4A - Amendment to Conditinal Use Permit - Wilderness Resort Villas

Home Browse Search

Dawn Bittner City of Pequot Lakes 4368 County Road 11 Pequot Lakes, MN 56472 February 12th 2014 Dawn, In regards to the proposed amendment to the Wilderness Resort Villas CUP, please include the following comments at the meeting. Thank you! The Lodge: Per the city ordinance, the height of the building shall not exceed 25 feet. Our discussion last month included Mr. Hallan commenting that this would make 1/3 of the building meeting the ordinance and 2/3 being in excess of the code. As a Planning Commission are we OK with this? Or do we require at least 50%of the building to meet the height requirement? Or limit the building height to a lower amount altogether? If the lodge is built as presented, trees should be marked on the lake side and trimming of branches avoided. Fines should be levied if excess trimming or tree removal occurs. Beach Areas: If the density of the resort is being reduced by building the lodge, I do not believe the second beach is warranted. Creating a second beach in the designated area would be damaging for the lake. Lastly, the ordinance allows movement/grading of 50 cubic yards. By creating this beach, how much grading/movement would be done? If WRV can stay within the city code of excess grading,then enlarging the existing beach area should be allowed. It would be important to know how they plan to prevent erosion and run off into the lake. Relocation of the Boat Ramp: For safety reasons it makes sense to move the boat ramp to the north end of the beach. Removing vegetation would be up to the DNR? Roadway in the Shore Impact Zone: Based on the August 2013 report, the original conditions of the CUP have not been met, intending to keep this as a walking trail/foot path. I believe it should stay as a non motorized walking trail, in keeping with the original intent of the CUP. Making it a motorized path will be injurious to the lake. We certainly can allow resort workers to use golf carts on the path for maintenance use only. It should be a locked gate that only maintenance can open. To include language allowing "handicap, small children and the elderly" to use golf carts is controversial. Doesn't this description include at least half of the guests? How do we allow a large number of guests to use golf carts on the path, and deny the other half? Golf carts should be used absolutely to a minimum by resort personnel, period. Respectfully, Deb Brown