Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City of Gem Lake City Council meeting minutes, March 17, 2015 Page 1 <br /> <br />City of Gem Lake City Council Meeting Minutes <br />Tuesday, March 17, 2015, 7:00 p.m. <br />Gem Lake City Hall, 4200 Otter Lake Road, Gem Lake Minnesota <br /> <br />Mayor Uzpen called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Councilmembers Artig-Swomley, Bosak, <br />Kuny and Lindner were present. Others in attendance: Greg Anderson and Justin Gese, S.E.H; <br />Patrick Kelly, City Attorney; Tom Kelly, City Treasurer and Ben Johnson, City of Gem Lake <br />Planning Commission chair. <br /> <br />March 17, 2015, Agenda <br /> <br />Upon motion made by Councilmember Artig-Swomley, seconded by Councilmember, Agenda <br />approved by 5-0 vote. <br /> <br />Committee Report <br /> <br />The matter and application for a non-conforming use permit of 1581 East County Road E, Gem <br />Lake, was presented to the City Council by the Planning Commission Chair, Mr. Ben Johnson. A <br />motion was made after the report by the Commission, by Councilmember Bosak, and seconded <br />by Councilmember Lindner, to deny the application of Salvador Torres for a non-conforming use <br />permit at 1581 East County Road E, for a proposed business use at 1581 East County Road E. Five <br />votes in favor of the denial of the use. <br />The denial is based on the following findings: <br />A public hearing was held on March 3, 2015, for the non-conforming use permit for 1581 East <br />County Road E. The application was for a business use of auto detailing and limited auto repair <br />service. At the hearing the applicant, Mr. Torres, and the property owner were not present to <br />address and clarify whether the proposed use would meet the standards for approval. The <br />Planning Commission needed clarification as to the types of use, the type of auto detailing, and <br />definition of limited auto repair service. <br />(a) There were no facts presented that the use by the applicant was a reasonable use of <br />the property in considering such factors as: <br /> <br />i. No evidence or facts presented as to the functional and aesthetic justifications <br />for the use, no plans of operation, storage of materials and extent of business; <br />ii. No evidence or facts presented that there was adequacy of off-street parking <br />for the use and the number of automobiles that would be placed in the business <br />and serviced; <br />iii. No evidence or facts presented that the use would not have an adverse off-site <br />impact from such things as traffic, noise, dust, odors, and parking;