03-18-1991 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

u Jeanne A. Mabusth February 11, 1991 Page 2 northerly part of the road in what is now a treed area, but was designed a wetland approximately 30 years ago. As you know, both the Watershed District and the Corps required that we obtain Orono Council approval of the plat before they would consider the project and decide whether to issue the variance and permit. Thus, we first obtained plat approval from Orono. After we obtained Council approval, the Watershed District granted their variance, but the Corps, after months of meetings, refused to issue the permit for the northerly portion of the road. If you will recall, we placed the road in the former wetland area in order to access the northerly four lots of this 16 lot subdivision. Among the reasons that caused Orono to grant the variance for that road placement was that if the road were constructed on the only other access to the northerly four lots, through Lots 6 and 7 of Block 2, there would be a "loss of major portions of [maple] trees". Furthermore, not only would these important maple trees be lost, but Lot 6 would be impaired and Lot 7 would be totally lost since its septic fields are located where the road would have to be placed. Therefore, the northerly four lots could not be realistically accessed except through the former wetland area as per the plat. Since, as the Orono Council found, "(t]he nature of the wetlands has changed over the 30 years since it was originally designated as a protected area ..." and "[mjature trees now occupy what was once classified as a marsh land ..." with "no obvious sign of flooding or retention of flood waters . . .", a variance was granted to permit the road in the former wetland in order to access those northerly four lots. As I said, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District granted a permit as well. As you know, the reasoning of Orono and the Watershed was thoroughly discussed with the Corps. They understood why the other government bodies granted their variances and seemed to accept their findings as justified. We asked the Corps to grant their permit on the s£une basis. However, they refused, their justification being that the northerly portion might be accessed at some time in the future through some other property not now owned by me. Given their decision, my alternatives are to either litigate with the Corps or accept their decision that the northerly 4 lots cannot be accessed at this time. I have no economically realistic choice but to ac ept their position. Therefore, I am willing to modify the plat to make the northerly 4 lots an