Laserfiche WebLink
i <br /> Mr.Walberg's mechanic stated there is no screening from Crow Wing Auto Body's north <br /> property line. Chair Hallan stated we can't go back in history;they are grandfathered in. <br /> Everyone is. Mr.Walberg asked why they aren't grandfathered in. Chair Hallan stated <br /> they have come in with a new application. Mr.Walberg asked if a new CUP is required <br /> when you change your business. Mr. Burslie stated that is correct,when you expand <br /> your business or change the use. Mr.Walberg stated he is adding towing, an expansion � <br /> of his business. Crow Wing Auto Body added towing,where is their new CUP? Mr. i <br /> Burslie stated Mr.Walberg is expanding the use of his business,doubling the size of the <br /> display area. Mr. Burslie stated the CUP is not a negotiation between the City and the I <br /> applicant. The City has the responsibility to place conditions upon the CUP and those ' <br /> have to be followed by the property owner. If the applicant does not want to abide by <br /> those conditions,they are in violation of their CUP. It is not a negotiation. The <br /> applicant has stated he would install the holding tank within 2 years;the Planning <br /> Commission stated they would like it installed within i year. The Planning Commission <br /> can make those requirements. <br /> When asked by Chair Hallan, Mr. Burslie stated this is the first amendment to the <br /> original CUP. Mr.Walberg stated he thought there had been 2 CUP's. Bittner stated the <br /> first was for a Used Automobile Lot and Computer Repair Business. Mr.Walberg stated <br /> he had initially been very limited to what he could do. Bittner stated when he wanted to <br /> expand that use,he was required to apply for a CUP. <br /> Chair Hallan stated the current CUP did not limit the number,but indicated areas for <br /> parldng of the used vehicles. <br /> Planning Commission Member Norton stated he is confused by Condition #9. He can't <br /> picture how i5o vehicles would lay out. Mr.Walberg stated he can't provide that. <br /> Planning Commission Member Paulbeck asked if Mr.Walberg could point out on the <br /> diagram how the vehicles would lay out. Mr.Walberg stated he is hesitant to do that; as <br /> a business and properry owner,he should be able to make changes. It seems some <br /> members want him to dial in where they want them. The City has already stated there is <br /> 60o feet of Commercial area to do with what you want. He further stated across the <br /> road SPR has no CUP. They are allowed to do whatever they want. How is that fair to <br /> other businesses. Tl�e conditions you propose are expensive and burdensome. He is <br /> willing to take them on,but could there be some fairness,a level playing field? <br /> Planning Commission Member Birch stated that whatever is decided tonight,it is going <br /> to have to go to legal to reference the fire code. Chair Hallan stated we have the letter <br /> from the Fire Chief requesting it be made a condition. Mr.Walberg asked if his <br /> document could be a part of what is sent to legal. Chair Hallan stated there will be <br /> further discussion regarding the fence, parlang area setback from the property line. He <br /> asked Staff if the io-foot setback from the property line was discussed at the November <br /> meeting or where did that come from. Bittner asked which property line he was <br /> referring to. Chair Hallan stated Condition #io states io feet or greater from all <br /> MINUTES 6 <br /> Pequot Lakes Planning Commission <br /> January i�, 2oi9 <br />