Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Barajas recommended tabling to work with Staff to develop findings of fact. Mr. <br /> Marohn recommended the motion be withdrawn until the City Attorney can develop <br /> findings of fact. <br /> Mr. Williams added the following Findings of Fact, seconded by Mr. Derksen,to support <br /> the motion to deny: <br /> 1. The use or development does not conform to the comprehensive land use plan. <br /> 2. The use is not compatible with the existing neighborhood. <br /> 3. The use with conditions would be injurious to the public health, safety, welfare, <br /> decency, order,comfort, convenience,appearance or prosperity of the City. <br /> 4. The conditional use will impede the normal and orderly development and <br /> improvement of surrounding vacant property for uses predominant in the area. <br /> 5. Adequate measures cannot be taken to prevent or control offensive odor,fumes, <br /> dust,noise,and vibration, so none of these will constitute a nuisance and to <br /> control lights and signs in such a manner,that no disturbance to neighboring <br /> properties will result. <br /> 6. The conditional use will not promote the prevention and control of pollution of <br /> the ground and surface waters including sedimentation and control of nutrients. <br /> 7. The conditional use will result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, <br /> scenic or historical feature of major significance. <br /> 8. The proposed use has the potential to be injurious to the use and enjoyment of <br /> existing residences in the area. All of the residences are at least 500 feet from the <br /> project site, but associated project noise from general operations has the potential <br /> to interfere with the enjoyment of the nearby lake properties. <br /> Roll Call Vote: Mr. Habein: Aye; Mr. Williams: Aye; Mr. Hallan: Nay; Mr. Varilek: <br /> Aye; Mr. Pederson: Aye; Mr. Derksen: Aye. Motion carried. 5— 1. <br /> SHORT RECESS: Meeting reconvened at 10:13 p.m. <br /> NEW BUSINESS: <br /> Valerie Dwight Wetland Application. <br /> Mr.and Mrs.Dwight were in attendance. Mr. Marohn explained the Staff Report. The <br /> Planning Commission had several questions regarding the TEP recommendation. He also <br /> advised the Planning Commission that there would be after-the-fact fees and staff fees in <br /> addition to the TEP recommendation. Staff was directed to check and see if we can <br /> increase TEP recommendations and if they need to be included on the fee schedule. <br /> A motion was made by Mark Hallan, seconded by Scott Pederson,to accept the TEP <br /> recommendation for wetland replacement and Crow Wing County 4:1 ratio, assess a <br /> penalty of 5 times to$500.00,plus Staff expenses not to exceed $400.00 and monies <br /> would go into the Lake Education Fund. All members voted "aye". Motion carried. <br /> Planning Commission 6 <br /> November 17,2005 <br />