My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 04/24/2007
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2007
>
Agenda - Council - 04/24/2007
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/19/2025 1:19:26 PM
Creation date
4/20/2007 9:41:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
04/24/2007
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
361
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
Mr. Peterson replied he agrees it would be ideal to look at all of the wetlands. However, in the <br />way the City ordinance is written the City map presents a prima fascie case of what the wetlands <br />should be classified as, and any landowner can bring in an expert to complete their own functions <br />and values analysis and request that the classification be changed. He has seen in other cities <br />where people have asked for changes to be made and the change is granted if the evidence is <br />there. <br />Commissioner Brauer clarified with Mr. Peterson that the <br />cost of the study. He requested information regarding <br />study. <br />Environmental Coordinator Anderson indicated eost ti <br />field surveyed was approximately $55,000. Th could <br />Pal <br />all of the wetlands, which is part of the reason e <br />highest ratings to be sure they were as accurate a "ya <br />what options there are to look at the other wetl <br />possibility that came up was to make it a conditio <br />physically inspected as part of this study be field . reviewed <br />question regarding the wetlands that hav nob — , " , <br />concerns there was a need to pick and cho <br />for the margin and error was the <br />t ncenta2es involved with the <br />Commissioner Brauer questioned if th Hof fi £ the wetlands would likely be <br />three times the amount for the wetlands ltwer d ve <br />Environmental CoordinatoiAA replied that it would be three times the <br />cost, but it takes time to p e ground. <br />Chairperson Nixt stated t cerning thing to him is that the ordinance keys off the <br />classification, two highest tiers were downgraded to be non - wetlands, <br />and in t�e buffers e been required from 25 to 50 feet, which was <br />elimi A toger ordinan ' pted the lower categories do not have quite as <br />Sig of a setba they app the statistical extrapolation of errors, this puts a <br />p ardship on the - at have wetlands. He inquired how old the empirical data is <br />tudv was based on. ... <br />Mr. lied the Nats etland Inventory maps are dated 1985 and are based on 1980 <br />aerial p How ley have brand new aerial photographs that can be used for <br />verification., he areas that turned out not to be wetland, anytime a subdivision is <br />to be done in thee` would be a requirement for wetland delineation. If it is concluded <br />not to be a wetland; would be taken off the map, assuming the City and Tech Panel agree <br />with that. At that time buffer would go away as well. <br />Commissioner Brauer indicated the concern is with property owners being told they will need to <br />buffer their wetland based on this map if it is approved. <br />Planning Commission /April 5, 2007 <br />Page 10 of 25 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.