Minutes - Council - 06/14/2022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City Planner McCann reviewed the staff report and recommendation to introduce Ordinance #22- 18 approving a zoning amendment to rezone the property from R-1 Rural Developing to E-3 Employment. Motion by Councilmember Riley, seconded by Councilmember Woestehoff, to Introduce Ordinance #22-18 to Rezone 15861 Jarvis St NW from R-1 to E-3. Further discussion: Councilmember Musgrove asked if Staff have received any feedback on this. City Planner McCann replied he has not received anything on this application. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Kuzma, Councilmembers Riley, Woestehoff, Heineman, Howell, Musgrove and Specht. Voting No: None. 7.04: Consider Extension for a Request for a Home Occupation Permit at 6131 Green Valley Rd NW (Project No. 22-118); Case of J. Hill Container Company City Planner McCann reviewed the staff report and request for an extension to a future meeting due to the applicant working with his architect. th Deb Kemp, 6003 178 Lane NW, stated she wanted to clarify that the City of Elk River requires HOP or CUPs for businesses so it was stated that he didn’t have any infractions but they weren’t required. She stated she googled the Elk River address with the street view and there is no room for large trucks or equipment at that location which she thought meant that what the applicant is doing at the two locations are different and they should be evaluated as such. She stated the applicant is still operating the business in Ramsey despite pending approval. She asked why that is allowed. She stated she lives on the other end of the development and can hear the truck noise from around the block. She felt that residents were being forced to attend City Council meetings to speak when Council should be taking action on issues of non-compliance. th Kelly Schmidt, 6000 177 Lane NW, stated she is adjacent to the property and has sent photos of the property showing that the business has continued to operate since the last Council meeting showing trucks coming and going. She stated the neighbor across from the applicant is a PUD property but had been denied because of semi traffic causing a traffic stop on Green Valley Road. She stated that is still happening. She asked if OSHA has been out or will be involved. She also asked if the applicant is paying taxes for friends of his children, other than cash. She stated this is commercial business and expressed concerns about the fire risk. Councilmember Musgrove asked if it is usual that if an applicant of a business isn’t compliant but they are working with City Staff towards compliance, is that part of the reason why the applicant may still be operating his business. City Planner McCann replied the first notice of violation that was sent to the applicant stated that as long as he applied and was working with the City to go through the process, enforcement would be withheld because there is an expense to bring an application forward and any additional City Council /June 14, 2022 Page 9 of 17