01-07-92 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 7, 1992 8 The City Attorney pointed out that there is a restriction on OutLot A which prohibits any structures. Also, OutLot A and Lot 1, Block 1, are two distinct legal tax parcels. This is not a lot that extends from a home uninterrupted to the waters edge. M/S/P Williams/Dick Johnson - to deny the shoreland permit with variances requested by Lou Skarda, 7980 DeMontreville Trail N., for the purpose of constructing a 16' x 8' storage shed based on the following findings: the proposal would substantially change the character of the area, many other properties exist in the city with similar conditions, granting this permit with variances would set an unacceptable precedent for the City, the conditions of the property were well known to the applicant when he purchased the property and for the (4) reasons stated in Mike Black's memo dated December 23, 1991. (Motion carried 5-0). B. New Life Homes John Briscoe, representing New Life Homes, presented in concept, a request for a private nursing home in a Rural Residential zoning district. This home would provide non - institutional long term care for older adults (18 to 24 maximum) in the early to middle stages of Alzheimer's and demential related issues and disorders by adapting and structuring the care delivery, staffing arrangements and physical environment to fit and support the unique need of individual residents. The parcel of land (22 acres) that New Life Home is looking at is located at DeMontreville Trail and Highway 36. The primary reason for this site is: visibility of traffic on Highway 36, isolated where walking trails can be developed, because of the terrain they can plan an attractive structure into the site and are able to shield it from the other residences in the immediate area. When asked what their future plans would be, Mr. Briscoe indicated his preference would be for the remaining 10 acres to remain a single family lot. By becoming larger than 24 units, this tends to lose what they are attempting to do. The Council indicated this was the best proposal for this land that has come before the City, but this use was not allowed in the RR zoning district. Discussion followed: Councilman Mottaz indicated he could not vote for a CUP because he felt CUPs are a means for spot zoning because once something is established by a CUP it is almost impossible to remove them.