12-15-81 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CITY COUNCIL MEETING, DECEMBER 15, 1981 -3 - Dayton -Hudson Subdivision --Eder -would like to see, at the January meeting, a drawing with the dimensions indicating the remaining front footage on Keats owned by Dayton -Hudson to the north, and to the west Motion carried 4-0. C. Pott Minor Subdivision - The Council reviewed the Planning Commission recommendation to approve this minor subdivision. This had already received Council approval contingent to Planning Commission review and recommendation. M/S/P Mottaz/Novak to adopt R-81-79, A Resolution g�)ying'f.tnal approval to ,h, Minor Subdivision .f_o.r_• Fran Pott, per Planning Com- mis s ion-rrecommendation . D. Hanson Trailer Sales -CUP Amendment - Commissioner Prince was present to answer any questions the Council might have on the Commission's discussion'.and recommendation to approve the permit amendment. --Whittaker - advised the Council that the Commission addressed the questions he raised in his memo through their discussion and recommendation. Councillors discussed what is agriculture vs agri-business. -Don Moe, Planning Commission - the Commission based its decision on what the current ordinance's definition and permitted uses are for Ag zoning. Many ambiguous statements in the ordinance that should be changed to cover more concrete, specific items in order to avoid the question -is it or isn't it an ag use. The Council discussed the necessity of limiting the growth of businesses operating under Conditional Use Permits. M/S/ Fraser/Novak to adopt R-81-80, approving an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit for Leonard Hansen--to-operate an open sales lot -(Sec, 301.070 D.,l.b.(5), as recommendedbythe Planning Commission with additional limits. Discussion: --Fraser - supporting this because the language in the Ordinance supports this use, and feels it is properly farm related, also, it is reasonable to have some limits. Also - permitted them to open a business and work to improve the property - would be r, very wrong to cut it (business) out from under them - if this was ever the intent they should never have been allowed to start up. Very serious to make regulations that would hurt or not allow them to expand their business in the normal course of the business. --Mottaz - anyone operating on a CUP is..made aware that they are operating through the good graces of the City from year to year and may not be permitted to operate the next year. --Whittaker - Mr. Hanson was never assured he could sell anything but horse trailers, initially. Now want to sell something more and different - this is an expansion: not just a simple renewal of the present use. --Novak - - why if Mr. Hanson remodeled the barn and lives on the premise, is this not considered a home occupation. Would like to put some limits on the number of pieces of equipment displayed and specifics on the parking. --Mottaz - City is not required to allow this -type of operation regardless of the zoning or the ordinance. It can exist if given a conditional use. Feels the request is very broad and hard to limit.