Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001.07.02 RESO 2001-0026CITY OF HUGO RESOLUTION 2001- 26 APPROVING FINDINGS OF FACT REGARDING AN APPEAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER RELATING TO THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8124 - 147' STREET WHEREAS, Mr. Andrew Goiffon appealed an Administrative Order issued by former City Administrator Bob Museus ("the City Administrator") regarding the slaughtering facility operated by Goiffon on property owned by Goiffon located at 8124 - 147` Street (see attached Exhibit A); and, WHEREAS, the order issued by the City Administrator required Mr. Goiffon to cease operation of the slaughtering operation because it allegedly violated the City's Comprehensive Land Use Regulations; and, WHEREAS, Mr. Goiffon appealed the order asserting that his operation is a lawfully existing non -conforming use; and, WHEREAS, the Board of Appeals and Adjustments has reviewed said appeal at a duly called public meeting; and, WHEREAS, notice of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments's meeting was mailed to all adjoining property owners within three hundred fifty (350) feet; and, WHEREAS, Staff was directed to review the operation and to report its findings, which findings are contained in the Staff Report attached hereto as Exhibit A, all of which is incorporated herein; and, WHEREAS, on the record before it, the Board of Appeals and Adjustments found that the slaughtering facility is a lawfully pre-existing non -conforming use that has continued since its inception; and, WHEREAS, the Board of Appeals and Adjustments found that there was no evidence of any unlawful expansion or change in the operation; and, WHEREAS, the Board of Appeals and Adjustments found that there was no evidence that the activity was established after the adoption and publication of any ordinances prohibiting the use or limiting it; and, WHEREAS, the Board of Appeals and Adjustments's recommendation was based on the information presented by the applicant, a review of public records, pertinent ordinance provisions, and input from the public and staff; and, Resolution 2001- 26 Page 2 WHEREAS, the Board of Appeals and Adjustments further recommends that the Administrative Order be rescinded. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUGO, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does find that, based upon the record before it at this time, and based upon the evidence and testimony available to date, there is no evidence before the Council that the slaughtering activities began or were expanded, enlarged or changed after the date of any ordinances which would prohibit or limit that activity. Further, it appears that there is no evidence which would establish the existence or terms of any zoning ordinances governing the property in the late 1950s, 1960s and early 1970s, when the use is claimed to have existed. Therefore, the Council hereby orders that the Administrative Order requiring Mr. Goiffon to cease operation of the slaughterhouse be rescinded based upon the following: 1. The applicant states that he and his family have conducted slaughtering activities on the property since prior to 1962. 2. The property is currently used by Mr. Goiffon for his primary residence and agricultural operations. Additionally, Mr. Goiffon currently leases the slaughtering facility to Meng Yang and Nhia Yang. The improvements and land which serve the slaughtering activities are as follows: a slaughtering pole barn, a finishing shed and hog holding pens. 3. Aerial photographs from 1969 and 1991 show the agricultural buildings located on the property, including the building used for the slaughtering operation. 4. In 1971, the Village of Hugo merged with Oneka Township and became the Village of Hugo. 5. In 1975, the Village of Hugo adopted a new zoning ordinance. Prior to 1975, it appears that the Village of Hugo used the old Oneka Township zoning ordinance. City staff was unable to locate the former Township ordinance. In addition to checking City records, staff contacted Marvin LaValle who was on the Village Council at the time the village merged with the township. Mr. LaValle checked his personal records and was unable to locate a copy of the ordinance. However, Mr. LaValle stated that he believed that the ordinance did not specifically address slaughterhouse operations. Staff also asked former Mayor Walter Stoltzman if he had a copy of the previous township ordinances. Mr. Stoltzman responded that he did not have a copy of the ordinance. Mr. Stoltzman indicated that the township may have never officially adopted a zoning ordinance. Lastly, City staff contacted Washington County to inquire whether or not the County had copies of any previous township or City ordinances. The County responded that they did not have any township or city ordinances. 6. At this time, the City Council has no record of Ordinances pre -dating 1975 which would prohibit or limit the slaughtering activities on the parcel. Resolution 2001- 26 Page 3 7. Since 1975, the City has adopted various revisions to the zoning ordinance which would prohibit or limit the later establishment of slaughtering activities. 8. In 1976, the Village of Hugo became a City by state statute. 9. On March 6, 1994, the building occupied by the slaughtering facility was destroyed by fire. 10. On March 31, 1994, the Mr. Goiffon applied for and received a building permit to replace the building. The building as approved and currently exists is 1,584 square feet (Note: The building that burned was a conforming agricultural building that housed the slaughterhouse operation, and Mr. Goiffon replaced it with a conforming agricultural building of equal size. The zoning ordinance in 1994 (Section 320-5 Subd. A. 4.) allowed the replacement of non- conforming uses damaged by fire, subject to the conditions set forth therein. 11. The Board received public testimony from two residents at the Board of Appeals and Adjustments meeting. Mr. John Waller stated that the slaughtering activities have been in existence since at least 1956. Mr. Walter Stoltzman indicated that the slaughtering activities have been conducted since at least the early 1970's, which was the time he first became aware of the operation. There was no one in attendance at the Board meeting who spoke in opposition to the claims made by Mr. Goiffon. Further, the City received no written or verbal information from the public or others disputing the claims made by Mr. Goiffon concerning the commencement or scope of his operation. 12. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments Chairman, David Schumann, testified that he has lived near the Goiffons all his life and remembers the slaughtering facility since 1955 or 1956. 13. City staff reviewed City records and found nothing at this time that would provide a basis for disputing the claims that Goiffon has been slaughtering hogs and other animals on the property since the late 1950s or early 1960s. The records reviewed by staff included former ordinances, aerial photographs, property files, and meeting minutes. Further, City staff made an on-site inspection of the property on April 3, 2001, and found the scope of the slaughtering operation to be consistent with the claims made by Mr. Goiffon. 14. Similarly, the City Council has been presented with no evidence at this time which would cause it to dispute the claims of Goiffon that slaughtering activities have been conducted on the parcel since the 1950s or early 1960s, or to find that there has been an expansion or enlargement of the use. ADOPTED by the City Council on July 2, 2001. Resolution 2001- 26 Page 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON ) The undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Hugo, Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at a meeting of the Hugo City Council on July 2, 2001 with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same is a correct transcription thereof. WITNESS my ha94 officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the City this 544 day of 12001. Mary eager, City Clerk