My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-16-99 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1990's
>
1999
>
11-16-99 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/19/2025 11:39:43 AM
Creation date
10/2/2019 8:42:46 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
PDF
View images
View plain text
Mayor Hunt closed the public hearing at 8:00 p.m <br />Council member Armstrong provided a list of findings for the Council to review. <br />M/S/P DeLapp/Siedow - to postpone consideration in order to permit Steve Johnson time to review <br />submitted findings for determination. (Motion passed 5-0). <br />M/S/P DeLapp/Siedow — to reconsider agenda item. (Motion passed 5-0). <br />W.C. Banton, neighbor and attorney representing Steve Johnson, indicated it was inappropriate to put <br />conditions at this time. The question is "Do you like what the Johnson's' have proposed to what is there <br />now, or you tell us why you like what is there now better than what is proposed". Steve Johnson has no <br />problem with the other conditions listed because they are dealt with in the site plan. <br />Attorney Filla explained if the Council approved the site plan, you will be approving many of the <br />conditions listed by Council member Armstrong. A third condition should be added to the Resolution: 3. <br />Subject to the approval of the site plan. <br />M/S/P Dunn/Siedow - to adopt Resolution No 99-83, as amended to include No. 3. Subject to the approval <br />of the site plan, A Resolution approving a non -conforming use for Stephen Johnson. (Motion passed 5-0.) <br />By approving a non -conforming use, Attorney Filla explained a person can continue what they are doing, <br />but cannot expand. Lighting and signage compliance are not typical of expansion of a nonconforming use. <br />The City is not removing the building from a nonconforming use. The long-term expansion is not an issue. <br />All dealt with at the site plan. Fiber optic cable is not city's concern. Steve Johnson has a new survey, <br />going through torrence property to clear up legals so the City needs the new legal description. <br />M/S/P Dunn/DeLapp - to adopt Resolution No. 99-84, A Resolution granting an after -the -fact minor <br />subdivision to Stephen Johnson to include new legals submitted by Stephen Johnson. (Motion passed 5-0.) <br />M/S/P Siedow/DeLapp — to approve the site plan submitted, the Planning Commission and Village <br />Commission approved that, which is before the Council at the 11-16-99 meeting. (Motion passed 5-0) <br />B. Staff Recommendation on Vacation of 25" Street and Lisbon Avenue <br />Administrator Kueffner reported the staff had the opportunity to review the Augustine file as it relates to <br />the reserved right-of-way. The Council was asked to visit the site and view it from Manning Avenue. The <br />Augustine's own approx. 27 acres and are eligible to do a cluster development, if they chose. This may not <br />be the right time to vacate until we find a solution. The Planning Commission should look at this site <br />during its Comprehensive Plan update to see if there are alternatives that haven't been considered. <br />Gary Johnson reported Council member DeLapp had walked his property and suggested coming up with a <br />predevelopment plan with adjacent property owners. The residents don't want their privacy interfered with <br />by an easement. Is the City willing to support attorney costs when the City prevents access to his land? <br />Gay VanPelt provided aerials and saw there was access to the Augustine property from Manning. The <br />ravine can be corrected with a culvert to drain to Downs Pond. She voiced concerns on the affect on the <br />mature oak stands, blind driveways, and wants these resolved now because we know how this Council <br />would develop. The easement serves no public purpose. Should an entire development bear the impact? <br />Jim VanPelt stated the Eden Park residents want finalization for what's good from a public prospective. <br />Scott McDonald, attorney representing the Augustines, stated there are three existing buildings, which <br />would have to be torn down, and a road built through the ravine. The Augustines' lived there 35 years and <br />have no plans to develop land. The City has no plans for building a road, so why cut off options and <br />penalize them now. Only vacate for couple of people to be comfortable and this is not reasonable. <br />LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 16, 1999 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).