01/06/87 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

~ _R~quest For Conditional Use Permit To O~erate Retail Sales From _~urser_v In R-IR Residential District.' Case Of l/r. Dale I/ir--: lis. ~orris stated that ]ir. lgirz is requesting a conditional use permit to operate a retail business from his nursery in the RI-R Residential District on his property at 17201 St. Francis Blvd. Mr, I/irz is proposing to operate the retail business from the west 4-1/2 acres of this parcel, Mr. l/irz is const~uctin~ a pole buildin~ on the p~operty to be used fo~ a~ricultural purposes which is i~ accordance v/th City Code. Planning and Zoning tec~ends approval of the request. Mr. Goodrich read the intent of conditional use permits from the Zoning Ordinance and stated that conditional use permits are typically issued for home occupations and not for retail businesses. Council should not use the conditional use process when in effect they are really rezoning. Hr. l/irz stated that as a tree farmer, the primary use of the land will be agriculture; he just wants a conditional use permit for light retail to sell his products and some landscaping accessories. llayor Reimann stated that the city has done a lot of planning with respect to zoning and Hr. Wirz' request is not consistent with the plans for that area. Nayor Reimann stated that he would only be in favor of Mr. W£rz selling what he grows on the immediate property. M~. Goodrich stated that he believes State law alloys farmers to sell products they have grown anywhere; Mr. Wirz could not be limited to selling only the products he has grown on this particular parcel at this location. Councilmember Cox stated that he believes Council is not in favor of expanding the commercial area beyond 16?th because it would create a hardship for those businesses that are operating in appropriate areas and being taxed accordingly. It may be to Mr. Wirz' benefit to use his property on Hwy. ~47 to grow his products and store his equipment and sell his products and accessory landscape items from appropriately zoned property. Council proceeded to review and mnend the proposed findings of fact as follows: IrefUl0 - Amended to read as follows: 'That the proposed use could be unduly dangerous or detrimental to persons workin~ in the area or to the general public.' Item ~11 - Delete. Ite~ ~12 - Amend to read as follows: 'That the proposed use is not harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Ramsay. IrefUl3 - Delete. IrefUl4 - Delete. City Council/November 25, 1986 Page 7 of 17