Laserfiche WebLink
Councilmember Musgrove introduced the following resolution and moved for its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION #21-163 <br />RESOLUTION PROVIDING STAFF DIRECTION REGARDING FILL IMPORTED AND <br />PLACED IN DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT AT 15564 IODINE STREET NW <br />WHEREAS, City Staff received a concern regarding a potential wetland violation(s) on <br />the property generally known as 15564 Iodine Street NW and legally described as follows: <br />Lot 29, Block 3 Wildlife Sanctuary 2nd Addition <br />(the "Subject Property"). <br />WHEREAS, on May 18, 2021, City Staff visited the Subject Property and informed the <br />contractor to stop work due to concerns with fill and earthwork possibly occurring within either a <br />wetland and/or drainage and utility easement; and <br />WHEREAS, Staff contacted Joyce Rogito (the "Property Owner") on May 21, to schedule <br />a site inspection along with a Wetland Specialist from the Anoka Conservation District, on May <br />24, 2021; and <br />WHEREAS, the Wetland Specialist determined that the fill was not within a wetland; and <br />WHEREAS, based on that determination, the Property Owner was instructed that upon <br />receipt of written authorization from the City, the earthwork could likely resume; and <br />WHEREAS, per the Wildlife Sanctuary 2nd Addition plat, the bulk of the rear yard of the <br />Subject Property is encumbered with drainage and utility easement (the "Easement"), which <br />should not be altered with fill or grading unless verified that said work will not diminish the <br />Easement's functionality. <br />NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF <br />RAMSEY, ANOKA COUNTY, STATE OF MINNESOTA, as follows: <br />1) That City Staff shall work with the Property Owner to identify a solution to achieve <br />their desired outcome. <br />-or- <br />2) That City Staff shall pursue corrective actions that would restore the Easement area to <br />pre -disturbance conditions. <br />The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember <br />Specht, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: <br />