Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />Mounds View City Council August 23, 1999 <br />Regular Meeting Page 19 <br />to R-4, High-Density Residential and Amending the city's Official Zoning Map; Planning Case No. <br />559-99. <br />Ayes - 3 Nays - 0 Motion carried. <br />MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Set the Public Hearing of Ordinance No 639 for 7:15 <br />P.M., September 13, 1999, and to Direct Staff to Publish the Notif cation Pursuant to the <br />Requirement. <br />Ayes - 3 Nays - 0 Motion carried. <br />Planning Associate Ericson inquired if the Council would also direct staff to prepare a resolution of <br />approval for the consideration of the conditional use permit at the next Council Meeting. Mayor <br />Coughlin stated this was the consensus of the Council. <br />C. Public Hearing to consider wetland alteration permit and the Introduction (First <br />Reading) of Ordinance 638, an ordinance vacating part of a drainage and public <br />utility easement over lots 17 & 18, Edgewood Square. <br />• <br />• <br />Mayor Coughlin opened the Public Hearing at 8:30 p.m. <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated Greg Peterson, representing Oakwood Land Development, was <br />requesting the City vacate a portion of a drainage and utility easement upon Lots 17 and 18 of <br />Edgewood Square, which is located to the north of City Hall, on Pinewood Circle. He stated a <br />similar request was made in 1997, before a previous City Council, for the partial vacation of the <br />easement, as well as a Wetland Alteration Permit. He stated the Council at that time, denied the <br />request. <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated this item was brought before the Planning Commission at their <br />meeting on August 4, and the Planning Commission unanimously recommended to the City Council <br />that the request be denied. <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated this request was to allow for two single-family homes to be <br />constructed upon Lots 17 and 18. He stated at the time the plat was recorded, there was a drainage <br />and utility easement dedicated over the entirety of the two lots, and an adjoining third lot, under the <br />assumption that they were not buildable. He stated there were less clear definitions regarding what <br />constituted a wetland at that time, and the prevailing opinion was to base the definition upon a <br />specific contour and elevation. He stated, in this case, it was the 904- foot contour, which extends <br />across all three lots. He stated in order to approve the plat, Ramsey County Soil and Water <br />Conservation District, and the City Engineer, recommended that there be easements upon these lots, <br />which were dedicated to the public in perpetuity. <br />19C:\ADM IN\M INUTES\CC\8-23-99.CC <br />