My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Council - 01/22/2002
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Council
>
2002
>
Minutes - Council - 01/22/2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2025 11:16:52 AM
Creation date
5/6/2003 10:40:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
01/22/2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
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).
View images
View plain text
responsibility to ensure that this runoff does not become problematic for adjacent propertieg. <br />City Staff has added text to the proposed policy to clarify that the wetland encumbrance <br />exemption on lots exceeding 10 acres in size does not supercede the City's authority to require <br />drainage easements when necessary to convey surface water. Council also requested that staff <br />survey other cities regarding wetland delineation and encumbrance. The cities of Ham Lake, Elk <br />River, Blaine and Andover all require drainage easements to be placed over wetlands during the <br />platting process. City Staff recommended adopting the policy as proposed. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen inquired if the policy presented included the ten-acre exemption. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Frolik replied yes, explaining that language was added stating <br />that when there is a drainage pattern to facilitate surface water runoff it is not superceded by the <br />exception. <br /> <br />Councihnember Hendriksen inquired as to how they would know that. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Frolik replied that staff would rely on the opinion of the City <br />Engineer. <br /> <br />City Engineer Olson explained that the new policy would place somewhat more responsibility on <br />the City Engineer, but reviewed that even if the wetland was delineated as a drainage and utility <br />easement they would not be protecting all of the drainage on the property. The drainage patterns <br />would have to be defined and protected. The current policy of delineating all wetlands with <br />drainage and utility easements does not resolve the problem either. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendfiksen stated that he did not understand what they would be accomplishing <br />with the exception. <br /> <br />City Engineer Olson explained that anything encumbered with a drainage and utility easement <br />can give the City more rights to the land, such as digging a six foot deep pond, which would <br />preclude the use of the land for agricultural purposes. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman stated that he failed to see what additional rights the City would be <br />given above and beyond what is stated on the plat. <br /> <br />City Engineer Olson replied that encumbering the wetlands with a drainage and utility easement <br />does not preclude the homeowner from using the land for agricultural purposes, but if the land is <br />dug out as a drainage and utility easement, the property owner could no longer use the land for <br />those purposes. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman stated that the property owner always has the right to agree or <br />disagree whether or not there should be a drainage and utility easement over the wetlands when <br />they plat their property. <br /> <br />City Council/January 22, 2002 <br /> Page 5 of 25 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.