My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Minutes - 1999/11/15
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1999
>
Minutes - 1999/11/15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/29/2025 1:24:50 PM
Creation date
8/1/2007 11:39:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Minutes
MEETINGDATE
11/15/1999
Description
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mounds View City Council November 15, 1999 <br />Regular Meeting Page 27 <br />Mayor Coughlin requested staff clarify this was the consideration of a small encroachment onto <br />the buffer of the wetland, and the proposal would not be touching the wetlands, whatsoever. <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated this was correct. He explained that a delineation has been <br />performed on the wetlands, which indicates the wetlands are approximately 120 feet from the <br />subject property, and between 190 to 200 feet away from the proposed house. He stated the <br />proposed encroachment would be into the 100-foot buffer of the wetland, and there would be no <br />impact or encroachment into the wetland itself. He explained that the protection of wetlands is a <br />perpetual concern for the City. <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated staff has apologized they had not provided better notification <br />to Mrs. DeGross and her family regarding what was occurring. He explained staff was of the <br />opinion that it was common knowledge these lots were being actively marketed, as there are "For <br />Sale" signs posted, and colored advertisements in the newspaper each weekend, which run for a <br />month at a time. He stated staff had simply assumed the DeGross' had the opportunity to offer <br />on these lots, and staff has apologized for at least not keeping them informed in that regard. He <br />stated he understood and shared with their frustration. <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated with regard to Favor Street, there would be no construction, <br />without a verification of the location and the survey, and staff will insure that any construction <br />that does occur, it will occur on the platted lot. He pointed out that possibly the 30-foot Hague <br />lot could have been marking Favor Street, and not actually what the applicant felt was their lot. <br />He reiterated that prior to any digging on the site, staff would insure the survey is verified. <br />Council Member Quick inquired if the property directly to the north of the proposed site was <br />privately owned. <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated the City controls the property to the north of the proposed site. <br />He explained there are a number of lots in this location that went tax-forfeit. He pointed out that <br />some of this property may have been picked up with the Highway 118 construction that the City <br />has use deeds over. He explained there are some lots that are privately owned, that could <br />conceivably be developed in the near future, when the City receives the adjusted wetland reports. <br />Council Member Quick inquired therefore, if the proposed site and the property to the east were <br />both privately owned. <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated this was correct. <br />Council Member Stigney inquired if there was enough access for a fire truck to get through the <br />driveway, as well as garbage trucks and the like to service both residences. <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated he would verify this with the City Fire Marshall, to insure that <br />the 15-foot width is adequate. He advised many properties within the City utilize long <br />driveways, therefore, it would not be uncommon to negotiate a large fire truck through a 100- <br />foot driveway. He advised however, this would be reviewed by the Fire Marshall to insure it is <br />• not an issue. He explained if there is an issue in this regard, staff will review the matter again, <br />and the applicant might possibly have to remove a tree. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.