My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
1987.06.15 CC Minutes
Hugo
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
1987 CC Minutes
>
1987.06.15 CC Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/26/2017 1:45:18 PM
Creation date
9/23/2015 10:37:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
6/15/1987
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
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).
View images
View plain text
75 <br />June 15, 1987 <br />of the applicant to construct a 34,000 square foot greenhouse and a 5,000 square foot <br />service building on the site in question. A site plan has been submitted reflecting <br />the precise location of the greenhouse establishment and supporting buildings. The <br />property in question is zoned CB (commercial). We can see no objections to the site <br />plan submitted subject to special conditions. The SUP, as issued in November, 1984, <br />required a detailed site plan as a condition of the permit, now being submitted. <br />City Engineer, Howard Kuusisto, stated that Mr. Johnson could need to obtain a permit <br />from the MPCA because of the size of the well that will be needed to be installed to <br />serve the facility. Should they decide to extend city utilities, plans would need <br />to be reviewed by the city. Councilmember Peltier asked if the SUP should be consi- <br />dered null and void if certain conditions were not met as required by Item #1. <br />Attorney Johnson stated that if any condition have not been met, that Item #1 would <br />be read literally and the permit would be void. Mr. Johnson was informed that he <br />would need to reapply for another SUP, bypassing the Planning Commission. <br />Atkinson made motion, Peltier seconded, that the City Council table the site plan <br />request of J.R. Johnson Supply, and that the applicant be directed to complete <br />another application for a SUP. The city staff shall be directed to bypass the <br />Planning Commission for this application, and Mr. JohnsorRo come directly to the <br />City Council. <br />All aye. Motion Carried. <br />Atkinson made motion, Peltier seconded, that the City Council reconsider the site <br />plan application of J.R. Johnson Supply Company. <br />All aye. Motion Carried. <br />The City Administrator noted that the original permit should be considered valid <br />because the conditions listed all relate to requirements that would need to be met <br />after construction of their buildings. In that no buildings have been built, it would <br />appear that Mr. Johnson has not violated the conditions of the SUP. <br />Atkinson made motion, Peltier seconded, that the City Council rescind the previous <br />action requiring Mr. Johnson to reapply for a Special Use Permit. <br />All aye. Motion Carried. <br />Peltier made motion, Olson seconded, to approve the Site Plan for J.R. Johnson Supply <br />Company (Mr. Rick S. Johnson) for the construction of a greenhouse on a 800' x 800' <br />tract of land identified as a part of the NWS of Section 19, T31N, R21W, Washington <br />County, Minnesota. The applicant is allowed to construct a 34,000 square foot green- <br />house and a 5,000 square foot service building on the site, subject to the following <br />conditions being met: <br />1. All conditions of the previously approved SUP (November, 1984) be met. <br />2. The easements for the judicial ditches reflected on the site plan be provided <br />to the RCWD as requested. <br />3. The SUP applies only to the 800' x 800' area reflected on the shaded area of the <br />site plan. <br />4. The appropriate driveway permits be secured from the county and culverts be in- <br />stalled as per the city engineer's recommendations. <br />5. Any signs installed be located a minimum of 50' from the road right-of-way or as <br />required by the municipal code, whichever is greater. <br />6. The lighting of any signs be subject to the approval of the city code enforcement <br />officer. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.