12-01-2009 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DECEMBER 1, 2009 6 overflow parking lot. The applicants are intending to move existing structures (greenhouses) and uses (hay ride and corn maze) to this area at a time in the future if and when the reconfiguration of County Road 17 and State Highway 26 and a subsequent frontage road displaces those uses and structures. The Conditional use Permit amendment would allow the movement of the following use and structure: a. Greenhouse growing range b. Sale of concessions 4. That the uses identified in the existing Conditional Use Permit are not allowed without the rezoning of the property to the Agricultural zoning district. 5. The proposed amendment, as stated by the applicant, is intended to allow the movement of an existing greenhouse to the property due to a future reconfiguration of County Road 17 and State Highway 36. This is preemptive in nature as a plan for the reconfiguration has not been approved, nor is a timeline identified for when the project will take place. a. The area identified for movement of the greenhouse may be n conflict with a future frontage road, public utilities, or other improvements in conjunction with a future reconfiguration of the interchange. 6. That the Conditional Use Permit Amendment does not meet the review criteria for Conditional Use Permits (Section 154.018). a. Without road reconfiguration, and/or until such road reconfiguration occurs, the applicant would still have reasonable use of existing property, in addition to the property identified within this CUP. 7. The expansion of the CUP property will likely lead to an expansion of the existing uses which would negatively impact traffic conditions on the site, a. Applicants own application material includes MNDOT concern over increased traffic problems, leading the City to conclude serious community life, health and safety considerations would be detrimentally harmed by approval of this CUP. Council Member Park seconded the motion. The motion was passed 5-0. The City Planner explained due to recent ordinance changes and the evolving nature of these types of requests, City Staff and the Planning Commission recommended the City Council direct greater scrutiny of this issue as part of the department’s 2010 Workplan. MOTION: Council Member Smith moved to direct the inclusion of the recommendations’ promulgated by the City staff and Planning Commission and delineated in this communication in the Planning Department’s 2010 Workplan. Council Member DeLapp seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0.