My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Minutes - 2020/06/08
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2020-2029
>
2020
>
Minutes - 2020/06/08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 9:24:29 AM
Creation date
6/23/2020 12:10:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Minutes
MEETINGDATE
6/8/2020
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Minutes
Date
6/8/2020
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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 June 8, 2020 <br />Regular Meeting Page 10 <br /> <br />this project would require the extension of Greenwood Drive. He indicated 12 properties were <br />willing participants in this project and two were not. <br /> <br />City Administrator Zikmund stated this was being driven by a change from the original proposal. <br />He explained the change was the ditch running through the existing property was being proposed <br />to be piped. However, the watershed district has denied this request. This denial would require <br />the developer to run all stormwater into a pond for treatment, which will expand the ponding by <br />40%. He explained after speaking with the City Attorney regarding this matter he argued there <br />was a legitimate reason to have all 14 properties participating in these improvements. He indicated <br />it would cost more for the City to install the storm water but the City would then control this utility, <br />while also being able to assess across all 14 property owners. <br /> <br />Council Member Gunn requested further information regarding the term “treated”. Public Works <br />Director Peterson explained treated stormwater meant rain water was running into a pond to <br />eliminate some of the sediment while also holding it back before running downstream. <br /> <br />Council Member Meehlhause stated the City would have the responsibility for maintaining this <br />pond. Public Works Director Peterson reported this would be the case. <br /> <br />Council Member Bergeron commented he was concerned with the fact this project was proposed <br />one way and now that was changing and the City would have to pick up more of the burden. He <br />indicated water was a huge issue for this project. He feared that the developer had not done his <br />due diligence and this burden was now falling on the City. He stated he tremendously opposed <br />this request. <br /> <br />City Administrator Zikmund reported Mr. Harstad had a wetland delineation completed prior to <br />moving forward this project and no wetland was reported. However, after further review a small <br />wetland was found. He indicated the Rice Creek Watershed also denied the proposal from the City <br />with Stantec to put the ditch into a pipe. He explained Mr. Harstad was not requesting additional <br />money from the City but rather was asking the City to have the City complete the stormwater <br />management with all 14 properties participating in the cost. <br /> <br />Mayor Mueller inquired what the cost would be for the 14 properties. <br /> <br />Council Member Bergeron stated at present the property was in compliance with watershed <br />requirements. He indicated if the development were to be constructed the property would be out <br />of compliance. City Administrative Zikmund reported this was the case, the changes were being <br />driven by the development. <br /> <br />Mayor Mueller asked if the lots on the east would have a water feature in their backyard. <br />Community Development Director Sevald explained the stormwater pond would be located in <br />their backyard but this pond would only have standing water after large rain events for 48 hours. <br /> <br />Further discussion ensued regarding how to proceed with this matter. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.