Laserfiche WebLink
MEMO TO COUNCIL <br /> TO: Mayor and City Council <br /> FROM: Jim Ericson, Planning Associate <br /> RE: Good Value Homes Application, <br /> Planning Case No. 506-97 <br /> DATE: December 5, 1997 <br /> Late Friday afternoon, after my staff report was finalized and delivered to Tracy to be inserted <br /> into the Council packet, I came across some information that may shed additional light on the <br /> Good Value Homes easement vacation request. <br /> In a file labeled "Ordinance No. 305 Permit Application," I discovered materials from the original <br /> "MOUNDSVIEW SQUARE" preliminary plat requested by Robert Eigenheer. In this file, which <br /> contained a preliminary plat and grading plans dated 1/21/81, were two important documents. <br /> The first is a letter from the Minnesota Soil and Water Conservation Districts to Mr. Eigenheer. <br /> This letter, which I have attached for your reference, recommends that Lots 17, 18 and 19 remain <br /> undeveloped for stormwater retention. <br /> The second document is a letter from SEH Engineer Dan Boxrud to the City of Mounds View. <br /> He also recommends that lots 17, 18 and 19 remain undeveloped because it was determined that <br /> the wetlands extend up to the 904 contour. Because the holding pond constructed on lot 16 <br /> extended into the 904 contour, it was suggested that the three lots could be reserved for wetland <br /> purposes. This letter is also attached for your reference. <br /> Given this new information, it is clear as to the reason why the lots were put into an easement. <br /> What is not clear, however, is whether or not the lots still serve a hydrological function. Given <br /> the approval of Rice Creek Watershed District and the recently-performed delineation, it might <br /> appear that they do not. Be that as it may, the Council--according to the City Attorney--is under <br /> no obligation whatsoever to vacate an easement, even if no public purpose is present. <br /> S <br />