Laserfiche WebLink
on all plats and drainage and utility easements shall be placed over all areas designated as <br />wetlands. Drainage ditches should be encumbered to insure the protection of upstream <br />properties. The alternative policy that was proposed was: For all plats located outside the <br />boundaries of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA), any proposed lots meaSuring ten <br />acres or more in size shall not be required to encumber the wetlands with drainage and utility <br />easements. No matter what the size of the parcel, in or out of the MUSA, drainage ditches <br />should be encumbered to insure the protection of upstream properties. <br /> <br />Councilmember Anderson stated that the MUSA line moves, which might not make the policy <br />workable in the future. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that the City could find themselves with the MUSA line <br />moving and more intense development occurring and then they have nothing for drainage and <br />utility easements. <br /> <br />Councihnember Kurak reviewed the pros and cons of changing the policy. She felt the City was <br />overstepping their boundaries by taking peoples property unnecessarily. Staff is recommending <br />approval of the new policy. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman stated that other cities use the same principal on plats off larger <br />lots. He inquired if staff has looked into the 1991 Wetland Conversation Act in regards to <br />platting land. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski replied that the Wetland Conservation Act does not come into play in <br />this situation. Up until now, what the City has been doing is requiring that wetlands be <br />delineated and protected with a drainage and utility easement for the benefit of the person who <br />was purchasing the adjacent property, but the wetland is still just as protected whether there is a <br />drainage or utility easement or not. The issue has to do with large parcels where the City could <br />be encumbering 30 to 40 acres of someone's property and the City could then come in and place <br />a pond on the property. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that there are drainage plans in the City that are established <br />because it is the way it works, if those drainage plans are not protected then people suffer. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak stated that they are not talking about changing the policy on 2.5 acres, but <br />only referring to parcels over ten acres. She felt that it was well over the boundaries for the City <br />to encumber the land because a property owner might want to do something with a small portion <br />of the property. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen replied that the City is not taking anything because it is wetland. <br />The limitations with wetlands are set by the law. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak stated that the property is privately owned and the City is taking their <br />ability to encumber private property. She stated that there is something wrong with the City <br />encumbering 20 acres on a 38 acre parcel. <br /> <br />City Council/November 13, 2001 <br /> Page 13 of 20 <br /> <br /> <br />