Laserfiche WebLink
)NR ..8 <br />PHONE <br />� <br />DkO n FF��STATE nn OF <br />u IE S VJ u G\ <br />DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES <br />1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, Minnesota 55106 <br />296 -7523 File No <br />March 31, 1983 <br />Ms. Anne Bronken <br />Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. <br />4820 Minnetonka Boulevard, Suite 420 <br />Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 <br />RE: SHORELAND BASIN CLASSIFICATION CHANGES- LITTLE CANADA <br />Dear Ms. Bronken: <br />p n7,7 <br />AP IT 4 1983 <br />CITY OF <br />WILE CANADA <br />We have reviewed the City's request to change our preliminary shoreland <br />classification for all basins to General Development (GD). We evaluated <br />your request using supporting information which you forwarded to us on <br />March 3, 1983, data which we generated from our March 15, 1983 field <br />inspection, and the City's zoning ordinance and land use plan. Based <br />upon our review, we make the following findings: <br />1) Gervais Lake (62 -7P) <br />2) Savage Lake (62 -8P) <br />3) Round Lake (62 -9P) <br />Preliminary: GD <br />Preliminary: RD <br />Preliminary: RD <br />4) Unnamed Wetland (62 -129W) Preliminary: NE <br />5) Unnamed Wetland (62 -154W) Preliminary: RD <br />6) Twin Lake (62 -39P) Preliminary: NE <br />Final: GD <br />Final: GD <br />Final: GD <br />Final: GD <br />Final: GD <br />Final: RD <br />(proposed) <br />We feel that Twin Lake should be reclassified to Recreational Det2sopment (RD) <br />instead of General Development as proposed by the City. In determining the <br />classification for Twin Lake we considered the size, crowding potential, <br />amount and type of existing development (development density), existing <br />natural characteristics of the lake and surrounding shoreland, and other <br />pertinent data (see enclosed table). In evaluating the above parameters, <br />we found that the basin best fits the characteristics of a Recreational <br />Development (RD) classification. We feel the character of this basin will <br />best be preserved by this classification. Should the City disagree with <br />our findings, you should provide further documentation to justify your request. <br />AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER <br />H. <br />