10-21-1975 Planning Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

PLAMtCWG CXatOSSICN MEETING OP OCTOBE31 12, 1975 - PAGE 3 attendance ware Mr and Mrs. Howard Eistnger and their Oattomey, Richard Schieffer. The Zoning Mninistrator presented the sumarization and staff reports concerning the landfill appUcation which made mention of the various pennitted and conditional uses for tiie currently zoned area; how the land had been expanded from four to sixteen acrea as a result of the previous sanitary landfill operation; traffic hauuuds; how the proposal was of a oonmercial and intotriaJ. nature and not conpatible with a residentially zoned area; the proposed 5 to 1 slope and runoff problem and the fcdlure of the Eisingers to supply pertinent data such as the proposed end land use, screening for the site and the hours and length of ci.^ily operation. It was also suggested that Eisingers could request additional unit credits on the filled area on a P.R.D. basis. Van Nest noted that the proposal was not. ap plicable in any zone in Qrono and the surrounding oonmunities. Mention was made that the Loretto diznp was not distant and serves the local area and Minneapolis. Attorney Schieffer presented a history of the Eisinger landfill making note that about 1968 when Qcono adopted a new zoning code, the Eisinger*s received a letter stating that they were allowed to continue the operation under the "grandfather clause". Then the City had a business licensing ordinance and Eisinger*s received a license until 1970-71 vdien it was not known v^ther their li censing would be continued. Then the PCA took up the matter of control and soon E.Q.C., Ifemepin Oomty and other agencies ^^Id a portion of control. All the agenci^ have asked for ^^direction from the City but, according to the attorney, the City has not been willing to give any. He reviewed the re quirements of the other concerned agencies that had given their approval and that now Qrono would have to act on the specific application in front of them which is for a variance of Ordi nance No. 125 filed in 1973. Oonoeming Lake Classen, he noted that the other agencies were also ooncemed about it and had given their approval. It was the attorney's opinion that the Oemnission felt that because the city has dsm zoning it would \73pe out the previous use and he disagreed with this ooncept. Oonoeming fined use of the land, Eisingers have no plans except continuation of grazing or residimtial uses. He noted that Vtoodlake Sanitation now planned to only fill in the approved areas of the dunp and dose the site. He espressed the diffi culty Eisinger's had due to all agencies being unsure of vdiere they beme authority. The Gatmission, eifter further discussion with Eisingers and review of the matter, made the follotinng decision. Van Nest moved, Pesek seconded, that the Planning Oonmissicn recenmend to the Ocuncil denial of the Tandftll Ap plication of Howard Eisinger based on staff reports and the dscussions of this meeting and directed staff to prepare a Resolution specityii^ the reasons that the Planning Oenmission came to their decision and which Resolution would be reviewed at the next Planning Oenmission meeting. Motion, Ayes (7) - Nays (0). HOWAFD EISINGBR UNOETLSu APPUCATION O' i ■ . ►