My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-19-2012 Planning Commission Minutes
Laserfiche
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Minutes
>
2012
>
01-19-2012 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/18/2016 10:08:39 AM
Creation date
5/18/2016 10:08:38 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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
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 requested information. The Planning <br /> Commission stated that this is not a priority and will look at the information when she <br /> completes it. <br /> b. CSAH 11 Corridor Study (continuation): <br /> The Planning Commission had previously looked at the proposals submitted by the <br /> County. The proposed improvements were not visions of Pequot Lakes, but proposals <br /> submitted by the County. Once the new highway is constructed, the portion west of the <br /> highway will become City roadway. The Planning Commission chooses not to comment <br /> on the County proposals. <br /> The Planning Commission does feel it is necessary to begin discussions on what the <br /> corridor should look like, the gateway to Pequot Lakes. It was suggested we open dialog <br /> with the City Engineer, Tim Houle, and the County. The outcome can be affected by the <br /> Comprehensive Plan. <br /> c.Non-Conforming Structure Ordinance,Discussion: <br /> Mr. Marohn explained that the Ordinance Amendment was sent back from the City <br /> Council. He stated the Planning Commission can review it and send it back. The Mayor <br /> did not like the tiered approach. Council Member Ryan had requested information <br /> regarding the Shoreland Rules and that information was sent to him. <br /> Mr. Marohn explained that we could repeal the whole section, and then it would be <br /> conforming to State Statutes. Our Ordinance created an exception; it is more lenient than <br /> what the State provides. The City had to get a waiver from the DNR to create our <br /> Ordinance. If we repeal 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 /> January 19, 2012 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.