HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991.05.22 PC MinutesMINUTES OF THE HUGO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - May 22, 1991
Chairman Peltier called the regular meeting to order at 7:03PM.
PRESENT: Thoreson, Oswald, Barnes, Peltier
ABSENT: Davis, Henry, Mezzano
Motion made by Barnes, seconded by Thoreson to approve the minutes of
April 24, 1991 as amended.
All aye, motion passed.
REZONING REQUEST (DUNBAR DEVELOPMENT)
Commissioner Barnes reviewed this request with the Planning Commission.
She stated that Mr. Eloy Molitor and Dunbar Development/Washington County
Housing and Redevelopment Authority have made application to the City of
Hugo for the rezoning of a 21.26 acre tract of land from Industrial to
SFU. The purpose of the rezoning is to accommodate an application for
Planned Unit Development which would involve future construction of 60
units of multifamily residential housing and 41 single family home lots.
The property in question is located west of Highway 61 and immediately
south of 140th St. If the rezoning request is approved by the City, the
owners would then be required to secure a Special Use Permit for Planned
Unit Development and go through the necessary subdivision approvals. The
site in question is within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area and it is
intended to serve the site with sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer and
street/curb and gutter. This request involves only the rezoning of the
property and it is the Planning Commissions charge to determine if the
request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and other development in
the MUSA. The property north of the site is zoned SFU, the area to the
west is RR1, to the south is SFE and to the east is Retail Business.
Several years ago the Planning Commission did recommend approval of a
similar rezoning request from Industrial to SFU for the SFU district
located north of 140th St. and adjacent to the site in question. The
property is generally described as that portion of the northwest 1/4 of
the northwest 1/4 of Section 29, T31N, R21W, lying west of the
right-of-way of the Burlington Northern Railroad, except that portion
described as the south 300 ft. of the north 333' of said parcel lying east
of the west 731.33 ft. according the U.S. Government Survey thereof,
Washington County, Minnesota.
Mr. Dennis Balyeat was present to address the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Barnes expressed some concerns regarding the reduction of
Industrial zoning, and the additional traffic crossing the railroad tracks
west of Highway 61 could create a dangerous situation. Commissioner
Thoreson and Peltier concurred. Commission member Oswald was not
concerned about the change from Industrial to SFU, stating that there
doesn't appear to be a great deal of interest in utilizing this property
as Industrial.
Hugo resident Dick Mireault stated that the railroad tracks are used only
once a week at this time and should not create a hazard. Commissioner
Barnes informed the audience that it was the grade of 140th St. crossing
the railroad tracks that concerned her.
P.C. Minutes - May 22, 1991
Page 2
Mr. Balyeat agreed to table the issue until the following meeting hoping
that a full commission would be available and a favorable response would
be secured. He stated that being a redevelopment authority, they have a
good grasp on what areas show signs of industrial growth, which is
primarily in the Lake Elmo and Oakdale areas. Mr. Balyeat informed the
commission that they do not pursue issues of this nature past the Planning
Commission level if the recommendation is negative.
Chairman Peltier made a motion to table this request until the meeting of
June 26, 1991. Second by Barnes. All aye, motion passed.
SPECIAL USE PERMIT (TOM BROWN)
Commissioner Oswald reviewed this request with the Planning Commission.
Mr. Oswald stated that Mr. Thomas R. Brown of 16614 Fenway Ave. North, has
made application to the City of Hugo for a Special Use Permit to construct
a 5,670 sq. ft. accessory building in an Agricultural zoning district.
The maximum square footage permitted by ordinance in 3,600 sq. ft. The
site in question consists of 10 acres and is located on Fenway Ave. north
of 165th St. The property is generally described as Part of the southeast
114 of the northeast 1/4 of Section 27, T31N, R21W, Tax parcel
93007-2500. The 54' X 105' structure in question would be located 200'
from Fenway Ave. and 50' from the north property line. Mr. Brown has
stated that he would like to put up a pole barn for his personal use that
would accommodate the storage of cars, snowmobiles, trailers, an old
tractor and combines. He has also indicated that he might store livestock
in the building in the future. He stated that the old horse barn and
metal shed on the property will be removed prior to erection of the new
building. The new building will not be used for any type of commercial
purpose now or in the future. If the Planning Commission feels this
request is appropriate for the area and the size of the building does not
exceed reasonable standards for an agricultural district, we would
recommend that the action for approval be subject to special conditions.
Commissioners didn't have any objections to the construction of the
accessory building proposed. Commissioner Oswald stated there was no
difference between a 5,000 sq. ft. house or 5,000 sq. ft. accessory
building.
Motion made by Thoreson, seconded by Peltier to recommend approval of
request of Thomas Brown, 16614 Fenway Ave., to construct a 54' X 105'
accessory building for personal storage or livestock only subject to the
following special conditions.
1. No commercial use of any accessory structures on site will be
permitted.
2. No part of the accessory structure be permitted in the flood plain.
3. The size of the structure shall not exceed the square footage
requested in the application.
4. The structure not be permitted in any drainage easements on site.
5. The old horse barn and metal shed identified on the site plan shall be
removed prior to construction of the newly proposed building.
P.C. Minutes - May 22, 1991
Page 3
b. The required building permits be secured prior to construction of the
proposed building.
7. Said building must meet all structural standards for accessory
buildings accommodating the uses proposed.
B. Property owner shall provide access to the City at reasonable times
for inspections to ensure conformance with this special use permit.
9. Failure to comply with this special use permit shall be grounds for
revocation of same.
All aye, motion passed.
LEGAL NOTICE ON LAND USE LAWSUIT
The Planning Commission was made aware that the City's insurance company
has requested that we put all public officials on notice that the City is
being sued by David and Carol Schumann, as are several members of the City
Council and staff. In light of the fact that the lawsuit involves land
use issues, we feel it appropriate to caution the Planning Commission not
to discuss this case or land use issues with David and Carol Schumann,
their attorney, or others having a personal or business relationship with
the Schumann's. The only exception would be in a case where the City's
attorney or insurance representative is present. It should be noted that
Planning Commission representatives may have personal liability regarding
lawsuits of this nature, therefore it is imperative to follow the
recommendations of the City's insurance company and legal staff. Copies
of the notice from the City's insurance company were forwarded to the City
Council, Ordinance Violations Committee, and all members of the City
staff.
Commissioners thanked the clerk's office for sending out the packets
earlier than in previous months.
Motion made by Barnes, second by Peltier to adjourn at 7:38PM.
All aye, motion passed.
Carole LaBelle, Secretary
Hugo Planning Commission