Laserfiche WebLink
4 <br />and seawall <br />ng riprap <br />h the years <br />ant is, <br />tallation <br />removal of <br />al ^otos <br />he property. <br />1 minutes <br />I believe <br />y of the <br />me on <br />n projected <br />involve <br />Dsal, the <br />the <br />of the <br />that <br />. The <br />ion taken <br />nnnission <br />They were <br />e on the <br />tion of <br />proposed <br />felt this <br />r'. <br />m <br />'A i <br />y. <br />¥ <br />HJ <br />1) <br />North Star Marine <br />Page 2 O /iJ <br />The Planning Comnission recofimended denial., Justifications: <br />(1) <br />(2) <br />(3) <br />(4) <br />No hardship demonstrated to justify a variance from our wetlands moratorium. <br />con^m about dredging because of the adverse affect on the lake and adjacent nei^bors. •' <br />Policy for permitting dredging is to provide access to the lack for riparian <br />owners. In this case, no reason could be found to justify this as property <br />owner does have access to the lack. Maintenance dredging would not be <br />necessary to provide access. <br />In general, no objection to riprap. Indicated they were in favor of shoreline protection and ripr^. <br />COUNCIL MEETING - April 11, 1977 <br />Coimcil leconsidered. Directed City Engineer r <br />coanents on the matter before the next meeting. <br />. Netjands Variar <br />Page 3 <br />a oriet <br />the moratorium <br />effect until Ji <br />Mr. Birkeland w <br />14, 1977, and h <br />COUNCIL MEETING <br />Tabled pending <br />material for fi <br />STAFF - April 6, <br />I*m enclosing co <br />response, regard <br />A <br />B