Laserfiche WebLink
property owner via his Realtor asked for a second opinion from the Planning <br /> Commission. The owner will need to make a formal appeal. <br /> Auto body and auto repair are similar. Mr. Marohn explained the Letter of Agreement <br /> protecting the historic activities happening there. Used car sales is a new use, not <br /> allowed. New buyers could continue uses listed in the Letter of Agreement. There is no <br /> compelling reason to allow used auto sales. <br /> OLD BUSINESS: <br /> a. Building Code Enforcement(continuation): <br /> Bittner indicated that she had not collected the requeste rmation. The Planning <br /> Commission stated that this is not a priority and will I a information when she <br /> completes it. <br /> b. CSAH 11 Corridor Study (continuation): <br /> The Planning Commission had previously at t proposals su d by the <br /> County. The proposed improvements were not ns quot Lakes t proposals <br /> submitted by the County. Once the new highway i tructed, the portion west of the <br /> highway will become City roadway. e Planning Co lion chooses not to comment <br /> on the County proposals. <br /> The Planning Commission does feel it nee be discussions on what the <br /> corridor should look like ateway to ak as suggested we open dialog <br /> with the City Enginee e, and the aunty. outcome can be affected by the <br /> Comprehensive PI <br /> c.Non-Conforming Str ce, ussion: <br /> Mr. Marol d th e Or mendment was sent back from the City <br /> Counci e state ann ommission can review it and send it back. The Mayor <br /> did ike the tiere road cil Member Ryan had requested information <br /> reg d 1 Shoreland s and t information was sent to him. <br /> Mr. Maro dined th we could repeal the whole section, and then it would be <br /> conforming to to Our Ordinance created an exception; it is more lenient than <br /> what the State pr The City had to get a waiver from the DNR to create our <br /> Ordinance. If were this section,we go back to what is included in State Statutes. <br /> Chairman Pederson stated the tiered language allowed larger additions further back than <br /> those closer to the lake. The City Council stated it looked confusing and added <br /> complexity. The value would have been worth the time spent doing the math. <br /> Council Member Akerson suggested eliminating anything less than the 50% setback. Mr. <br /> Marohn explained that that would be more restrictive than our existing Ordinance, but a <br /> viable option. <br /> MINUTES 7 <br /> Pequot Lakes Planning Commission <br /> December 15, 2011 <br />