Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council Page Eleven <br /> • ular Meeting July 13, 1992 <br /> Paul Harrington stated that if one thing is denied, certain properties would <br /> go through. <br /> Sandy Krogh, four or five houses are in the wetland. Shouldn't the map <br /> amendment be considered first. <br /> Paul Harrington, stated this is dealt with as one property. <br /> Mayor Linke stated that the resolution has several "whereas'". One requires <br /> a-4/5- vote. <br /> Sandy Krogh, stated that, in her opinion, Harstad is under no hardship. <br /> Harstad purchased a swamp as a swamp. Harstad had bought several areas such <br /> as this speculating that when all the good land was built on these swamps <br /> would be worth money. Bona Road was part of the original land purchased. <br /> Harstad stated that three lots were land locked, and he wanted 17 houses for <br /> 3 , and now 13? Ms. Krogh wanted to know why he is so greedy. <br /> Mr. Roos commented that Harstad made every attempt to comply with the City's <br /> Wetland Ordinance. Mr. Roos stated that they have not declared a hardship. <br /> Mr. Roos further states that there were 21 condition that were stipulated in <br /> e ordinance that had to be met. Mounds View has a very restrictive <br /> tland ordinance. Mr. Roos stated that even with the variance they are <br /> equesting, improvements will not negatively impact the wetlands. <br /> Councilmember Rickaby commented that she recalled in 86 or 87 Mayor Linke <br /> wrote a letter in the Mounds View newsletter that there was a new supreme <br /> court case that we would have to allow Harstad to develop or we would suffer <br /> a lawsuit. Rickaby stated that she studied this particular case in school <br /> and this case would not have made the City allow Harstad to do the <br /> development and Harstad has sued us in the past and hasn't won. There is a <br /> present lawsuit that has been dismissed for the present time. <br /> Councilmember Quick stated_that_the case that was referred to__in_Eagan_had <br /> _ <br /> to do with a rare species of plant. This plant was in danger so the City <br /> would not let the land be developed. The City of Eagan had to pay for the <br /> loss of the development. Our ordinance states that the City has to be <br /> reasonable. <br /> Mayor Linke stated that he does not remember the newsletter article and <br /> asked Councilmember Rickaby to bring it in. Mayor Linke also stated that <br /> our experts stated that the proposal meets the City's ordinance and Mayor <br /> Linke stated he must weight the benefits and effects for the entire <br /> community. Mayor Linke stated that he voted against the proposed <br /> development for legal reasons and they wer defensible in a court of law. <br /> The City cannot be arbitrary or capricious in regards to these matters. <br /> Supposition will not hold up in a court of law. <br /> • <br />