My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Minutes - 2005/11/14
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
Minutes - 2005/11/14
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/5/2025 4:21:32 PM
Creation date
3/5/2025 4:21:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Minutes
MEETINGDATE
11/14/2005
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 November 14, 2005 <br />Regular Meeting Page 12 <br />• Councilmember Flaherty asked for an explanation of the RCWD requirement fora $60,000 cash <br />surety. Director Ericson explained that with every application the Watershed District requires a <br />cash surety, which they hold to assure the developer completes the tasks necessary to the wetland <br />permit, provides the mitigation, restores the wetland, and places proper seed. If the developers <br />do not follow through with those provisions, the RCWD has enough surety to complete the work <br />themselves. He noted this is much higher than you typically see and may relate to the size of the <br />parcel. <br />Councilmember Flaherty referenced language in Resolution 6632 indicating: "The proposed <br />alteration will not decrease the flood storage capacity of the site but will instead increase capacity <br />by a four to one ratio.. The proposed alteration will not reduce the existing wildlife habitat value. <br />Because of the mitigation efforts and ditch realignment, wildlife habitat should be enhanced." <br />He noted that these are benefits to the City. <br />MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Stigney. To waive the reading and adopt Resolution 6635, <br />Approving Medtronic CRM Final Plat; Planning Case MA2005-002. <br />Mayor Marty stated he has asked in the past if there will be a berm around Outlot A to keep the <br />water on that site. He noted they have created an access and NURP ponds but in looking at <br />Exhibit 4, it is far to the east where it is controlled on the property. He stated he wants to assure <br />there is no runoff into that pond. <br />. Director Ericson stated no run off generated from this site will go to the pond on Outlot A. He <br />explained that all of the impervious area drains into the interior storm water management <br />ponding of .Medtronic. He stated as Public Works Director Lee indicated at the previous <br />meeting, the City probably does not want to create a situation where the pond gets absolutely no <br />recharge because it may dry up. He also explained that a berm is not necessary because all of the <br />drainage from the Medtronic impervious surface drains into their internal system. <br />Director Ericson stated that BRAA reviewed the storm water management plan with a "fine tooth <br />comb" and made recommendations that were addressed to protect the City from any storm water <br />management issues. <br />Ayes-4 Nay-1 (Marty) Motion carried. <br />2. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 764 Rezoning Medtronic. <br />Site from Industrial (I-1) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) <br />MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Thomas. To waive the second reading and adopt Ordinance 764 <br />Approving a Rezoning of the Medtronic CRM Development Area from Light Industrial (I-1) to <br />Planned Unit Development (PUD) and authorize staff to publish a summary. <br />Mayor Marry referenced Page 3 of the staff report, item 2.(2) indicating the geographic area <br />• involved and that nearly 16 acres of the project area is in the City of Blaine. He stated that while <br />this is not an "apples-to-apples" comparison, Mounds View sold 72 acres for $8.6 million and <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.