Laserfiche WebLink
a. Blaine Jones Lot Consolidation <br /> Mr. Burslie explained the Staff Report. The ordinance requires lots to be consolidated to <br /> become conforming. Mr. Jones was present. <br /> Mr. Jones stated he is concerned with the tax increase. The County is not requiring the <br /> consolidation. He is not incompliance with his Variance approval until the <br /> consolidation takes place. He further stated he is not in favor of paying an additional <br /> $104 in taxes. They are 50 foot lots and one lot can't be built on because of the <br /> topography. When asked, he stated that the new dwelling was built on the same <br /> footprint; one corner of the building is over the lot line (of Lots 1 and 2). <br /> Planning Commission Member Hallan stated the lots are nonconforming lots. The <br /> Planning Commission's actions were typical; a Variance was requested and as a <br /> condition, consolidating the 2 lots made the lot conforming. The 3 lots are being used <br /> as a single property. <br /> Mr. Jones stated Lot i is not buildable and he will lose the $76,00o benefit. Planning <br /> Commission Member Hallan stated the dwelling sits on Lots 1 and 2 and should be <br /> made one lot. <br /> Chair Seils asked if any of the Planning Commission Members felt they made a wrong <br /> decision at the time of the Variance. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission <br /> �. that they were not in favor of changing the decision made during the Variance hearing. <br /> It was the correct decision since the dwelling sits on both lots. <br /> The tax increase is $24. <br /> Mr. Jones asked why the consolidation is necessary if it doesn't make any difference to <br /> the County. Mr. Burslie explained the City has the zoning authority and the Shoreland <br /> Rules require consolidation to make the lots conforming. <br /> Mr. Jones stated he will consolidate Lots 1 and 2. This should be the last condition of <br /> the Variance approval. <br /> b. Extractive Use Ordinance — Discussion <br /> Mr. Burslie explained the Staff Report. Anderson Brothers stated our ordinance was a <br /> little vague and provided information for improvements. The language in red was added <br /> to our ordinance requiring a better survey and additional maps. If the Planning <br /> Commission agrees with the changes,we can provide an ordinance amendment. <br /> Planning Commission Member Wilson stated the haul road conditions were discussed at <br /> the public hearing; we should add language regarding the haul road conditions. <br /> MINUTES 3 <br /> Pequot Lakes Planning Commission <br /> April 16,2015 <br />