Laserfiche WebLink
agree to remove the fill at any time the City might later request <br /> it. No permit was issued and the City kept the owner's $405.00 <br /> permit fee. The supplier couldn't wait any longer and it turned <br /> out to be just another expensive lost opportunity for the owner. <br /> (see documents #48 thru 52) <br /> These are standard requirements for any property that is changing <br /> grade levels. Where is the request for the inlet that he talks <br /> about? <br /> 1988 & 1989 - The Ramsey County Assessor tried to assess the <br /> property at $261,000 (1988) and $406, 100 (1989) but when the <br /> owner pointed out the wetland condition and classification, along <br /> with the restrictions, the valuations were changed to $75, 800 and <br /> $132,700 respectively (see documents #53 thru 64) <br /> Tax dollars saved. <br /> 1989 - City announced another plan to use subject property to <br /> solve its drainage problems (see document #65) <br /> Another newspaper article. . .check on ownership of property <br /> "behind" Bel-Rae <br /> 1992 - Mounds View, without prior notice, began billing the owner <br /> at the rate of over $600 per year for lighting. The owner can <br /> only wonder why he needs to provide lighting for a wetland, what <br /> benefit this expense affords him, and what will be next (see <br /> document #66) • <br /> Only one quarter billing with a late charge. . . <br /> 1992 - City gave Harstad variance. City officials said "He <br /> bought the property years ago prior to the City's adoption of a <br /> wetlands ordinance in 1982. He didn't create the buffer. The <br /> City did. What we're talking about is a line on a drawing that <br /> we made. " (see document #67) <br /> Not applicable, that's Harstad property. <br /> City changed wetland for owner John Forsberg. City officials <br /> said, "The wetland was originally decided by a contour line on a <br /> map. More or less, it was an arbitrary decision. " (see document <br /> #67a) <br /> Not applicable, that's Forsberg property. <br /> The City, over the years, has alternately discouraged, then <br /> encouraged, private development or improvement of the property. <br /> (see documents #6, 16, 17, 20, 21 thru 27, 38 thru 43 and 48 thru <br /> 52) <br /> That's progress, part of zoning. <br />