Laserfiche WebLink
APPLICANT: Charles B. and Beverly G. Peterson <br /> Applicant requests to Rezone from Forest Management to Rural <br /> Residential and Commercial <br /> Mr. Burslie explained the Staff Report. Applicant was present, along with Pat <br /> Trottier, Stonemark Land Surveying. <br /> The colored map included in the Staff Report was discussed. Planning <br /> Commission Member Hallan asked why there is a portion being left Forest <br /> Management. Mr. Burshe explained that there have been several subdivisions <br /> and rezones in the past. The City is working with the applicant to get this <br /> property where it should be by taking baby steps. Platting the property is not an <br /> option at this time; a Metes and Bounds Subdivision will take place if the Rezone <br /> is approved. <br /> Public comment: None. <br /> A motion was made by Planning Commission Member Snyder, seconded by <br /> Planning Commission Member Brown,to recommend the City Council approve <br /> the Rezone request from Forest Management to Rural Residential and <br /> Commercial,based on the following Findings of Fact: <br /> On the Property to be Rezoned Rural Residential: <br /> 1. The applicant is proposing to rezone 6.3 acres of a 25.75 acre tract from <br /> "Forest Management"to"Rural Residential." <br /> 2. The subject property does not contain any natural sensitive areas. <br /> 3. The subject property is privately owned. The property owner has not <br /> indicated any plans for future development. <br /> 4. The subject property is within the Shoreland Area but no Shoreland soil <br /> types have been identified. <br /> 5. There does not appear to be any lowland area on the subject property. All <br /> of the 6.3 acres appear to be buildable. <br /> 6. The vegetative cover of the subject property primarily consists of trees. <br /> There is a small clearing on the subject property. <br /> 7. The subject property is not adjacent to a public water body. "In-water <br /> physical characteristics" and recreational use of surface water do not <br /> apply. <br /> 8. The property has sufficient frontage on County Road 168 and Hurtig Road. <br /> 9. The proposed rezoning does not increase the socio-economic development <br /> needs for the public. <br /> 10.The public sewer and water utilities are not available in the vicinity of the <br /> subject property. There are no plans to extend the public utilities to the <br /> area of the subject property. <br /> 11. The subject property does not contain any known significant historical or <br /> ecological value. <br /> MINUTES 6 <br /> Pequot Lakes Planning Commission <br /> April 18, 2013 <br />