Laserfiche WebLink
the property to industrial. The initial concern of the city council was <br />to deal with the existing situation and be sure that it was kept in check <br />and didn't become a large manufacturing operation. The staff feels the <br />only way to deal with this site would be to rezone it to industrial to <br />allow for further expansion of this facility. It is a difficult situation <br />to deal with as it is a use currently in existence and was authorized by <br />the city council although they appeared to be extremely reluctant to <br />approve this permit in 1985. <br />Mr. Gary Markovich, owner of the manufacturing business stated that the <br />expansion would be used primarily for storage space and he would not add <br />any manufacturing equipment or employees. <br />Chairman Senkler opened the public hearing. Area resident Ron Cressman <br />informed the planning commission that they have had no problems with the <br />manufacturing business operating adjacent to his property. Councilman Tom <br />Jesinski stated he had received a call from other residents who supported <br />the operation of the business. <br />Chairman Senkler stated that there is no legal way to allow the expansion <br />of this business and we can no longer continue to consider this a home <br />occupation. Mr. Senkler indicated that to rezone the property to <br />Industrial would be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. <br />Motion made by Senkler, seconded by Henry to recommend denial of the <br />amended special use permit application request by Gary Markovich to allow <br />for the expansion of his manufacturing business based on the fact that it <br />could not be considered a home occupation. <br />All voting aye, motion passed. <br />) <br />Chairman Senkler reviewed this application with commission members. Mr. <br />Senkler stated that Mr. Alex Zaluckyj and George Schtowchan have applied <br />to the City of Hugo for a minor subdivision to split a 73.6 acre tract of <br />land into two parcels of approximately equal size. The property in <br />question is zoned conservancy and located on the southeast corner of Oneka <br />Lake. These lots are split by Oneka Lake Blvd. and are to be subdivided <br />with frontage on Oneka Lake and additional property southeast of Oneka <br />Lake Blvd. The survey is extremely difficult to read with regard to the <br />existing lots and the lots being proposed. It would appear, however, that <br />a main lot division line splitting tract A and B extends through an <br />existing dwelling on site. There is also a portion of Hardwood Creek <br />located at the southwest end of tract A which may necessitate providing <br />easements to the Rice Creek Watershed District. There is also a portion <br />of tract B extending from the low wet area identified on the site plan to <br />Oneka Lake which is identified on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Map as <br />a flood zone district. The staff recommended to the applicants and their <br />surveyor that applications be made with the watershed district and the <br />Army Corps of Engineers for permits relating to this survey. The staff <br />requested that the surveyor identify the flood zone A on the survey and <br />indicate that flood control maintenance easements be provided to control <br />future flooding concerns. The surveyor for the applicants has indicated <br />that he has discussed our concerns with the property owners in question <br />and the survev <br />P.C. Minutes 4-26-89 5 <br />