05-03-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commission May 3, 2000 Regular Meeting Page 4 Mr. Keehn stated he believes the current Water Management Plan has worked very well for the City, and there have not been many controversial issues in the last five years. He added that they have a cooperative working relationship with the Rice Creek Watershed District engineers. He requested the Commission provide feedback regarding the current issues facing the City, and the issues they would like to see addressed with the Local Water Management Plan. He advised that the City would have regulatory authority over residential development of 5 acres or less, and one of the issues for consideration is whether or not the City should approach these situations in the same manner as the Watershed District, applying their rules and guidelines across the board, or if some of these considerations should be left to the discretion of City staff. Mr. Keehn indicated a question had recently come forward with an individual site development, pertaining to whether or not there should be a rate control for one-third acre lots. He stated this particular project did not fall under Rice Creek criteria, however, from an engineering perspective, it presented a somewhat minor impact to the overall hydrologic system. Mr. Keehn stated that SEH has done modeling based upon future development, and they have a fair estimate of what is going to occur in the future. He explained that as long as the land use or development is consistent with the plan, the impacts have generally been identified. Property owners are made aware of the building elevations, setbacks, and items of this nature. Chairperson Peterson stated one of the major changes to the updated Comprehensive Plan relates to properties along Highway 10 that are currently residential, but are now being proposed for commercial use. He inquired if these properties have been identified in SEH’s models. Mr. Keehn indicated these properties would be incorporated into the models, and the Highway 10 Corridor would be identified in the plan. He pointed out that this was one of the reasons they held off development of the Local Water Management Plan until the update of the Comprehensive Plan was complete. He noted there have been only four or five minor changes to the models since the previous plan, with the majority of this development occurring in the past six or seven years, and this has had very little impact on the overall system. . Commissioner Hegland requested clarification regarding the Metropolitan Council’s criteria for determining or defining problems. Mr. Keehn stated these were typically the same issues as those the City would consider problems. He indicated this was not highly implemented in the original plan, which primarily addressed water quality issues. For example, the City has studied the possibility of installing a stormsewer system and providing stormwater treatment at the Arden Avenue sub-district in the northern portion of town. He stated this area has been identified as a problem, in terms of water quality, and they have incorporated plans for resolving this. He pointed out that City staff has also identified other problems, such as flooding at specific intersections. If the Commission is aware of other problems, they could also be included in the plan. He advised that these items are based upon input from City staff, the commissions, the Council, and the residents.