Develop Driftwood Resort Inside Ordinances

All of these variances have the likelihood of degrading the water quality of the lake, destroying the wetland between Kater Island and the proposed development area, and are in direct conflict with protections put in place to protect our environment. There is no reason to approve this plan as presented. The County and reviewing agencies must uphold the legal land and water protections that have long been in place. The Crow Wing County Planning Commission must reject this proposal.

I do not see a compelling reason to modify existing limits on density, boat slips, hard cover, open space, etc. I was once denied a variance to replace a 48 sq. ft. shed that was non-conforming. This petition is non-conforming on steroids and should be denied.

I am most concerned about the impervious service and the run off as well as the number of docks

I concur with all statements made. Also have very serious safety concerns with traffic on Silver Sands road and the increase in boat traffic at the public access. If Driftwood is allowed so many boat slips then they should be creating their own lake access.

We agree with the well stated reasons for opposition to this proposed “overdevelopment” of the Driftwood property. Approval of any of the variances requested would signal a wholesale assault on the water quality on the Whitefish Chain. Development of the property within the existing rules and regulations is to be encouraged...and required to protect this great natural resource.

As seen last summer (2018) Upper Whitefish is already struggling with excess phosphorus, nitrogen, increased algae, and boat-stopping vegetation. It would seem on a lake with all these problems that granting further variances to this or any other development on the lake is not the way to go.

I too agree with the concerns the others neighbors have expressed. I am not opposed to a small resort and restaurant with in existing ordinances. I also feel the 76 dock slips if too excessive. My husband and I wish to retain the "up north" rural feel this was the main reason we bought in the area.

We are one of the properties most directly affected, as we own the lot adjacent on the east side of the proposed development. We oppose the excessive nature of this resort plan. When we bought our property three years ago, we did so with the understanding the former driftwood resort was now zoned and for sale as residential. Kater island is a historically peaceful area where everybody takes great care to be respectful of the land, shoreland use and of neighboring properties. This is the reason we chose to be a part of this community. While we understand the desire for development, the property proposal is extremely excessive. It is hard for us to fully imagine how much of an impact a development of this scope would have on our value and neighboring home values. If approved as is, the slips they intend to put in the wetland will essentially be a marina- to be accessed by a narrow channel that you can barely navigate a kayak through. The reconstruction of existing small cabins adjacent to our land , will essentially be a whole line of 2 story houses along the property line channel just steps from the water. These existing small structures along the water should not be allowed to be redeveloped into Multilevel homes without having to follow the same shoreland setbacks that the rest of us must follow to build a home. The proposed 70+ dock plan, expansion into 28 homes/ units plus shared resort structures, on just 7 acres of land does not seem fair and reasonable to the property owners in the area. The 2 page list of variances requested is evidence of this. For these reasons, we oppose the plans as set forth and ask the crow wing planning commission to adhere the building and water guidelines.

I totally agree with all the comments that have been made regarding the amount of variances being asked for at this time. I would love to see a development in the Driftwood location and would welcome a restaurant at this end of the Whitefish chain. To go from 13-15 cabin resort to the requested 22-27 homes and 70 plus docks would be a total disregard for the conservation of the land and lakeshore. For this to come up at this time of year, when many of the neighbors are not around and how this has had NO publicity in the local Echo paper is way beyond my comprehension and sure comes across as somebody trying to keep it all quiet until it is to late. I beg you to listen and NOT approve these veriences as written.

Matt and Sarah Pavek 6201 Driftwood We support the redevelopment of this resort to a new resort site if it fully complies with the state and local ordinances and regulations without variances. If variances are needed, they should be minor, reasonable/practical variances used only to improve the quality of the project, or in a hardship case. A variance should not be approved if it negatively impacts natural resources or adjacent property values. The variances requested (particularly as it relates to the boat slips) do not seem appropriate as it relates to the site constraints and practical difficulties inherent to this property. All of these land use ordinances (open space, hard cover, docks, etc.) are in place for the exact purpose of protecting properties and people's property rights and those around them, as well as natural resources etc.. We (as neighbors and land owners) all adhere to these requirements and should be able to fully rely and depend on the fact that our neighbors will adhere to them as well. Everyone's investment is large and should be equally protected by the ordinance.

I encourage development of the Driftwood Resort and the proposed restaurant. However, the scope and density of the project is overly ambitious. The degradation of water quality from 76 boat slips as well as a large increase in traffic on Lower Hay is a great concern. Trash, septic, run off and all the associated pollutants that come with development must be balanced. State and local regulations have been placed to keep those environmental issues in check. The requested variances are beyond those protections and should be respectfully denied.

I welcome development of the Driftwood property. A restaurant and small resort on the south end of Whitefish Lake would be good for the community. I share the concerns of the other petitioners regarding the density of development and wide ranging variance request.

As we experience degradation of water quality in our lakes, it is imperative that the purposeful regulations be adhered to. Variances being requested in this permitting request are way beyond limits set in law. The County and all Agencies must uphold their responsibilities for protection of our precious waters.

We also share in the concerns named in this petition. We are not opposed to redevelopment that adheres to current regs/ordinances.

I have many concerns about most of the setbacks and all the variances. I live on Kater,s Island, and my grandfather bought the island in the 1930 so I have known quality time spent on the wetland for many years. In the past Driftwood only had just a few boat slips coming into the wetland and to want 36 would totally the water, vegetation , Lilly’s ,and animals that we have enjoyed for the last 70 years.

I also have concerns, especially with the density of individually owned cabins and the increased traffic they will create on Driftwood Lane. I also share concerns relative to runoff and pollutants from whatever sewage system that will be employed.

We as neighbor fully agree with this ! We have sent Crow Wing Co a similar message as well.

36003 Mary Beach Rd. Pine River, MN.

Save the integrity of our shoreline and the environmental protections we all support. We are not against reasonable development within the constraints of current local regulations. This proposal is excessive in number and scope.

Use variance requests are are overreaching what current law states and therefore should be denied.