My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 11/20/2001 - Special
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2001
>
Agenda - Council - 11/20/2001 - Special
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2025 12:30:01 PM
Creation date
9/8/2003 3:30:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Title
Special
Document Date
11/20/2001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
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
Chairperson Nixt questioned whether having employees in a home business is prohibited. He <br />also questioned whether new wetland laws apply to this. He stated that this issue needs more <br />investigation. He noted that the choices are to grant a temporary extension until the research is <br />complete and the issue is brought before the Commission again, or shut the operation down. <br /> <br />Commissioner Jotmson raised the question if this operation should be allowed to... continue until <br /> <br />Commissioner Sweet pointed out that the permit is expired. <br /> . ~%i'- ,. <br />Mr. Enstrom stated he did request a 5-year term on the permit. He sai~c~;~-did g¢~ng himself <br />the first 2 years and used old equipment that was functional. He~sai~t*'he could ~ggibro'ught in <br />much more equipment to continue to work himself, but that wo~!'i~use too much n0;iS~?~ <br />Commissioner Johnson questioned why-this.situation?~sn~'t brought up' to the-ei'~ng <br />Commission months ago. '?-'!?~-.~_ <br /> <br />Mr. Enstrom responded he noticed the permit was up and ~'~'~0'~i:~::~eapply. There was nothing <br />that suggested the reapplication shouid be 3 months before th~-~P~ation date. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson asked what ramificb, tions"would there be to Shuf'down the operation. <br />Mr. Enstrom replied he would need to have stibsi'dizatio~?~(~ bay` ~C~i2 Unemployment. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt pointed out'that the'Planning Commission is a recommending body and cannot <br />gant an extension, nor s~ut' the operation down. 'The.Commission can only recommend the City <br />Council extend the permit or deny i,t.'.2-Ie'explaine~ that without a permit, Mr. Enstrom cannot <br />operate and the citY cOUld enforceth~t; .which in essence would shut his operation down. <br /> t._;~' ,-.. ..-..- .: ..... ::-;.;;,:2: <br />Mr, Enstrom stated the-false-:statements by neighbors should not be used for making a <br />recommendation7 '- :~ ~:' <br /> <br />Motion'by Commissibner Johnson.to continue this matter to the next meeting of the Planning <br />c~mmission m Decemb'eh'-% <br /> <br />Moti6nfa~fled due to lack :ora second. <br /> <br /> Chairperson .~-Ni~:t explained to Mr. Enstrom that there are two choices. The item can be <br /> continued, which means no action would be taken at this meeting. A motion could be made to <br /> deny the permit,'~d he could appear before the City Council at their next meeting. This moves <br /> the item off the Planning Commission docket and up to the City Council for a decision. He <br /> asked what Mr. Enstrom wanted. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/November 5, 2001 <br /> Page 8 of 21 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.