Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board denies restaurant conditional-use permit; approves Audubon Society semi‑public use with conditions
Summary
The county denied a conditional‑use permit for a proposed restaurant at a lakeshore resort and approved a separate conditional‑use permit allowing the Mississippi Headwaters Audubon Society to expand semi‑public uses on a government lot with conditions.
Environmental Services staff (presenting) asked the board to act on two conditional‑use permit applications.
Application CU‑23 (Woodson Property Group) sought a conditional‑use permit to operate a restaurant on a lakeshore property on the north side of Lake Beltane that currently holds a nonconforming resort use. The planning commission had recommended denial after the applicant failed to supply information the commission requested; a companion variance needed to allow further impervious surface coverage was denied by the Board of Adjustment. The county planning staff said a restaurant would have required the variance; without it the board could not legally approve the conditional use. The board voted to deny CU‑23 and adopted findings of fact.
Application CU‑25 (Mississippi Headwaters Audubon Society) requested permission for a semi‑public use on a government lot where the society already owns surrounding land and structures near Spearhead Lake. The society sought to add a seasonal tent/yurt for staff and occasional use by outside parties; planning staff said the use did not fit the nature‑area allowance but could qualify under a semi‑public use. The planning commission recommended approval with six conditions; staff advised condition six (a compliance inspection of an outhouse) could be dropped because the society had already provided the inspection. The board approved CU‑25, accepted the planning commission findings of fact, and imposed five conditions (the planning commission’s six, minus the now‑satisfied sixth condition). The society’s representative, identified in the meeting as Bessler, was present for questions.
Both decisions were recorded as motions the board approved by voice vote.
