Laserfiche WebLink
plan. The owner is proposing to construct a solid privacy fence. The owner provided <br /> photos indicating existing trees providing screening located in public right-of-way. This <br /> would not be an adequate landscaping plan. Mr. Burslie pointed out the photos on the <br /> table taken by Staff that indicate there is not 50%screening. <br /> The Staff Report contains the Findings of Fact reviewed in November and also ii <br /> potential Conditions of approval. Conditions io and ii were added or modified. <br /> Condition ii refers to a fence along the south lot line being 20o feet in length. The <br /> applicant proposes a fence �2o feet in length. Staff recommends 20o feet in length. <br /> We have received 2letters of correspondence. The first is from the Fire Chief suggesting <br /> the Planning Commission apply these as conditions of approval regarding access for fire <br /> equipment. The second is from Ryan Schlueter,43Y3 Chainber Lane, opposing the CUP. <br /> These letters are on the table. <br /> Planning Commission Member Birch asked if there were a total number of vehicles <br /> included in the request. Mr.Walberg stated he requested 15o vehicles or sawmills. Mr. <br /> Burslie stated at the November meeting the Planning Commission asked for a site plan <br /> indicating specific areas and number of vehicles in each area. Condition 9 states an <br /> actual number of used vehicles and sawmills or used vehicles and sawmills for sale shall <br /> only be allowed in areas"A"through"H", as indicated on the site plan. Bittner stated <br /> areas"A"through"H"were on the original site p1an, not the one recently submitted. <br /> Mr. Walberg stated he would like to address�the fire department issue. His last 2 CUP's <br /> indicated driveways at i2 feet in width and were approved. The Fire Chief visited his <br /> properry in his personal vehicle. Nir.Walberg stated the Chief stated there was a foot on <br /> either side of his dually. Mr.Walberg stated he contacted his attorney and provided the <br /> Planning Commission with a Minnesota State Department of Public Safety information <br /> sheet for the record. He further stated the information sheet states the fire department <br /> needs to get within i5o feet of all of the buildings. There is a DNR access next door to <br /> the south that is 3o feet wide. That wauld accommodate any fire equipment that would <br /> be there. The law does not state that it has to be on your property; it says they have to <br /> have access roads. The access has to be at least 2o feet wide and capable of supporting <br /> the weight of the trucks. He doesn't feel the letter should be included as conditions. Mr. <br /> Walberg stated if he has to have 2o-foot access roads that makes his property 2o feet <br /> smaller. Twenty feet times 60o would be taken out of his properry when there is a <br /> perfectly good access right ne�ct door. Mr.Walberg stated all of his buildings are well <br /> within the 15o foot requirement. He further stated he contacted the Fire Chief and <br /> invited him back after learning the Chief generated a letter to Bittner. He stated the Fire <br /> Chief agreed the buildings were within the 150-foot requirement,but stated he would <br /> like the access roads to be 2o feet wide. Mr.Walberg requested that this not be included <br /> in his CUP as he was given limited access to this and feels he is in compliance. Mr. <br /> Walberg stated he had the cell number for the Fire Chief and we could call him since he <br /> was unable to attend. Chair Hallan stated that this will need to go to the City Attorney <br /> MINUTES 2 <br /> Pequot Lakes Planning Commission <br /> January i�, 2oi9 <br />