My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Minutes - 2013/11/25
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2013
>
Minutes - 2013/11/25
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 9:25:29 AM
Creation date
9/19/2017 12:50:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Minutes
MEETINGDATE
11/25/2013
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mounds View City Council November 25, 2013 <br />Regular Meeting Page 9 <br /> <br />F. Resolution 8180, Considering Stormwater Infiltration Program (SIP) 1 <br />Appeals in Area G of the Street and Utility Improvement Program. 2 <br /> 3 <br />Public Works Director DeBar stated that Area G of the Street Program was in the final design 4 <br />phase. He discussed the Stormwater Infiltration Program (SIP) that was being followed to 5 <br />address the City’s stormwater requirements. He commented the City identified 52 candidates 6 <br />within Area G for infiltration basins. It was noted this number may decrease as the plans are 7 <br />finalized. 8 <br /> 9 <br />Public Works Director DeBar reported the City received six appeals to the proposed infiltration 10 <br />basins and two have since been eliminated from the plans. This left four appeals to be 11 <br />considered by the City. The first appeal was submitted by Abraham Eapen and Renie Abraham 12 <br />at 8305 Sunnyside Road. The owners are alleging there is high ground water on the site with 13 <br />non-permeable soils. He discussed a recent soil boring indicating the water table was 8½ feet 14 <br />below the surface, and noted the soil was sand and silt, which would not be an issue. The 15 <br />property owners were also concerned with the level of water runoff from adjacent properties. He 16 <br />commented the new roadway would be crowned to ensure that the water does not run across the 17 <br />street. Staff recommended the Council deny this appeal. 18 <br /> 19 <br />Public Works Director DeBar presented the next appeal, submitted by Sharon Goodroad, located 20 <br />at 2581 Arden Avenue. The property owner appealed based on spacing and based on the fact the 21 <br />required maintenance of the basin would not be possible given her age. Public Works Director 22 <br />DeBar explained it was not uncommon for SIP’s to be located across the street from one another 23 <br />due to the fact the roadway would be crowned. Public Works Director DeBar stated the basin 24 <br />required no more maintenance than mowing the grass. For this reason, staff recommended 25 <br />denying this appeal. 26 <br /> 27 <br />Public Works Director DeBar explained the next appeal, submitted by Randy Heltzer, located at 28 <br />8180 Eastwood Road. The property owner was appealing based on the fact a pine tree at the end 29 <br />of the block may be affected. Public Works Director DeBar reported the basin would be smaller 30 <br />in size, so as not to impact the entire boulevard and would be more aesthetically pleasing. Public 31 <br />Works Director DeBar stated the property owner objected to the spacing and questioned the 32 <br />safety of the basin near the fire hydrant. He commented there were no safety concerns with 33 <br />locating a basin near a fire hydrant and for this reason, staff recommended the appeal be denied. 34 <br /> 35 <br />Council Member Mueller stated snow removal around a fire hydrant was wise through the winter 36 <br />months. She encouraged Mr. Heltzer to reconsider his position and encouraged him to keep the 37 <br />fire hydrant on his property clear and free of snow in the winter. 38 <br /> 39 <br />Public Works Director DeBar indicated the final appeal was submitted by David and Sarah Hunt 40 <br />of 8310 Eastwood Road. The property owners thought they had high ground water due to the 41 <br />level of activity of their sump pump after small rain events. He reported a nearby soil boring 42 <br />shows the ground water was 7½ feet from the surface. Another concern was the safety of the 43 <br />water collected in the basin and how this would affect their children. He explained the catch 44 <br />basin was only six inches deep and the water collected drained away quickly. The last concern of 45
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.