02-06-01 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council member Siedow didn't care that the people travelling along I94, going to and from work, saw a contractor's shop, but did not want to see trash piled up there. Council member Dunn wants appropriate screening so we see something pleasing and doesn't want negative sites as she saw in Chicago and Pittsburgh. M/S/P Siedow/Hunt- to amend the motion adopting Ordinance 9771 to include outside storage shall be completely screened from adjacent property (Completely will have to be defined) (Motion passed 5-0.) Council member Armstrong was more concerned with longer setback along I-94 because she doesn't like it closer than a 200' setback, and was not in favor of a 50' set back for outside storage. The restriction would be conditioned of the CUP. If the ordinance was ever taken away, this would let them have free reign on the business. M/S/F Siedow/DeLapp - to adopt ordinance 9771, as modified to include completely screened, An Ordinance amending Section 300.07, Subdivision 4.A.6.e. of the Lake Elmo Municipal Code. (Motion failed 3-2 Armstrong, DeLapp) M/S/P DeLapp/Siedow - to adopt Ordinance 9772, An Ordinance adding a Definition for Non Agricultural Low Impact to Section 150 of the Lake Elmo Municipal Code. (Motion passed 5-0). Terry Emerson explained the only reason he put the shop where he did was to save the green space, the sod farm, because this is what he thought the City was looking for. If we moved the setback, 50 acres would not be irrigated. M/S/P DeLapp/Armstrong - to postpone ordinance 9773, An ordinance adding a definition for "contractor maintenance shop" to Section 150 of the Lake Elmo Municipal Code. (Motion passed 5-0). (Armstrong thought it was too wide open and asked staff to look at size restrictions of facility to adjacent zoning to be added to zoning code or definitions) LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 6, 2001 6