HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989.11.21 PC MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR HUGO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, November 21, 1989
The regular meeting was called to order by Chairman Senkler at 7:02PM.
PRESENT: Mezzano, Henry, Thoreson, Barnes, Senkler, Administrative Intern
Stu Schmeling, Carole LaBelle
ABSENT: Oswald
Motion made by Senkler, seconded by Mezzano to appprove the minutes of
October 25, 1989 as amended.
All aye, motion passed.
Chairman Senkler requested that Administrative Intern Schmeling review
this application with the planning commission. Mr. Schmeling stated that
Mr' Fred Suess has applied to the City of Hugo to rezone 5725 165th St.
from Industrial to Agricultural for the purposes of obtaining a mortgage.
The property is ten acres in size and is generally located west of Highway
61 and south of 165th St. Said tract is legally described as the east 443
ft. of the west 1168 ft. of the north 984 ft. of the northeast 1/4 of the
southwest 1/4 of Section 8, T31N, R21W. The property is adjacent to an
agriculture zone on the west and Industrial zones on the east and south.
Chairman Senkler requested comments from the general public. No one
commented other than the applicant. Mr. Suess informed the commission
that he needs to rezone for financing purposes.
Commissioner Henry felt that decreasing the industrial zone along Highway
61 was contrary to what was discussed in regard to the comprehensive plan.
Other commissioners felt that this area was not suitable for industrial
particularly since there is an existing house on the property.
Motion made by Thoreson, seconded by Barnes to recommend approval of the
request by Fred Suess to rezoned approximately 10 acres from industrial to
agricultural. Legal description as follows: The east 443 ft. of the west
1168 ft. of the north 984 ft. of the northeast 1/4 of the southwest 1/4 of
Section 8, T31N, R21W.
All aye, motion passed.
Administrative Intern Schmeling reviewed this application with the
planning commission. He stated that Mr. Howard Nicholson and Mr. Harlee
Anderson have applied to the City of Hugo for a minor subdivision and
waiver of formal subdivision requirements to subdivide a 16.9 acre tract
of land into 3 lots of at least 5 acres each. The property is zoned RR2
(5 acre minimum) and is generally located south of 125th St. and east of
Fiona Rd. The property is legally described as follows; That part of the
iorth 770' of the northwest 1/4 of the southwest 1/4, Section 32, T31N,
R21W, Washington County, lying west of the east 500' thereof and lying
easterly of the centerline of Fiona Rd.
P.C. Minutes 11-21-89 1
No. subject to easement in favor of the City of Hugo for 125th St. No.
over that part of the north 33' of the northwest 1/4 of the southwest 1/4
zf said section, lying easterly of the center line of Fiona Rd. No.
If the planning commission chooses to recommend approval of this request
we would suggest it be subject to special conditions.
Chairman Senkler requested comments from the general public. No one
commented other than the applicant. Mr. Nicholson stated that the
building which exists on proposed lot J-2 meets the setback requirements
as the lots are proposed. He also informed the commission that there is
access to lot J-1 from 125th St. as it exists, and there is enough
property in the easement to create a cul-de-sac at the east end of 125th
St. Mr. Nicholson stated he would provide the city council with a survey
which identifies the building on Lot J-2 and proposed building sites on
the other lots. The main concern expressed by the commission was that
125th St. by surfaced to the satisfaction of the city engineer and
extended and improved to allow for turning around at the end of the
street.
Motion made by Barnes, seconded by Henry to recommend approval of the
request of Howard Nicholson and Harlee Anderson to subdivide 16.9 acres
(legal description as stated above) into three lots each being at least 5
acres in size subject to the following special conditions.
1. The preliminary 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. 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.
3' Proposed driveways or drainage areas within the development must
include installation of a minimum 15" diameter corrugated metal
culvert in a manner acceptable to the city.
4. No building permits shall be issued until the survey has been approved
and recorded with Washington County.
5. Securing the required permits from the watershed district, Department
of Natural Resources, and Army Corps of Engineers is required prior to
final survey approval.
6. All fees relating to this subdivision shall be paid by the applicant
including the cost of recording documents with Washington County.
7. Percolation tests for each buildable site must be submitted to the
city prior to final survey approval.
8. Dedication of required parkland or payment of fee in lieu of parkland
dedication shall be paid to the city prior to final plat approval.
9. All property owners shall be responsible for maintenance of drainage
areas within easement on their property.
10. Legal descriptions of all parcels to be subdivided should be included.
11. Convey 33 ft. easement to the City of Hugo for 125th St. right of way.
12. 125th St. be extended to serve proposed lot 3-1 at the developers
expense with surface materials to be determined by the city engineer.
13. Applicant provide the city council with a survey indentifying the
existing building on Lot J-2 to assure compliance with setback
requirements.
All aye, motion passed.
P.C. Minutes 11-21-89 2
Idministrative Inter Schmeling reviewed this request with the planning
commission. He stated that Mr. Dan Santanni, 1019 W. Sherren St.,
Roseville, has applied to the City of Hugo for an amended Special Use
Permit to construct a 50' X 81' accessory storage building instead of the
originally proposed 54' X 40' accessory storage building and requests the
waiver of conditions 1, 5, 6, 7 of the previous special use permit
approved on 10-6-89 by the city council. This tract is located north of
125th St. and east of Goodview Ave. (aka 7124 125th St.). The parcel is
zoned agriculture and is 80 acres in size. The property is legally
described as the east 1/2 of the northeast 1/4, Section 33, T31N, R21W,
Washington County. The city staff sees no problem with the larger
building but would question the desirability of eliminating the special
conditions of the previous permit.
Chairman Senkler requested comments from the public. Mr. Santanni stated
that he felt conditions 1, 5, 6, 7 were unreasonable and an infringement
of his constitutional rights. Mrs. Santanni was present and informed the
commission that her husband has a hearing problem and that contributes to
his confusion and misunderstanding of the issues. Mr. Santanni stated he
would welcome any representative from the City of Hugo at anytime to his
accessory building but does not feel the condition mandating it is
necessary. A majority of the commission members concurred that requiring
a building permit on an agricultural building was unnecessary if the
building is used solely for agricultural purposes. Administrator Huber
attended the meeting briefly and informed the commission that the building
zermit condition could be eliminated if the use is solely for farming
purposes. Several members also agreed that most farm operations do store
machinery outside and to forbid Mr. Santanni from doing so would be
unreasonable.
After a lengthy discussion and in a motion by Henry, seconded by Barnes
the commission recommended approval of the amended special use permit
request of Dan Santanni to construct a 50' X 81' accessory storage
building for storing his crops, grains, and farm machinery subject to the
conditions of his original permit with the following revisions:
1. Shall be deleted
5. If the owner initiates any action to subdivide all or a portion of the
80 acre site described, he shall be required to post a $3,000 letter
of credit with the City, assuring that a residential structure will be
constructed on the site where the proposed building will exist. Said
construction will take place within three (3) years of the submitted
letter of creditor the deposit forfieted.
6. No exterior storage of equipment or materials other than for farming
purposes shall be permitted on site.
7. Representatives of the City be allowed access to the site at
reasonable times to assure compliance with this permit.
Members voting Aye: Mezzano, Henry, Thoreson, Barnes
Members voting Nay: Senkler
Motion passed.
P.C. Minutes 11-21-89 3
\dministrative Intern Schmeling reviewed this request with the planning
commission. Mr. Schmeling stated that on behalf of Wil Harris
Investments, Inc. the city has received an application for a special use
permit by DLW, Inc. of Lino Lakes to operate a non -alcohol teenage night
club at 17255 Forest Blvd. No., Hugo Minnesota. In reviewing the request
the city has been dealing with Mr. Murray Wright and Mr. Dave Doris. The
property in question is currently zoned RB on the west and agricultural on
the east' The building is currently the home of Willy's 61 Club. It is
the intent of the applicants and owners to use the east 70' of the
building for the teenage night club, while the west 90' will continue to
be used as a bar. In our initial review of this request with Mr. Doris
and Mr. Wright, we emphasized our concern regarding the operation of a
non -alcohol teenage night club in the same building, and at the same time,
that the bar is being operated. We also pointed out our concern regarding
parking and proper traffic control at the site in question. Based on the
rough site plan provided it would appear that the property in question
involves parcels 2320 in section 5, 2430 in section 4, and the west 235'
of parcel 2220 in section 4 all in the City of Hugo, Washington County,
Minnesota. It would also appear from the city's section maps that Mr.
Harris may own more property than what is shown on the site plan.
Administrative intern Stu Schmeling met with the applicants on several
occasions to discuss the deficiencies in their site plan in an effort to
identify in more detail how the site will accomodate the patrons and
customer parking that will be generated by this type of activity. In
reviewing the application the staff noted the following.
1. The applicants did not provide a survey clearly identifying the
dimensions and description of the property in question.
2. The precise legal description of the parcel identified on the site
plan was not provided.
3. Although the site plan indicates that signs will be installed, there
is no indication what the signs will look like, nor is there any
indication of the setback distances.
4. A method of snow removal or snow storage on site was not identified.
5. No reference was made to the method of refuse removal or location of
refuse containers on site.
6. The angular parking identified north of the building and south of the
building are in the opposite direction of the flow of traffic
identified as entrances and exits on the site plan.
7. The south fire door of the building opens into the exit driveway.
8. One way exit out of the parking lot south of the building indicates
proposed exit onto Highway 61 (currently no exit onto Highway 61
exists at the south property line on site).
9. The distance between angular parking shown in the parking lot is only
twenty feet and a minimum of 24 feet is recommended.
10. Existing entrances and exists from the building do not meet city
building code and fire codes as they currently exist.
P.C. Minutes 11-21-89 4
Based on the information in the application provided, it would appear that
]LW, Inc. is requesting this special use permit and will be responsible
`or the operation of this facility. In checking with the Secretary of
State's office, information on file there indicates that DLW, Inc., has
been in existence since 1975 under the name of Mr. Kenneth Albrecht,
located in Hastings, Minnesota. This information is not consistent with
the application that indicates that DLW, Inc. is located in Lino Lakes,
and the principal individuals involved are as indicated in the enclosed
narrative.
Because of the conflicting uses proposed and existing in this building
with regard to alcohol consumption, we feel it is essential to identify
areas of responsibility with regard to applicants, owners, and operators
of this facility. The current operator of Willy's 61 Club is one
individual, while the owner is Wil Harris Investments, Inc., DLW, Inc. is
supposedly the applicant and Mr. Murray Wright and Dave Doris are
purported to be the managers. The property is in two different zoning
districts and site plan information provided by the applicants is
minimal. It should also be kept in mind that the special use permit runs
with the land and Mr. Harris will have to sign the special use permit and
agree to all special conditions attached thereto. Although a sample lease
was provided by Mr. Dave Doris, it was not signed nor was any other type
of formal agreement provided indicating that DLW, Inc. will be operating
in this building.
If the planning commission feels that the uses proposed are compatible
with the area and consistent with the city's comprehensive plan, we would
suggest that any recommendation for approval of this special use permit be
subject to special conditions.
Mr. Murray Wright and Dave Doris were present to answer any questions.
They stated that they have not as yet registered their corporation with
the Secretary of State and that they intended to do so when their
application was approved. They will change the name on the appliction to
one of the individuals involved in the proposed corporation. Mr. Wright
stated that the area will be well policed, enforce strict rules, no
smoking or drinking will be allowed, no sitting in cars in the parking
lot, patrons must park their vehicles and enter the club, and they will
provide a parking lot monitor during hours of operation (8 until
midnight). Applicants stated that they are willing to take any measures
necessary to avoid problems with the club. Mr. Wright informed the
commission that their lease agreement was not signed on the advice of
their attorney, until they have approval from the city to operate the teen
club. Mr. Doris stated that they have a lot of money invested in the
venture and plan to provide a respectable place for area kids to spend
time. The applicants stated that they had the support of the local school
districts, but later clarified that they had only heard through the
grapevine that the school districts were in favor of the concept. Mr.
Doris informed the commission that he could provide the names of clubs he
is familiar with that operate the same type of business.
Commission members all agreed that the teen club was a good idea in
concept and needed, but were skeptical that liquor and non liquor
establishments could operate without incident from the same building.
Commissioner Barnes felt that outdoor activities may encourage or
facilitate teen drinking and create a loitering problem in the area
because of all the open space.
P.C. Minutes 11-21-89 5
Members entertained the possibility of visiting one of the teen clubs
mentioned and would like the names of the law enforcement agencies
policing these clubs. Mr. Doris informed the members that he will provide
the name of a club to visit. Commissioner Mezzano requested the
applicants provide the city with examples of what they consider a good and
bad club of this type and questioned whether the law enforcement agency in
Hugo is equipped to deal with this type of situation. Commissioners
stated they were not as concerned with the technical issues involved in
the site plan as they can more readily altered to comply with City
regulations.
Because of the lack of information Chairman Senkler requested permission
from the applicants to table this issue until the December 27th meeting.
The applicants agreed and stated that they would contact city hall to
advise us of their intention to pursue or withdraw their request.
Motion made by Senkler, seconded by Henry to table the request of Murrary
Wright and Dave Doris until the meeting of 12-27-89.
All aye, motion passed.
Motion made by Barnes, seconded by Henry to adjourn at 10:13PM.
All aye, motion passed.
Carole LaBelle, Secretary
Augo Planning Commisson
P.C. Minutes 11-21-89 6