My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9A - Minutes 081910
Laserfiche
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010
>
09-16-2010 Planning Commission Meeting
>
9A - Minutes 081910
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/13/2016 2:53:57 PM
Creation date
5/13/2016 2:53:56 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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).
View images
View plain text
Mr. Derksen pointed out that limbing trees puts the trees in distress and some may die. <br /> He doesn't like the limbing part possibly killing the tree. <br /> Ms. Brown asked if an arborist may be the route to take. <br /> Mr. Adams stated he likes Mr. Pederson's idea for an initial visit to understand what it <br /> will look like. There has been talk of taking out dead trees, he would like to hear about <br /> putting trees back in, to replenish where trees have been removed. There appears to be a <br /> fairway in front of the units that have been constructed. That is what is driving the <br /> concern from the people on the lake. Mr. Miller stated they do not propose to take out <br /> any trees from the path to the lake. There are probably areas where they would like to <br /> remove thick limbs to have windows to the lake. There are some big trees from the path <br /> to the lake. Mr. Adams stated trimming of those trees would be 30 to 40 feet up. Mr. <br /> Miller stated there is a clump of mature poplars that they may look on either side. They <br /> are willing to work out a solution so it looks good from the lake and for our people to see <br /> the lake from the units. They are willing to have people come out on the first one. <br /> Chairman Woog stated that there may be a majority around the table who feel there <br /> should be supervision on the first and/or second units. It is a solution to be considered. <br /> Mr. Marohn stated he will change Condition#13 to read 30 units rather than 22 as 30 is <br /> what they are proposing. <br /> A motion was made by Tom Adams, seconded by Bill Habein, to approve the <br /> Conditional Use Permit application with the conditions included in the Staff Report, <br /> changing Condition b-b to state that Design Review Team will visit Wilderness Point and <br /> work with the developer on the first clearing when they build the first unit up there, <br /> Condition#13 be changed to 30 units, Condition#8 shall state any changes to association <br /> documents, Condition 4-a shall include last sentence "The documents shall address the <br /> continued operation of Wilderness Resort as a commercial resort" and Condition#17 the <br /> word"OMIT" shall be removed and the first sentence shall be restored, based on the <br /> following Findings of Fact: <br /> On the zoning&setbacks <br /> 1. The underlying zone is Shoreline Commercial and Open Space. <br /> 2. The Shoreline Commercial district allows commercial PUD's with a conditional <br /> use permit. <br /> 3. The Commercial PUD is subject to all of the setback requirements of the <br /> underlying zone, in this case Shoreline Commercial. <br /> 4. All of the units are outside of the 75 foot shoreline setback. <br /> 5. All units meet the 30 foot bluff setback. <br /> On the conditional use permit <br /> 6. There is no reason to believe that expansion on the Wilderness Resort, with <br /> vigorous conditions, would harm the health, safety, or welfare of the community. <br /> Operation over the past two years has not created such harm. <br /> Minutes 4 <br /> Pequot Lakes Planning Commission <br /> August 19, 2010 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.