Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning Board <br />January 9, 2002 <br />Page 19 <br />APPROVED MINUTES <br />minimum, requiring deed covenants to prevent disruption of the shoreland buffer area. <br />He indicated that a deed covenant would be a recorded document that would run with the <br />land and allow the buffer area around the island to remain undisturbed forever. <br />Mr. Peake stated Mr. Vaughn wants to go through with this project and he does expect <br />cooperation from the City, which has been promised. He acknowledged that the <br />Department of Natural Resources or the Rice Creek Watershed District could still shut <br />the project down. <br />Mr. Lyden stated he had been serving on the City Council during the time of the <br />litigation alluded to by Mr. Peake. He stated there had been a great deal of meetings <br />regarding that issue and Mr. Peake was correct regarding the outcome of the litigation. <br />He stated the spirit of the Court order was that the City help facilitate the development of <br />the island and he felt this should be taken strongly into account when making a decision <br />on this application. <br />Mr. Corson noted in their report to the City, the Department of Natural Resources stated <br />they do not support the granting of a variance for decreased setbacks as proposed. <br />Furthermore, the report stated it appears that the island may be un-buildable considering <br />the current zoning and if the City decides somehow that the island can be built on, it may <br />be beneficial to reduce the number of units, “custom” grade the individual building sites <br />to reduce soil disturbance and vegetation loss, minimize the length and width of the road, <br />and minimize the impact to the Shore Impact Zone. With this in mind, although the City <br />is required to work with the applicant, he did not feel this meant the City must approve <br />the construction of seven homes. <br />Mr. Smyser felt it would be wise for the Planning and Zoning Board to not attempt to <br />determine what the legal agreement means, rather he felt this should be left up to the City <br />Attorney. He stated he has been working with the City Attorney on this project and <br />indicated that the City has not committed to approving this project. He stated the City <br />has in no way committed to anything other than cooperating with the review of the <br />project. He did not feel it appropriate for anyone other than the City Attorney to <br />comment on the City’s commitments, legally or otherwise. <br />Mr. Lyden reiterated that he had been serving on the City Council at the time the <br />commitment was made and was privy to all the meetings. <br />Mr. Smyser reiterated the City was not committed to anything. <br />Ken Asleson, Lot #8 Ruffed Grouse, provided the Board with handouts regarding his <br />concerns. He indicated his interpretation of working with a developer on a project did <br />not mean the project would be rubber stamped. <br />Mr. Asleson stated he has a golden retriever who likes to roam in the wood in his back <br />yard. He indicated during summer months his dog likes to dig a little hole and lie in the <br />water that fills the hole. He was curious whether the proposed pond would fill with <br />storm water or would fill with water while being dug.