My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Minutes - 2004/01/12
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2004
>
Minutes - 2004/01/12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/5/2025 1:25:20 PM
Creation date
3/5/2025 1:25:19 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Minutes
MEETINGDATE
1/12/2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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 January 12, 2004 <br />Regular Meeting Page 14 <br />Director Ericson indicated he would add the trees in the right of way to the resolution but <br />explained that the city engineer's review of the hydrology analysis is covered in Item 1B under <br />the City wetland alteration permit. <br />Council Member Quick expressed concern that imposing strict tree removal requirements on the <br />developer would open the City up to a lawsuit. He then suggested that any changes to the <br />resolution be reviewed by the City Attorney. He further commented that he has suggested in the <br />past that the City should consider a tree removal ordinance. <br />Council Member Stigney indicated he does not feel that the City can tell someone they cannot cut <br />down their trees. He then asked whether the wetland alteration permit restricts building within <br />the 100-foot buffer. <br />Director Ericson indicated there are provisions in the ordinance that allow the City to review with <br />a careful eye what happens within the buffer but it does not restrict development. <br />Director Ericson indicated that if the standards were met the City would have a hard time <br />denying it. He then said that those standards were put into place to ensure that any alteration or <br />encroachment be minimal. <br />Mayor Linke suggested requiring that any trees marked as significant by the City Forester be <br />replaced at two to one if they are damaged or removed. <br />Mr. Harstad indicated he is a New Brighton resident and reads the community newspaper. He <br />then asked Council to carefully consider the restrictions placed upon his development as there <br />seems to be no precedent for some of the things Council is suggesting. He then commented that <br />Council is selling unimproved ground to another developer and is not requiring that developer to <br />pay park dedication fees to develop it. He further commented that the City is suggesting that <br />someone should appraise his property and he questions whether that is done in the City with <br />other properties. <br />Director Ericson indicated that the City has required appraisals before. <br />Mr. Harstad asked whether anyone has had to do two to one tree replacement. <br />Mayor Linke indicated that the City has not yet instituted a two to one tree replacement. <br />Mr. Harstad commented that the City creates ordinances that he has to live by and he is hearing <br />all kinds of new things at this meeting. He then said that the last thing he recalls was the <br />townhomes on Silver Lake Road had no tree replacement and no trail and he is asking the City to <br />be fair with him on this. He further commented that this is an infill project and it is very <br />sensitive because residents have been looking at his 7.5 acres as their own private park but he <br />pays the taxes on the property and is asking the City not to overburden him in such a manner to <br />kill the project before he gets to the starting gate. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.