Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF A PLANNING OOW1ISSION MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 17, 1976 - PAffi 8. <br />this is the information provided by them shotdng what they are <br />going to do to rectify the illegal grading and tree removal <br />that took place last spring. <br />In looking over the infoxmation provided I have the following <br />comnents: <br />1. On Page 3 of his Febniaiy lb letter I think he has omited <br />one rather in|x>rtant date i^ch mlist have been sometime ber Foen <br />Novenher 1, 1974 and July i8, 1975. This would be the date at <br />Which tine the grading and tree removal actually took place <br />which was done by Mr. Marfield without a permit from the Village* <br />2. It would be my recomnendation to the Village Gotiicll that <br />pursuant to any agreement with Mr. Marfield that he must agree <br />to have this woxk done uider the direct supervision of both <br />yourself (Mr. Mtiiich) and our Village Engineer. I would feel <br />that it wi^d be teascnablb that we be notified prior to the <br />woik beink oonb at least 2 da)!^ arid that we be allowed aixess <br />after the woik has been <br />^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ the condition o^ the <br />property is before aHd after the wOtic has been done in drier to <br />assure the Village that the problem caused by Mr. Marfield has <br />been adequately rectified. <br />to the property both befpre, durina and af <br />accomplished so that we deteiittuie vilat <br />proberty is before ana after the wOtx has I <br />3. Pertaining to the drawing by Hickock and Associates, I <br />find that the scale to which the drawing has been made is totally <br />insufficient. Ihe plan view need only show the imnecliate area <br />where the grading is to take place but it should be draivn to <br />scale of not less than 1"«10' so that we can detexmine exactly <br />what he plans to do. I also notice on Section BB that there is <br />a notation made that that section at least is not even drawn to <br />scale. Certainly any infoxmation that is provided on this <br />drawing must be dram to scale if it is to have meaning to us <br />at all. I do not believe that the drying need to show the con­ <br />tour and plan view of the entire Dicon subdivision as does the <br />drawing by Hickock dated Febxuary 3, 1976. It certainly would <br />be sufficient only to show the area that is being chang^. <br />Ihe one thing that ooncoxns me about this proposal is that Mr. <br />Marfield is alleviating his illegal action by doing more of the <br />very thing that we are trying to prevent with our Ordinance that <br />is distuibing the land masses surrounding the shoreline of Lake <br />Minnetonka. In other words we are allowing Mr. Marfield to <br />clear himself of a grading violation by doing even more grading <br />within the 75* protected area. I am not all sure that this ac­ <br />tion is in the best interest of the Village. Signed: Brad <br />Van Nest (End of Letter) <br />Ihe Planning Connission concurred with the Van Nest letter and <br />stated that they still held the opinion that Mr. Marfield should <br />conply to the previously stipulated Village requirements. <br />Guthrie moved, Woolley seconded, that the meeting be adjoumed <br />at 9:50 P.M. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). <br />SAMJEL MARFIELD <br />VAN NEST LETTER, cont. <br />i <br />ADJDUR^»C^^' <br />J,