08-04-1999 PC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commission August 4, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 17 110 raccoons. He added that he believed the majority of the residents were overwhelmingly opposed to this. Cathy Gryzmala, 2374 Pinewood Circle, stated that she lived directly across the street from one of the proposed sites. She stated that she moved into her house in 1991, and spoke with her neighbor, Ms.Haselius,about constructing a stationary playground on the subject site. She stated she petitioned the Rice Creek Watershed District in 1995 in this regard. She stated she was informed by the Watershed that the entire lot was subject to drainage easement, and no fill material or structures could be placed upon it. She stated that, with a proposal that might generate some tax income, they appear to have changed their mind. She provided the Commission with a copy of a plat map for Edgewood Square. She stated Ms.Haselius' signed this document, which states, "...have caused the same to be surveyed, platted, and known as Edgewood Square, and do hereby dedicate to the public, for the public use forever, the drainage and utility easements, drive circle, and the roads to be shown on the plat." She stated that this map was dated April of 1983. She stated that she believed that Ms. Haselius learned she could make some money with the property, and changed her mind about dedicating it to the public. She stated that she had received a copy of the map after her initial proposal to purchase her home, and was told by the Rice Creek Watershed District that those lots would never be built upon. Mr. Meehan stated that he had also been told by his realtor, these lots would never be developed. • Gary C ollis 2390 Pinewood Circle,stated he had attended the meeting on this matter, the prior year. He stated the Mayor had asked the City Attorney if the City could keep the drainage ditch, and the City Attorney stated they could. He stated, at that time, the Mayor reviewed all of the agreements made at the time of development of the parcel. Mr. Collis stated this area was a ten-acre plot, considered wetland by the State of Minnesota. He stated that if any of it is taken away, it must be mitigated. He added it appeared that Mounds View had no other wetland to replace this. He stated he was not in favor of damaging the wetland any further. He stated they have dug holes in it for drainage ponds on the north end of the wetland, and have developed a street,and a cul-de-sac turn around,which are within the wetland. He stated that this area was never replaced. He stated that houses have been built with backyards encroaching upon the wetlands. He stated that he brought this to the attention of staff, who stated this should have been more closely monitored, and should not have been done. He stated that the proposed development would encroach upon the wetland as well. He stated that the purpose of the wetland is to act as a sponge,explaining that the polluted water is filtered through the wetland to wells, which the residents take water from. He stated he is prepared to go to the State of Minnesota if the wetlands are not replaced. Acting Chair Stevenson stated that he did not disagree, and that they did not want to lose any wetland either. He stated the development of the homes,cul-de-sac,and Edgewood spur, was mitigated by the dredging and deepening of the wetland, which created a pond. He stated this was reviewed by the • Corps of Engineers.