06/27/2001 Env Bd Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Planning & Zoning Board June 13, 2001 Page 3 Chair Schaps invited applicant to make comment. Ms. Lane stated some lots were not build able lots and indicated this lot appeared to be one of these lots. She asked what was the City's responsibility. Mr. Smyser replied the Courts had stated the landowner must be allowed reasonable use of the property. He indicated this property was very difficult to deal with. He stated they could not prevent somebody to reasonable use of the property. Mr. Rafferty asked for clarification of Anoka County's right -of -way. Mr. Smyser stated the right of way would bring it to within 5 feet of the garage. Mr. Rafferty asked how long had applicant owned this piece of property. Mr. Valentine responded he was not the owner of the property, he was the builder and he had been working on it for 6 months to get something build able on it. The property was closed on May 20, 2001. Mr. Rafferty stated there were certain guidelines that had been in place and he believed those guidelines were such to protect the people who were being grand fathered in. However, he stated they were speculating on the use of a property on guidelines th e, ad been in place. He stated he was leery of this request because the buyer should have bee are of the condition of the property prior to purchase, and this would not fit into a gr ing clause. Mr. Valentine replied the previous owner had this 1 regardless of the owner of the property, the same situa recently purchased the property did not chan _ the fact reasonable use to the property. He stated the and the Ordinances had changed over this perio never occur under today's Ordinance in 197 d ` Mr. Smyser replied would exist. The fact that somebody oever owned the property had e lots had existed for some time He stated this type of platting would Mr. Corson inquired about the septi wetland was being impacted system did not impact the Ham Lake and Hugo ha . designed, built and maintaine He stated the septic system wou secondary system and expressed concern the tem. He asked if they could ensure the septic d if it was possible to look at a septic system, such as at this be considered. Mr. Smyser stated a properly system, treated wastewater better than a treatment plant. of have any impact on the wetland if it properly built. He indicated the systems Mr. Corson was referring to were considered experimental, and at this point, there were no regulations by the City, which required this type of a septic system. Mr. Powell stated he was familiar with these types of systems, and encouraged the applicant to consider a design of a wetland treatment system. He stated he believed this type of a system would be appropriate. Mr. Lyden asked about the status of the watershed. Mr. Smyser replied the Board would make a decision on this tomorrow morning. He stated he had received a copy of the text for this project and the Board was recommending approval of the wetland mitigation plan. Mr. Lyden asked if staff had had any concerns. Mr. Smyser replied they had been working with applicant and had worked out all of the concerns.