Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council November 14, 1983 <br />Regular Meeting Page Fourteen <br />like to once again look at the proof offered by <br />the consultants, that the boundaries should be <br />changed on the basis that certain areas were not <br />wetlands. He stated the developer and the consultants <br />should come forward and meet with the Council, and <br />show that the area that has been subtracted is not <br />wetlands, and prolide proof, along with 1 -22. <br />Councilmember Linke asked what extent of proof <br />would be required. Mayor McCarty replied it would <br />be discussed with the developer and consultants. <br />Director Johnson stated that since the second reading <br />is schedule for November 28, they could, in the <br />interim, schedule a meeting with Braun, Barr and <br />RCS &WCD. <br />Jim Miller stated that the evidence has been given <br />by all the experts already for exactly what the <br />ordinance asks. <br />Councilmember Hankner stated that in looking at all <br />the information received, the wetlands map is based <br />on the RCS &WCD survey, and it has been pointed out <br />over and over that it is very general in nature, and <br />if site specifications are required, they must be <br />obtained from specialists. She replied that the <br />Braun report is simply taking site specific information <br />and applying it to the property. <br />John Miller reminded the Council that they must con- <br />sider that when the City made the wetland map, it <br />was done by biology students, not professionals, and <br />a professional engineering firm is redefining it now, <br />He stated the City should go back to Braun and ask <br />for substantiation, which would be the proper <br />procedure. <br />Mayor McCarty stated they are just asking for proof. <br />Clerk /Administrator Pauley stated that authorization <br />would be required if any additional money is expended <br />in asking for clarification or proof from Braun. <br />Mayor McCarty replied that he is not willing to invest <br />any more of the City's money, from the SWM fund, and <br />that it is the developer's responsibility. <br />Councilmember Linke stated he was against spending any <br />further funds as the engineering report has come back <br />with the delineation of 1 -23, which is exactly what <br />the City asked for. <br />Councilmember Hankner stated she was against spending <br />any further money as she does not fee] the City or <br />anyone else needs to incur the expense, as they already <br />have enough information from the experts. <br />