Laserfiche WebLink
Burl'ors put in by the developer to ensure that property owners are aware of the buffer <br />when purchasing the property <br />t';nforcement of the buffer maintenance <br />Salability of the landowner's property if the allowable number of lots are reduced versus <br />increased value due to proximity to the wetland and buffer <br />Restricted activities on the buffer <br />PlJD's <br /> <br />Merlin I lunt, resident, presented an aerial photograph of his property. He expressed concern that <br />thc implementation of this ordinance would eliminate the ability for part of his property to be <br />built on. l-lo stated the DNR protects wetlands and has defined 2 of his 40 acres as wetland. <br />Now thc City wants to take more of his property, and he will be losing all of his high land. He <br />expressed concern in how this ordinance will affect the value of his property. He stated if this <br />ordinance is passed a developer will not pay nearly as much for his property. He expressed <br />concern with the spreading of noxious weeds in the buffer zone. <br /> <br />Councihnember Strommen stressed the need to be careful about writing this ordinance for the <br />cxccptio~a, rather than the rule. She noted there is a variance process for situations that are out of <br />the ordinary. <br /> <br />John l';nstrom, resident, expressed concern with the proposed ordinance and the devaluing of his <br />property if the ordinance is passed. He stated his property contains two miles of wetland <br />shoreland, and this buffer would require him to give up a lot of his land as not being developable. <br />I Ie stated if this ordinance is adopted there will be no way to control the weeds. Mother Nature <br />has built in a buffer and the City is trying to put in a buffer to protect a buffer. He stated the <br />entire cause is to save the water; the City should save the water and purify it so it does not run <br />of'l: ~I'his could be done with better topsoil being required and with mandatory topsoil <br />amendments that are being used in other communities, or by determining other measures to save <br />the water. <br /> <br />Mayor (Jamco commented some of these properties may need to be looked at individually. <br /> <br />Commtmity Development Director Trudgeon indicated staff would like direction from the <br />Council il' substantial changes should be made to the ordinance. <br /> <br />A resident expressed concern that the City does not own these properties and the landowner that <br />is paying taxes will have a limited use. <br /> <br />Mr. 1,;nstrom requested the City Council to visit and view his property before making any <br />dccisi(ms regarding this ordinance. <br /> <br />Mayor (;amcc suggested the Councilmembers can individually visit Mr. Enstrom's property. <br /> <br />The consensus of the Council was to move the Wetland Buffer Ordinance forward for the <br />consideration of adoption by the Council. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Trudgeon indicated the ordinance will be on the agenda of <br />tl-~e next Council meeting. <br /> <br />City Council Work Session / September 20, 2005 <br /> Page 5 of 7 <br /> <br /> <br />