My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1983/03/28
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1983
>
Agenda Packets - 1983/03/28
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/13/2025 9:57:05 AM
Creation date
3/13/2025 9:57:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
3/28/1983
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
151
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
MEMO on Dynamic Designers <br />Page 3 <br />March 31, 1983 <br />Phosphorus Assimilation Capacity Per 36.4 pounds <br />Year <br />In 1979 the applicant requested approval to fill a portion of the <br />wetland. Approval was given but the development agreement was never <br />completely executed and subsequently was withdrawn by applicant. <br />Prior to withdrawalof application, fill was placed on the lots in <br />question. This fill altered the wetland as follows: <br />Reduced Total Wetland Area by: 0.210 acres <br />Reduced Total Wetland Storage 0.203 acre-feet <br />volume by: <br />Reduced Phosphorus Assimilation 2.52 pounds <br />Capacity Per Year by: <br />Issues to be Resolved <br />1. Should the wetland boundary be changed to conform with existing <br />topo? <br />2. Can sites support two fourplex buildings or should provisions <br />of 48.06, Subdivision CAM) be exercised? <br />3. The "existing dry -buildable" (recent fill) is entirely within <br />the 100 foot wetland buffer area, therefore, a setback variance <br />will be necessary. <br />4. Applicant proposes to fill an additional 0.250 to 0.297 acres <br />of wetland. Will this be allowed? <br />5. Site is in floodplain and, therefore, will requirs conditional <br />use permit for additional fill. Fill will result in rise of <br />100 year, 24 hour flood level, therefore, is contrary to 49.04, <br />Subdivision 3(a and b). <br />6. Proposal anticipates using the wetland to meet some of the deten- <br />tion requirements of Chapter 49A (Resolution No. 983). <br />7. What is the next step in review process? <br />a) Refer to Planning Commission. <br />b) Act on some issues and refer balance to Planning <br />Commission. <br />c) Reject Application. <br />The above review comments were prepared after consultation with <br />• Attorney Meyers. <br />ici/bc <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.