My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06.01 - Planning Commission Report
Laserfiche
>
City Council (Permanent)
>
Agenda Packets (Permanent)
>
2013
>
08-06-2013 Council Meeting
>
06.01 - Planning Commission Report
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/28/2014 9:29:36 AM
Creation date
12/17/2013 2:17:50 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mr. Cooper explained he had sent a letter and pictures in May documenting their <br />efforts to complete the restoration agreed upon at the September, 2oi2 Planning <br />Commission meeting. He had assumed this issue was over but then received a <br />letter from Bittner stating another site visit was necessary. <br />Mr. Burslie stated that he had conducted a site visit that afternoon, along with <br />Bittner and Planning Commission Member Oraskovich and that the restoration <br />met the requirements laid out at the September, 2oi2 meeting. <br />Mr. Burslie explained that this type of violation, where the ��,opers unknowingly <br />worked on their shoreline not aware a permit was required, rie��is to be <br />documented as resolved. We were on site today noting the plantings are in and <br />the rip rap is in place. The vegetation needs to grow;.�p. `Staff is comfortable with <br />��,,:. <br />the restoration and to remove this from the Viola�'o' '�List <br />; ��,•, h^,, ,� <br />A motion was made by James Oraskovich, seconded �by Deb Brown, to remove <br />this item from the Violation List. All members voted""�ye". Motion carried. Staff <br />will remove this from the Violation List. Plannin,� C�"`�ission Member <br />Oraskovich reiterated to Mr. Cooper that this rri ere will be no`more <br />monitoring. <br />'�!''�I <br />;� �, i �,i <br />Mr. Burslie stated that it is going to ����ke 5 ta lo years ��� '��;�'shoreline to take <br />hold and be in compliance. He furth'�',,,,stated that the C„�pers had restored as <br />directed and would be off the list; no rrY;i�re letters wo��1 be written. <br />Mr. Cooper asked if they were going to b�� �ield hostage for what Mother Nature <br />does over the years. How do�!this end? � <br />�; ;::., <br />Mr. Burslie stated that the Cooper ' �avated an historic ice ridge; they <br />would ha�e been allowed to fix an annu ice ridge. The City wants both sides of <br />the dock to match. , ,:,. <br />'�' <br />�NI���y��;� <br />Mr. Cooper asked what <br />a horrible sQ��tion for e <br />are you lookiri�� �Qr? <br />Mr. Burslie exp <br />if it doesn't ever grow to match. Restoration was <br />. What is future monitoring going to do? What <br />Ordinance and what the City's expectations are. <br />Mr. Cooper stated that it will never grow in as expected. It took 13 years to get <br />ugly like the City likes it, natural. <br />Mr. Burslie explained the City doesn't actively go out looking for violations, they <br />work off of complaints. The City will not be going back out to look unless we get a <br />complaint. <br />Review Variance Application Form <br />MINUTES <br />Pequot Lakes Planning Commission <br />July 18, 2013 <br />3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.