Agenda Packets - 1999/09/27 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council August 23, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 25 Mayor Coughlin explained that as a contractor himself, and in light of the unpredictability of the weather, they could begin to get frost on the ground, and may actually incur additional costs in having to break the ground up, and possibly thawing it out, if necessary. He stated he would not want a two-week delay to result in additional expense. Council Member Stigney stated that Director of Public Works Ulrich had adequately answered his question regarding the change order authorization. G. Consideration of Resolution 5365, a Resolution Approving a Wetland Buffer Permit for Vista Construction to Construct a Home at 6991 Pleasant View Drive per the EDA Approved Purchase and Redevelopment Agreement. Planning Associate Ericson stated the subject property was one of the homes purchased by the EDA, through the Housing Replacement Program. He stated the existing home on the site was demolished, and the lot was cleared to make way for a new home. Planning Associate Ericson stated one of the issues with this lot is that it is within the 100-foot wetland setback, which would require the Council to approve a wetland buffer permit in order to proceed. He explained that there are standards for the approval of these types of permits, and staff has reviewed all of these standards, and is fully confident that they are met, and that the wetland buffer permit would be appropriate in this situation. Planning Associate Ericson stated that Resolution 5365 approves the Wetland Buffer Permit for this property, subject to the plans provided by the developer. He noted a stipulation, which pertains to the erosion control fence being installed along the edge of the grading to prevent any erosion back toward the wetland. Council Member Thomason noted Item 3 of the standards for approval, which indicates "Any alteration shall not reduce the existing wildlife habitat value of a wetland as measure using methods approved by the City." She inquired if there were set methods for determining this. Planning Associate Ericson stated this issue is addressed through the terminology "Any alteration shall not reduce the existing wildlife habitat." He explained that there is no alteration. He noted this terminology was specific to the alteration of a wetland, for which there are standards and criteria, however, it is not the case with this proposal. Council Member Thomason commented that many times during her 20 years in mortgage banking, she had seen situations where part of the land was at a lower elevation, and the building was above grade, and does not affect anything. She explained that if the home is located in the flood plain, the purchaser would probably have to obtain flood insurance or go through the process with the Federal Emergency Management Association, and the responsibility would be theirs. Council Member Stigney inquired if there was a difference in size of the structure previously on the property, and the structure that was proposed to be constructed, in terms of encroachment into the wetland buffer area.