HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989.01.25 PC MinutesMINUTES OF THE HUGO PLANNING COMMISSION - January 25, 1989
The regular meeting of the Hugo Planning Commission was called to order by
Chairman Senkler at 7:00PM.
Mr. Bill Mezzano and Mr. Bob Oswald were welcomed as new planning
commissioners and administered the oath of office.
PRESENT: Mezzano, Thoreson, Oswald, Barnes, Senkler
ABSENr: Henry
Motion made by Senkler, seconded by Barnes to approve the minutes of
December 28, 1988. All aye, motion passed.
Motion made by Chairman Senkler, seconded by Thoreson to elect Debra
Barnes as vice chairman. All aye, motion passed.
Chairman Senkler requested Administrator Huber review this application
with the planning commission. Mr. Huber stated that Merila and Assoc., on
behalf of the Harstad Co. have made application to the City of Hugo for
the rezoning of a 53 acre tract of land from single family estate (SFE) to
single family urban (SFU) in the City of Hugo. The property in question
is located immmediately south of Hugo Meadows Subdivision and was platted
as Outlot C on the original Hugo Meadows Plat. It is the intent of the
developer to improve this property for single family development with the
extension of utilities and streets to serve the area. Notices of this
rezoning were published in the Forest Lake Times as required and mailed
notices sent as per city ordinance advising affected residents of the
public hearing scheduled for this evening. When the Harstad Companies
came before the city in 1.986 to rezone an 80 acre tract of land for
residential development, the planning commission felt that with the
drainage concerns and impact of this development on the area that the site
in question should be approved in phases rather than approved as one large
parcel. The Harstad Co. reduced the scope of their request to a 27 acre
tract consisting of 57 residential lots. The original preliminary plat
called for the dedication of a park off of Goodview Ave. to serve the
development. The lot development on the 53 acre tract in question would
be worked around a protected wetland within this area. Our preliminary
review indicates that the site can be served by municipal utilities and
the development of this area into single family residential lots appears
to be consistent with the city's comprehensive plan. We should point out,
however, that any approval of the rezoning is not a guarantee that a
subdivision approval will follow unless all conditions of the subdivision
ordinance are complied with. Soil conditions and drainage plans must be
acceptable for development of the area. The original plat of Hugo Meadows
was designed to provide road access for expansion to the area in question.
Mr. John Johnson with Merila and Assoc., represented the Harstad Company.
He stated that they are working with the Dept. of Natural Resources, Corp
of Engineers, and Rice Creek Watershed to address the drainage system
needed to service the development. Mr. Johnson stated they intend to
optimize the homesites in the development, lots would be approximately
14,000 sq. ft. in size and retain as many of the natural amenities as
possible.
1
P.C. Minutes - January 25, 1989
Chairman Senkler opened the public hearing for comment. Area residents
were concerned that the development would be left incomplete as the first
phase was. Area residents stated that promises were not kept such as
fencing around holding ponds, repair work on private yards after
installation of utilities. Also, the problem of blowing dust and dirt from
the construction area was at times unbearable.
Mr. Johnson and Administrator Huber concurred that they do not recall
promises of fencing. Mr. Johnson informed Louis Bailey that he would see
that the problem of finishing work on his yard would be taken care of.
Mr. Johnson also informed the residents that they attempted to seed the
ponding areas, but found it totally unsuccessful because of the drought.
Mr. Johnson stated that the Harstad Co. would be willing to participate in
cleaning of the ditch west of the developments to assure better handling
of stormwater. The developers will be importing approximately 30,000
yards of fill to the site.
Motion made by Senkler, seconded by Barnes to recommend approval of the
request of Harstad Companies to rezone a 53 acre tract of land from SFE to
SFU (Outlot C, Hugo Meadows). All aye, motion passed.
Administrator Huber reviewed this application with the planning commission
at the request of Chairman Senkler. Mr. Huber stated that on behalf of
the property owners identified on the application Heritage development of
Minnesota has made application to the City of Hugo for the subdivision of
a 47 acre tract of land zoned SFU into approximately 130 residential
lots. The property in question is located north of Oneka Lake Blvd. and
East of Geneva Ave. extended. A small portion of the site does extend
south of Oneka Lake Blvd. The rezoning of various parcels of this tract
was approved by both the planning commission and city council in the fall
of 1988. Part of the tract in question is located in floodplain zone B
and surface water drainage has been identified as one of the primary
concerns in this area. The applicants have submitted their preliminary
plan to the Rice Creek Watershed District for review and the district's
initial comments can be found on the enclosed correspondence. Also
enclosed you will find a report from city engineer Howard Kuusisto with
his response to this proposed development. The developers have indicated
that they will be platting this tract in phases and are requesting
variances from lot widths and sizes. This plat calls for several outlots
and an area in block 7 to accommodate the construction of twin homes.
Block 11 has been tentatively earmarked as the primary stormwater holding
area to serve this development. Although not required at this time, the
applicants have chosen to submit preliminary utility and grading plans for
your review.
The applicants have also indicated an interest in working with the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development in a pilot program that would
provide a number of smaller lots for the construction of homes in a
multitude of price ranges. The intent is to participate in a program that
would allow for smaller lot sizes and other cost saving improvements in
2
,P.C. Minutes - January 25, 1989
the plat, that would in turn, reduce the price of a home to first time
home buyers in the $65,000 to 70,000 price range. Because of the
uniqueness of this development proposal, staff review has been somewhat
difficult. On the surface, the concept seems to make a lot of sense and
is consistent with the city's comprehensive plan with regard to providing
for the diversified housing needs of the community. The staff does not
feel that it has adequate information at this stage to make a
recommendation to the commission, although, the developers would like some
sort of indication from the planning commission with regard to your
receptiveness to this proposal.
The staff feels that there are some additional needs and concerns that
should be addressed before planning commission approval.
1. If the intent of the developers is to improve this area in phases.
Said phasing should be indicated on the plan.
2. Block 11 of the plat have been earmarked for a stormwater collection
pond to save the development. The developers are also requesting that
this area be platted into 4 lots. We are concerned that this area
might not be conducive to residential development and by approving the
subdivision of this block we might be implying that it is an
acceptable residential area.
3. A number of the lots within the development are substandard in size.
Although this is not a critical concern it does deviate from our
subdivision ordinance and previous development practices. The reduced
lot size would be an acceptable approach from the staff's viewpoint if
it were tied to a program that would provide more affordable housing
to first time home buyers and younger couples.
4. The outlots on site should be more clearly identified as to there
purpose and how they will be improved and maintained.
5. We should make it clear that outlots C and D cannot be resubdivided
unless served by streets and utilities as per city policy.
6. The stormwater drainage plan needs to be more clearly identified. We
would question the desirability of locating the detention ponds within
the development north of Oneka Lake Blvd. (who maintains the ponds,
how do we control the activities that take place in the detention pond
areas).
7. With the exception of Lot 8, block 10, none of the lots in this
subdivision development should have direct driveway access to Oneka
Lake Blvd.
Because of the phasing of this development, preliminary plat approval
should be regarded as a general concept approval only. If this
preliminary plat is found to be acceptable by the planning commission, we
would recommend that it be subject to the typical plat conditions with
additional conditions added that reflect the staff and consulting
engineers concerns.
Mr. Dennis Johnston, project manager with Heritage Development informed
the planning commission that HUD won't be involved because of the flood
plain elevations in the development. After much consideration Heritage
Development has decided to withdraw their application for this project,
,
°
siting high costs for fill and drainage solutions as the principal
reasons. Mr' Johnston then formally withdrew his application for '
subdivision of the property identified as Oneka Lake Estate preliminary
plat.
Under the circumstances Chairman Senkler stated there was no need for
public comment.
Motion made by Barnes, seconded by Mezzano to adjourn at 8:21 PM.
All aye, motion passed.
Carole LaBelle, Secretary
Hugo Planning Commission
11