My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1995/01/09
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
Agenda Packets - 1995/01/09
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:45:51 PM
Creation date
7/2/2018 10:41:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
1/9/1995
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
1/9/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
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
1F',,, 11 11 p 0 r) ‘ f ., <br /> k t• /LA ''''''' i t--'41 . '''''' <br /> Lr i\ PJ111 Ei <br /> Mounds View City Council Page 12 <br /> Regular Meeting December 12, 1994 <br /> 1 Keene stated that it did appear as if there would be a wall, but <br /> 2 noted the issue to be considered was drainage of the area. <br /> 3 <br /> 4 Linke asked Mr. Keene if the only concern he had regarding this <br /> 5 Wetland Alteration Permit was to assure the drainage off the two <br /> 6 adjacent properties through this property and into the Wetland. <br /> 7 <br /> 8 Keene stated that was correct. <br /> 9 <br /> 10 Linke went on to ask if Keene felt there would be a problem with <br /> 11 the house itself or the property itself, other than blocking that <br /> 12 drainage area. <br /> 13 <br /> 14 Keene said there appears to be engineering solutions to all of the <br /> 15 problems. <br /> 16 <br /> 17 Linke reminded the Councilmembers that the Wetlands and the <br /> 18 drainage issues are what must be considered at this public hearing, <br /> 19 not the home itself. The house would not negatively impact the <br /> 20 Wetland. <br /> 21 <br /> 22 Trude expressed concern that the house would impact the Wetland <br /> 23 because natural vegetation would be removed and landscaping soils <br /> 24 would be put in. She questioned the impact of the driveway on the <br /> 25 Wetlands. <br /> 26 <br /> 27 Keene explained that the purpose of a Wetland Buffer Zone was to <br /> 28 protect the Wetlands. He felt that, in this case, the driveway <br /> 29 would go through approximately 60 or 70 feet of buffer area and <br /> 30 would not have a negative impact to the Wetlands because it was <br /> 31 being buffered before it got to the Wetland. <br /> 32 <br /> 33 Trude pointed out that it appeared as though a sodded area bordered <br /> 34 the Wetland itself which meant it would not be buffered. She was <br /> 35 concerned that runoff from the sodded area would not be filtered <br /> 36 before it entered the Wetland. <br /> 37 <br /> 38 Keene said the amount of sod to be permitted was something the City <br /> 39 could direct by placing a contingency on the Resolution. <br /> 40 <br /> 41 Quick asked if the Buffer Zone had been established to act as a <br /> 42 filtering system as well as to control development in that area. <br /> 43 <br /> 44 Keene said he had made an attempt to find the specific definition <br /> 45 of the Buffer Zone, but past Ordinances were unclear in defining <br /> 46 the specific purpose. <br /> 47 <br /> 48 Bill Frits, 8072 Long Lake Road, stated that he agreed with Mayor <br /> 49 Linke that over the years, the Wetlands and the Buffer Zones have <br /> 50 gotten smaller. During the last 50 years that he has lived in the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.