My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Council - 03/08/2022
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Council
>
2022
>
Minutes - Council - 03/08/2022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/13/2025 10:26:22 AM
Creation date
4/15/2022 11:09:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
03/08/2022
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
38
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
<br />Councilmember Musgrove agreed with Councilmember Howell’s suggestion. <br /> <br />Mayor Kuzma asked Councilmember Specht and Councilmember Heineman if they were <br />agreeable to Councilmember Woestehoff’s suggestion to add to the motion the contingency that <br />the pole barn meets standards. <br /> <br />Councilmembers Specht and Heineman accepted the friendly amendment. <br /> <br />Councilmember Howell asked how the trips are limited to a certain number but also not take Staff <br />time with calls about vehicles of relatives or friends. <br /> <br />City Administrator Ulrich replied annual inspections aren’t done, there are conditions which the <br />permit holder has to abide by. He stated if the conditions aren’t met, the permit can be revoked <br />and have been revoked by Councils with proper public hearing and process. He stated they rely <br />on neighbors to be the eyes and ears and are a complaint based system as they know the conditions <br />best. He stated monitoring trips would be difficult but if there were complaints they could look at <br />and inspect records of the business or ask to see records of appointments. He stated that interviews <br />could be done regarding complaints. He stated a follow-up inspection is a part of the process and <br />they would ask for accountability. <br /> <br />Councilmember Woestehoff commented that he won’t be supporting this, not because of guns, as <br />he didn’t care that it was a gun dealer. He stated that the issue for him is that the response of a <br />complaint is issuing a higher level permit, which doesn’t sit well with him from a process <br />standpoint. He stated he would be comfortable with keeping it at a Level One for six months to a <br />year to ensure compliance. <br /> <br />Councilmember Riley commented that he would not be supporting this because retail is being <br />allowed in a residential area. <br /> <br />Mayor Kuzma expressed concern about the violations and moving it to a higher level permit, which <br />he didn’t think was right. <br /> <br />Deputy City Administrator/Community Dev. Director Hagen asked City Attorney Knaak if it <br />would make more sense to bring back a resolution that is formatted and written in a way that is <br />approving an amended home occupation permit to allow more time to think about conditions that <br />might make sense, because Staff hasn’t had an exhaustive conversation. He stated there were 18 <br />noted in the original HOP and he has five more written down. <br /> <br />City Attorney Knaak asked if the question was if it was a good idea for the Staff to take more time <br />to recommend more conditions. <br /> <br />Deputy City Administrator/Community Dev. Director Hagen replied correct, if Council is under <br />the consensus to allow this type of use that it may make more sense to have some additional time <br />to think about conditions making sure they are thinking of everything and have another <br />conversation with the Police Department. <br /> <br />City Council /March 8, 2022 <br />Page 24 of 38 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.