03-13-2002 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Hanson, Joel From: Clifton Aichinger [cliff @rwmwd.org] Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 8:56 AM To: joel .hanson @ci.Iittle- canada.mn.us Cc: karl hammers Subject: Re: Palmen Property Lv� Card for Clifton Aichinger Joel - 1 have visited the site on a number of occasions over the last 15 years or so. The site is long and narrow, This presents real limitations to its development without encroaching on the buffer requirement we have in our plan, but it is buildable. I think a good case can be made for the need to encroach on the buffer to fit more than one house on the property. I think a case could be made that Gordy Howe's proposal to fit a number of single family sites on the property is incompatible. It would probably take a strong willed City Council and Watershed Board to stand firm on ruling that one house is a reasonable use of the property and not a taking of development rights. can sympathize with the residents that the tree cutting and housing neat the wetland edge may have wetland impacts, but I'm sure their main concern is the visual impact. Should the City or the District be involved in purchasing property to protect the visual aesthetics for a few residents? Should we be buying property that doesn't fit with the open space or parks plan of the community? I would be all for buying property if I could clearly demonstrate that the buffer area is critical to the health of the wetland or protects unique species, but I'm not confident that this is the case here. We could (in the Spring) do a more complete inventory of the site and give you a better understanding of the site's habitat and quality, but we don't have that now. We do know that the site is wooded, but primarily with boxelder and other lower value trees. The quality of the wetland is not exceedingly high. It is primarily a cattail monotype without a lot of diversity. However, it is a large wetland that does serve a valuable water storage and water quality function for Lake Gervais. I'm sure it also has good wildlife value. However, I would have a difficult time proving that some development on this property would harm those values. I think some development on the property is compatible. I think Gordy Howe's proposal may be overly ambitious. Given the concern expressed in the neighborhood, I think a more conservative approach may be warranted (i.e., be restrictive on the variances offered for building on the site). My Board has discussed the possibility of getting involved in property acquisition of valuable wetlands and buffers, but we haven't had any requests or looked for opportunities. I think it may be interesting if you or the Council would present this request to my Board for consideration. If we receive this request, staff will have to develop some method to evaluate the site and make a recommendation. We could definitely be involved in evaluating the site and providing you with natural resource data but our financial involvement would be a new venture for the District and may take some time to get an answer. As another approach, if we both held firm to restricting the use of the site a less intense use of the site would accomplish protection of the habitat and the vistas of concern to the residents. Maybe we should meet and strategize about the project once we get a firm proposal. I'm sure we will be talking about this more. See you soon. Cliff Aichinger