06-20-2011 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Minutes June 20, 2011 Page 5 • Mr. Kaatz stated the finding (for approval of a conditional use permit that the use will not endanger, injure, or detrimentally affect the public health, safety, morals of the neighborhood) is not a condition of the permit and shouldn't be used as evidence for the revocation of Wapiti's conditional use permit as it would be illegal. Mr. Kaatz stated it makes no sense for his client to pay the $225 liquor license fee because the City Council denied the consumption and display permit previously. He stated the building is a legal non-conforming use and Vv'apiti Park should never have been required to obtain an interim use permit. He stated the building is an accessory structure serving the principle use of the campground and under Minnesota law and Elk River Code should have been allowed to be rebuilt. He requested specific violations of the conditions of the conditional use permit. Councilmember Westgaard questioned if the applicant is withdrawing their liquor applications. Mr. Kaatz stated yes. Mr. Kaatz then recanted after consulting with Mr. Battina and further stated if the basis for denial of the liquor licenses is for non-payment of the fee, then they will pay the fee. He stated the building is not an illegal use and if that is what is holding up the liquor application, then they wish not to withdraw and if the city would like the fee paid, it will be turned in as soon as possible. Isabelle Smith, 18252 Concord Street -Stated Council should consider how the people living at Wapiti Park will be affected. She stated it would be nice if the city had more affordable homes for people. Mr. Kaatz submitted a petition in support of Wapiti Park. There being no one else to speak to these items, Acting Mayor Gumphrey closed the public hearing. Attorney Beck stated staff attempted to go out to Wapiti Park last week to reconfirm some of the issues, such as the rigid piping, wheels on vehicles, and the additions, but were asked to leave the site by Wapiti personnel. He highlighted the record before the City Council, including the documentation in the staff report, which all goes to whether Wapiti Park is a recreational campground as defined by state law. He stated the condition of the conditional use permit is that Wapiti Park comply with the requirements of Chapter 327. He stated staffls conclusion, as noted in the record and the photos, is that the campground is not being used exclusively for recreation and travel. He stated the "design for use" doesn't matter if the vehicles are being used for permanent residential use. He noted that recrearional vehicle is also defined in Chapter 168 of state law as "... a vehicle that is not used as a residence of the owner or occupant..." He stated the concern has never been about having a campground at Wapiti Park but rather that it is being used as a residence, which is not consistent with state law and the conditional use permit requirements. Attorney Beck stated if the City Council wants to proceed with revocation of the conditional use permit based on the record and testimony presented this evening, they could direct staff to prepare a resolution with findings of fact for consideration at a future meeting. He stated non-payment of the liquor fee is one of the findings for non-renewal of the liquor licenses. • He stated the purpose of the fee is to take care of administrative costs associated with