Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission Meeting <br />June 9, 1976 <br />Page 4 of 10 <br />are hearing so much noise now. They didn't come in and ask for a permit <br />to cut these trees or change the terrain of the land. They had no permit <br />and we would like to see you take a look at this. <br />Chapman: This was a matter of great concern of Judge Anderson. PCA sub— <br />mitted as testimony before the court, data relating to this. Tests were <br />made in the general area early last summer and these tests have definitely <br />shown that this variance has not been met. I ask you to consider the <br />court's testimony in this matter. There is no question now in anyone's <br />mind that there has been violation of many factors besides the trees. Do <br />they have a permit with PCA for the removal of lead? Why should this be <br />opened to one issue when there are so many violations? <br />Ehret: I think it is my understanding that the item before us.is that <br />the Council declared the Special Use Permit null and void on the basis <br />of the :White Bear Rod and Gun Club failed to comply with item #2. It <br />would be my understanding that the other items involved in the Special <br />Use "Iermit as they are being considered in court, could be taken care of <br />by the Council, but tonight we are only considering condition #2. <br />Jaller: When you are considering this matter —there is criteria for the <br />zoning ordinance — is this your guide? I refer to Chapter 320-8 and 320-9. <br />Are these the guidelines you follow? <br />Spitzer: Basically, yes. <br />Smith: I don't think you can restrict this to Item #2. Also I think the <br />Planning Commission should make some recommendation in regards to Item #4— <br />talking about the shootin; hours. <br />Spitzer: I think I understand what you are getting at. We are directed <br />by the Council to clarify if the tree planting has not been done by such <br />a time, the permit is null and void. It is my understanding that if our <br />recommendation is that the requested variance to Condition #2, is not <br />granted, that the entire Special Use Permit is indeed null and void, and <br />we also understand we are introducing re—instatement of the Special Use <br />Permit, if granted. It is not our job to re—open the entire series of <br />conditions to the Special Use Permit because they have already been con— <br />sidered and acted upon. <br />Smith: Then you are not concerned with any of the violations? <br />Spitzer: This is an advisory body. Ile can only make recommendations. <br />We are not an enforcement body. If it is your judgment that violations <br />have been made, you should be talking to the Chief of Police. <br />Smith: How can you make the recommendations if they don't concern the <br />violations? <br />Spitzer: We make recommendations based on the criteria. <br />Bramster;t: I was told by the Chief of Police that he has strict orders <br />to lay off by the City Attorney and City Council. This is a violation <br />of the law. I have insisted that he make a record of every call he makes. <br />