Project Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #1039 August 14, 1986 Page 2 Staff's only concern with Boudreau's finding is that permit 86- 6178 was issued by the DNR on April 22, 1986 (Exhibit C). Staff specifically asked in the Local Unit of Government response (Exhibit Q) that the DNR delay all action until the City's review is completed dated June 11, 1986 - form recieved by City 5/19/86. The City never received the same material for permit review 86-6178 and yet note in that letter of approval that the mayor of the City may call for a public hearing within 30 days. Staff has reviewed this matter with John Noble who had correctly assumed that the DNR would have taken care of this through normal procedural review. He advises that the well had to be drilled before the DNR would consider the permit (this has been confirmed by staff) and that the well serves not only the geothermal use but will serve the more intense needs cf the residence. Staff has had difficulty tracking down John Fax because he has been transfered to a different division. Clearly, this is not a problem related to the applicant's doing but a failure of communication between the two levels of government. Staff will resolve thin matter with the DNR. The issue has been reviewed in this memo because certain members have addrer--ed the installation of the well and the unvsual timing of the installation. Issues for convideration: 1. Could the discharge pipe have been deEigned to drain into wetlands to the east - without creating drainage problems for surrounding properties? 2. Is Planning Commission satisfied that City's only Jurisdiction over this specific application ib the excavation and installation of underground lines within the lakeshore protected area. It would appear that both P.C.A. and the DNR are satisfied with the use level and well specifications For ground water use. 3. Are there other areas in this review that should be considered as part of the City's review? Staff has asked that an engineer from Bonestroo, Anderlick i Associates be present to respo.id to any questions you may have regarding the relevance of the technical information submitted in response to our specific questions. Please contact my office prior to the meeting if any member has additional questions. It Planning Commission is ablt to make a recommendation upon satisfaction that all applicable standards have been addressed, refer to Section 10.09, 10.00 and 10.55, Subdivisior 25 A for direction in m %.ing the necessary findings fc: action - note you would be dealing with both a c-r, iit Iona l use permit and variance.