Laserfiche WebLink
a. Greenhouse growing range <br />b. Sale of concessions <br />4) That the uses identified in the existing Conditional Use Permit are not allowed without <br />the rezoning of the property to the Agricultural zoning district. <br />5) The proposed amendment, as stated by the applicant, is intended to allow the movement <br />of an existing greenhouse to the property due to a future reconfiguration of County Road <br />17 and State Highway 36. This is preemptive in nature as a plan for the reconfiguration <br />has not been approved, nor is a timeline identified for when the project will take place. <br />a. The area identified for movement of the greenhouse may be in conflict with a <br />future frontage road, public utilities, or other improvements in conjunction with a <br />future reconfiguration of the interchange. <br />6) That the Conditional Use Permit Amendment does not meet the review criteria for <br />Conditional Use Permits (Section 154.018). <br />a. Without road reconfiguration, and/or until such road reconfiguration occurs, the <br />applicant would still have reasonable use of existing property, in addition to the <br />property identified within this CUP. <br />7) The expansion of the CUP property will likely lead to an expansion of the existing uses <br />which would negatively impact traffic conditions on the site. <br />a. Applicants own application material includes MNDOT concern over increased <br />traffic problems, leading the City to conclude serious community life, health and <br />safety considerations would be detrimentally harmed by approval of this CUP. <br />Based on the foregoing, the Applicants' application for a Conditional Use Permit amendment is <br />denied. <br />Passed and duly adopted this Is' day of December 2009 by the City Council of the City of Lake <br />Elmo, Minnesota. <br />Dean A. Johnston, Mayor <br />ATTEST: <br />Bruce A. Messelt, City dministrator <br />