08.b2 Johnson Variance - CC Packet
Date of Meeting: April 15, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: T.J. Hofer, Consultant City Planner
Re: Variance from the OHWL Setback of a Recreational Development Lake
for PID 0503220430015
Applicant Rick Johnson Zoning: RR-N, SM-O
Owner: Rick Johnson Future
Land Use: General Rural
Location: 23261 Lofton Court North
PID 0503220430015
Review
Deadline April 22, 2025
The applicant is requesting approval of a variance from the ordinary high-water setback of a
recreational development lake to expand a nonconforming setback and construct a deck on an
existing legally nonconforming single-family dwelling.
The staff report to the Planning Commission from the April 1, 2025, meeting is attached and
includes the background of the project as well as an analysis based on the standards in the
Unified Development Code.
Variance
Section 153.500.060 Subd. 1 (B) establishes the standards for when the City shall approve a
variance. The variance must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, must be in harmony
with the general purpose and intent of this Chapter, and when the strict enforcement of this
Chapter would result in practical difficulties with carrying out the strict letter of the Code.
Practical difficulties are established within the UDC and are listed below in italics. Staff’s
analysis of these is below each practical difficulty:
a. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this
Chapter.
The proposed use of a deck accessory to a single-family dwelling is a reasonable use for
the zoning districts; however, the addition of a deck would increase an existing
nonconformity by further encroaching into the ordinary high water level setback. The
2040 Comprehensive Plan establishes environmental stewardship as a priority for the
City of Scandia and because of this, allowing further encroachment into the ordinary high
water level setback is not reasonable.
b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner.
The circumstances are not unique to the property and are created by the landowner. With
the approval of the previous variance, with the same applicant, in 1992 and the
construction of the existing dwelling, the applicant maximized the area on the lot which
could be developed based on the constraints of the nonconformity established with the
approval of the 1983 variance and the need for the septic system on the site. The need to
accommodate a septic system is not unique to the property and must be addressed by all
lots within the city that are not connected to a city-owned sewer utility.
c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
If the variance were granted, it would not alter the essential character of the locality as it
is a reasonable use and reflects the purpose of the Rural Residential Neighborhood
zoning district.
d. Economic conditions alone shall not constitute practical difficulties.
Economic conditions are not the sole factor in the variance.
e. May include, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy
systems.
The variance is not related to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy
systems.
f. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the
danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property
values within the neighborhood.
The proposed variance will not impair adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property, substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, increase the danger of
fire, endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within
the neighborhood.
g. The requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical
difficulty.
The practical difficulty existing on the lot was addressed with the approval of the
variance requested by the applicant for the construction of the dwelling in 1992. The
structure approved with that variance maximized the area on the lot which could be
developed based on the constraints of the nonconformity established with the approval of
the 1983 variance and the need for the septic system on the site. The additional deck
would increase nonconformity where no practical difficulty exists that has not already
been mitigated. An alternative exists on the north side of the property where a deck could
be constructed in the side yard along the plane of the existing legal nonconformity. The
current structure is setback approximately 27.29 feet from the side lot line, which would
allow for up to approximately 17 feet of deck parallel to the shoreline.
ANALYSIS
Review Comments
The submittal was sent to city staff and other regulatory agencies for review and comment, and
comments have been incorporated into the resolution. These comments are detailed in the
Planning Commission report that is attached.
Planning Commission
The Planning Commission reviewed the application at their April 1, 2025, meeting. The Planning
Commission held a public hearing where no comments were received. The Planning
Commission then closed the public hearing.
The Planning Commission discussed the variance, the history of the City in reviewing
encroachments into the ordinary high water level, and the minimum action required to address
the practical difficulty.
The Planning Commission moved to recommend approval of the minor subdivision. The motion
was approved with a vote of 5-0.
Staff Analysis
Staff finds that the proposed variance is inconsistent with the UDC and the Comprehensive Plan.
The Comprehensive Plan prioritizes environmental stewardship on lakeside lots. Increasing the
encroachment into the OHWL setback does not align with the goal of environmental
stewardship.
Staff acknowledges that a practical difficulty exists on the site based on the size of the lot and
restraints created by the need for a septic system, but staff believes that the practical difficulty
was addressed with the approval of the variance in 1983 and subsequent variance in 1992.
Additionally, the need for a septic system is not unique and must be addressed by all lots within
the city that are not connected to a city-owned sewer utility. No unique circumstances exist on
the lot that are not caused by the landowner. The variance requested by the applicant in 1992
allowed for a structure that stretched the length of the lot from the septic setback to the
nonconforming OHWL setback, leaving no additional room for a deck to be installed without a
variance.
Additionally, an alternative location exists where a
deck could be constructed that does not require a
variance. An administrative permit could be
approved to allow for construction of a deck on the
north side of the property that is an expansion of the
existing legal nonconformity. Staff does note that
stairs or landings for stairs on decks are not allowed
to encroach into the OHWL setback but are allowed
to encroach into the side yard setback by up to four
feet.
COUNCIL ACTION
The City Council can do one of the following:
1. Recommend approval, with or without conditions, of the attached ordinance and
resolutions.
2. Recommend denial, with findings, of the attached ordinance and resolutions.
3. Table the request for further review/study.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommend denial of the proposed variance:
Motion to recommend approval of the attached resolution to deny a variance to allow for
the construction of a deck to increase an existing nonconformity and encroach into the
ordinary high-water level.
The following findings are recommended:
1. The proposed use of a deck accessory to a single-family dwelling is a reasonable use for
the zoning districts; however, the addition of a deck would increase an existing
nonconformity by further encroaching into the ordinary high water level setback. The
2040 Comprehensive Plan establishes environmental stewardship as a priority for the
City of Scandia and because of this, allowing further encroachment into the ordinary high
water level setback is not reasonable.
2. The circumstances are not unique to the property and are created by the landowner. With
the approval of the previous variance, with the same applicant, in 1992 and the
construction of the existing dwelling, the applicant maximized the area on the lot which
could be developed based on the constraints of the nonconformity established with the
approval of the 1983 variance and the need for the septic system on the site. The need to
accommodate a septic system is not unique to the property and must be addressed by all
lots within the city that are not connected to a city-owned sewer utility.
3. If the variance were granted, it would not alter the essential character of the locality as it
is a reasonable use and reflects the purpose of the Rural Residential Neighborhood
zoning district.
4. Economic conditions are not the sole factor in the variance.
5. The variance is not related to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy
systems.
6. The proposed variance will not impair adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property, substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, increase the danger of
fire, endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within
the neighborhood.
7. The practical difficulty existing on the lot was addressed with the approval of the
variance requested by the applicant for the construction of the dwelling in 1992. The
structure approved with that variance maximized the area on the lot which could be
developed based on the constraints of the nonconformity established with the approval of
the 1983 variance and the need for the septic system on the site. The additional deck
would increase nonconformity where no practical difficulty exists that has not already
been mitigated. An alternative exists on the north side of the property where a deck could
be constructed in the side yard along the plane of the existing legal nonconformity. The
current structure is setback approximately 27.29 feet from the side lot line, which would
allow for up to approximately 17 feet of deck parallel to the shoreline.
Attachments
1. Draft Resolution 04-15-25-02 Denying a Variance
2. Planning Commission “Variance from the OHWL Setback of a Recreational
Development Lake for PID 0503220430015” Packet, dated April 1, 2025
CITY OF SCANDIA, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 04-15-25-02
DENYING A VARIANCE FOR AN ENCROACHMENT INTO THE ORDINARY HIGH
WATER LEVEL SETBACK LOCATED AT PARCEL ID 05.032.20.43.0015
WHEREAS, Rick Johnson (the “applicant”), have made an application for a variance to
increase an existing legal nonconformity from the ordinary high water level setback to allow a
deck to encroach 32.4 feet into the 100 foot ordinary high water level setback of Bone Lake for on
property identified as 23261 Lofton Court North, Scandia, Minnesota 55073, legally described as
follows:
Lot 9 of Sandgren Addition, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in
the office of the Registrar of Titles, Washington County, Minnesota
WHEREAS, Washington County approved and a variance on November 15, 1983, that
allowed for a structure to be constructed and created a legal nonconformity that allowed a 25 foot
encroachment into the 100 foot ordinary high water level setback on the property described above;
and,
WHEREAS, Washington County approved a variance on May 28, 1992, requested by the
applicant that allowed for an existing structure to be demolished and the current structure to be
constructed with the existing legal nonconforming 25 foot encroachment into the 100 foot ordinary
high water level setback on the property described above; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the variance request at a duly noticed
Public Hearing on April 1, 2025, and recommended that the City Council deny the request;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SCANDIA, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does
deny the requested variances, based on the following findings:
1. The proposed use of a deck accessory to a single-family dwelling is a reasonable use for
the zoning districts; however, the addition of a deck would increase an existing
nonconformity by further encroaching into the ordinary high water level setback. The
2040 Comprehensive Plan establishes environmental stewardship as a priority for the
City of Scandia and because of this, allowing further encroachment into the ordinary high
water level setback is not reasonable.
2. The circumstances are not unique to the property and are created by the landowner. With
the approval of the previous variance, with the same applicant, in 1992 and the
construction of the existing dwelling, the applicant maximized the area on the lot which
could be developed based on the constraints of the nonconformity established with the
approval of the 1983 variance and the need for the septic system on the site. The need to
accommodate a septic system is not unique to the property and must be addressed by all
lots within the city that are not connected to a city-owned sewer utility.
3. If the variance were granted, it would not alter the essential character of the locality as it
is a reasonable use and reflects the purpose of the Rural Residential Neighborhood
zoning district.
4. Economic conditions are not the sole factor in the variance.
5. The variance is not related to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy
systems.
6. The proposed variance will not impair adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property, substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, increase the danger of
fire, endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within
the neighborhood.
7. The practical difficulty existing on the lot was addressed with the approval of the
variance requested by the applicant for the construction of the dwelling in 1992. The
structure approved with that variance maximized the area on the lot which could be
developed based on the constraints of the nonconformity established with the approval of
the 1983 variance and the need for the septic system on the site. The additional deck
would increase nonconformity where no practical difficulty exists that has not already
been mitigated. An alternative exists on the north side of the property where a deck could
be constructed in the side yard along the plane of the existing legal nonconformity. The
current structure is setback approximately 27.29 feet from the side lot line, which would
allow for up to approximately 17 feet of deck parallel to the shoreline.
Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 15th day of April 2025.
Steve Kronmiller, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kyle Morell, City Administrator
1 | P a g e
Date of Meeting: March 3, 2025
To: Chair Loeffler and Members of the Planning Commission
From: T.J. Hofer, Consultant City Planner
Re: Variances for an Impervious Surface in the Ordinary High Water Level
Setback for 19489 Manning Trail North
Applicant: Paul Bruggeman Zoning: RR-G, SM-O
Owner: Denise Bruggeman Future
Land Use: General Rural
Location: PID 29.032.20.32.0019 Review
Deadline November 4, 2024
The applicant is requesting approval for an after the fact variance to for an impervious surface
(driveway) within the setback from the ordinary high-water level (OHWL) and from a wetland.
Since submitting the application, the applicant has constructed the path without approval.
BACKGROUND
The application was heard at the October 1, 2024, meeting and a public hearing was held. No
comments were made. The applicant requested the application be tabled. The Planning
Commission motioned to table the application with a 4-0 vote (Loeffler absent). The packet from
the October meeting is attached and includes the background, evaluation of criteria, and analysis
of the application.
The applicant has reached out to City staff regarding concerns about the conditions included
within the staff report. Staff have amended the language within the staff report to separate
conditions recommended by City staff and conditions recommended by the Watershed.
The Planning Commission reviewed and recommended the application for approval at the
December 3, 2024, meeting. At the December 17, 2024, City Council meeting the Council
reviewed the application and discussed concerns regarding the conditions in the staff report with
the applicant. The applicant indicated that they would be interested in further discussing the
2 | P a g e
conditions and other potential requests with the Planning Commission. The applicant verbally
and with a written statement, waived their right to a timely review under Minnesota Statute 15.99
for an additional 120 days. The City Council then motioned to recommended the application
back to the Planning Commission.
Staff met with the applicant on site in January and reviewed the property history. Staff
established a history of the site and identified an area where intensive vegetation clearing
occurred. Staff proposed corrective action to address the issues in a lett er which is attached.
The applicant also inquired about the possibility of amending the shoreland ordinance to allow
for multiple view corridors. Staff reached out to the Area Hydrologist to understand if this is
something that the Department of Natural Resources would allow in a shoreland ordinance. This
was conveyed to the applicant in the above referenced letter.
The applicant is free to make any application that they wish to the City and at this time no
additional requests have been received.
COMMISSION ACTION
The Planning Commission can do one of the following:
1. Recommend approval, with or without conditions, of the attached ordinance and
resolutions.
2. Recommend denial, with findings, of the attached ordinance and resolutions.
3. Table the request for further review/study.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request for an after
the fact variance to for an impervious surface (driveway) within the setback from the ordinary
high-water level (OHWL) and from a wetland as 19489 Manning Trail North. Approval includes
a resolution. Staff have included two new conditions based on the letter dated February 6, 2025,
as conditions 5a and 5b. The following findings are recommended:
1. The proposed use for an impervious surface (impervious path) is a reasonable use. The
City approved the location of the accessory dwelling unit (ADU) in 2021 and providing
access to the legally nonconforming structure is reasonable for the personal use of the
property as well as emergency services.
2. The location and need for the path are unique to the property. The proposed impervious
path is needed to do circumstances created by the landowner, however, the path is
necessary to access a legally nonconforming structure.
3. If the variance were granted, it would not alter the essential character of the locality.
4. Economic conditions are not solely a factor in the variance.
3 | P a g e
5. The variance is not related to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy
systems.
6. The proposed variance will not impair adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the
danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property
values within the neighborhood.
7. Construction of the impervious path is the minimum action required to eliminate the
practical difficulty of accessing the ADU.
The following conditions are recommended:
1. The impervious surface shall be in substantial compliance with the site plan reviewed
with this application and dated, subject to conditions.
2. The impervious surface shall not be expanded in either length or width without
approval of the City Council through an application for an amendment to this
Resolution.
3. The impervious path shall not be wider than 10 feet.
4. The applicant shall submit an exhibit documenting the view corridor on the property.
The view corridor shall be a single contiguous corridor of 50 feet. The applicant shall
restore areas outside of the view corridor where intensive vegetation clearing was
performed in the bluff impact zone.
5. Restoration of perennial vegetation and trees shall be completed by June 1st, 2025.
a. Work with either Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District or the
Washington Conservation District to establish deep rooted woody and herbaceous
vegetation with a high stem-density plantings along the retaining wall and allow
the area to remain in a natural state once plantings are established. Minimum
maintenance is be allowed to ensure the retaining wall is functional.
b. Work with either Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District or the
Washington Conservation District and the City to identify areas where either three
deciduous trees at least 2.5 caliper inches/coniferous trees at least 6 feet in height
or two deciduous trees at least 4 caliper inches/coniferous trees at least 12 feet in
heigh can be planted. These shall be located to aid in slope stabilization and shall
be of a species that has deep root to aid in slope stabilization. Alternatively, if no
location exists for slope stabilization as determined by the Carnelian-Marine-St.
Croix Watershed District or the Washington Conservation District, these trees can
be located to create screening to aid in the establishment of a view corridor.
6. The applicant shall acquire any required permits from the Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix
Watershed District and comply with their requirements.
4 | P a g e
7. The applicant shall secure any other applicable Federal, State, County, and local
permits required for the project.
8. The applicant shall pay all fees and escrows associated with this application.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends the Planning Commission:
Motion to recommend approval of the attached resolution to approve an after-the-fact
variance to allow for construction of an impervious path, with conditions as described by
staff within the staff report.
Attachments
A. Resolution 03-18-25-XX Approving a Variance for an Impervious Surface
B. Site Visit Follow Up and View Corridors (PID 29.032.20.32.0019) Letter, dated February 11,
2025
C. City Council “Variances for an Impervious Surface in the Ordinary High Water Level
Setback for 19489 Manning Trail North” Packet, dated December 17, 2024 (link only )
CITY OF SCANDIA
RESOLUTION NO. 03-18-25-XX
APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR AN IMPERVIOUS SURFACE WITHIN THE
SETBACK OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER LEVEL AND WETLAND FOR
PARCEL 29.032.20.32.0019 LOCATED AT 19489 MANNING TRAIL NORTH
WHEREAS, Paul Bruggeman (the “applicant”), has requested and made an application for a 24.8-
foot variance from the 100-foot ordinary high water level setback for an impervious surface and a
3.88-foot variance from the 75-foot wetland setback on a property located at 19489 Manning Trail
North and the property is legally described as:
See Attachment A; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the variance request at a duly noticed Public
Hearing on October 1, 2024, and recommended that the City Council approve the request;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SCANDIA, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve,
a 24.8-foot variance from the 100-foot ordinary high water level setback for an impervious surface
and a 3.88-foot variance from the 75-foot wetland setback, based on the following findings:
1. The proposed use for an impervious surface (impervious path) is a reasonable use. The
City approved the location of the accessory dwelling unit (ADU) in 2021 and providing
access to the legally nonconforming structure is reasonable for the personal use of the
property as well as emergency services.
2. The location and need for the path are unique to the property. The proposed impervious
path is needed to do circumstances created by the landowner, however, the path is
necessary to access a legally nonconforming structure.
3. If the variance were granted, it would not alter the essential character of the locality.
4. Economic conditions are not solely a factor in the variance.
5. The variance is not related to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy
systems.
6. The proposed variance will not impair adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the
danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property
values within the neighborhood.
7. Construction of the impervious path is the minimum action required to eliminate the
practical difficulty of accessing the ADU.
FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED that the following conditions of approval shall be met:
1. The impervious surface shall be in substantial compliance with the site plan reviewed
with this application and dated, subject to conditions.
2. The impervious surface shall not be expanded in either length or width without
approval of the City Council through an application for an amendment to this
Resolution.
3. The impervious path shall not be wider than 10 feet.
4. The applicant shall submit an exhibit documenting the view corridor on the property.
The view corridor shall be a single contiguous corridor of 50 feet. The applicant shall
restore areas outside of the view corridor where intensive vegetation clearing was
performed in the bluff impact zone.
5. Restoration of perennial vegetation and trees shall be completed by June 1st, 2025.
a. Work with either Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District or the
Washington Conservation District to establish deep rooted woody and
herbaceous vegetation with a high stem-density plantings along the retaining
wall and allow the area to remain in a natural state once plantings are
established. Minimum maintenance is be allowed to ensure the retaining wall
is functional.
b. Work with either Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District or the
Washington Conservation District and the City to identify areas where either
three deciduous trees at least 2.5 caliper inches/coniferous trees at least 6 feet
in height or two deciduous trees at least 4 caliper inches/coniferous trees at
least 12 feet in heigh can be planted. These shall be located to aid in slope
stabilization and shall be of a species that has deep root to aid in slope
stabilization. Alternatively, if no location exists for slope stabilization as
determined by the Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District or the
Washington Conservation District, these trees can be located to create
screening to aid in the establishment of a view corridor.
6. The applicant shall acquire any required permits from the Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix
Watershed District and comply with their requirements.
7. The applicant shall secure any other applicable Federal, State, County, and local
permits required for the project.
8. The applicant shall pay all fees and escrows associated with this application.
Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 18th day of February 2025.
Steve Kronmiller, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kyle Morell, City Administrator
Attachment A
ALL THAT PART OF LOT 7 OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 32 NORTH, RANGE 20
WEST, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, TO WIT: COMMENCING AT A POINT IN THE
NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 7, 1364.00 FEET EAST OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER
THEREOF, THENCE SOUTH 150.00 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 27 DEGREES 30
MINUTES 00 SECONDS WEST, 190.00 FEET TO THE INITIAL POINT OF
BEGINNING OF THE LAND TO BE DESCRIBED; THENCE TO THE RIGHT ALONG
THE CIRCUMFERENCE OF A CURVE WITH A RADIUS OF 45.50 FEET, A
DISTANCE OF 104.43 FEET, THENCE NORTH 21 DEGREES WEST 167.60 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 68 DEGREES WEST 54.5 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 4 DEGREES 20
MINUTES EAST 179.00 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 4 DEGREES 30 MINUTES WEST
177.00 FEET, THENCE SOUTRH 10 DEGREES 40 MINUTES EAST 84 FEET TO THE
SHORE OF BIG LAKE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE SHORE 356.00
FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO A POINT WHICH BEARS SOUTH 44 DEGREES 15
MINUTES EAST FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY
TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
ALL THAT PART OF LOT 7, IN SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 32 NORTH, RANGE 20
WEST, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: TO-WIT: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE
NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 7, 1364.00 FEET EAST OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER
THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH 150.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE SOUTH 27
DEGREES 30 MINUTES WEST 190.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE
PARCEL OF LAND HEREBY CONVEYED; THENCE SOUTH 44 DEGREES 15
MINUTES EAST 176.00 FEET TO THE SHORE OF BIG LAKE; THENCE
NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID SHORE 64.10 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE
NORTH 49 DEGREES WEST 198.60 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE SOUTH 27
DEGREES 30 MINUTES WEST 50.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
1 | P a g e
February 11, 2025
Paul Bruggeman
19489 Manning Trail N.
Scandia, MN 55073 THIS LETTER SENT ONLY ELECTRONICALY
RE: Site Visit Follow Up and View Corridors (PID 29.032.20.32.0019)
Dear Mr. Bruggeman,
Thank you for having City Administrator Morell and I out to the property to discuss your
concerns regarding the previous staff reports to the Planning Commission and City Council in
December of 2024. I have since reviewed the standards for tree clearing, discussed the option of
multiple view corridors with the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and met with Tom
Langer of the Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District (CMSCWD) to understand the
concerns that the Watershed has regarding the work on your property.
Intensive Vegetation Clearing
After meeting on site, reviewing historical aerials of the property, discussing the issue of
vegetation clearing with CMSCWD, reviewing all surveys submitted to the City, reviewing
permitting records, and receiving additional photographs from the Watershed, I believe that there
was intensive vegetation clearing that was done to build the retaining wall on the southwest of
the site, prior to any permits being issued which would have allowed the clearing.
The surveys I was able to identify that the City received are detailed in the table below:
Revision Date Description City Has?
1 07/12/2021 Added old structures Yes
2 08/04/2021 Added wetland Location
3 12/16/2021 Add 25' x 50' Septic Areas Yes
4 3/25/2022 Revise House
5 4/19/2022 Revise House and Grades
6 6/22/2022 Revise House, Grades and notes Yes
7 6/28/2022 Add Prop Out Bldg, update Improv
8 7/07/2022 Rev. Rain Gard, Out Bldg & Buffer Yes
9 7/22/2022 Rev. Cabin with Grading Yes
10 9/15/2022 Add Staked Cabin and Pol's
11 9/30/2022 Rev. grades and added staked elev.'s
12 06/05/2023 Add Asbuilt shots & Rev Grading Yes
13 07/11/2023 Add Trees removed per bldr/owner
2 | P a g e
Revision Date Description City Has?
14 07/26/2023 Revise per builder and watershed
15 08/15/2023 Revise per builder and watershed Yes
16 08/15/23PM Trees Removed per Watershed Yes
17 10/17/2023 Revise Trail & Improv. accordingly Yes
18 11/28/2023 Revise Drain Tile per Builder Yes
Additionally, CMSCWD provided multiple files regarding the site including site photos from
May 3, 2022, August 19, 2022, and June 5, 2024 as well as Erosion & Sediment Control
Compliance Summary & Corrective Action Notices (“ESC Report) dated April 19, 2023, April
20, 2023, and July 27, 2023, which include descriptions of the site as well as images.
My understanding of the retaining wall area and the sequence of events is the following:
• December 16, 2021: The variance for the site is approved. The site plan/grading plan for
this does not show a retaining wall in the area in question.
• May 3, 2022, and August 19, 2022: Photos of the site provided by CMSCWD show the
area where the retaining wall currently is established with vegetation and containing
multiple trees.
• June 22, 2022: Survey submitted to City shows a retaining wall on plans as a single row
of boulders. (Date based on revision date on survey, submittal date unknown)
• July 14, 2022: City Engineer approves grading permit. Submitted plan show a single
tiered retaining wall with no grading activities occurring in area in question.
• April 20, 2023: An ESC Report from CMSCWD shows the site either disturbed with the
vegetative cover removed or covered in erosion runoff from site.
• June 5, 2023: Survey submitted to City shows retaining wall expanded to north and south
and realigned with the removed and relocated gravel trail. (Date based on revision date
on survey, submittal date unknown)
• July 27, 2023: An ESC Report from CMSCWC shows the lowest level of boulder
retaining wall installed, the area entirely disturbed, and trees removed.
• August 1, 2023: The City received a permit application from the landowner for the
retaining wall. The initial submittal shows a single row of boulders.
• August 15, 2023: Survey submitted to the City shows a realigned lower wall that reflects
the site photos from July 27, 2023, and shows additional tiered walls. (Date based on
revision date on survey, submittal date unknown)
• August 25, 2023, to September 11, 2023: City Engineer contacts Applicant to confirm
that engineering for retaining walls accounts for the grading plan dated August 15, 2023.
• September 18, 2023: City Engineer approves revised grading plan which includes three
tier boulder retaining wall.
Grading and clearing as well as vegetation removal is controlled by the City’s Shoreland
Ordinance. Based on the information that I have reviewed, I believe the first documented
instance of the area being cleared is either April 20, 2023, or July 27, 2023. Both dates occur
3 | P a g e
before the Vegetation Management standards in the Shoreland Ordinance were amended in
March of 2024, so the violations are subject to the standards in place at the time.
Intensive vegetation clearing in shore and bluff impact zones and on steep slopes is prohibited.
Removal or alteration of vegetation must comply with this standard except for vegetation
alteration necessary for the construction of structures and sewage treatment systems under
validly issued permits for these facilities. Before September 18, 2023, any removal or alteration
of vegetation in the area in question was prohibited.
The Shoreland Ordinance prior to the amendment the City approved in March of 2024 does not
have a way to address violations outside of misdemeanors. I believe addressing the issue in this
instance is both unnecessary and unproductive. The issue was eventually reviewed by the City
for engineering related to the walls and grading. Vegetation was removed that was not permitted
at the time but may have been permitted if a permit was applied for prior to the work. Erosion
impacts resulted from the work on site that impacted natural resources around and, on the site,
but these have been mitigated by actions required by the CMSCWD.
Previously, the City attempted to address the issues with the Resolution to approve the variance
for the driveway to the accessory dwelling unit, through the following condition:
4. The applicant shall submit an exhibit documenting the view corridor on the property.
The view corridor shall be a single contiguous corridor of 50 feet. The applicant shall
restore areas outside of the view corridor where intensive vegetation clearing was
performed in the bluff impact zone.
As the retaining wall has been installed and erosion appears to be stabilized, many of the
concerns regarding the disturbance of the area have been addressed. The current vegetated state
of the retaining wall and areas around it are unknown, but based on photographs from June of
2024, the area appears to be covered in mulch with limited plantings. The City proposes the
following corrective actions to finalize the issue.
1. Work with either CMSCWD or the Washington Conservation District to establish deep-
rooted woody and herbaceous vegetation with a high stem-density plantings along the
retaining wall and allow the area to remain in a natural state once plantings are
established. Minimum maintenance would be allowed to ensure the retaining wall is
functional.
2. Work with either CMSCWD or the Washington Conservation District and the City to
identify areas where either three deciduous trees at least 2.5 caliper inches/coniferous
trees at least 6 feet in height or two deciduous trees at least 4 caliper inches/coniferous
trees at least 12 feet in height can be planted. Ideally these would be located near the
slope to aid in slope stabilization through deep roots. Alternatively, these can be located
to create screening to aid in the establishment of a view corridor.
I feel that these are reasonable solutions to the issue at hand and will have a minimal impact on
your lot. Please let me know if you would like to discuss further.
4 | P a g e
View Corridors
At the Council meeting in December, you expressed interest in the possibility of establishing two
view corridors and during the site visit you showed Kyle and myself three areas that you wished
to establish view corridors. As you are aware, the City’s ordinance allows for limited trimming
and clearing for a single view corridor that is either 50 ft. wide or 1/3rd the width of the lot,
whichever is less. During the site visit, I mentioned that I had been in contact with the DNR
seemed potentially open to the idea of two view corridors. Following the site visit I contacted the
Area Hydrologist with the DNR asking about multiple view corridors. I received the following
reply:
We think a single corridor of 50’ or 1/3 of the lot width, whichever is less, is a standard
that’s easy to communicate, evaluate, and administer. One corridor is best for
administration. The risk is that multiple corridors will get chipped away over time until
they become one big corridor.
At this time, the City believes that an amendment to the Shoreland Ordinance to allow for
multiple view corridors would not be supported by the DNR.
Additionally, staff met with Tom Langer with CMSCWD to discuss the buffers that are recorded
against your property because of the variance from a water resource. My understanding of the
buffers is that altering vegetation aside from removal of invasive exotic species or of trees for
disease control or revegetation is not allowed and any tree over 6” DBH requires the written
approval from CMSCWD.
The conflict between the view corridor and the buffers is something that the City and CMSCWD
only recently identified as the view corridor has yet to be fully implemented on any properties.
We are continuing our conversation to establish how to advise landowners with lake buffers to
proceed.
As a note, a violation of the vegetation management standards is subject to a restoration order
and a three-year maintenance plan as well as being a misdemeanor. The details regarding the
restoration are established in the Shoreland Ordinance 8.26.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
Thank you,
T.J. Hofer
City Planner
City of Scandia
612-271-6984
tj.hofer@bolton-menk.com
5 | P a g e
Attachments:
1. Section 8.2 Vegetation Management, City of Scandia Chapter 155 Shoreland
Management Regulations, adopted May 15, 2018
2. Section 8.2 Vegetation Management, City of Scandia Chapter 155 Shoreland
Management Regulations, adopted March 19, 2024
3. Slope and Bluff Determinations Exhibit
4. Slope and Bluff Profile Worksheet
5. Vegetation Management Issue Exhibit
6. 19489 Manning Trail North Retaining Wall History Chronological Summary and
Findings
cc: Kyle Morell, City Administrator
Brenda Eklund, City Clerk
Ryan Goodman, City Engineer
Tom Langer, Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District
Daniel Scollan, Department of Natural Resources
Ordinance No. 198 Page 22 of 29
performance standards of sub items 7.21 to 7.25 and the requirements of Minnesota Rules,
Chapter 1341.
8.0 VEGETATION AND LAND ALTERATIONS
8.1 Purpose. Alterations of vegetation and topography are regulated to prevent erosion into public
waters, fix nutrients, preserve shoreland aesthetics, preserve historic values, prevent bank slumping,
sustain water quality, and protect fish and wildlife habitat.
8.2 Vegetation Management.
8.21 Removal or alteration of vegetation must comply with the provisions of this subsection
except for:
A. Vegetation alteration necessary for the construction of structures and sewage treatment
systems under validly issued permits for these facilities;
B. The construction of public roads and parking areas if consistent with Section 7.1 of this
ordinance;
C. Forest management uses consistent with Section 5.3 of this ordinance; and
D. Agricultural uses consistent with Section 5.2 of this ordinance.
8.22 Intensive vegetation clearing in the shore and bluff impact zones and on steep slopes is
prohibited. Intensive clearing outside of these areas is allowed if consistent with the forest
management standards in Section 5.3 of this ordinance.
8.23 Limited clearing and trimming of trees and shrubs in the shore and bluff impact zones and on
steep slopes, is allowed to provide a view to the water from the principal dwelling and to
accommodate the placement of stairways and landings, picnic areas, access paths, livestock
watering areas, beach and watercraft access areas, and permitted water-oriented accessory
structures or facilities, provided that:
A. The screening of structures, vehicles, or other facilities as viewed from the water,
assuming summer, leaf-on conditions, is not substantially reduced;
B. Existing shading of water surfaces along rivers is preserved;
C. Cutting debris or slash shall be scattered and not mounded on the ground; and
D. Perennial ground cover is retained.
8.24 Removal of trees, limbs, or branches that are dead, diseased, dying, or pose safety hazards is
allowed without a permit.
8.25 Fertilizer and pesticide runoff into surface waters must be minimized through use of
vegetation, topography or both.
8.3 Grading and Filling.
8.31 Grading and filling activities must comply with the provisions of this subsection and the
Scandia Development Code, Chapter 2, Sections 3.6.
Attachment 1
Ordinance No. 198 – Shoreland Ordinance Page 22 of 30
Amended Ordinance 2024-04, passed 3/19/2024
7.23 The area of stairways, lifts, and landings shall be included in the calculation of lot coverage
and maximum area of coverage permitted by this ordinance.
7.24 Canopies or roofs are not allowed on stairways, lifts, or landings;
7.25 Stairways, lifts, and landings may be either constructed above the ground on posts or pilings,
or placed into the ground, provided they are designed and built in a manner that ensures
control of soil erosion;
7.26 Stairways, lifts, and landings must be located in the most visually inconspicuous portions of
lots, as viewed from the surface of the public water assuming summer, leaf-on conditions,
whenever practical; and
7.27 Facilities such as ramps, lifts, or mobility paths for physically handicapped persons are also
allowed for achieving access to shore areas, if they are consistent with the dimensional and
performance standards of sub items 7.21 to 7.25 and the requirements of Minnesota Rules,
Chapter 1341.
8.0 VEGETATION AND LAND ALTERATIONS
8.1 Purpose. Alterations of vegetation and topography are regulated to prevent erosion into public
waters, fix nutrients, preserve shoreland aesthetics, preserve historic values, prevent bank slumping,
sustain water quality, and protect fish and wildlife habitat.
8.2 Vegetation Management.
8.21 Removal or alteration of vegetation must comply with the provisions of this subsection
except for:
A. Vegetation alteration necessary for the construction of structures and sewage treatment
systems under validly issued permits for these facilities;
B. The construction of public roads and parking areas if consistent with Section 7.1 of this
ordinance;
C. Forest management uses consistent with Section 5.3 of this ordinance; and
D. Agricultural uses consistent with Section 5.2 of this ordinance.
8.22 Intensive vegetation clearing in the shore and bluff impact zones and on steep slopes is
prohibited. Intensive clearing outside of these areas is allowed if consistent with the forest
management standards in Section 5.3 of this ordinance.
8.23 Limited clearing and trimming of trees and shrubs in the shore and bluff impact zones and on
steep slopes, is allowed to provide a view to the water from the principal dwelling and to
accommodate the placement of stairways and landings, picnic areas, access paths, livestock
watering areas, beach and watercraft access areas, and permitted water-oriented accessory
structures or facilities, provided that:
A. Vegetation shall be restored or maintained to screen all structures, vehicles, or other
facilities by at least 50% as viewed from the water, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions.
B. The maximum view corridor shall be a single contiguous corridor less than 50 feet or
Attachment 2
Ordinance No. 198 – Shoreland Ordinance Page 23 of 30
Amended Ordinance 2024-04, passed 3/19/2024
one-third of the parcel width, whichever is less;
C. Existing shading of water surfaces along rivers is preserved;
D. Cutting debris or slash shall be scattered and not mounded on the ground; and
E. Perennial ground cover is retained.
F. Picnic areas, access paths, livestock watering areas, beaches and watercraft access areas
are prohibited in bluff impact zones.
8.24 Removal of trees, limbs, or branches that are dead, diseased, dying, or pose safety hazards is
allowed without a permit, provided the standards within 8.23 are maintained. Removed trees
that are dead, diseased, dying, or pose safety hazards within the shore impact zone or bluff
impact zone shall be replaced to meet the standards within 8.23.
8.25 Fertilizer and pesticide runoff into surface waters must be minimized through use of
vegetation, topography or both.
8.26 Violations
A. Violations of 8.2 Vegetation Management shall be subject to a Restoration Order
including vegetation restoration plan and a three-year maintenance plan prepared by the
landowner and approved by the zoning administrator.
B. Restoration is subject to inspection by the Zoning Administrator, Watershed District, and
Washington Conservation District to make a finding that vegetation standards and
integrity and inherent stability of the existing landscape will be maintained.
(1) Vegetation restorations, when required, must be accompanied by a restoration
plan approved by the local Zoning Administrator.
(2) Restorations must utilize native plant species for replacement. Near shore or
highly erodible locations are to be planted with a mix of deep-rooted woody and
herbaceous vegetation with a high stem-density, and if applicable, resilient to
fluctuations in water levels.
(3) Restorations must meet, at minimum, the replacement ratios in Section
153.400.700 Woodland and Tree Preservation Subd. 2 (B) IV.
(4) Section 153.400.700 Woodland and Tree Preservation Subd. 2 (B) V. Tree
Replacement Fund shall not be used when a Restoration Order has been issued.
8.3 Grading and Filling.
8.31 Grading and filling activities must comply with the provisions of this subsection and the
Scandia Development Code, Chapter 2, Sections 3.6.8.32 Permit Requirements.
A. Grading, filling and excavations necessary for the construction of structures and sewage
treatment systems, if part of an approved permit, do not require a separate grading and
filling permit. However, the standards in Section 8.33 of this ordinance must be
incorporated into the permit.
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
for-- PAUL BRUGGEMAN
of-- 19489 MANNING TRAIL
SCANDIA, MN
S89010'54"E 1364.00
TO NW CORNER ( EAST DESC)
OF GOVT LOT 7,
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE CALCULATIONS
TOTAL PARCEL AREA ABOVE OHW ........................ 83,939 S.F.
EXISTING IMPERVIOUS
EXISTING BUILDINGS ........................................ 1,622 S.F.
EXISTING GRAVEL ROAD ..................................... 2,509 S.F.
EXISTING GRAVEL TRAIL ..................................... 2,563 S.F.
EXISTING CONCRETE .......................................... 194 S.F.
TOTAL PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS SURFACE ............. 6,888 S.F.
PERCENT PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS ....................... 8.2%
L
I
NORTH LINE OF GOVT LOT 7, - T - 1
SEC.29-T32N-R20W
SEC.29-T32N-R20W
I __ '_1
1-1 '\ EXISTING PROPERTY DESCRIPTION.
AS PROVIDED BY CLIENT)
All that part of Lot 7 of Section 29, Township 32 North, Range 20 West, described as follows,
to -wit: Commencing at a point in the north line of said Lot 7, 1364.00 feet East of the
northwest corner thereof; thence South 150.00 feet; thence South 27 degrees 30 minutes 00
seconds West, 190.00 feet to the initial point of beginning of the land to be described; thence
to the right along the circumference of a curve with a radius of 45.50 feet, a distance of
I-
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ROAD
EASEMENT ALONG EXISTING ROAD
104.43 feet; thence North 21 degrees West 167.60 feet; thence South 69 degrees West 54.5
AS GRADED" AND AS DESCRIBED IN feet; thence South 4 degrees 20 minutes East 179.00 feet; thence South 4 degrees 30
DOC. No. 157193. minutes West 177.00 feet; thence South 10 degrees 40 minutes East 84.00 feet to the shore
X11 \
of Big lake; thence Northeasterly along the shore 356.00 feet, more or less, to a point which
bears South 44 degrees 15 minutes East from the point of beginning; thence Northwesterly Itothepointofbeginning.
All that part of Lot 7, in Section 29, Township 32 North, Range 20 West, described as follows: Ito -wit: Beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot 7, 1364.00 feet East of the NORTH
northwest corner thereof; thence South 150.00 feet to a point; thence South 27 degrees 30
f --- \
minutes West 190.00 feet to the point of beginning of the parcel of land hereby conveyed; Io02 \ \ thence South 44 degrees 15 minutes East 176.00 feet to the shore of Big Lake; thence
Northeasterly along said shore 64.10 feet to a point; thence North 49 degrees West 198.60 20 0 10 20 40
feet to a point; thence South 27 degrees 30 minutes West 50.00 feet to the point of I7111, beginning. A ^ ?
1 INCH 0 FFFT
I....
I.,.
LEGEND
I .
977'3
11 •
DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND
978.5 2a o ` o DENOTES IRON MONUMENT SET
soo.o DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION
1. X1011.2 DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION
9 s s \
DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE I
0 DENOTES WOOD HUB/METAL SPIKE
AT 11 FOOT OFFSET (UNLESS
THFRWTgF NI(1TFr11 1
SETBACKS
PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS
JOB NO: 210856HS DATE: 07/08/2021
PUBLIC R/W = 40 FEET
PROPOSED HOUSE, GARAGE AND STOOP ............... 4,061 S.F. SIDE LOT LINES = 20 FEET
PROPOSED DRIVEWAY ......................................... 1,712 S.F. OHWL = 100 FEET
PROPOSED PATIO AND WALK ............................... 618 S.F. WETLANDS = 75 FEET
EXISTING BUILDINGS TO REMAIN ........................ 696 S.F.
DESCRIPTION
EXISTING GRAVEL ROAD ..................................... 2,509 S.F.
EXISTING GRAVEL TRAIL ..................................... 2,563 S.F.
EXISTING CONCRETE TO REMAIN .......................... 194 S.F.
TOTAL PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS SURFACE ............. 12,353 S.F.
PERCENT PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS ....................... 14.7%
20
20
O I
O
LnofV)=
W O0
1
O con
I
I____,
00
LL J
7.9
Lu~ 0
6 ------
7 .7f x Qi
It O .m \ / _
x 956:8 (A x '
968.0 - I . .
1.
I . rn x \ .1 ..
I . . . . --
ROAD AS SHOWN ON ' 6s o -- ---
A \ 20. ,' _ SURVEY BY. G. H. BUDD -___
97s.2
x \
A >' (
MAY 23; 1919)
tflj 1./
69.1 .
x
O / \ 968.9 PRIOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURESI . \ . '. .
x I. ;"
A 20 0 \ / , (
REMOVED BY CLIENT)
i ';
O ,
x
r \ \
90 / /\ / +
969.5 ^ 968.8
S; j\ \ \ \
y '0 O o 2 \ -, 0 /
X\ 69.2 970.1970. / 96\
N////
2•
x T O 1 > 0) /
969.4 S / // ' .
Q 2 O G m \ / O i 968 9 970A: / 60.6 /> // . C
O - _0 L \ \ /
0 \., / x969. 5 \ // .// . Cri
J' 3 07 0 2 x \ / gyp'/ I \ h + / :! f 9>, <mm \ J,; 969.9 0, \ /
1
71 ,A \ 1 <I-
x I O f'fi o \ \ 970.9 „ ..vG' 69.4 + /
IS"\
I . ... .
I 7. 1:
O C1 979.7
0 0'' \
I .
I . \ .
1
I . .
1. . . . \
x OO Q O 979.1 // 9Z8.6 jo ''•. ( \
969.6 / .\ + S /.
CD , I \ .. . / \\
1 V
o /
Q
O 1 // \ 9 /
Q
i719, /
Q /
O / 973.6 • . c . \ /
20 '` S "9':\ ' 977.1 x.43 y''' / "/ .. ° :/ \
r s '' `,' /
x I O x 975.5 ", e /' / /
19 0 /' \ / SO \ OLS 963.1 / Fgg2.3
954.8
975.8 tP X T IV I /\
I
I
1. / \
T2 3 / / 975f X
I'V' 9.> 1 ,
O. / I +
Q : / 0 . `9 / F cP
x . \
O 2 /' /. 4 4 / '
11 / .
11 (
GO V.. /
c ( /942.2
I "
I
79.0 \
11 ... ... , '. 1.
I . "..
11 I I '. , . I I/
78.7
i
5 . ` `
Q , .. \ +.... \ \ ...
1 I . I . 11 . 0 \ j _\ - _____ . / " X ..
I
q,0 e<v \
I , / .
v $ 0 g76 n 19 0 /R 1.. / /,
941.6 f.. X 97 6 " \ \
x X/ Go .:/ 010. / &' \ ,/
954:6 Imo.` ` / 940.6 /// I.
Q0 o O ,
EWL x95457 976.9
h0
76 `?q0 M ' . .\-:- ,
Q' ,.. \.< +
may/ /
ELAKE x/ /
Q
f ylo V1 / QQ
G (C \ / / ori /
F x 7.7 ..
975.5 O /
j. O SGyO .1 \ / / I x 0
6._
Q . + //
v yo Z t / //
to
963.8 `. rn . . / . -
977.6
g o Z Q O
7 ZS ( OI Cf / / G>
X00
x / \
949.7
FND 1
9 2.2 /
p I C9 WALK N 0 ' : '
Z
LO / EWL / /
x
x962.5 0 9 T .0 \ / \\\ / / N' 1 0 9 42.2JG 'C 9
r \ ' FLOOR = 976.8 6 ' \ / \ N / 4\ .- / ''
O / /
x
97s.2 9 \\ FLOOR UNDER
a \ \/ ' ;
S (0
942.8 /' 941.0 ///
I I .
I ".
5 U GARAGE:'- 967.5 G / / \ 'O /
940.7 .. \ ) O 1 42.3 /
EWL `. ?. Q V \ j.' / EWL ///
I x
t o SIV I 4
t \. ST
x \
yb'67 67 O `` \ 3
z 9j1 U W 975. \ \
J /.
v` / /
OS ti g76
5
7 W O . i //
953.5
i ° 26.1 PROPOSED - / 940.7 /
97 0._...... T.W.=975.0
HOUSE C 954 : 1 .\ .
y
ELAKE //
8'
s / /
i
940.4 942 z I ` eO LOWEST HOUSE __ O / ' 942.1 / '
EWL------- - FLOOR - .5 B W g7
EWL2
xI . ---- . ---69.4 - --- O G• 9 O\\,
rn >641.8
T W 975;0 cb yaF
r ,t------------ -=------------- - ------------108.6 -, --- --- -- -- - _----__--- ---- gV.0 50
8
1I`P o O / /
0 /
958.8 '•------- - - - - - - - - - EiL so- ? 1 O
y
105.2 ---x-- - --- -- '1 EOi n q. 9-I P X20 O /. O=- -------- -- --`-- - : - -----
959.6. Mw 9 lJ F17 96g /
1 S
E i 9 • o / F /
a.R x O ' 1 65
O-. , ho / \ /
z . I .
967.5 a+o O
16 O s g O
O
VA fZ . 1 O
O /
rn . / Ix G O p P q / 940.7
11V) w .
J / 971.2 w N O .. ,.O' i; . / ELAKE /
Z m W° / i / 1 0 N OJ N
x,
V _ TW.=970.5x9s7.9 / /
C 1 7ro B:W.=970.6 .,,. / G
70 941.1
O 9 I (
Y' / i
t0 EWL i o ` 969:3' 970.3 , : , 1(
O / , O'
tp p3: / ' /
N ._.
971.7 ,
1
1 . 1
Q `V / •
x 941.7 / / i
P'
LcYO
I0`b. 97s.8
m \` - 14._ 95; -- °
li Ckn ` 03 X . / 941.7 / /
i
9 10 C
D 45.6: - ---------EWL
F1
n !' '
to Rte' /'
L '
O
I .... rn 1ti. 975.7 F+ \
1 I.
F 940.8 /
0%
974.5 G, `, ELAKE /,z
IV 964.1 .
6 MOVE. , \ . /
i `
05
E C2
i 5
o I m' / O 6E / /, vy O
o \ x
I ^
n , 963.1 \ 97s.s
LINE / ._X . / 0\ 9 FOOT POURED WALL AT HOUSE
1 ; s T.W.=974.5- .FF P
941.2 \ ` ` .-B / \... / o` / OL 10 FOOT POURED WALL AT GARAGE
EWL y
949.4 O Z D \ :
B.W.=974.0 \
Y, / :
Oo)\ / \-' V
G1 r . \ 975.8 , ice! 968,0 / ti / /
M W r
9.§2.3g /
iI' 3C :964.6 \
972.7 /' ' ! PROPOSED
ri m
0 975.6 S c /
942 3 . Z r SI.1./•'.
942.2 V / i
OHW
2.
a
S 9q /' Z/
5/.... /•'
N 3 / ELEVATIONS
1.
m \ f GI
v9 74.4_7 ..... / O /i'
y . : ..... 942.942. -
j
J
o 1.\ /,
TOP OF WALL = 977.2
940.7
1.942.2 i ELAKE GARAGE FLOOR = 8
955.0 95s.1
v `. ........ / L
G / ' O
941.3 ; a . 956.E O 1.
OM/' /
LOWEST HOUSE FLOOR = 968.5
EWL
TOP OF955.2 70 4 .
x952.7 v .. -, _ 9ss.o ...... ' / % LOWEST HOUSE FLOOR FOOTING 968.2
LOWEST FLOOR UNDER GARAGE = 967.5I954.6 0 / 6
Y x943.5 I . I.. 1. TOP OF LOWEST FLOOR UNDER GARAGE FOOTING = 967.2lt /
0 967:8 ....... / /
i
1-
957.6 / hereby certify that this survey, IanX.0 ,5i. / / Y Y Y, p
V
941.5 : . I
954.3 1.11.1-111 94 2., x / / ' or report was prepared by me or under
EWL
z ' m direct supervision and that I am a
951.1 .
952.1 I fl ..
i / ,
963.3 x942.4 i ' 42.s
Q A duly Registereded Land Surveyor underyEX. STRUCTURE - 952.1 I °' / /'941.1 ` f " Y g Y
TO BE REMOVED) ..: . 9s7.7 0 % E / ELAKE P .Lc11 _0 the laws of the State of Minnesota.
9s0.1'- -
951.3 . 958.5z I.
I'llI./ / ' /
1 VVV
GJ0
2.1--
951.8 95 9 g58 / F /, / 1 L 0` O, 943.2 i I:O
9s4:2.
S.. /i'
f P y. ° LO
2 p , 95 g5 / % 0\ , /Fo ° JASO DZ / /
G
O \ O951.0 951.1 943.3 \. / / (
I ::` I 952 (35 y. y F / Q p5
i a .................... 9 8 946 942.7/ 941.7
P Date: 12-16-2021 License No. 41578
q x9.50.5 I 7 C / / EWL /i
X
fft 951.0.......... I
54s. -
x 945.1 / ' I
949.6 I
1951.1 III'l__ 940.6 / ,
x946.3 .FNNCEEND .H A• %'.. I, S86°46'06"E r ELAKE / ,
j 0 ... 942 / / i,
MVA - I /
944 7 $
bfl
ai
943.5 941. /
i
945:3'....
I ......
J
943.2 EWL / i
v NOTES
1. ..".
r
9_ . -
x942.5 / /z' * BUILDER TO VERIFY HOUSE DIMENSIONS SEWER DEPTH ANDx9430
DRAWN BY: JEN JOB NO: 210856HS DATE: 07/08/2021
CHECK BY: JER FIELD CREW:TBD
1 07/12/2021 Added old structures JEN
2 08/04/2021 Added wetland Location JEN
3 12/16/2021 Add 25' x 50' Septic Areas JEN
N0. DATE DESCRIPTION BY
941.7
FOUNDATION DEPTH.
9. 42.4 /
WE1 9
WET WET- -` / ,' * eooa
941.9 9408 , DRIVEWAYS ARE SHOWN FOR GRAPHIC PURPOSES ONLY. FINAL
9422 , ''
WET
EWL EWL KE /%' DRIVEWAY DESIGN AND LOCATION TO BE DETERMINED BY
EWL_ • '' WE 41.0 - ----- --- --
9al.o-- ---------------
ELAKE
CONTRACTOR. BUD
942JET- ELAKE
ELAKE * FINISHED GRADE ADJACENT TO HOME SHALL BE 0.5 FEET BELOW TOP EST. 1977 Professional Land SurveyorsOFBLOCKEXCEPTATDRIVEWAYANDPATIO. wE1 EA1KE *
TOPOGRAPHY SHOWN IS FROM PREVIOUS SURVEY DONE IN 2005.
WETLAND DELINEATION PERFORMED BY EARTH SCIENCE JULY OF 2021
WETLAND FLAGGING LOCATED BY E.G. RUD & SONS, INC. ON
8-04-2021.
www.egrud.com 6776 Lake Drive NE, Suite 110
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
Tel. (651) 361-8200 Fax (651) 361-8701
S:\RUD\CAD\21PROJ\210856HS\210856HS.DWG 210856HS
20.02 ft
~25 ft. above OHWL
Determined to not be bluff, but meet
12% standard for steep slope.
119.36 ft
1
0
1
.
8
0
f
t
Approximate Measure from MN
Topo - Surveyed Elevations
Correlate with MN Topo Data
Toe of Bluff
Approximate Top of Bluff
127
.
0
2
f
t
20'-10 1/2"
20'-10 1/2"
20'-10 1/2"
20'-10 1/2"
20'-10 1/2"
20'-10 1/2"
Determined to not be bluff, but meet
12% standard for steep slope.
Bluff Impact Zone
Steep Slopes (over 12%)
Bluff line appears to be incorrect. Bluff does
not account for top of bluff being: "For the
purposes of measuring setbacks, the higher
point of a 50-foot segment with an average
slope exceeding 18 percent." Not relevant to
current review, but to be noted with memo in
future for reference.
Attachment 3
942.2 OHWL
Cumulative
Distance
(feet)
Elevation
(Feet)
Toe of bluff
determination
Slope
determination
Top of bluff
determination Labels
0.00 941.58 #DIV/0!
1.44 941.73 5.29%
2.89 941.92 3.80%
4.33 942.03 2.72%
5.77 942.07 2.78%
7.22 942.06 4.53%
8.66 942.09 7.30%
10.10 942.19 #DIV/0!942.19 OHWL/Toe of Bluff
11.55 942.44 17.39%942.44
12.99 942.67 16.43%942.67
14.43 942.93 16.96%942.93
15.88 943.25 18.38%943.25
17.32 943.54 18.65%943.54
18.76 943.37 13.61%943.37
20.21 943.18 9.75%943.18
21.65 943.03 7.25%943.03
23.09 942.92 5.63%942.92
24.54 942.86 4.63%942.86
25.98 942.87 4.25%942.87
27.42 942.89 4.05%942.89
28.87 943.11 4.92%943.11
30.31 943.39 5.96%943.39
31.75 943.84 7.63%943.84
33.20 944.47 9.86%944.47
34.64 945.09 11.80%945.09
36.08 945.71 13.56%945.71
37.53 946.34 15.13%946.34
38.97 947.12 17.06%947.12
40.41 947.91 18.86%947.91
41.86 948.66 20.36%948.66
43.30 949.47 21.93%949.47
44.74 950.28 23.34%950.28
46.18 951.10 24.68%951.10
47.63 951.92 25.93%951.92
49.07 952.69 26.95%952.69
50.51 953.38 27.68%953.38
51.96 954.05 28.33%954.05
53.40 954.72 28.93%954.72
54.84 955.38 29.49%955.38
56.29 956.10 30.12%956.10
57.73 956.87 30.82%956.87
59.17 957.65 31.51%957.65
60.62 958.51 32.30%958.51
62.06 959.37 33.06%959.37
63.50 960.29 33.89%960.29
64.95 961.24 34.73%38.35%961.24
66.39 962.27 35.68%38.05%962.27
67.83 963.44 36.80%39.80%963.44
69.28 964.58 37.84%42.42%964.58
70.72 965.80 38.96%45.26%965.80
72.16 967.06 40.07%48.06%967.06 25 ft. above OHWL
73.61 968.34 41.18%50.84%968.34
75.05 969.67 42.32%53.63%969.67
76.49 971.01 43.40%56.28%971.01
77.94 972.12 44.12%58.46%972.12
79.38 973.14 44.68%60.05%973.14
80.82 973.99 44.97%61.19%973.99
935.00
940.00
945.00
950.00
955.00
960.00
965.00
970.00
975.00
980.00
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Distance (feet)
Attachment 4
82.27 974.77 45.15%61.86%974.77
83.71 975.39 45.10%61.85%975.39
85.15 975.75 44.72%61.34%975.75
86.60 976.19 44.45%60.96%976.19
88.04 976.40 43.89%60.11%976.40
89.48 976.56 43.29%58.88%976.56
90.93 976.54 42.50%57.27%976.54
92.37 976.38 41.55%55.44%976.38
93.81 976.21 40.64%53.48%976.21
95.26 976.13 39.86%51.71%976.13
96.70 976.06 39.11%49.93%976.06
98.14 976.04 38.45%48.24%976.04
99.59 976.04 37.83%46.70%976.04
101.03 976.05 37.24%45.35%976.05
102.47 976.09 36.70%44.08%976.09
103.92 976.12 36.17%42.81%976.12
105.36 976.16 35.66%41.56%976.16
106.80 976.20 35.17%40.19%976.20
108.25 976.25 34.70%38.76%976.25
109.69 976.31 34.26%37.32%976.31
111.13 976.37 33.83%35.72%976.37
112.58 976.43 33.41%34.12%976.43
114.02 976.49 33.01%32.41%976.49
115.46 976.55 32.61%30.62%976.55
116.91 976.61 32.23%28.68%976.61
118.35 976.65 31.83%26.42%976.65
119.79 976.58 31.35%24.00%976.58
121.24 976.49 30.86%21.37%976.49
122.68 976.28 30.28%18.44%976.28 "Top of Bluff"
124.12 976.07 29.71%15.45%
125.57 975.92 29.21%12.49%
127.01 975.81 28.76%9.62%
128.45 975.72 28.33%7.20%
129.89 975.59 27.88%4.90%
131.34 975.47 27.45%2.95%
132.78 975.38 27.06%1.22%
134.22 975.34 26.71%-0.10%
135.67 975.32 26.38%-0.87%
137.11 975.28 26.06%-1.82%
138.55 975.23 25.72%-2.34%
140.00 975.16 25.38%-2.79%
141.44 975.10 25.06%-2.89%
975.02 #VALUE!-2.70%
152.68 BIZ
942.2 OHWL
Cumulative
Distance
(feet)
Elevation
(Feet)
Toe of bluff
determination
Slope
determination
Top of bluff
determination Labels
0.00 941.12 #DIV/0!
1.74 941.26 2.88%#REF!
3.48 941.43 2.35%#REF!
5.22 941.52 2.07%#REF!941.52
6.96 941.51 2.36%#REF!941.51
8.69 941.44 3.03%#REF!941.44
10.43 941.34 4.12%#REF!941.34
12.17 941.31 4.97%#REF!941.31
13.91 941.32 5.67%#REF!941.32
15.65 941.35 6.53%#REF!941.35
17.39 941.35 8.11%#REF!941.35
19.13 941.44 9.10%#REF!941.44
20.87 941.60 9.21%#REF!941.60
22.61 941.75 9.34%#REF!941.75
24.34 941.92 #DIV/0!#REF!941.92 OHWL/Toe of Bluff
26.08 942.21 17.22%#REF!942.21 0.30
27.82 942.51 17.03%#REF!942.51 0.59
29.56 942.93 19.47%#REF!942.93 1.02
31.30 943.36 20.73%#REF!943.36 1.44
33.04 943.80 21.69%#REF!943.80 1.89
34.78 944.22 22.13%#REF!944.22 2.31
36.52 944.51 21.28%#REF!944.51 2.59
38.26 944.85 21.09%#REF!944.85 2.93
39.99 945.39 22.17%#REF!945.39 3.47
41.73 945.90 22.93%#REF!945.90 3.99
43.47 946.38 23.36%#REF!946.38 4.47
45.21 946.87 23.73%#VALUE!946.87 4.95
46.95 947.36 24.08%#VALUE!947.36 5.44
48.69 947.84 24.36%13.44%947.84 5.93
50.43 948.32 24.55%14.11%948.32 6.40
52.17 948.92 25.17%14.99%948.92 7.00
53.91 949.60 26.01%16.17%949.60 7.69
55.64 950.42 27.17%17.83%950.42 8.50
57.38 951.29 28.36%19.69%951.29 9.37
59.12 952.37 30.07%22.06%952.37 10.46
60.86 953.53 31.80%24.44%953.53 11.61
62.60 954.20 32.12%25.76%954.20 12.29
64.34 954.81 32.23%26.92%954.81 12.89
66.08 955.07 31.52%27.44%955.07 13.15
67.82 955.31 30.82%27.74%955.31 13.40
69.56 955.37 29.76%27.55%955.37 13.45
71.29 955.46 28.85%27.41%955.46 13.54
73.03 955.59 28.09%27.35%955.59 13.68
74.77 955.76 27.46%27.09%955.76 13.85
76.51 956.04 27.08%27.07%956.04 14.13
78.25 956.47 26.99%27.07%956.47 14.55
79.99 957.15 27.38%27.58%957.15 15.23
81.73 957.76 27.61%27.91%957.76 15.84
83.47 958.25 27.63%28.05%958.25 16.33
85.21 958.75 27.65%28.48%958.75 16.83
86.94 959.22 27.64%28.73%959.22 17.30
88.68 959.71 27.65%28.64%959.71 17.79
90.42 960.23 27.72%28.65%960.23 18.31
92.16 960.78 27.82%28.79%960.78 18.86
93.90 961.33 27.91%28.93%961.33 19.42
95.64 961.92 28.06%29.12%961.92 20.00
97.38 962.51 28.20%29.33%962.51 20.59
99.12 963.08 28.30%29.51%963.08 21.16
100.86 963.62 28.37%29.40%963.62 21.70
102.59 964.22 28.51%29.24%964.22 22.31
104.33 964.83 28.65%28.82%964.83 22.91
106.07 965.54 28.90%28.50%965.54 23.62
107.81 966.26 29.17%27.77%966.26 24.34
109.55 966.95 29.38%26.84%966.95 25 ft. above OHWL25.03
111.29 967.61 29.55%26.81%967.61 25.69
113.03 968.17 29.61%26.73%968.17 26.26
114.77 968.67 29.59%27.21%968.67 26.76
116.51 969.06 29.46%27.51%969.06 27.15
118.24 969.35 29.22%27.96%969.35 27.43
119.98 969.43 28.77%27.94%969.43 27.51
121.72 969.49 28.32%27.80%969.49 27.57
123.46 969.51 27.84%27.49%969.51 27.59
125.20 969.76 27.60%27.43%969.76 27.84
126.94 970.21 27.58%27.48%970.21 28.29
128.68 970.65 27.54%27.00%970.65 28.73
130.42 971.09 27.50%26.66%971.09 29.17
132.16 971.58 27.52%26.66%971.58 29.67
935.00
940.00
945.00
950.00
955.00
960.00
965.00
970.00
975.00
980.00
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00 180.00
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Distance (feet)
133.89 972.07 27.53%26.65%972.07 30.16
135.63 972.38 27.37%26.33%972.38 No Bluff 30.47
137.37 972.64 27.18%30.72
139.11 972.93 27.02%31.01
140.85 973.22 26.87%31.31
142.59 973.48 26.69%31.56
144.33 973.72 26.51%31.81
146.07 973.95 26.32%32.04
147.81 974.13 26.10%32.22
149.54 974.20 25.79%32.29
151.28 974.30 25.51%32.38
153.02 974.38 25.23%32.47
154.76 974.43 24.93%32.51
156.50 974.43 24.60%32.51
158.24 974.61 24.42%
159.98 975.00 24.39%
161.72 975.30 24.30%
163.45 975.53 24.16%
165.19 975.51 23.85%BIZ
166.93 975.27
168.67 975.20
942.2 OHWL
Cumulative
Distance
(feet)
Elevation
(Feet)
Toe of bluff
determination
Slope
determination
Slope
determination
every 50 ft.
Top of bluff
determination Labels
0.00 941.12 #DIV/0!
1.74 941.26 2.88%#REF!
3.48 941.43 2.35%#REF!
5.22 941.52 2.07%#REF!941.52
6.96 941.51 2.36%#REF!941.51
8.69 941.44 3.03%#REF!941.44
10.43 941.34 4.12%#REF!941.34
12.17 941.31 4.97%#REF!941.31
13.91 941.32 5.67%#REF!941.32
15.65 941.35 6.53%#REF!941.35
17.39 941.35 8.11%#REF!941.35
19.13 941.44 9.10%#REF!941.44 118.24
20.87 941.60 9.21%#REF!941.60 116.51
22.61 941.75 9.34%#REF!941.75 114.77
24.34 941.92 #DIV/0!#REF!941.92 OHWL/Toe of Bluff 113.03
26.08 942.21 17.22%#REF!942.21 0.30 111.29
27.82 942.51 17.03%#REF!942.51 0.59 109.55
29.56 942.93 19.47%#REF!942.93 1.02 107.81
31.30 943.36 20.73%#REF!943.36 1.44 106.07
33.04 943.80 21.69%#REF!943.80 1.89 104.33
34.78 944.22 22.13%#REF!944.22 2.31 102.59
36.52 944.51 21.28%#REF!944.51 2.59 100.86
38.26 944.85 21.09%#REF!944.85 2.93 99.12
39.99 945.39 22.17%#REF!945.39 3.47 97.38
41.73 945.90 22.93%#REF!945.90 3.99 95.64
43.47 946.38 23.36%#REF!946.38 4.47 93.90
45.21 946.87 23.73%#VALUE!946.87 4.95 92.16
46.95 947.36 24.08%#VALUE!947.36 5.44 90.42
48.69 947.84 24.36%13.44%947.84 5.93 88.68
50.43 948.32 24.55%14.27%14.11%948.32 6.40 86.94
52.17 948.92 25.17%15.18%14.99%948.92 7.00 85.21
53.91 949.60 26.01%16.22%16.17%949.60 7.69 83.47
55.64 950.42 27.17%17.65%17.83%950.42 8.50 81.73
57.38 951.29 28.36%19.39%19.69%951.29 9.37 79.99
59.12 952.37 30.07%21.68%22.06%952.37 10.46 78.25
60.86 953.53 31.80%24.16%24.44%953.53 11.61 76.51
62.60 954.20 32.12%25.57%25.76%954.20 12.29 74.77
64.34 954.81 32.23%26.73%26.92%954.81 12.89 73.03
66.08 955.07 31.52%27.21%27.44%955.07 13.15 71.29
67.82 955.31 30.82%27.68%27.74%955.31 13.40 69.56
69.56 955.37 29.76%27.62%27.55%955.37 13.45 67.82
71.29 955.46 28.85%27.50%27.41%955.46 13.54 66.08
73.03 955.59 28.09%27.44%27.35%955.59 13.68 64.34
74.77 955.76 27.46%27.46%27.09%955.76 13.85 62.60
76.51 956.04 27.08%27.42%27.07%956.04 14.13 60.86
78.25 956.47 26.99%27.68%27.07%956.47 14.55 59.12
79.99 957.15 27.38%28.19%27.58%957.15 15.23 57.38
81.73 957.76 27.61%28.56%27.91%957.76 15.84 55.64
83.47 958.25 27.63%28.65%28.05%958.25 16.33 53.91
85.21 958.75 27.65%28.80%28.48%958.75 16.83 52.17
86.94 959.22 27.64%29.17%28.73%959.22 17.30 50.43
88.68 959.71 27.65%29.46%28.64%959.71 17.79 48.69
90.42 960.23 27.72%29.43%28.65%960.23 18.31 46.95
92.16 960.78 27.82%29.50%28.79%960.78 18.86 45.21
93.90 961.33 27.91%29.64%28.93%961.33 19.42 43.47
95.64 961.92 28.06%29.85%29.12%961.92 20.00 41.73
97.38 962.51 28.20%30.04%29.33%962.51 20.59 39.99
99.12 963.08 28.30%30.20%29.51%963.08 21.16 38.26
100.86 963.62 28.37%30.34%29.40%963.62 21.70 36.52
102.59 964.22 28.51%30.35%29.24%964.22 22.31 34.78
104.33 964.83 28.65%30.19%28.82%964.83 22.91 33.04
106.07 965.54 28.90%29.98%28.50%965.54 23.62 31.30
107.81 966.26 29.17%29.70%27.77%966.26 24.34 29.56
109.55 966.95 29.38%28.90%26.84%966.95 25 ft. above OHWL25.03 27.82
111.29 967.61 29.55%27.92%26.81%967.61 25.69 26.08
113.03 968.17 29.61%27.70%26.73%968.17 26.26 24.34
114.77 968.67 29.59%27.50%27.21%968.67 26.76 22.61
116.51 969.06 29.46%27.75%27.51%969.06 27.15 20.87
118.24 969.35 29.22%27.84%27.96%969.35 27.43 19.13
119.98 969.43 28.77%27.89%27.94%969.43 27.51 17.39
121.72 969.49 28.32%27.82%27.80%969.49 27.57 15.65
123.46 969.51 27.84%27.60%27.49%969.51 27.59 13.91
125.20 969.76 27.60%27.75%27.43%969.76 27.84 12.17
126.94 970.21 27.58%28.09%27.48%970.21 28.29 10.43
128.68 970.65 27.54%28.12%27.00%970.65 28.73 8.69
130.42 971.09 27.50%27.64%26.66%971.09 29.17 6.96
132.16 971.58 27.52%27.41%26.66%971.58 29.67 5.22
133.89 972.07 27.53%27.41%26.65%972.07 30.16 3.48
135.63 972.38 27.37%27.04%26.33%972.38 No Bluff 30.47 1.74 29
935.00
940.00
945.00
950.00
955.00
960.00
965.00
970.00
975.00
980.00
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00 180.00
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Distance (feet)
137.37 972.64 27.18%26.61%30.72
139.11 972.93 27.02%26.21%31.01
140.85 973.22 26.87%25.77%31.31
142.59 973.48 26.69%25.19%31.56
144.33 973.72 26.51%24.57%31.81
146.07 973.95 26.32%23.86%32.04
147.81 974.13 26.10%23.05%32.22
149.54 974.20 25.79%22.07%32.29
151.28 974.30 25.51%21.17%32.38
153.02 974.38 25.23%20.15%32.47
154.76 974.43 24.93%19.03%32.51
156.50 974.43 24.60%17.63%32.51
158.24 974.61 24.42%16.56%
159.98 975.00 24.39%15.96%
161.72 975.30 24.30%15.25%
163.45 975.53 24.16%14.59%
165.19 975.51 23.85%13.55%BIZ
166.93 975.27
168.67 975.20
942.2 OHWL
Cumulative
Distance
(feet)
Elevation
(Feet)
Toe of bluff
determination
Slope
determination
Slope
determination
every 50 ft.
Top of bluff
determination Labels
0.00 941.60 3.56%
1.89 941.64 3.77%#REF!
3.78 941.73 3.62%#REF!
5.68 941.79 3.65%#REF!941.79
7.57 941.87 3.57%#REF!941.87 0.08
9.46 941.90 4.01%#REF!941.90 0.11
11.35 941.91 5.29%#REF!941.91 0.11
13.24 941.99 5.88%#REF!941.99 0.19
15.13 942.09 6.19%#REF!942.09 0.30
17.03 942.21 #DIV/0!#REF!942.21 OHWL/Toe of Bluff0.41
18.92 942.35 7.31%#REF!942.35 0.55
20.81 942.47 6.97%#REF!942.47 0.68
22.70 942.63 7.36%#REF!942.63 0.83 107.83
24.59 942.88 8.84%#REF!942.88 1.08 105.94
26.48 943.01 8.52%#REF!943.01 1.22 104.05
28.38 943.31 9.68%#REF!943.31 1.51 102.15
30.27 943.58 10.35%#REF!943.58 1.78 100.26
32.16 943.86 10.91%#REF!943.86 2.07 98.37
34.05 944.32 12.39%#REF!944.32 2.52 96.48
35.94 944.77 13.54%#REF!944.77 2.97 94.59
37.84 945.26 14.66%#REF!945.26 3.46 92.70
39.73 945.70 15.39%#REF!945.70 3.91 90.80
41.62 946.27 16.54%#REF!946.27 4.48 88.91
43.51 946.92 17.80%#REF!946.92 5.13 87.02
45.40 947.57 18.89%#REF!947.57 5.77 85.13
47.29 948.19 19.75%#REF!948.19 6.39 83.24
49.19 948.87 20.73%#VALUE!948.87 7.08 81.35
51.08 949.44 21.23% #VALUE!949.44 7.64 68.10
52.97 950.08 21.91%16.53%16.96%950.08 8.29 66.21
54.86 950.53 17.24%17.79%950.53 8.74 64.32
56.75 950.58 21.07%17.20%17.70%950.58 8.78 62.43
58.64 950.56 20.08%17.02%17.54%950.56 8.77 60.54
60.54 950.57 19.21%16.96%17.39%950.57 8.77 58.64 27
62.43 950.45 18.16%16.73%17.10%950.45 8.66 56.75
64.32 950.35 17.22%16.38%16.89%950.35 8.56 54.86
66.21 950.19 16.22%15.85%16.41%950.19 8.39 52.97
68.10 949.87 15.00%15.00%15.56%949.87 8.08 51.08
69.99 949.56 13.88%14.12%14.70%949.56 7.76 49.19
71.89 949.31 12.94%13.38%13.92%949.31 7.51 47.29
73.78 949.22 12.35%12.91%13.50%949.22 7.43 45.40
75.67 949.28 12.06%12.53%13.31%949.28 7.48 43.51
77.56 949.50 12.04%12.69%13.24%949.50 7.70 41.62
79.45 950.03 12.53%13.16%14.03%950.03 8.24 39.73
81.35 951.02 13.70%14.57%15.43%951.02 9.23 37.84
83.24 952.03 14.83%15.99%16.89%952.03 10.23 35.94
85.13 953.10 15.99%17.19%18.48%953.10 11.31 34.05
87.02 954.42 17.44%18.89%20.20%954.42 12.62 32.16
88.91 955.77 18.87%20.58%22.01%955.77 13.98 30.27
90.80 956.87 19.88%21.87%23.23%956.87 15.08 28.38
92.70 957.60 20.34%22.17%23.80%957.60 15.81 26.48
94.59 958.30 20.74%22.27%24.04%958.30 16.50 24.59
96.48 958.80 20.89%22.00%23.76%958.80 17.01 22.70
98.37 959.29 21.00%21.73%23.44%959.29 17.49 20.81
100.26 959.77 21.10%21.34%23.17%959.77 17.98 18.92
102.15 960.28 21.22%21.22%22.80%960.28 18.48 17.03
104.05 960.79 21.35%20.95%22.70%960.79 18.99 15.13
105.94 961.28 21.45%21.05%22.40%961.28 19.49 13.24
107.83 961.78 21.55%21.92%22.48%961.78 19.98 11.35
109.72 962.25 21.62%22.88%23.35%962.25 20.46 9.46
111.61 962.73 21.70%23.82%24.34%962.73 20.94 7.57
113.51 963.20 21.75%24.95%25.26%963.20 21.40 5.68
115.40 963.56 21.71%25.85%26.21%963.56 21.77 3.78
117.29 963.88 21.62%26.81%27.05%963.88 22.09 1.89
119.18 964.34 21.67%28.33%29.57%964.34 22.55
121.07 964.85 21.76%29.94%31.09%964.85 23.06
122.96 965.35 21.84%31.40%32.25%965.35 23.55
124.86 965.79 21.87%32.45%33.03%965.79 24.00
126.75 966.25 21.91%33.22%33.50%966.25 24.45
128.64 966.63 21.88%33.54%33.20%966.63 24.83
130.53 967.03 21.87%33.28%32.01%967.03 25.23
132.42 967.44 21.86%32.14%30.82%967.44 25 ft. above OHWL25.64
134.31 967.84 21.86%30.97%29.49%967.84 26.05
136.21 968.23 21.83%29.61%27.62%968.23
138.10 968.64 21.83%27.85%25.74%968.64
139.99 969.10 21.87%26.09%24.45%969.10
141.88 969.49 21.85%24.69%23.77%969.49
143.77 969.77 21.75%23.83%22.95%969.77 No Bluff
145.66 970.11 21.69%23.14%
147.56 970.58 21.73%23.05%
149.45 971.04 21.77%23.00%
935.00
940.00
945.00
950.00
955.00
960.00
965.00
970.00
975.00
980.00
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00 180.00 200.00
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Distance (feet)
151.34 971.48 21.79%22.92%
153.23 971.88 21.78%22.71%
155.12 972.29 21.78%22.52%
157.02 972.71 21.79%22.36%
158.91 973.11 21.78%22.19%
160.80 973.47 21.74%21.96%
162.69 973.85 21.72%21.77%
164.58 974.22 21.70%21.58%
166.47 974.56 21.64%21.53%
168.37 974.84 21.56%21.45%
170.26 975.05 21.43%20.96%
172.15 975.24 21.29%20.33%
174.04 975.44 21.17%19.77%
175.93 975.58 21.00%19.16%
177.82 975.68 20.82%18.48%
179.72 975.79 20.64%17.94%
181.61 975.87 20.45%
183.50 975.95 20.27%
942.2 OHWL
Cumulative
Distance
(feet)
Elevation
(Feet)
Toe of bluff
determination
Slope
determination
Top of bluff
determination Labels
0.00 942.42 #REF!942.42 OHWL/Toe of Bluff
1.15 942.55 #REF!942.55 0.13
2.29 942.69 #REF!942.69 0.27
3.44 942.77 #REF!942.77 0.35
4.59 942.84 #REF!942.84 0.43
5.74 942.94 #REF!942.94 0.53
6.88 943.03 #REF!943.03 0.61
8.03 943.11 #REF!943.11 0.69
9.18 943.18 #REF!943.18 0.76
10.32 943.25 #REF!943.25 0.83
11.47 943.31 #REF!943.31 0.89
12.62 943.35 #REF!943.35 0.94
13.77 943.36 #REF!943.36 0.95 65.39
14.91 943.36 #REF!943.36 0.95 89.48
16.06 943.40 #REF!943.40 0.98 88.33
17.21 943.58 #REF!943.58 1.16 87.19
18.35 943.79 #REF!943.79 1.37 86.04
19.50 944.07 #REF!944.07 1.66 84.89
20.65 944.45 #REF!944.45 2.03 83.74
21.80 944.83 #REF!944.83 2.41 82.60
22.94 945.20 #REF!945.20 2.79 81.45
24.09 945.58 #REF!945.58 3.16 80.30
25.24 945.95 #REF!945.95 3.54 79.15
26.38 946.35 #REF!946.35 3.93 78.01
27.53 946.78 #REF!946.78 4.36 76.86
28.68 947.22 #REF!947.22 4.81 75.71
29.83 947.77 #VALUE!947.77 5.35 74.57
30.97 948.43 #VALUE!948.43 6.01 73.42
32.12 949.10 13.37%949.10 6.68 72.27
33.27 949.76 14.43%949.76 7.35 71.12
34.42 950.43 15.48%950.43 8.01 69.98
35.56 951.12 16.71%951.12 8.71 68.83
36.71 951.82 17.96%951.82 9.41 67.68
37.86 952.54 19.18%952.54 10.12 66.54
39.00 953.26 20.47%953.26 10.85 65.39
40.15 953.91 21.60%953.91 11.49 64.24
41.30 954.49 22.62%954.49 12.07 63.09
42.45 955.07 23.64%955.07 12.65 61.95
43.59 955.60 24.58%955.60 13.18 60.80
44.74 956.09 25.48%956.09 13.68 59.65
45.89 956.58 26.44%956.58 14.17 58.51
47.03 957.16 27.59%957.16 14.74 57.36
48.18 957.79 28.78%957.79 15.37 56.21
49.33 958.43 29.70%958.43 16.01 55.06
50.48 959.16 30.73%959.16 16.74 53.92
51.62 959.92 31.71%959.92 17.51 52.77
52.77 960.70 32.51%960.70 18.29 51.62
53.92 961.38 33.11%961.38 18.97 50.48
55.06 962.01 33.61%962.01 19.59 49.33
56.21 962.61 34.07%962.61 20.19 48.18
57.36 963.38 34.85%963.38 20.96 47.03
58.51 964.19 35.67%964.19 21.77 45.89
59.65 964.99 36.43%964.99 22.58 44.74
60.80 965.94 37.44%965.94 23.53 43.59
61.95 966.90 47.18%966.90 24.48 42.45
63.09 967.84 40.30%48.97%967.84 25 ft. above OHWL25.42 41.30
64.24 968.61 40.77%50.49%968.61 26.19 40.15
65.39 969.32 41.14%51.91%969.32 26.90 39.00
66.54 969.98 41.43%53.16%969.98 27.56 37.86
67.68 970.49 41.48%53.83%970.49 28.08 36.71
68.83 970.98 41.50%54.38%970.98 28.56 35.56
69.98 971.43 41.47%54.72%971.43 29.02 34.42
71.12 971.55 40.96%54.20%971.55 29.13 33.27
72.27 971.62 40.41%53.59%971.62 29.21 32.12
73.42 971.69 39.88%52.97%971.69 29.28 30.97
74.57 971.77 39.37%52.39%971.77 29.36 29.83
75.71 971.85 38.88%51.80%971.85 29.44 28.68
76.86 971.94 38.41%51.18%971.94 29.52 27.53
78.01 972.08 38.03%50.61%972.08 29.67 26.38
79.15 972.22 37.66%50.00%972.22 29.81 25.24
80.30 972.36 37.29%49.19%972.36 29.95 24.09
81.45 972.51 36.95%48.16%972.51 30.09 22.94
82.60 972.66 36.61%47.12%972.66 30.24 21.80
83.74 972.80 36.29%46.08%972.80 30.39 20.65
84.89 972.94 35.95%45.01%972.94 30.52 19.50
86.04 973.07 35.63%43.90%973.07 30.66 18.35
87.19 973.18 35.29%42.72%973.18 30.77 17.21
940.00
945.00
950.00
955.00
960.00
965.00
970.00
975.00
980.00
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Distance (feet)
88.33 973.25 34.90%41.42%973.25 30.83 16.06
89.48 973.30 34.52%40.07%973.30 30.89 14.91
90.63 973.35 34.13%38.88%973.35 30.93 13.77
91.77 973.40 33.76%37.82%973.40 30.98 12.62
92.92 973.45 33.40%36.76%973.45 31.03 11.47
94.07 973.53 33.08%35.87%973.53 31.12 10.32
95.22 973.66 32.82%35.14%973.66 31.25 9.18
96.36 973.81 32.58%34.46%973.81 31.40 8.03
97.51 973.96 32.35%33.60%973.96 31.54 6.88
98.66 974.06 32.08%32.55%974.06 31.65 5.74
99.80 974.13 31.77%31.39%974.13 31.71 4.59
100.95 974.10 31.38%29.88%974.10 31.68 3.44
102.10 974.00 30.93%28.14%974.00 31.58 2.29
103.25 973.92 30.52%26.43%973.92 31.51 1.15
104.39 973.91 30.17%25.06%973.91 31.50
105.54 973.95 29.88%23.87%973.95 31.53
106.69 973.99 29.59%22.76%973.99
107.83 974.02 29.31%21.28%974.02
108.98 974.05 29.03%19.73%974.05
110.13 974.08 28.76%18.18%974.08 Top of Bluff
111.28 974.13 28.50%16.38%974.13
Removal consistent with expected
removal when issuing building permit
and excepted by 8.21.
Violation area. Area is considered bluff
impact zone and steep slopes. Time of
grading/vegetation removal is
documented by CMSCWD as early as
7/27/2023 before permit for retaining wall
was received or approved (8/1/2023 and
9/11/2023, respectively). Additional trees
exist in area based on photographs.
Significant tree determination (over 6"
DBH) is not relevant when considering
vegetation removal in 8.2 Vegetation
Management.
Removal consistent with
expected removal when
issuing building permit
and excepted by 8.21
Unclear need for removal. Area likely
considered bluff and trees are located
over 50 ft. from structure and 16 ft.
from draintile. Removal of is only
allowed in the BIZ rather than on bluff
(clarify with DNR if old 8.23 should be
interpreted to be limited to BIZ (30 ft) or
entire length of BIZ). Hollow basswood
could be removed without permit is
posed a safety hazard.
34.7
5
f
t
1
6
.
3
7
f
t
20'-10 1/2"
20'-10 1/2"
20'-10 1/2"
20'-10 1/2"
Bluff Impact Zone
Estimate End of Bluff (not a 25
ft. rise), still steep slopes
Attachment 5
19489 Manning Trail North
Retaining Wall History Chronological Summary and Findings
• 12-16-2021: Retaining wall not shown on 7-12-2021 or 12-16-2021 surveys (12-16 is
Variance approval)
• Existing Conditions (photos from CMSCWD)
o 5-3-2022
Attachment 6
o 8-19-2022
• 6-22-2022: Retaining wall first appears on 6-
22-2022 survey as one row, shown as one
row through 7-22-2022 survey
• 7-14-2022: City Engineer approves grading
permit. Submitted plan show a single tiered
retaining wall with no grading activities
occurring in area in question.
• 4-20-2023: ESC report from CMSCWD shows significant sediment accumulating in
area, unclear if area is disturbed at this time. Appears to be without vegetation or at
least covered in eroded materials
• 6-5-2023: Survey shows retaining wall expanded to north and south and realigned
with removed gravel trail. As-built grading (5-26-2023) along retaining wall area and
below.
• 7-27-2023: ESC report from CMSCWD shows work has begun on retaining wall that
matches plans that will be dated 8-15-2023. Trees noted below as potential
violations clearly removed. No permit or variance approval that allows work at time
of observation.
• 8-01-2023: permit submitted to City for retaining wall. Submittal only includes a
singular wall without south piece wrap around.
• 8-15-2023: Survey shows realigned lower wall and additional tiered wall with as-
built grading that has been changed (as-built from 2023-05-26) As built grades on
bottom of retaining wall different from 2023-06-05 with same date of observation.
Review of 12-16-2021 survey confirms that bluff exists south of the area and vegetation
was cleared in the bluff impact zone and along steep slopes. Therefore, the alterations
made before submitting a permit, were a violation of the vegetation management
standards. Site should be reviewed to confirm location of existing trees located at top of
retaining wall. Healthy trees confirmed to be removed by applicant in retaining wall area
should be considered unauthorized vegetation management. Trees to be confirmed
shown circled in orange below. Trees believed to remain shown circled in blue.