Council_Minutes_1983_11_29 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council November 29, 1983 Regular Meeting gage Two Considerable discussion took place before the vote was called for on the previous motion. Councilmember Linke stated he was in agreement with the supporting data outlined in the memo from Director Johnson, dated November 23. Councilmember Doty stated that in the supporting docu- mentation for eliminating 1 -22 as a wetland, he did not feel it gave adequate reason for eliminating it. He pointed it out it deals with a culvert that does not work, and was put in 50 years ago, and the culvert has no bearing on the wetland in its present conditions. He added it compares this wetland with other non- specific wetlands, not the same size, and he did not feel the terms were specific enough, nor the documen- tation sufficient to say the wetland does not function specifically as a wetland. Mayor McCarty stated it was his understanding from the discussion at the November 14 meeting and the last agenda session that the Council was to receive specific data, preferrably a comparative analysis to support the generalizations the City has received so far. He added he was also looking for something from the developer that would provide comparative data, with specifics, and requested Mr. Miller outline Phase II. Mr. Miller replied that Phase nature, and has nothing to do Mayor McCarty replied he must analysis. II is conceptual in with Phase I. have a comparative Councilmember Hankner stated the Council has that comparative analysis from the three reports that have been received. She reminded the Council that they paid $5,000 for an engineer's report, and he has provided site specific information to the City, as requested. She reviewed excerpts from the Braun Report, from their letter of October 31, concerning 1 -22 not functioning as a wetland. She also pointed out that the culvert has been the cause of 1 -22 being in the condition it is in. Councilmember Hankner stated she felt the Council has the information they have requested, and it is very specific and adequate enough to redelineate the lines for 1 -23 and eliminate what has been classified as 1 -22.