05-20-2004 Planning Commission Minutes

Home Browse Search

population. I would expect more wealthy baby boomers to locate on bigger waters rather than the smaller lakeshore here in Pequot. 3. P.24, I don't think the mobile homes pictured exist any more. This picture and caption should be removed. I think HRA is building two new homes on these lots. 4. P.27, action#1. See comment 2 above. Remove this action item.Who is to dictate what amenities will be provided in a development? A City planner is not in a position to prepare the market analysis needed or other incentives necessary for a developer(even HRA)to move forward on a project. 5. P.27, action#2,"diverse home ownership options": Remove this requirement,as it is too vague to guide the City. No one could build a"new housing development"that could comply with this statement(especially senior development). Economic Development 1. P.32, Background, paragraph#2:The industrial park is not expanding rapidly. In fact it has been quite a while since any lots were sold. Also,there is not a consensus among City leaders that the industrial park needs expansion at this time. This should be corrected or removed. 2. P.33, Demands of Modem Business: remove"proximity to a research institution." This is no longer necessary with high speed-intemet. 3. P.33,Aging and Shifting Demographics:"...rise in retirees and the flight of young workers to urban centers." Why won't young people live in Pequot Lakes? 4. P.34,Zoning Controls in Adjacent Cities:We need to be watchful of other areas being easier to deal with and cheaper to do business in order to not lose any competitive edge. Also, "Pequot has the potential to maintain an advantage in attracting tourists....neighboring resorts." Note:very restrictive zoning ordinances will not allow us to capitalize on this economic situation. 5. P.34, Industrial: remove"There is an agglomeration effect Pequots industrial park as it has grown." This is not noticeable at all and half of the businesses are not industrial. 6. P.38,Transient Merchants: It should be noted that most of the transient merchants in Pequot are local residents, not fly-by-night operators. 7. P.41, LT action#3: How can government drive retail strategies to achieve this goal? This is properly done in the private sector. The City can support good business, but should not be determining winners and losers based on whom administrators think should or shouldn't be in Pequot Lakes. Natural Resources 1. P.47,Water resources, paragraph#1: States"Although the depth and size of these lakes vary,the general water quality in most lakes is below average for the area and nearly all are reaching the eutrophic stage." I believe that the general water quality of our lakes is average for some lakes and better than average for others. With the exception of some of the smaller lakes,almost all are mesotrophic and support healthy fisheries. The definitions on page 49 do not describe our primary lakes. Indicating that the water is worse than it is could lead to more stringent ordinances than are necessary to protect the resource. 2. P.51,Soils and geology, last sentence:"With increasing evidence that ...."This comes from a 10-year-old Crow Wing County Comp plan. It is not specific to Pequot and could be factually incorrect. Can't we get better and more current information? 3. P. 56, Policies#1:states"...continued growth and development at the current rate could result in massive land consumption and natural resource degradation." What is the current rate? This needs to be referenced and supported by facts. 4. P. 57,ST action#12 &#13:the limitation on boat canopies and the distance docks can extend. This is not a problem and we don't need more ordinances addressing non-existing problems. A modest proposal addressing extensions and adjacent landowners may be appropriate, however. 5. P.58,LT action#7:remove proposal to make the issuance of on-site septic permits contingent on lake quality rating. Each individual landowner can only control compliance on