Agenda - Council - 05/24/1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CASE REQUEST FOR REVISED FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF CHESTNUT RIDGE; ~ASE OF GOOD VALUE HOMES, JOHN PETERSON By: City Engineer Steve Jankowski Background: As you may rec~ill, on March 22, 1994, the City Council granted final plat approval to Chestnut Ridge. That app~val was given contingent upon the developer obtaining a permit from DNR to cross Wetland #3:114P in order to construct Krypton Street N.W. as a through street versus a cul- de-sac. Observations: The DNR has rejected the request for a permit which would allow the placement of fill and a culvert to facilitate a road crossing approximately a twenty-four foot channel over which it has jurisdiction as a portion of protected wetland 114-P. The DNR's position is that the impact to this protected area ist,avoidable by bridging the wetland or terminating Krypton St. N.W. short of the channel as a cul-de-sac. At this point, the iCity's options are as follows: (1) Appeal th~ DNR's permit denial. The pernlit application had proposed placing two six-foot wide culverts to replace the existing {ighteen inch corrugated metal pipe. The appeal process would involve public notification culminating in a heating before an administrative law judge. The judge's decision ~ould be submitted to the Commissioner of the DNR who would render the final decision. !The cost of the appeal could be as minimal as the cost of the public notices and court costg, however, the cost could be greatly increased if paid witnesses are utilized. The process v~ould be lengthy and construction could not be considered until 1995 at the earliest. (2) (3) Revise th{ final plat to include a cul-de-sac instead of a through street. This alternative would result in a 1,400 foot cul-de-sac which is over twice the City standard for cul-de-sac lengths. This would also result in the loss of one lot from the through skeet configuration. In the event of an emergency, twenty-five homes would be dependeni on a single access point. Bridge th~ DNR jurisdiction. This woul~ require consmacting a bridge over the entire 24 foot distance under jurisdiction of the DNR. Although a DNR permit would be required to construct the bridge, the DNR would noi need to address the fill issue which they find so objectionable. The most economic¢l bridge for this road is anticipated to cost between $50,000 and $60,000. This bridge wogld have a service life of between 20 and 30 years. The Developer has indicated that it wotild be economically unfeasible to pay this entire cost. If the Council would select this optiori, the City would be expected to contribute a portion of the bridge cost.