My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06 - Planning and Zoning Report
Laserfiche
>
City Council (Permanent)
>
Agenda Packets (Permanent)
>
2012
>
11-13-2012 Council Meeting
>
06 - Planning and Zoning Report
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/22/2014 11:20:05 AM
Creation date
1/21/2014 6:07:17 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
the Variances that had been granted for the property earlier by Crow Wing County. Mr. <br />� Boschee was present to appeal the Zoning Administrator's decision to not issue the <br />permit. <br />� <br />Mr. Burslie explained the appeal process in the ordinance; the applicant can appeal the <br />Zoning Administrator's decision to the Planning Commission and the Planning <br />Commission's decision to the City Council. <br />Council Member Akerson questioned when the provision to not allow additions to <br />nonconforming structures with prior Variances had been added to r ordinance. Mr. <br />Burslie stated he was not sure, but it is fairly standard land use g e. <br />Mr. Snyder stated he understands the wording in the ord' ce; as a Planning <br />Commission, how do we change it. It was the consen us not a the ordinance. <br />There are no setback issues, just the fact that there n previou 'ances granted. <br />Mr. Boschee had provided Staff with the reqi <br />Inspector, Scott Sadusky. His report stated al <br />Minnesota Building Code for frost depths, he <br />to the main house. <br />Mr. Boschee asked if the age of the p <br />were issued in 1980, 1986, and 1992. <br />Ms. Brown stated the <br />She asked if there <br />Boschee stated th re <br />foundation is sound. <br />Ms. <br />Leve further sta� <br />Bos he uld need <br />a certified <br />y is not up current <br />a fine candidate for expansion <br />a difference. They <br />were for a k and dr field from Crow Wing County. <br />any co s with th urrent foundation not meeting Code? Mr. <br />no c erns; Mr. Le ke agreed, stating the existing <br />that ould need to go through the Variance process. Mr. <br />Pla mmission can't trump the ordinance; Mr. <br />Varia � e to follow proper protocol. <br />Council Me yan stat when the ordinance was approved no one would have <br />contemplated th ery � iance would have counted, not just the Pequot Lakes <br />Variances. Someo d have had a Variance in 1965 and laws could have changed 14 <br />times; that would no ave been in the spirit of what the City was doing. He further <br />stated that he wouldn't have any problem issuing an over-the-counter permit for <br />Variances this old. Anyone that has applied to Pequot Lakes and received a Variance <br />from Pequot Lakes, such a Variance would count. <br />Mr. Burslie explained that Staff is trained to read the letter of the law. If the Planning <br />Commission's interpretation is only Variances that were granted by Pequot Lakes, that is <br />not Staff's interpretation. <br />.. <br />Minutes 2 <br />Pequot Lakes Planning Commission <br />October 18, 2012 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.