Laserfiche WebLink
Lake Elmo City Council Meeting 11-15-83 Page 7 <br />Since approval of the application would take four positive votes <br />to pass, and there were only four Council members present, Mr. <br />Nelson requested that he be able to make his presentation so as <br />it get a general feeling of how the Council felt about this <br />application. <br />Nelson presented his proposed site plan and a soil map of the <br />ten acres he intends to develop. <br />He discussed the covenant that was suggested by the Planning <br />Commission. ie; each prospective buyer would be informed of <br />a potential noise nuisance before making a purchase on this <br />site. <br />Klaers stated that he discussed the proposed covenant with the <br />City Attorney, and his opinion is that a covenant attached to a <br />development agreement and filed at the County would be feasible. <br />Dunn asked how effective a covenant would be, and Klaers stated <br />that that would be something the City Attorney would best answer. <br />However, it would mean that the City had made every effort <br />possible to protect any prospective buyer. <br />Eder asked Mr. Waterous (Gun Club President) if the Gun Club was <br />opposed to the proposed development, and if so, to what extent. <br />Mr. Waterous stated that if the track to the west of the Gun Club <br />(the Hammes prperty) was to develop, it could put pressure on <br />the Club to move the ranges that are on the west side over to the <br />( east side. That there is now a minimum of clearance on the east <br />side, so there is the possibility of a future request to move <br />some of the ranges over to the east, and with a cluster of homes <br />there, it could present a problem to the Gun Club. <br />Denny McCarty (President Elect of the Gun Club) stated that a <br />covenant will not prevent anyone from offering litigation against <br />the existance of the Gun Club. He further stated that if this <br />application is approved, the Gun Club would like it on record <br />that they are very much in favor of a covenant, but do not <br />consider it a safety wrap for the Club. He also pointed out that <br />the issue of safety was not given much concern by the Planning <br />Commission. The Gun Club would have to be satisfied that some <br />steps were taken to provide complete safety to the people in the <br />homes just outside the area of the range. <br />Eder stated that he did not agree that local children were going <br />to be a problem. That by introducing any new families in the <br />area to the Gun Club could eliminate the curiosity. <br />Mazzara stated that Mr. Nelson's proposal was quite different <br />than the original Nelson/Hagman proposal and could go along with <br />this new proposal. <br />! Dunn statedthathe would not vote in favor of the application at <br />this meeting as a more serious look should be made at the <br />drainage, etc. Furthermore, Mr. Nelson has indicated that there <br />is going to be a difference of opinion as to what constitutes <br />safety, noise levels, etc, and that we had better be prepared for <br />some form of dispute over these land uses. <br />