My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-05-91 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1990's
>
1991
>
03-05-91 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2025 6:21:03 PM
Creation date
10/2/2019 8:19:09 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
137
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
trDEPARTMENT <br />n �STATE OF <br />METRO WATERS, <br />PHONENO. 772-7910 <br />March 1, 1991 <br />MAR q.1991 <br />OF NATURAL RESOURCES <br />1200 Warner Rd., St. Paul, MN 55106 <br />FILE NO. <br />Ms. Mary Kueffner <br />City of Lake Elmo <br />3800 Laverne Avenue North <br />Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042 <br />RE: VARIANCE REQUESTS AND SHORELAND PERMITS <br />Dear Ms. Kueffner: <br />Ad: R h 1991 <br />Metro Region Waters has reviewed the information submitted for <br />several variances and shoreland permits. Our comments follow: <br />Joseph Kieslina <br />The plan attached in his permit application is the one which was <br />agreed to at the February 13th meeting between Joe and John Stine, <br />Regional Hydrologist. We have no objection to the issuance of <br />permits for this project. We recommend that a restriction be <br />recorded which would prevent future owners from continuing to <br />obtain more deck on the lake -side of his structure. <br />Lohmar <br />The Lohmars are proposing to construct a deck on the rear of the <br />structure, construct a deck and lattice work near the shore and put <br />in significant landscaping. The deck on the north site meets the <br />structure setback. Your ordinance does not specifically address <br />landscaping. The terracing may require a grading and filling <br />permit. It appears to us that the new cedar deck and lattice shade <br />would be considered a structure which would be subject to the 75' <br />setback requirement. <br />There is not enough topography information on the plan to determine <br />if the ground level at the structure is above the 100 year flood <br />elevation. The drawing erroneously states that the "high flood <br />mark elevation" is 888.01. The 100 year flood elevation is 889.01. <br />The plan also states that the munimum basement elevation is 891.011 <br />so we assume that the ground surface must be above 889.01. Since <br />the additions are not closer than the existing structure, we would <br />not object so long as hardship can be demonstrated. We would <br />recommend that some additional tree plantings be placed on the <br />lakeside since the structure's visibility will be nearly doubled. <br />Again, your ordinance does not give any guidance for landscaping <br />proposals. A grading and filling permit will probably be <br />necessary. <br />AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.