HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992.03.25 PC MinutesMINUTE" FOR THE PLANNIN _YPMMISPION
_PQ11Yg_QF_MARCH_25, 14
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Peltier at 7:00 PM.
PRESENT: Davis, Mezzano, Olson, Oswald, Rubenzer, Peltier
Acting Secretary, Mary Ann Creager
MINOR SUBDIVISION (FIRSTAR HUGO BANK)
The Firstar Hugo Bank and Dr. George Lindy have made application to the
City of Hugo for a minor subdivision, and waiver of the formal platting
requirements, to subdivide a 1.4 acre tract of land. The request also
involves a variance to allow 37% lot coverage with impervious surface (30%
maximum allowed). The property in question is zoned concentrated
business, and is located east of Highway 61, and north of the Firstar Hugo
Bank parking lot (part of Govt Lot 5, Section 20, T31N, R21W, and part of
Lot 3O, County Auditor's Plat #7). The site is to be subdivided into two
tracts identified as Parcels A-1 and A-2 on the enclosed certificate of
survey. The lots meet minimum -dimension requirements for a CB zoning
district. It is the intent of the applicant to construct a dental clinic
on the site, and connections to the existing water mains and sanitary
sewer will be made. The required permits are being processed by the RCWD
and the DNR. The request in question appears to be consistent with the
City's comprehensive plan, and complies with the City's subdivision
regulations. Dr. Lindy was present and reviewed the site plan for his
proposed building. The public hearing was opened, with no comments being
made.
Olson made motion, Oswald seconded, to recommend approval of the
application of the Firstar Hugo Bank and Dr. George Lindy for a minor
subdivision, and waiver of the formal platting requirements, to subdivide
a 1.4 acre tract of land. Recommendation for approval includes approval
for a variance to allow 37% lot coverage with impervious surface.
Approval is subject to the following special conditions:
1. The final survey must be submitted to the City Council within 90 days
of preliminary survey acceptance or Planning Commission approval shall
be null and void.
2. Survey approval shall be contingent upon compliance with the survey
conditions, as well as the grading, storm water drainage, and utility
plans.
3. All conditions of plat approval must be met prior to the stamping of
any deeds for recording by the city clerk, unless otherwise permitted
by Council action.
4. The property lines on site must be identified by the applicants to
assure proper setbacks when buildings are to be constructed, if
required by the building inspector. All lots must be properly staked.
5. No building permits shall be issued until the survey has been approved
and recorded with Washington County.
6. Securing the required permits from the watershed district and the
Department of Natural Resources is required prior to final survey
approval.
7. All fees relating to this subdivision shall be paid by the applicant
including the cost of recording documents with Washington County.
S. Any driveway permits requiring access to highways or county roads may
not be issued until the necessary permits are secured from Washington
County or the Minnesota Department of Transportation.
Planning Commission meeting of March 25, 1992
Page 2
9. Soil tests for each buildable site must be submitted to the City prior
to final survey approval.
10. Dedication of required park land, or payment of fee in lieu of park
land dedication, shall be paid to the City at the time of final survey
approval.
11. No improvements, landscaping, or grading shall be permitted in the
defined drainage areas without the express written authorization of
the City and the approved watershed districts.
12. All property owners shall be responsible for maintenance of drainage
areas within easements on their property.
13. The developer shall permit access to the referenced site for periodic
inspections to assure conformance with this subdivision.
14. Legal descriptions of all parcels to be subdivided shall be included.
All aye. Motion Carried.
REZONING REDUEST-(D.-.T—_P'R*CO)FPERTIE,"'
On behalf of D.T. Properties of Forest Lake, MN., Mr. Richard Tschida has
made application to the City of Hugo to rezone a 8.9 acre tract of land
from RB to Industrial. The site in question is located north of 170th
Street and east of Highway 61. Several years ago, the property owners of
the site petitioned the City to rezone the property from agriculture to
RB. The staff recommended that the Commission review the list of
permitted and special uses allowed in industrial zones, as identified in
the City's zoning ordinance, as well as the comprehensive plan addressing
industrial uses (page 36) and economic development (page 12). Mr. Tschida
was present at the meeting, stating that he didn't need a rezoning to
accommodate his use for the property, but felt it would be the best use of
the property, and that he would ultimately subdivide the property. The
meeting was opened for public comment, and two adjoining residents
expressed their objection to the industrial zone because of the lack of
knowledge as to what types of business could occupy the lots.
Mezzano made motion, Davis seconded, to recommend denial of the
application of D.T. Properties to rezone an 8.9 acre tract of land from RB
to Industrial because rezoning would not be consistent with the City's
comprehensive plan.
All aye. Motion Carried.
SPECIAL_USE PERMIT Q. OLSEN)
Mr. John Olsen of 14728 Irish Avenue has made application to the City of
Hugo for a Special Use Permit to conduct a firewood processing operation
on his property generally described as follows: The SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4
of the Section 23, T31N, R21W. The property in question is zoned
agriculture, and consists of approximately 7.75 acres. Mr. Olsen has been
operating on a temporary SUP, since May 15, 1989. Mr. Olsen's original
request was for wood storage covering approximately 11% of the site. He
later modified his request for 16.3% lot coverage, and is now requesting
20% lot coverage. The staff recommended that the Planning Commission
Planning Commission meeting of March 25, 1992
Page 3
visit the site in question to see if it appears in compliance with the
site plan submitted. Although the SUP has expired, Mr. Olsen's operation
continues in existence and can be viewed for compatibility with the
surrounding area and the City's comprehensive plan. The meeting was
opened for public comment, and several neighbors stepped forward to
indicate that Mr. Olsen was a "model" neighbor, and that they had no
objection to his operation.
Oswald made motion, Rubenzer
request of John Olsen, 14728
conduct a firewood processing
follows: That part of the SE
lying 255.75 feet west of the
subject to the 15 conditions
5/15/89.
All aye. Motion Carried.
seconded, to recommend approval of the
Irish Avenue, for a Special Use Permit to
operation on his property described as
1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 23, T31N, R21W,
center line of Irish Avenue. Approval is
listed in the original SUP approved on
grECIPL USE !:PERMIT GRAVEL PIT)
Mr. Richard Carron and Darrell Hansen have made application to the City of
Hugo for an Amended Special Use Permit to allow a gravel -pit operation to
be conducted on the following described property: The NW 1/4 of the SW
1/4 of Section 23, T31N, R21W, and the E 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of Section 22,
T31N, R21W. The property in question is zoned agriculture and consists of
120 acres. Approximately 40 acres of the site is being used as a gravel
pit, and regulated by a Mining Permit issued by the City of Hugo. It is
the applicants' intent to expand the gravel pit by approximately 80 acres
identified as Lots 1-8 on the enclosed site plan. The proposed expansion
area would then abut on Evergreen Hills subdivision to the west, and
County Road 8A (140th Street) on the south. The City Engineer has
reviewed the site plan, and his comments are a part of the record. The
40+ acre tract of land, west of Irish Avenue, which currently accommodates
a gravel/mining operation, has been in existence for many years. Mailed
notices were sent to property owners within 1/2 mile of the site in
question. Mr. Bruce Folz, representing Mr. Carron, was present at the
meeting and reviewed the proposal with the Commission and general public.
The meeting was then opened for Commissioner's input. Oswald questioned
whether a 50' buffer from property lines was adequate, and Folz responded
that 50' was standard in Washington County. Mr. Carron expected the
original 40 acre pit would be finished by July, 1992, and the restoration
process would start. The meeting was then opened for public comment, and
John Bannigan, representing a group of residents, submitted a petition,
with approximately 190 signatures, requesting no expansion of the gravel
pit. After a lengthy discussion, the following is a summary of the
concerns expressed by many residents: has the City considered the
criteria needed to be met for approval of a SUP, truck traffic, unsafe
operation of trucks, noise, air pollution, groundwater contamination,
abuts residential property, devaluation of property values, and
non-compliance with existing permit. Mr. John Waller stated that he was
not aware of any accidents because of the trucking, and that he preferred
the mining operation over development of the property. Rich Carron
addressed the Commission, and stated that he would like to meet with area
residents in an effort to reach a compromise. Mr. Carron noted that they
Planning Commission meeting of March 25, 1992
Page 4
saved Hugo taxpayers about $460,000 on the CIP, Phase 2, because of their
location within the City. Darrell Hansen, property owner of the proposed
expansion, suggested that concerned residents pay off his mortgage, and he
would close the gravel pit. The public hearing was closed, and the
Commissioners asked that the following concerns be addressed by the
developers, the City Engineer, or City Attorney:
1. Identify an area in Washington County where a gravel pit has been
restored.
2. Impact of gravel pit on neighboring wells.
3. What is appropriate for a buffer area in addition to the ordinance?
4. Developers identify life expectancy of the existing pit.
5. Address water control after mining restoration (protected wetlands).
6. Identify when current Mining Permit expires.
7. Discussion of the bituminous plant, and whether it is allowed by a SUP
or the Mining Permit.
8. Is the bituminous plant appropriate for agriculture or industrial
zone?
9. Has the City created a non -conforming use? Are they able to expand?
10. What happens water after sand washing?
11. Have there been any complaints filed with the City regarding land use?
12. Include location of bituminous plant on plans.
13. Address land use after termination of expansion. Will land be
developable?
14. Review validity of original Special Use Permit.
15. The applicant complete an Environmental Assessment Worksheet prior to
any approval of expansion request by the council.
Mezzano made motion, Davis seconded, to table this application for an
Amended Special Use Permit for 30 days to allow time to answer the above
listed concerns. This public hearing will be continued on April 22, 1992.
All aye. Motion Carried.
Michael and Patricia Harvieux of 8460 130th Street have made application
to the City of Hugo for a SUP to keep two pleasure horses on their
property generally described as follows: Part of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4
of Section 26, T31N, R21W, Washington County, MN. The property in
question is zoned RR2, and consists of 6.8 acres. The applicant intends
to provide a 16' x 28' animal shelter within the pasture area identified
on the enclosed site plan. The request is consistent with previous
approvals for this type of use. There were no written or oral objections
to this request.
Rubenzer made motion, Davis seconded, to recommend approval of the request
of Michael Harvieux, 8460 130th Street, for a Special Use permit to keep
two pleasure horses on his property described as: Part of the SW 1/4 of
the SW 1/4 of Section 26, T31N, R21W, Washington County, MN. Approval is
subject to the following special conditions:
1. The animal shelter located on site
acceptable condition at all times.
2. The horse -pasture area identified
the two horses be confined to the
be maintained in a safe and
on the site be properly fenced, and
pasture area for grazing.
Planning Commission meeting of March 25, 1992
Page 5
3. The animals on site be treated in a safe and humane manner at all
times.
4. The number of horses permitted on site be limited to two animals.
All aye. Motion Carried.
Davis made motion, Oswald seconded, to adjourn at 10:30 PM.
All aye. Motion Carried.
r Mary Creager
Acti�m^Secretary —