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
study there is no basis for the ordinance and the buffer setbacks. The ordinance is only triggered <br />when a property is proposed for development. Landowners can continue the practices they <br />currently have going until they propose to develop. <br />Commissioner Levine questioned if the landowner would need to bring someone in at their cost <br />to show that their wetland has been classified incorrectly. <br />Environmental Coordinator Anderson replied yes, there is an appeals process included in the <br />ordinance which requires that a qualified person would c ct a functions and values study at <br />Af"Ouk <br />the developer's expense. If those results prove contra.Yfa� 9 on record it would be <br />reasonable to look at amending the map. G <br />Commissioner Hunt questioned if it is not: a givOb an <br />Environmental Coordinator Anderson replied tf <br />expert or professional in the wetland field. The <br />Planning Commission and City Council. He woi <br />made to amend the map accordingly. <br />Chairperson Nixt requested i <br />analysis from delineation. <br />Mr. Peterson explained a wetland <br />wetland or not and what the bog, <br />look at how good a wetland is iri x <br />Chairperson Nixt clarifie <br />values relates to quality, <br />questioned ifapdcers <br />of the <br />is <br />would n .. " -" _ .N, e from an <br />then need to ifiie through the <br />haw recommendation would be <br />functions and values <br />it is determined whether it is a <br />tions and values analysis they <br />Peterson th -eation relates to size and function and <br />study determined quality and did not assess size. He <br />5&44e City's assessment based on size or quality. <br />Mr. P cM'` ,siot uncommon on the Anoka sand plain for the <br />act end boon An e� be very, and ultimately a developer will have a hydrology <br />s _ ne to figure out wHer x, oundary is. <br />er Brauer comin asically there is currently a good handle on the Preserve and <br />Ma ds in the Ci . , en a limited amount of funding, that would likely have been <br />where h e put the ey as well. Manage 2 and Manage 3 wetland classifications are <br />not quite as anding is that the buffer ordinance does not apply to landowners <br />until they want d, and until then they can basically do what they want. <br />Environmental Coordin or Anderson indicated selling the land would not trigger the buffer <br />requirements either. The only trigger for the ordinance is once the property is proposed to be <br />subdivided or developed. <br />Planning Commission /April 5, 2007 <br />Page 15 of 25 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.