07-05-83 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LAKE ELMO COUNCIL MEETING - 7/5/83 Page 4 from RR to AG. He stated it would be in conformance with surrounding area since it is next to AG zoning, use would be in conformance with area and actually less obtrusive than some uses already allowed on Highway 36, no noise, and traffic would be minimal since used for wholesale business only. (Mrs. Klawitter mentioned they do most of the delivering, etc.) No objections have been received from neighbors. • Fraser - acknowledge certain misgivings due to previous infraction of selling retail. Would you elaborate on wholesale business? (Mrs. Klawitter - we're starting to plant shrubberies and trees to be used for landscaping business; tree trimming business has been sold off). • Fraser - equipment? and where would it be stored? (Mr. Klawitter - tree planter, 2 riding tractors and small hand types, 2 pickup trucks, 2 trailers - smaller equipment would be stored in machine shed; other equipment would be behind building which is not visible from road. • Mazzara - why did City have to go to court? (Mrs. Klawitter - circumstances were such that we didn't have a choice economically and could not go out and rent more land for otoring equipment) • Wolf - 60-day stay was granted at 5/17 hearing, temporary injunction. • Fraser - this is permitted use in AG zone and this business can be generally accepted but can also see extension of business creating more traffic, signs, etc. Would zoning regulations protect us from this? (Whittaker - yes, but City would probably have to go to court to enforce it. You in fact could sell trees grown on property but not other landscaping materials.) • Eder - record should show that the Klawitter's original intent is to only sell wholesale (i.e. anything grown on property) and not sell retail. 0 Whittaker did not know City court expenses to date in regard to withdrawal of complaint against the Klawitter's. • Eder - would like to know amount of court expenses before action is taken and feel the Klawitter's should reimburse us for part of these costs. M/S/P Morgan/Dunn to adopt Ordinance 7955 to rezone the Klawitter property (48 acres on the SW corner of Keats and Highway 36) from RR to AG. (Carried 5-0) Withdrawal of Complaint: • Fraser - could action be deferred until we see what costs are? (Whittaker - 60 days is up in July.) • Dunn - would just as soon drop complaint and not incur any more costs to City. • Eder - violation was made so subsequent court costs should be reimbursed at least in part. Amount should not be much - $100 or 300. • Morgan - inclined to drop complaint since situation has been corrected. • Mazzara - a portion of legal fees would be suitable. M/S/P Eder/Mazzara to defer withdrawal of complaint issue until City attorney can give us cost figures. (Carried 3-2, Morgan and Dunn nay) B. Burrwood Estates - Folz presented the final plat containing all easements, dedications, etc. Park donation amounted to $239.27 per lot. Since improvements only consist of cutting drainage swale and putting in culvert, detailed development agreement would not be necessary. M/S/P Morgan/Mazzara to adopt Resolution 83-47: TO ACCEPT THE FINAL PLAT FOR BURRWOOD ESTATES, PARK DONATION, MAINTENANCE PROVISIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTS, AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. (Carried 5-0)