1988.12.28 PC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Motion made by Thoreson, seconded by Senkler to recommend approval of the request of Margaret and Nancy Doerrer to rezone 20 acres from Conservancy to agricultural. Legally described as the west 725.0 ft. of the north 1201.65 ft. of the northeast 1/4 of the southwest 1/4 of Section 8, T31N, R21W, according to the United States Government survey thereof, Washington County, Minnesota All aye, motion passed. MINOR SUBDIVISION - DON VALENTO Chairman Senkler requested Administrator Huber review the application with the planning commission. Mr. Huber stated that Mr. Don and Janet Valenta have made application for the subdivision of a 42 acre tract of land located north of County Road 8 between Elmcrest Ave. and Everton Ave. in the City of Hugo. The property in question is located in the south half of Section 18, T31N, R21W, Washington County, Minnesota. The Hugo Planning Commission held a public hearing on this request November 22, 1988 at which time this matter was tabled pending the submittal of additional information regarding the location of Everton Ave. Mr. Valenta has submitted a revised preliminary survey identifying three tracts of land which shows the relationship of Everton Ave. to Tracts B and C of the proposed survey. Mr. Dave Torgersom of Milner Carley indicates that when they surveyed the exact location of the road, it shows that Everton Ave., as it currently exists, abutts on both tracts B and C of the proposed survey giving Mr. Valenta public roadway access to both tracts. At the previous meeting Mr. Valenta stated that he would have the 16' X 26' shed removed from Tract A which is located on the easement line of a proposeddriveway. It should be noted that the northern property line of Tract A is the center line of the easement which eliminates the north half of the easement in question from the survey. If the planning commission now feels that the information provided is satisfactory and they wish to recommend approval of this subdivision to the city council we would recommend that it be subject to special conditions. Mr. Valenta stated that in view of the fact that the survey indicates he has road access to parcel C he would like to eliminate the proposed easement between Parcel A on the north border and the residual lot. Mr. Valenta stated he will dedicate the 33' easement for roadway purposes as requested in the special conditions. Area residents indicated their concern that they have a survey indicating that Everton Ave. is completely on the Peltier property. Administrator Huber informed the residents that if at any time the survey provided by Mr. Valenta is proven to be incorrect, the subdivision approval granted could be negated. Residents felt the planning commission was arbitrarily choosing which survey they felt was correct. Commissioner Barnes informed the public that there is no conclusive proof that there is a conflict in the two surveys. Mr. Huber provided a copy of the survey done by Milner Carley to Leroy Peltier who will have it compared to his survey done by Hult and Assoc. to determine if there is a discrepancy in the location of Everton Ave. as traveled. Motion made by Jesinski, seconded by Barnes to recommend approval of the subdivision request of Don and Janet Valenta to subdivide 61.82,acres into 3 lots and one residual lot subject to the following special conditions. 5