Council denies appeal of tree-removal permit request after applicant failed to provide location map

5844657 ยท June 19, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Hibbing City Council denied Dennis Richards's administrative appeal of a city denial to issue a permit to remove trees in a vacated alley right-of-way, citing the applicant's failure to supply a map showing the exact location.

The Hibbing City Council on Wednesday denied an administrative appeal by Dennis Richards challenging the city's refusal to issue a permit to remove trees and brush in what the city described as a vacated alley right-of-way near 30 Third Street West.

City public-works staff told the council Richards submitted a permit request by email but did not provide a map showing the exact location of the proposed cutting. "He did not provide said map, so I denied the request," Public Works staffer Mister Storey told the council. Storey said the city needs a location map so staff can determine whether the proposed clearing would fall inside the public right-of-way, where the city routinely clears vegetation that interferes with utilities or access.

The council asked for a motion either to grant the appeal and overturn Storey's denial or to deny the appeal and affirm the staff decision. Councilor Swiberger moved to deny the appeal; Councilor Bayless seconded. After brief discussion about whether Richards could later provide the requested map, Storey said that if the map shows work within the right-of-way the city would perform the clearing or authorize it for utility purposes.

The motion to deny the appeal carried. Storey and other staff confirmed the applicant retains the option to resubmit the permit with a map; approval would depend on the map showing work within the city's right-of-way or for utilities, in which case the city would address the clearing.

No formal fines or further penalties were discussed at the meeting; the action on the appeal was a staff-decision affirmation, not an enforcement action.

The denial was recorded as the council's formal disposition of the administrative appeal.