My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1997/11/24
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1997
>
Agenda Packets - 1997/11/24
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:51:13 PM
Creation date
6/29/2018 7:23:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
11/24/1997
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
11/24/1997
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
70
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
iipiiyi 9 ' <br /> J i , ' <br /> • Page 5 <br /> October 27, 1997 <br /> Mounds View City Council <br /> Mr.Ericson stated it was his understanding that Good Value Homes was the owner of the property and that <br /> they have been paying the taxes on the property,however this has not been verified with the County. <br /> Mr.Little,5539 St.Michael Street, stated he understood that after the original homes were built in that area, <br /> there would be some land left over. At the time,they submitted a petition around to have members of the <br /> community vote as to whether or not they would be in favor of the development of the land. That request was <br /> turned down. He feels the city should do what's right for future generations and that the property should be <br /> left as it is. <br /> Jim Gryzmala,2374 Pinewood Circle,stated at one time he inquired about purchasing the two lots there,but <br /> the Rice Creek Watershed District sent them a letter stating that Lot 17 was subject to drainage easements and <br /> that no construction could be placed on it. <br /> Tim Meehan,2382 Pinewood Circle,stated he is against the property as he feels it would be destroying the <br /> wetlands and that a hole in the ground is not the same as preserving the wetland-it is just a holding pond. The <br /> home on Lot 16 has absolutely no background,no grasses,no trees-just a deep hole in the backyard. That is <br /> exactly what would happen on these lots. He compared this situation to the Lake Calhoun problem,where <br /> continual building has affected the water quality. Now they are trying to convert a lot of the area back into <br /> wetlands now. <br /> SKathy Gryzmala,2374 Pinewood Circle,stated they looked into purchasing the two lots approximately two <br /> years ago and at that time there were back-taxes of over$1,600 on the property. She would propose that <br /> rather than building more homes there,residents should be given the option of purchasing it to leave it as it is. <br /> Bill Doty,3049 Bronson Drive,stated over the years the designations for wetlands have been ignored. <br /> Wetlands were meant to be preserved and not just substituted with a hole in the ground. He understood that <br /> Lot 16 was never supposed to be built on. Now a home on that lot stands vacant with a hole in the backyard. <br /> He feels the Council should consider the original intent of wetland preservation and leave the lots as they are. <br /> When development occurs in wetlands,it is merely substituted with holding ponds and the city needs to <br /> preserve what is left. <br /> Council member Quick explained that all laws,regulations,covenants and agencies have been satisfied before <br /> development has taken place in the City. <br /> Leah Hager,2387 County Road I,stated she is not in favor of the proposal. <br /> Scott Dumouceoux,2359 Pinewood Circle,stated he also is not in favor of the proposal. <br /> The Public Hearing was closed at 7:55 p.m. <br /> COUNCIL BUSINESS: <br /> B. Consideration of Resolution No.5173,a Resolution Approving the Wetland Alteration Permit on <br /> Lots 17 and 18 of Edgewood Square for Good Value Homes. <br /> John Peterson,President of Good Value Homes,stated they are the owners of the property and have been for <br /> many years. They purchased the property from the original developer of the property. He explained that they <br /> do not propose to do anything to the wetlands. The land in Lots 17 and 18 is not wetland. They have walked <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.