My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
02/07/2002
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Dissolved Boards/Commissions/Committees
>
Board of Adjustment
>
Minutes
>
2000's
>
2002
>
02/07/2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/6/2025 3:46:20 PM
Creation date
5/5/2003 3:42:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Document Title
Board of Adjustment
Document Date
02/07/2002
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
Motion by Board Member Johnson, seconded by Board Member Reeve, to close the public <br />hearing. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Nixt, Board Members Johnson, Reeve, Brauer, <br />Kociscak, Sweet and Watson. Voting No: None. Absent: None. <br /> <br />The public hearing closed at 7:30 p.m. <br /> <br />Board Business <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt called the Board of Adjustment meeting back to order at 7:30 p.m. <br /> <br />Motion by Board Member Johnson, seconded by Board Member Kociscak, to adopt Resolution <br />#02-02-025A adopting Findings of Fact #0600 relating to John Enstrom's request for a variance <br />from the maximum slope grades. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Nixt, Board Members Johnson, Kociscak, Brauer, <br />Reeve, Sweet and Watson. Voting No: None. Absent: None. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski pointed out that point number 5 in the Findings of Fact is wrong and <br />the maximum slope on shorelines is 5' horizontal to 1' vertical. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt said by granting this one Variance, it sets a precedent. He asked if the City is <br />satisfied with the 5 in 1 slope and City Engineer answered yes. <br /> <br />Motion by Board Member Johnson, seconded by Board Member Kociscak to approve John <br />Enstrom's request for a variance from the maximum slope grades based on Findings of Fact <br />#0600 and adopt a Resolution declaring terms of same. <br /> <br />Further Discussion: <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt wanted to clarify that a variance to maximum slope grades is not being granted <br />to the entire grading and mining site, just the pond and shoreline is not given to. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt advised that he would like to discuss the legal description for the extent of the <br />slope variance if it doesn't inconvenience the applicant. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski said that cross sections are part of a permit process and they would be <br />helpful to have for this case. <br /> <br />Board Member Reeve stated he doesn't feel like we have all that is needed to adequately discuss <br />this. <br /> <br />Board of Adjustment/February 7, 2002 <br /> Page 6 of 7 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.