Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Spot Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council declines to recommend proceeding with Antlers by Claus concept plan amid spot-zoning concerns
Summary
Council reviewed a concept plan for Antlers by Claus, a proposed 15,000-square-foot antler reproduction and taxidermy business on a 33.87-acre parcel but, citing inconsistency with the future land use map and spot-zoning concerns, moved not to recommend proceeding with subsequent development applications.
The New Richmond City Council reviewed a concept plan from property owner Jerry Clausen for a proposed business called Antlers by Claus but voted not to recommend that the applicant proceed with subsequent development applications.
Jerry Clausen, the property owner, described the business and site. “Antlers by Claus is a high quality antler reproduction company. They specialize in antlers, trophy mounts, fish replicas, and complete wildlife displays,” Clausen said. He said the remaining roughly 30 acres of the 33.87-acre parcel would be used for a single-family home and conservation, and that the proposed building site is isolated with railroad tracks and the Willow River nearby.
City planning staff told the council the parcel is guided by the future land use map for medium-high-density residential and zoned Z 2 Suburban District, where manufacturing and processing businesses are not allowed. Staff said the proposal would require rezoning to Z 7 Specific Use Industrial or an amendment to the zoning ordinance to permit such uses in residential districts. Staff also noted that a 2024 certified survey map included a condition requiring future development on the parcel to be served by municipal water and sewer, so private well and septic would not meet that condition and the developer would be responsible for connection costs.
Council members raised standard planning concerns about spot zoning — rezoning a small parcel surrounded by residential uses — and the long-term implications of allowing industrial zoning in a residential area. One council member said the city is “fortunate to have” the applicant’s business in town but warned that a rezoning would remain with the land and could allow other industrial uses in the future if the property changed hands.
The council moved to record whether the city would be supportive of the applicant spending money on subsequent development applications. A motion “to not recommend applicants proceed with subsequent development applications for the proposed concept plan” carried on a council vote.
