Laserfiche WebLink
<br />prohibited from developing in such a way that we decrease the <br />flow of water beyond that ., (Changed Tape) <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />MAYOR CRICHTON: That is correct, A;l of the properties <br />are subject to the Rice Creek watershed District's quality con- <br />trol. What is being proposed here is an attempt to get the <br />(inaudible) flow of water in this district under control so that <br />you and others are not flooded. <br /> <br />COUNCILMAN WOODBURN: It's possible that one can also <br />argue that of all the people benefitted, you are benefitted more <br />than anyone because these are all pieces of property figured at <br />equal c.a. factors. If that c.a. factor is correct on developed <br />and undeveloped property, then this project is, needed as it <br />stands. At least we can argue that, but it could be needed <br />(inaudible) 15% c.a. factor. If that is more than will actually <br />occur, then we have to cut down on the undeveloped property. We <br />would have to enlarge that ponding (inaudible) so of all the <br />people who could lose land by this are those that are undeveloped. <br /> <br />MR. WAYNE SERKLAND: We will lose land or you gain land by <br />regulations of the Watershed District which will control the <br />size of that pond, as I understand the system of regulation. <br />The way we could benefit would be if the project would relieve <br />us from those regulations which, I understand, it will not. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: It would relieve you to the extent <br />that you would not have to provide ponding for the entire <br />drainage area, only to the extent of your land. It would also <br />benefit as far as the Tri-State property. There is a large <br />open ditch along the north side of Grey Fox Road. If placed on <br />a conduit, that ditch could then be filled. You would gain <br />additional property. Granted, it may not be used for building, <br />per se, but for landscaping, access to your property, whatever. <br />The size of the pond, if the Rice Creek Watershed adopts the <br />plan, Arden Hills' plan, the size of your pond would be greatly <br />reduced over what they would expect you to provide today. I'm <br />not certain exactly what they expect you to provide, but my <br />understanding is that they expect you to provide that low area, <br />which they consider the widening of the ditch, for ponding, for <br />everything. If they approve the plan, then you would only have <br />to provide sufficient ponding just for your property, which <br />would greatly reduce the amount of water, or the amount of area <br />necessary for ponding. <br /> <br />MR. WAYNE SERKLAND: We are going through something that <br />I guess is imponderable - what the Rice Creek Watershed District <br />would or would not do with our property. It's probably not <br />(inaudible). I would just simply like to sum up that the posi- <br />tion of Tri-State Land Company is that we are well able to, <br />through ponding, handle the storm water problems that will be <br />created by development on that property in such a way that we <br />will discharge, even considering the natural flows of water <br />that are now being accelerated by adjacent developments, that <br />we will be able to discharge a flow of water that is no greater <br /> <br />10 <br />