservation District offices may be able ro provide further technical advice. The DNR Section of Wildlife can give general advice for your area, and should be checked for permit requirements. In forested.areas of the state, your DNRforester may be able to provide cost- sharing through the Forest Stewardship Program. Fi- nally, local and statewide dubs may offer cost-share assistance; check with them for specifics. AGENCIES WHICH REGULATE WETLANDS OR PROVIDE TECHNICAL OR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR WETLAND PROJECTS AGENCY FUNCTION PHONE NUMBER Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service Regulatory & financial assistance (612) 290-3651 Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory DNR - Forestry (612) 220-0375 Technical & financial assistance (612) 296-4491 DNR - Wildlife Technical assistance (612) 296-3344 DNR - Waters Regulatory Soil Conservation Service (612) 296-4800 Technical assistance (612) 290-3675 Ill" 1992, S=ofMio_., ~,.fN...... .....=. Printed on recycled paper. @ ft I. I I . Cf) ill :J l- t) Z ~ I- ill I I- u... 0 a: ill a.. <t: a.. Cf) ~ ill Z . . . . (") en en ..- ....... (") >- ... co :J C co ..., ):: ~ Z ::J U)! . ,'j . ., .f ~'. -.11 .':1 ~ _. .;:~ 1 '--'~ ~ .~-.. /- ~ . '" .. iii ~ ca C/l 't:l e ~ Ql ~ ca C/l ca ~ - III : >- Ql C/l E ca a: .5 ~ 'in C ell E c. 0 Q) > Ql "C 01 e e .; Q) ::l -. Cl 0 0 .J:: i:D Cll ~ <Il -; ~, -\ 2 E m .J:: .J:: Q) f ~ <.J .... >- ttl ~ .Q >- 0 .J:: >., -0 "Iii .J:: <.J a. C/l iii a: z U5 c CJ z >- a: '0' . . ,. :;:.- . .. ..:; ....::i. ~ot-:r .......~J...'r. -;:f. ..: ~ '. .....: ~I Q) ..- "0 ---.. -. en CO Q) (/) ._' .,;...A CI) ..- ~:~ ---.;...........-: Q) "0 (/) (/) > (/) -,-"1'/ .....;;._~lS '- Q) 0 Q) ?' - --~ CO C C Q) '- '.c: ~,...~~ ~ C Q) :U Cll c f-' ~ en :::: 0 > Q) Q) ".')~ Q) Q) 0 0) 0 > ~- " ~~. ,.. :~ 3: > .;::; > ._~ () C "0 C'CS () C c ..c 0) c: CO 0 - ~ E - ~ 3: ..- -.:= 0) en C'CS Q) '- ~ 0 2: ..c Q) - Q) "0 Q) Q) ..c ..c (/) > - - C'CS c C (/) 0) (/) -= 0 :c .0 - () -0 ," C'CS '- C'CS C ::J c: Q) .0 '0) >< C 0 ::J Q) ::: .0 (/) (/) ~ Q) 0) (/) '- ::J ::J <( C'CS (/) I -c .;: C'; e , c:. :!;;i~ u.!! < N .;;; >.- .. U N ~.= :::"'::1- 0 >0 = 0 c....o = E ~ ~ C'; ?; =tn = C'; ;; C'; C'; e.J';;)_ ~-= (5 .. Co ~1 C;c:':~$(_~ u c ;;U5-; ;;'"0 E~ 0 ~ ~.~ > ""B 't:l ~u c~z2::;: c< U u ..; ::l o ?; :;~u~~ .:: .: -'- ~.~-=.; 0.. 0 u C u 0 ~.~ ::l '" (.J >-'"':j:;- 0 c..:.: :::I-C-- C';.. U C en..2: ::s :: E. '" Co ... C ::l ~ ~ ~.: c: 't:l '" "Cl 0":: C::l C UU v,::: u.- C'; 0 .!!! "'u .~~j = w; -=:.0 ~ t:S 1o..0\'-UC: u::l u ~ c:.,""oU~ ~'t:l .... , C , 85'" u ..: > C C'; .~.~ ;;:'~ "B ~r;:5~ u ~ -= .. ~ C'::.J_C':-;, -0 a3'= ~ U e.J '- &II ... I- -"":J'",= C':-'-~ . ~ ~ U._ &II t>c::: := '" _gu u ;::~o::: ~ -;> "'--. ",OO?;u. ;..\'-r""-,-> en - c.QN' C) - Uc.... _ ~'" % ..: C ::l C ~~ 'oJ-O_u_ = .~ ~ 0 > u !.:=<uu~ . ~~ ~;;o:; ?; (",lI-=~":O c.o~; U CJ -= ...: c~--c.!:,..... .-.... <: <: ;> 0 o.'t:l _ 0 ::: 0_ Co C ~ QIl- C ::: 2cECo;-ci-'t:u "in ~.r; -= ~ 5.5 -g ~'"~ cn'"~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ] fj .:: -= ':oJ .-.- C': c: --;j "'''::o-uoc ....~,...i:i'O~..:: 5'O;~O~;j UC't:l'--O~ =<coc:;c:;_ o <: . >0-- ~~~.:"'?o.~. ~~~..2~~.e ~ ~ ., '- '"; ~ ~ -s'"e' o ::::.- ~ co c. gE:=~c :: t ~;.:-o y .!:Jc:..c:oc:= '': _ '" ell eJ C. 1- c.= ~.~. 0 \i.,. r=.: 0 (J..'!i ~-=uuo.> tnC) "'Ou '->> ~ .=-=u~ -= g c'~ ;"; ~ >0 \.0 . QIl'O -= .Q =] =-5.:t ~ ;.: - E'- 0 .~ -=.: <: ~ ~ :>CJ .", U\,;,,-oClO.~.,; \i.,.O~QQu.... < - ::l C-._ 0 c"'->_ "'O..!.. 0.... u U _ 0 - ~ u>'t:l~'- :- ,.;:::: u 0 ~r:-o.", -c.,t:"'-c ~",,,..CJ- '::cuCoC; =.C':'::: B ; ;-e ~ -0 := .~ .5.: ;; = ~ ~ vi -;. 0 E ~.~:;.a u'-'u- 0 U .c"O .'--0 ':::cgc o c.:~..:: ;:: "::><1--- UU ?;.= ::l~C)o- :E -= -= Qo'i -C) on _ c.E-= lit .- u ... utc(,J>...... 'Oucco::l C u._ ;- In .!!:~:.~ ~ u>c<:E ?; <':l ... ~_ . ,-..::Eg~E o <: 0.._ u U ~~~~~-= '- ca >._ '- _ u:;u~'O~ CO._ 't:l U C - . '0.: c'C III e ...Uco..;~c. 'B.=-e~ ~ S ":l:::lo- "'_ -gl-.g-~; ::suClt!!:::su :t:S.!!SE '" .... l(':l > ~ <<>,.. ....co ..E .- .c 'C'C .!:!c ceo '" eu UE ~o u.c >E "0 ..c.... ",= 'C DO ec .....- _..c 'Uc ~u ~~:.. .. ... .c. .0. =.. NQ ==: ;:.:::.... ... 5'E ~~~ ~Zl:: >. "l:I eG _c... -lIItn 12A .. A~~ ' ,,\I ~ 0 R Y I N G ""Jilt, UP etlands Continued from page lA ..permit was issued so Anoka could i,9uild a gazebo. In Plymouth, the Sil- ver Buckle Saddle Club destroyed wetlands to create a horse pasture and track. T.oday, wetlands are no longer Viewed as swamps and marshes to be !: ,bull~ozed wholesale. Most projects that Involve filling wetlands are lim- it~d to a few acres or less. Gradually, . .~etlands have become recognized as lfI,lportant ecosystems that contribute ,to wildlife, water purity and floodwa- ter storage. Some suburbs have enacted strict controls on development and com- piled their own inventory of wet- lands. And a tough new state law is . designed to force even the most re- . calcitrant suburb to ensure that wet- lands taken by development are r~placed. Totaling the loss of wetlands is all 'impossible because federal and e wetland regulators haven't cked it. Only in the past few . mo~ths has the U.S. Army Corps of , EngIneers. which regulates wetlands under federal jurisdiction, kept accu- rate records of what's been lost. In .fact. the federal count that puts the nl;1l!lber of wetland acres in the Twin Cities area at 270,000, released in !'fovember. is based on data collected In the early 1980s. Furthermore. wetland draining isn't even r.egulated by federal law, and only since early 1992 has it been covered by a new Minnesota law. ~nd the~e still isn't a federal report- Ing requirement for most wetland projects tilling less than an acre. Some attempts have been made to quantify the loss. One study by the state Department of Natural Re- sources (DNR). which examined a selected nu~ber of proposed devel- opment proJects, shows a projected ne,t loss of 58 1 wetland acres from mld-1988 to early last fall in the seven metro counties of Anoka, Car- ver, Dakota. Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott and Washington. The losses ranged from 27 acres in Ramsey ety to 410 acres in Anoka Coun- nly Dakota County did not show a projected loss. Sunday/January 3/1993/Star Tribune In 1~89, th.e U.S. Fish and Wildlife' Service estlmated that more than half of the wetlands in the Twin Cities a:ea had been lost to development Stnce tbe area was settled. Since then hundreds of perm its allowing wet- ~nds to be filled have been issued adding to tbose losses. Beth Kunkcl, ,,~tlands consultant who frequently w.,?rks for Twin Cities developers, ~l~, "The 'no-net-Ioss' policy isn't a no-till policy. .. . We can't reason- ably believe that we can stop filling wetlands." . The loss is compounded by other problems, from developers who try to cut comers to suburbs and town- ships now charged with protecting wetlands while seeking development ventures that could endanger them. Another wild card is "mitigation," a federal requirement designed to re- place wetlands lost to development with new, man-made wetlands. But sucb a requirement, which usually applies only to projects that fill more than an acre of wetland, doesn't guar- antee good results. Duplicating na- ture is an imperfect science, followup checks are spotty :J.nd enforcement penalties are rarel" meted out. Often mitigation has resulted in the scoop-' in'g ofa hole out of the ground- wetland in name only. Some city officials and developers charge that wetlands are overregulat- e~, and that too many marginal, un- Sightly wetlands are being preserved at the expense of development. Thev argue that some net loss is inevitable and generally favor a policy that would save only larger wetlands. Meanwhile, the debate that pits wet- lands against growth rages on from the White House and Congre~s to A.noka County and the Rice Creek Watershed District. Wetlands under pressure A.i~st-completed federal mapping of the seven-county metropolitan area shows that 14 percent of its total ~creage is wetlands. In rapidly grow- mg Anoka County, 28 percent The pressure to develop wetlands in the Twin Cities area is so intense that the Corps of Engineers spends one-third of its time regulating metro projects, even though the Twin Cities ac- co~nts for only 4 percent of the st~te's total land acreage. Some projects that fill wetlands are driven by public purpose: A highway b3/-pass in Shako pee, a new middle ~~~Iln Fa~ington, a hospital op- erating room 10 St. Louis Park. Oth- ers 'are more questionable. Wetlands were filled to create a ballfield in Maple Grove, which by the city's count already had 39 ballfields. . Even projects deemed a success can have.serious side effects. Wal-Man, the glant Arkansas-based retailer is building a new store in Fridley · w"ere it filled 2.6 acres ofwetl~nds and agreed to create S.7 acres of new wetlands. City officials were elated. B~lt Wal-Mart's new wetlands, along WIth. storm water runoff from its parking lot, will flow into the nearby Sprin~ Brook Nature Center. Wal- Mart IS the latest offour new major developments that, within the past year, have surrounded the city- owned nature center and its wetland I network. Siah S1. Clair, director of . the nature center, said storm water ~n~ff already causes a 3- to 4-foot nse In the wetlands' water levels and floods nesting areas for waterfowl. I Much wetland fill, such as the Wal- Man pr?ject, is driven by growth and economics. In 1987, Mills Fleet Farm wanted to build in Oakdale and fill 5.3 acres of wetlands. The store pr~!TIis~d to replace the loss through mltJ~t1o.n, and the city's community sen'lce director urged federal officials to grant the permit because of "the financial benefits that would accrue to th.e city." The permit eventually was Issued, the mitigation was com- pleted and the store was built. Still other projects compound dam- age caused by earlier wetlands loss. In a subdivision in Washington County, the Corps of Engineers is- su~d a permit to fill wetland for two dnveways. The Fish and Wildlife Service, trying unsuccessfullv to stop the permit, said the wetland 'was "es- ~ntial to maintaining the water qual- Ity of Clear ~ke. . . [which has) already been Impacted by residential development. " Monitoring compliance Wetlands protection in Minnesota involves a dizzying maze of overlap- ping jurisdictions and evolving regu- lations. Although a host of watershed districts and cities regulate the filling of wetlands, two agencies - the Corps of Engineers and the DNR- wield the most power. The DNR oversees large waterlogged marshes and open-water wetlands. The Corps of Engineers regulates all metro-area wetlands, but generally acts only on those that fall outside the DNR's pun.jew. Because most of the small wetlands targeted for devel- opment fall outside the state'sjuris- diction, the Corps of Engineers issues the bulk of wetland fill permits, Corps officials concede that there has been a net loss of wetland acreage despite the no-net-Ioss policy. In awarding permits, the Corps consid- ers more than just the environment; it also takes into account the need for roads, houses, utility lines and the economic benefits that come from development. Corps officials also say that they lack the resources to regu- late the smallest wetlands. Many developers have found the ar- rangement confusing. "Vou don't kno~ ifit's going to be the Corps of Engineers, the DNR, forl the water- shed district," said James Schilling, a Forest Lake developer who's often clashed with the agencies over E~sd:~eated even more co:::- sy is a federal procedure that grants blanket approval to most projects that fill less than an acre of wetlands, and requires no mitigation for de- stroyed wetlands. The streamlined procedure is designed to remove red tape that might entangle smaIl devel- opments. But critics have dubbed it the "I-acre-giveaway." Ted Rock- well, director of Minnesota opera- tions for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. said, "I don't un- derstand how vou can have a 20al of "no net loss' and at the same time have this hole in the program." The DNR and the Minnesota PoIlu- tion Control Agency (MPCA), in a letter to the Corps of Engineers last year, charged that the procedure "un- dermines our state directive and the federal directives to comply with a no-net-Ioss policy." Recently, the Corps of Engineers has tentatively agreed to decrease the maximum acreage it covers from I acre to one- half acre. Further complicating matters is the state's Wetland Conservation Act of .91. Its purpose is to fill in the gap the federal law by ensuring that no wetland. no matter how small. can be fiIled without mitigation. Loopholes in the laws But the law aIlows plentv of excep- tions. For instance, projeCts ap- proved during the five years up to the law's effective date ofJan. I, 1992, are exempt. Other exemptions are marred by loopholes, said Barbara Ohman of the state Board of Water and Soil Resources, the law's overall administrator. She said some devel- opers are already taking advantage of poorly worded agricultural land ex- emptions to avoid the mitigation requirements. Another concern is that the new state law ~s being a~ministered by cities, pu~tJng them m the position ofregu- lat~ng the very development they're trymg to attract. Not surprisingly, ~th as. m~ny ~s nine different agen- C1:S weIghmg m on a single wetland, thmgs have often gone awry. - Da~ Utecht was in a hurry to build a spht-Ievel home in Linwood Town- ship in Anoka County on 7.7 acres of .d. More than half was wetland. \ e Anoka Conservation District d the township that Utecht could ' have a temporary permit, even I though details on how Utecht would mitigate weren't complete. The prob- lems multiplied, the district said, when Utecht was issued a perma- nent, not a temporary, permit. Ai-' though things were finally resolved, the process left Utecht angry about what he says is government incompe- tence: "We w~nt to pull a building permIt and thIS was dropped on us." Another complaint is that many . farmed-over wetlands are of such poor q~ality that they don't deserve ~rotecuon. There are two classifica- tion systems for wetlands in Minne- sota identifying at least eight wet- lands types. Some often lack standing water. Many already have been de- graded by farming and road-building. "What I'm observing in the hundreds of wetlands I've seen over the years is that the quality has deteriorated sub- stantially," said Franklin Svoboda a w<<:t1a~ds consultant and wildlife biol- OgIst m the Twin Cities area. Indeed, many wetlands simplv don't look the part, which can add to the confusion for developers who don't know how to spot them. In Blaine, for example, three different experts all looked at the same wetland and came away with three different esti- mates of how big it was. The only wetlands that are universal- ly recognized. are what Ben Wopat, regulatory chief of the Corps ofEngi- n~' S1. Paul District, called "Joe- Six-Pack" ~etlands: water-logged and crowded WIth geese and cattails. PrC?blems with developers WhIle. some developers are sophisti- cated In approaching wetlands, oth- ers have less experience. An industri- al park that was being developed bv Cu~ Leibel and Lenny Dupree near Whue Bear Lake was 'temporarily halted by the Corps of Engineers be. ca~se "somebody reported us," com- pl31ned Leibel. Bill Short, a White Bear Township official, said the proj- ect drained into Bald Eagle Lake and tJ:te two men had little experience either as developers or with wetlands. SchilI~ng, the Forest Lake developer. was gIven an after-the-fact permit in 1988 when regulators found he had alreadyfiIled wetland. Now, he's . back again at a new location. This ~ time, said the Army Corps ofEngi- . n~rs, he'd filled 5 acres of wetland. . WIthout a permit as part of a new h industrial park in Chisago County. . Earlier this year, Savage city oftic~s approved the filling of more than' U acre of wetland in the northwest pan of the city without having a Corps.of Engineers permit. Savage city admm- , istrator Mark McNeill argued that : II the city, which had applied for a..~ permit, had to proceed with the fi1J..i because streets in the adjoining con- strUction area were already tom UP.I' A~, ~ere were still new foads .;;cL. utllny hnes to put in before winter .. shut down the construction ~_i When tbe Corps of Engineers 's~ o~ the permit, the city went ahead WI~ the work anyway, The Corps 0{ Enl?neers tben issued a cease and " deSist order. No decision has been .. made. yet on whether to issue the ' : perynn aft~r the fact. or take puniti'o.'c action agamst the city. M~ny developers complain that the:. strtcter wetland laws have drastically undercut propeny values. Ed Engler I ofTowle Real ~sute is trying to sell it 2.2-acre parcel m Crysul in which I half the land IS wetlands. EniUer said he hopes he can lure a fast-food res. taurant to thl: site. Bu.t the propcny. despite being zoned I neighborhood commercial, ma\' o.nlv fetch S 1.1 0 a square foot. far It>Ss . th.an the $3 to $4 it would bring; wnhout wetlands. said Engler. Ironi- call}:. the first call Engler said he received about the property was frora a man who wanted to get rid of some fill by dumping it on the wetland. . Suburbs get involved . As anI:\\' sensiti\'ity toward wetlands emerges. many Twin Cities suburbs' have begun to pay more attention to. . them. A few ha\'e adopted specific I wetl~nd ordinances. even if it means buckmg dl:velopers. Wetland protection has been forced' ~n cities such as Maple Gro\'e, whicb IS lad.en with wetlands and is now . openmg ItS remaining vacant land to deve~o~rs. When Highpointe HiIl. a subdmslOn with jO single-family homes. was proposed. citizens com- , plained it would destroy too many . wetlands. That led the cit\' to form a wetlands task force. - ! A few suburbs. such as Mahtomedi and <;hanhassen, ha\'e been more ag~ gresslve. Mahtomedi adopted a wet- land ordinance last Januar\' and John Olinger. the citv administrator. said he personally ~ent out and counted.. the city's wetlands. The total: 125. ' varying from one-quaner acre to 17 , acres. The new ordinance requires. I both a 75-foot setback from the edge of a wetland for new construction and a permit for any building ....ithin' that area. ,.',; Despite these effons. the debate ove;'. what takes precedence, wetlands or , I) development. is expected to continue. as suburbs develop farther out, and the demand grows for housing, road~) shopping centers and parks. . :'.'.: '*"ll "There's really no land a developer.:.... can buy on which you don't have to... deal with wetlands in one way or ';Ii~ another," Svoboda said. "It's tough,;... to miss them all, and if you do miss,.; them all, you've got fewer houses.'~:.~~ , ,r:.;,' I, :r Slar Tribunel Sunday/January 311993 .13A .. ~DRYING - -~~, UP ~Wetlands-rich Anoka County in the thick of constant clashes' By Mike Kaszuba "StafTWriter The bulldozers came rumbling through the wetlands in the city of ~Ramsey one morning last August, and developers Gilbert Menkveld llnd his son. Jack, had embarked on two idyllic-sounding subdivisions .,rknown as Ramsey Meadows and Sunny Ponds, -~:." Even though ~linnesota's new wet- ;Ii-rands conservation act was in place, ". both projects had gone through the Itity Council without raising an eye- '~brow. And the city's engineer, Steve ';'Jankowski, hadn't gone to any of the training sessions on how cities were to enforce the new law. :.s isn't a great tragedy." Jan. kowski said of the 1.3 acres of wet- lands filled in the Menkvelds' two projects. Throughout Anoka County. old hab- its, development pressures and a wariness toward wetlands protection 'are clashing daily with the move to preserve wetlands. Of the seven ;counties in the metropolitan area, Anoka has not on Iv the most wet- ;'.}ands acreage but also the highest percentage of wetlands - 27.5 per- cent of its total land. Sometimes the attitude toward wet- lands in Anoka County is bluntly -:Stated. When the state Department of Natural Resources (DNR) an- nounced that Andover couldn't ex- tend Eldorado 5t. across a wetland, a local newspaper announced the deci- -sion in October with the headline, ," Wetland Threatens Street Project." ',- '. fOne DNR studv said that Anoka Countv had 4 t d of the 581 acres of I ~\M etlan'ds slated to be lost to develOP_j ment in the metro area from mid- .}988 to early last fall. fI' : .er DNR survey of the most e natural arC:lS in Anoka County showed th:lt between 1985 and 1990 dozens of wetlands sites Were harmed by draining. housing developments and even ofT-road vehicles. The contlict is likely to escalate as cities in the county'simultaneouslv try to attract economic development and enforce new wetlands laws. "Have vou ever driven around Ano- ka Cou~tv?" asked Pat McGuire of the DNR: "Nothing but wetlands. . . . We're going to have real problems there as development happens:' Much of the county'S land is flat and sandy, so few wetlands have distinc- , tive boundaries or lie in more tradi- tional bowl-shaped low spots. That, however. does not make them any less worthy to preservationists. "It's time we put our Iimitcd natural resources before the monetary ~ins ofland dc\dopcrs," s;ud Carol Del- monico. one of 27 ICller .....riters against a recent proposal to fill ~et- lands in Coon Rapids for development. The skirmishing over the county's wetlands has at times overwhelmed regulators. Cathy Brehm, a state con- servation official working in the county, wrote at least seven cease- and-desist orders against developers building in .....etlands in a four-month period ending in November. "Thank God. everything's freezing up." she said as cold .....eather heralded the annual slowdown in construction. Building permits have jumped in Co- lumbus Township as homeowners push north into a township whcre . nearfy 50 percent of all property is wetlands. . But the new state law. which focuses i on preserving or replacing wctlands ofless than an acre, has left home- owners such as Robert Jeukens c1ear- : Iy frustrated. He's trying to sell a 5- I acre property with two wetlands and says the law has scared ofTbuvers and will probably force him to reduce! his price. "They're going oyerboard:' he savs of wetlands protection. . In Coon Rapids. one of the most controvcrsial cases bt:fore the L.S. Army Corps of Engineers involves a permit requcst by dcveloper William Cooley to put a 100-room hotel. res- taurant and stores on a 26-acre plot. 14 of which are wetlands. Coole\'. who once co-owned the Mall or" America land in Bloomington. is mum on what he'll do if the Corps of Engineers denies a permit. "I think they really struggle with it:' Tim Fcll of the Corps of Engineers said of Anoka County's overall ap- proach to wetlands protection. "They want to attract development. . .. It's close to downtown Minneapolis and St, Paul. . . [but] it's gOt a lot of wetlands. " The county consistentlv ranked third in building permits. behind Dakota and Hennepin counties, from 1987 through 1990 before being nudged into fourth by Washington County last year. Since 1989, Coon Rapids has ranked either first or second among 132 municipalities in the met- ro area in the number of housing units built. Filling wetlands has been an issue in many of Anoka County's splashier projects, such as the National SportS Center in Blaine, which obtained a permit to fill about an acre of wet- land in 1988. But the more mundane projects have taken the larger toll over time. Per- mits have been matter-of-facth' is- sued to fill wetlands to make room for everything from a driveway in Coon Rapids to the upgrading of 2nd Av. in Lino Lakes to handle more traffic, Although all projects, at least on pa- Ii per, call for creating new wetlands to replace what's being destroyed, many projects don't have a happy ending. And often the smaller projects lead to I the biggest headaches. . ~ . f ~"._ "__"n, _. ,I ;"1. t, ~, t" j i ,. ,.;.l~',( ~ ' ", !fI'; . "'~~''-. I': i ~, .,t' ,: ':t., ../"/ i.~r ;- ~'"~!' .~;~~ "'. .a. ""~- _ - t" '..' . ~ ; ':.........':...'J ~.~r~ . L I :t.%'T'....,._ ~,:f:.;': . I" Staff Photo by John Croft Some wetlands were filled in to make way for the new Wal-Mart store in Fridley. . Last year. for example, the Anoka Conservation District gave Gerald and Marge Sygulla permission to build a 300-foot driveway through a wetland to their new home in Colum- bus Township - provided the drive- way was onlv 24 feet wide. "I'm dri~ing by later. and instead of a driveway. he's got a runway through it:' savs the conservation district's Chris Lord. The Sygullas complain that the township is against develop- ment and that the wetlands laws are too rigid. Before long, six conservation officers were involved. Old aerial photos were studied to trv to determine the wetlands' originaI"boundary. When Woods told them to stay otTthe propeny. the county attorney was asked for a legal opinion on whether conseJ'"\'ation officials could go and inspect the damage. Making matters more complicated. the suspected wet- land was a unique variety that loqked more like a forest than a wetland. . . Larger homebuilders are even more frustrated. "A l2-by-12 [foot) puddle of water with a little bit of canary gras,s around it . . . is not wonh [pro- tecting):' Anoka County builder Phil Tetrault said. "It'U dry up anyway.:' Eyen the smallest cases can have ., unheard-of complications. In 1991, Charles Mears wanted to dig out a' pond on his propeny and stock it . with trout. He got an agreement from a neighbor to pUT pan of the din on her propeny to t:reate a berm. But when she began divorce proceedings, her husband, Michael Woods, said the agreement was void and drove'a bulldozer through the berm. .' Woods' bulldozer also cut through' what officials suspected was a . " wetland. " The case finally ended a few months ago with Woods being ordered to ' remove a single pile of brush. "The. area atTected here is a few hund'red square feet," said John Raetz, Woods' attorney. ..It's not that much." As the new state law takes hold. it's' getter harder to find supponers of . saving every wetland in Anoka . County. "A tiny. tiny wetland. . .~ doesn't make any sense to preserve:' said Ron Henrickson, Blaine's plan-. ning and economic development director. Henrickson has an allv in Gilben Menkveld, the develoPer in Ramsey' who in the end reworked his new'" subdivision to accommodate wet- . lands when nearby residents com- ,,' plained. "Actually," said Menkveld: "they're overdoing the wetlands deal where we are - they're so ,- unreasonable." .. . .Acre-made-for-an-acre-Iost ~. . requirement doesn't hold water I . 'By Norman Draper .6taffWriter Birch Run Station is where both wet- lands and the law got dumped on. Three-and-a-half acres of wetlands were destroyed when the strip mall was built in Maplewood in 1989. Despite assurances from the develop- ers that they would replace what they had paved over. that was never done, And because of an oversight by wet- lands regulators. a $75.000 line of credit set up to hold the developers to their promises ex.pired without anyone getting a penny of it. The mall, formerly called Maple- wood Crossing, is one of the Twin Cities' most tarnished monuments to mitigation, the federal requirement lthat for every acre of wetland tilled, a new or improved one must be creat- ed nearby. It shows that despite a raft of state and federal wetlands laws and regula- \ions, developers have sometimes ed too free a hand to do as they eased. It also shows that regulators . sometimes don't pay enough attention. 1n addition, those in charge of moni- toring mitigation compliance in the Twin Cities area do not know how manv efforts have failed. worked well: or not been done at all. .' Mitigation sites can range from a small lake anchoring a housing devel- opment in Oakdale to a pond inside a'freeway ramp at the Interstate Hwy. 394-Hwy. 100 interchange. Some have been carefully ex.cavated and landscaped. Others were de- sIgned with too little attention paid to replacing the proper soils and veg- etation. Some are merely scooped- out holes in the earth that fill with water. Occasionally, as with Birch Run Station, the mitigation isn't done. " Projects that destroy sizable amounts of wetlands are required by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the state Department of Natural Re- sources (DNR) to include mitigation plans, Since the late I 980s, dozens of tiojects that have involved filling etro area wetlands for roads, uses, golf courses and other pur- poses have done so only on the con- dition that they replace what they've destroyed. As a result. state and federal regula- tors can boast that new or better wetlands should have been created in the wake of big projects that collec- tively devoured hundreds of acres of We~lands. Studies to tind out how mitigation is working are underway. The Environ- mental Protection Agency (EPA). which can veto Corps of Engineers wetlands permits. recently awarded the Minnesota office of the National Audubon Society a grant to perform one such study. It will take four years. [~iust don't know what's going on," said Ted Rockwell. EPA's director of Minnesota operations. "I'm con- cerned that not enough followup is being done." the Corps of Engineers and the DNR rarelv resort to them, preferring in- stead to negotiate a developer into compliance. Mitigation was basic and generic in its earlv davs. It often entailed noth- ing mo're than a big hole being , scooped out of the ground. But Corps of Engineers officials and private consultants say those days are gone. Thev contend that miti211tion can succeed if the site is properly graded and the right soils and plants are used. Regulators and wildlife biolo- gists who work with developers say they are trying harder to tailor the mitigation to the type of wetland lost. "We dug a lot of duck ponds back in the '80s," said Steve Eggers, an ecolo- gist with the Corps of Engineers' St. Paul district. "That didn't take into account the specific functions and values of the ditTerl'nt wetlands being lost." But unofficial observations reveal that there are plenty of problems with mitigation. Paul Burke, a wildlife biologist with the Twin Cities field office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. has viewed as many as 100 mitigation sites in the Twin Cities in the past five years. He said about one-quarter of the etTorts were poor or nonexis- tent, and another quarter were good. The remaining half were somewhere in between. he said. Wetlands were never re-created at Birch Run. northwest of the intersec- tion of Kennard St. and Beam Av. The Corps of Engineers issued a wet- land fill permit to the maWs develop- er, Michigan-based Maplewood Crossing Limited Partnership. with the understanding that a mitigation plan would be fonhcoming. When the partnership's parent com- pany. Weatherford/Walker Develop- ments Inc.. was slow in developing an acceptable mitigation plan. the Corps of Engineers agreed to give the company more time. Eventually, and despite a warning from a federal wildlife official that the amount was too low to ensure compliance, the Corps of Engineers accepted a $75,000 letter of credit issued by the Bank of Michigan on behalf of the developer to ensure compliance with mitigation requirements. .. .~": , "" And mitigation remains unproven, more art than science. The idea that humans can duplicate nature's handi- work in less than a fraction of na- ture's time has created plenty of skepticism about mitigation's value. even among federal and state officials. "It's like asking an engineering team to design the Columbia shuttle. and saying, 'Oh. by the way, you've got a month to do it: .. Rockwell said. Federal mitigation evolved informal- Iv after 1977 amendments to the Clean Water Act provided for the protection of the nation's wetlands. It became more common after 1986. when mitigation regulations were first spelled out. For projects that fill more than an acre of wetland, the Corps of Engineers requires at least an acre of mitigation for every acre of wetland filled. State mitigation re- quirements, which are less specific, date from the early 1970s. Although both state and federal law I provide for fines and jail sentences, But beset by financial hardships, the-; partnership and WeatherfordfWalker collapsed before doing the required"' ~ mitiltlltion. The mall went into fore~". closure and is now run by an Edele~ Prairie propeny manager who knows nothing about any wetlands mitiga:' J. tion plan. The deadline for the line'of credit expired two years ago. .':" ..f. "Our attorney has basically said we're screwed," said Tim Fell, the "T' Corps of Engineers' environmental. , speciali.st charged with monitoring '~ the proJect. "Pan of the problem is' :' mine. I didn't bird-dog it enough." :~ "'A. taff Photo by John Croft his wetland mitigation site was created by the Transportation Department under a ramp at the Interstate Hwy. 394-Hwy. 10~ interchange: . Elsewhere. Twin Cities mitigation' , sites can look strikingly different. '" In the shadow of a newly constructed entry ramp from Hwy. 100 onto 1-" 394. for instance. is an improved ," wetland with open water. mallards, . islands sprouting cattails. silt fences" to prevent erosion and a carpet of '" rocks carefully placed along the slope rising beneath the concrete ramp. ' The site. engineered by the State De. panment of Transponation. is pan of the mitiltation for the 12112 acres of wetlands filled during the 1.394 project. In Oakdale. a 12-acre storm water holding pond that serves as Olson Lake Estates. centerpiece is more ~,'. man-made lake than wetland. having inundated the 3-acre wetland once ' located at the south end of the pond.' The site designer. Carl W. Peterson " and Associates Inc.. agreed to design. changes to make the pond more wet- lands-like. The firm also used the";' pond as mitigation for some fill at ' , the south end of the wetlands. and' af another site. Company president Carl Peterson said what happened at Olson Lake'.' Estates is beyond his control. He said he was requ{red by Oakdale and the' , Yallev Branch watershed district to ' store storm water runoff from Olson ' Lake Estates somewhere on the de- ' velopment site. Also. because of ob- ' jections from nearby pro pert): o",:'n- , ers. Oakdale and watershed dlstnct , officials haven't been able to find a , route to siphon off excess water from the lake. As a result. the lake's outlet culven has been plugged up for sev~. eral years. with no relief in sight. _" "The wav it's done now is the way i( was approved:' Peterson said. "~e understand the water level now IS higher than it would normally be. . " ',: [but] it's no fault of ours," , , Such a mix of results aside. a ques- " tion remains: Can a man-made wet: . land ever make up for the natural '..~:. one it's replacing? '-,II , Said Rockwell: ..)t's like saying thai .. because there are prosthetic deviCCSj for amputated limbs, we Cln lose 3S many arms a~ we want" to . But Molly Shodeen. the DNR's hy~'~ drologist for Washington and Anoka: counties. calls the site nothing more" than "a flooded hole." . I.: Twin Cities wetlands . Wetlands as percent of county's total acreage c::J 0.10% (Dakota andWaslunglon) c:J 10.15 ", (Ramsey and Hennepm) c::::::J 15.20", (Carver and Scolll c::::::J 20'..lnore (Anoka) WHAT'S A WETLAND? Wetlands have proven 10 be very hard 10 define and frequently (jjfficullto spOt. Even expens have been unable 10 see a wetland when they stand in the middle 01 one. Congress has dispalched the National Academy of Sciences to evaluate how wellands are defined. v~ ~ ':,t.'}J.. /, i'l 1.1 !. That question should help solve the other major issue regarding wellands. namely. how many should be saved. During the 1988 presidential campaign. George Bush pledged Ihat "all e.isting wetlands. no matter how small. Should be preselVed: Bush evenrually backed away from that. and recenlly. the adminlstrauon dropped plans to loosen the definitIon of a wetland to e.c!ude marginal wetlands - leaving the controversy to PreSldenr Bill Clinton. . 1,1 Minnesota. where the state recognizes eight dil1erenr types of wetlands. the con. fusion is no dlllerent. Officials have only vague ideas 01 how much of each type exists in the Twin Cities. Here's a guide to the eight types: 07.251 ~:. .... ", ~f".. " CARVER COUNlf SCOTT COUNTY Sourc.: US. Fish and Wildl_'. S<<w:a 3. SHALLOW MARSH WETLANDS One of the mOSf common of Twin Cilies wellands. they oft~n are cover~ wllh up to 6 inches of water. Vegetafion indudes bulrushes and canal/s. As wrth Type 4 and 5 wetlands. Type 3 wetlands a.. common in recently develop~ suburbs suen as Oakdale. Woodbury. Plymouth and Maple Grove. 71,m 6. SHRUB SWAMPS Another of the most common Twin Cities wetlandS. shrub swamps are otten waterlogged with a few inches 0' waf!!t and occur in shrubby or wooded areas. This rype of wetland occurs 'reQuenUy along the Minnesola River and In parts of the nortl1em metro area. 1. BASIN/FLAT AREA WETLANDS These are waterlogged only at cet1ain times 01 Ihe year. Th"ey exist 11'1 h~tds. woods and farmland. Along with Ihe Type 2 variety. Type 1 wetlands dot the landscape In less.dev~oped parts of the Twin Cities -Indeoendence. northern Brooklyn Park and Minnetnst3,tor example. 4. DEEP MARSH WETLANDS These are usually filled with from 6 Inches to 3 feet of water. Among the easiesl tyr.s of weUands torecogniz!. these marshes otten fill shallow lake baSins and border open waler. 7. WOODED SWAMPS These are uncommon in the Twin Cilies. The ground is often covered wilh a thin layer of waler. The trees that grow In such swamps indude tamarack. spruce. balsam and ash. Such a wetland mIght be lound in the Scandia and Forest Lake area of northern Washingron County. 2. MEADOW WETLANDS ihese ohen border marshes and occur in farmland sloughs. Although the ground IS often dry, !his weUand IS usually wa1enogged within a few inches of the surface. . S. OPEN.WATER WETLANDS As muc!l ponds as wetlands. these are as easy to Spol as the deep marsh variety. Waler mighl be as deep as 10 leel. and vegetation includes walemlies. canalls and pondweeds. _ Souree: Mmnesota Oep~nt of NabJrai Resourees and U.S. Atmy Coros of e"~S ~~"i~~"i r.~(~.~;;'~~~{~:f.11 :A:l ~~\.l" n'I""~ .~~r. 'i '.)~:.~i~~,-:~..~~ - i~;:~~~f~'~~:f~~~ 8. BOGS Perhaos the rarest kind Of w~lIand in the metro area. bogs are usually walerfogged and covered wllh mosses. Other vegetatIOn includes shnlbs and Stunled trees. Type B wetlands occur in the East Bethel and Linwood township areas aI northern Anoka County. . Well-meaning development can end up suffocating \ By !\1ike Kaszuba SiafTWriter The seven homes in Welter's Way Sixth Addition in Eden Prairie have been heralded by the city and the developer as an example of how to build a subdivision around a wet- land without destroying the wetland. The Peter Andrea Co., the subdivi- sion's owner, says the homes were built at least 100 feet from the edge of the water-filled wetland. John Shaw, the real-estatc agent who marketed some of the lots, says they'll "be the most attractive sites in that neighborhood." The homes have sold for up to S800,000. . But Welter's Way. wetland suppon- ers say. has instead become an ex- ample of how subdivisions across the Twin Cities encircle and even- tually choke wetlands. The lots in Welter's Way that back up to the wetland divide it up like a pie, making the homeowners wet- land owners as well. Homeowners can put in lawns up to the water's edge because there are no setback regulations in Eden Prairie. That means grass can be mowed to the water line and lawn fenilizers prob- ably will drain into the wetland. One home in the subdivision that complied with a voluntary lOO-foot setback began settling into the peat. II "It was a house that set against the pond. but it was set back from the pond," said Jim Ostenson, the managing panner for Welter's Way Sixth Addition. "It was a real quirk." The wetland was drasticallv altered in the 1970s as pan of a storm- sewer project tied to increasing nearby development. Once just a grassy low spot. the wetland was dug out. That project created an open-water pond that Welter's Way Sixth was eventually built around, and in efTect changed the wetland into a basin that primarily collects storm water. Welter's Way doesn't appear to be an exception. The University of Minnesota targeted 48 wetland sites in the Twin Cities from 1988 to 1991 and found 39 had been afTect- ed by development, erosion from nearby development or highway construction, or had been conven- ed to storm water ponds. "You can drive around the metro area and see all kinds of dead wet- lands, where storm water was dumped directly into them," said Gary Obem, a senior environmen- tal planner with the Metropolitan Council. "In the long run, that's going to kill them ofT. . . . There are a lot of cities that misunderstand that whole concept."