Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council January 12, 2004 <br />Regular Meeting _ Page 10 <br />Mr. Harstad indicated they would be utilizing the existing curb stops that are there and there <br />would be two extra curb stops that would be capped. There is sewer and water on Silver Lake <br />Road on the other side so they would have to bore under Silver Lake Road and bring it across. It <br />becomes complex as there is no curb or storm sewer along Longview. There is curb but it goes <br />to an open ditch, which is unusual in today's age. He then said that the same is true for the <br />sidewalk, because it should be right along Silver Lake Road but the County chose to dig the ditch <br />so it creates obstacles to be worked through with the County. <br />Mr. Harstad indicated that there would be significant tree loss on the property but assured <br />residents that he would maintain whatever trees possible as it adds value to the project to leave <br />them. <br />Dallas Thompson of 5178 Longview Drive indicated that this plan would be a massive change to <br />the area and that concerns him. He then asked Council who his lawyer should contact should he <br />develop water problems in his home after the homes are built on the wetland. He further <br />commented that he has no water issues now and does not want any after the homes are built <br />there. <br />Mayor Linke indicated that the developer is required to follow specific criteria from the City, the <br />County, and Rice Creek Watershed District to ensure that the adjoining properties are not <br />negatively impacted. He further indicated that the water cannot flow off of this property and onto <br />adjacent properties. <br />Council Member Stigney asked if it is possible to state something in the development agreement <br />that Mr. Harstad has a responsibility for any water damage caused to adjoining properties <br />attributed to this development. <br />Director Ericson indicated the City usually requires a performance bond but the difficult thing <br />would be proving responsibility for someone's water issue. He then said that if someone incurs <br />damage that can be directly attributed to the development the developer could be held responsible <br />but if there is some 100 year event that happens to everyone and they all have water it would be <br />difficult to prove that the water damage is directly attributable to the developer building those <br />homes. <br />Director Ericson indicated that the bonding could be drafted to be extended a couple of years to <br />account for any potential issues but residents would still need to prove that the water was caused <br />by the development. He then said that the hydrology analysis and Rice Creek Watershed District <br />will dictate the requirements necessary to resolve any drainage issues with the site. <br />Barbara Koziak of 5173 Red Oak Drive indicated she has lived at her home since 1973 and, at <br />the time they purchased the property, they were told the area was a protected wetland that would <br />not be built on. She then commented that the area is a very nice wildlife wetland area that should <br />be protected. She further commented that the bonding for any damages does not help her <br />because she does not want the damage in the first place. <br />