Laserfiche WebLink
d <br /> • REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION <br /> Meeting Date: August 4, 1999 <br /> Staff Report by: James Ericson, Planning Associate <br /> Planning Case No.: 565-99 <br /> Request: Wetland Alteration Permit, Easement Vacation <br /> Petitioner: Greg Peterson, representing Oakwood Land Development <br /> Location: Lots 17 & 18, Edgewood Square (Pinewood Circle) <br /> PIN Nos. 05-30-23-34-0076 <br /> 05-30-23-34-0077 <br /> Zoning/Land Use: R-1, Single Family Residential/Vacant Land <br /> Applicable Regulations: <br /> • Section 1010.08 --Requires that any work done within a wetland (or within 100 <br /> feet of a wetland) as shown on the City's Wetland Zoning Map shall require a <br /> • permit. <br /> Attachments: Planning Application <br /> Zoning Map <br /> Location Map <br /> Grading Plan <br /> Purchase Agreement Letter, dated 2/11/99 <br /> RCWD Permit, expires 10/16/99 <br /> City Council Minutes, 12/8/97 <br /> Letter from SEH, dated 8/12/81 <br /> Letter from the MN SWCD, dated 6/28/99 <br /> • Letter from the MN SWCD, dated 7/27/99 <br /> Background: <br /> Greg Peterson, representing Oakwood Land Development, has requested that the City vacate a <br /> portion of a drainage easement that covers Lots 17 & 18 of Edgewood Square which had been <br /> dedicated to the City as a result of the initial platting in 1982. Even though wetlands are present <br /> over parts of Lots 17 & 18 and all of Lot 19, drainage easements were dedicated for the entirety of <br /> the three lots. This was done to satisfy Minnesota Soil and Water Conservation District concerns <br /> and City concerns about the potential for flooding and runoff in this area. In addition to the <br /> easement vacation, to build on the two lots, a wetland alteration permit would need to be obtained <br /> because work would be done within the wetland as shown on the City's official Wetland Zoning <br /> • Map. Approval is also needed from the Rice Creek Watershed District. <br /> The applicant made a similar request with regard to these two lots on September 9, 1997, however <br /> the request was denied by the Council on 12/8/97 because it was felt that the easements were <br /> granted in good faith and that the lots were never intended to be built upon. <br />