HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988.05.25 PC MinutesThe meeting was called to order by Chairman Senkler at 7:00PM.
PRESENT: Henry, Jesinski, Barnes, Sonnenfeld, Senkler, Adm. Huber,
Carole LaBelle
Motion made by Jesinski, seconded by Henry to approve the minutes of April
27, 1988 as amended.
All aye, motion passed'
SUP FOR HOME OCCUPATION (M. PERRAULT
Chairman Senkler requested the city administrator review the application
with the planning commission. Mr. Huber stated that the public hearing
had been scheduled for this evening to consider the application of Mr'
Mike Perrault for a special use permit and variance involving a home
occupation. The property in question is zoned agricultural, and is
approximately 1'16 acres in size. The site is generally identified as
17803 Henna Avenue North, and is located in the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of
Section 3, T31N, R21W, Washington County, Minnesota. The home occupation
issue involves only a request to store band equipment in the proposed
storage building, and use his home telephone for answering questions
involving his entertainment activities. The variance requested would
allow Mr. Perrault to construct his storage building within 8' of the
north property line (20' required), and within 27' of the road
right-of-way (40' required). The Hugo City Council did grant a similar
variance request to Mr. Perrault in 1983 allowing the 3 -car garage to be
constructed within 27' of the road right-of-way (see enclosed mjnutes).
Mr. Perrault has assured the city, in his narrative letter, that all
activities on site will be limited to those requested in his application.
With regard to Mr. Perrault's variance request, he states that because of
the location of the existing, personal workshop, it would be very
difficult to attach the storage building in an alternate location without
cutting down some trees and locating the storage building farther from the
road than is maintainable and usable for the purposes intended. It should
be noted that the existing personal workshop identified on the site plan
is currently located closer to the property line than required by
ordinance. We would suggest, however, that Mr. Perrault consider locating
the proposed storage building no closer to the property line than the
existing personal workshop. If the Planning Commission recommends
approval of the home occupation, we would recommend that said approval be
subject to special conditions.
Mr. Perreault stated he has an office in Roseville for his entertainment
business and only the band equipment would be stored at his home with an
occassional phone call from potential clients. Mr. Perreault stated that
his property had been surveyed and the proposed building location staked
by the contractor to assure the setbacks requested would be correct. The
distance was measured from the existing center line of the road. The
building would be similar in appearance to the home and would not be a
pole barn. Mr. Perreault stated that he has two drainfields located in
the northeast corner and southeast corner of his lot which prohibits him
from locating the storage building behind the home. Mr. Perreault noted
that there are currently three rows of pine trees along the north property
line. Two rows of trees would have to be removed but one would remain.
.Planning Commission May 25, 1988
Page 2
No comments were made from the general public and the hearing was closed.
Mr. Henry and Mr. Sonnenfeld felt that there was not sufficient reason to
locate the building to within 27' of the roadway and 8' from the north
property line. They felt additional information should be provided as to
exact location of the drainfields before approval. Other commissioners
stated that because of lot size, the flat area of land, location of
drainfields, and the existing variance to the front yard setback was
sufficient reason for allowing the additional variance.
Motion made by Senkler, seconded by Barnes to recommend approval of the
special use permit for a home occupation to store band equipment and
variance allowing a 27' front yard setback and an 8' north side yard
setback for Mike Perreault, 17803 Henna Ave. subject to the following
special conditions.
1. Compliance with the site plan and request as referenced in the
applicant's narrative.
2. The use does not involve electrical or mechanical equipment that would
change the fire rating of the building or the fire district in which
the building is located.
3. The use does not cause a measurable increase in any of the utilities.
4. The use does not create noise, dust, vibrations, smell, smoke, glare,
electrical interference, fire hazard, or any other hazard or nuisance
to any greater or more frequent extent than that usually experienced
in an average residential occupancy in the area in question under
normal circumstances.
5. The use does not create visible or audible interference in radio or
television receivers.
6. The use does not create greater vehicular/pedestrian traffic than is
normal for the area in which it is located'
7. The use does not display, either inside or outside the dwelling,
materials, goods, supplies, or equipment related to the home
occupation.
S. The use is continous, in contract to occasional use, such as garage
sales, auctions, or temporary stands for the sale or display of
merchandise.
9. The use shall not involve advertising signs on the premises or other
on-site advertising which calls attention to the fact that the
dwelling is being used for business purposes.
10. That the home occupation is an accessory use of the dwelling that is
so located and conducted that the average person, under normal
circumstances, would not be aware of its existence.
11. Prior to review by the city council applicant shall draw the site plan
to scale including all dimensions, location of two drainfields, and
determine the road right-of-way.
Members voting aye: Jesinski, Barnes, Senkler.
Members voting nay: Henry, Sonnenfeld.
Motion passed.
Administrator Huber reviewed the application for the planning commission
and public, identifying the property on the zoning map. Mr. Huber stated
that a public hearing was scheduled for this evening to consider the
application of Ms. Cheryl Lametti, on behalf of L-6 Properties, for an
amended special use permit on their property located at 16028 Forest
Boulevard North, Hugo, Minnesota. The property in question is zoned
industrial, and contains approximately 22.5 acres located in the BE 1/4 of
Section 8, T31N, R21W, lying west of the right-of-way of the Northern
Pacific Railroad. The special use permit request is to allow continu,
Planning Commission May 25, 1988 Paqe
use of two temporary trailers, and to attach wooden structures, to be used
for office facilities for an extended 5 -year period. The applicants have
indicated that if they construct a permanent office complex on the site,
the old buildings will be removed. The applicants are also requesting
authorization to upgrade their existing entrance to Highway 61 by
bituminous patching of the abandoned railroad crossing, and allowance of
an additional access from Highway 61 as noted on the site plan. Several
years ago, the City Council approved a special use permit allowing use of
the temporary buildings in question for a specified period of time which
expires this year. The applicants are requesting an extension of their
special use permit to allow continued use of their property as noted
herein. The buildings in question are located in the southeast corner of
the property and just north of the existing access from 61 to site in
question. If the Planning Commission recommends approval of this amended
permit request allowing for a 5 -year extension of the permit, we would
suggest that said approval by subject to special conditions,
Ms. LaMetti stated that with an additional driveway they could allow for
trucks hauling to enter without conflicting automobile traffic exiting.
She also felt that their company would be in a better position to
construct their proposed office building within 2 to 3 years. Ms. LaMetti
understands that approval for an additional access would be subject to
Burlington Northern and MNDOT approval.
Chairman Senkler requested comments from the public. Mr. George
Indyciewcz stated that he also feels the existing slope of the roadway at
the railroad crossing is dangerous and should be reduced.
Planning Commissioners felt that an additional 5 year period to allow for
the construction of a permanent office building would not be
objectionable, however, an additional access from Highway 61 could create
a problem. The proposed driveway is within several hundred feet of the
existing drive and commissioners could not see any advantage in have 2
accesses. Installation of a new driveway would be allowed if the existing
one was closed. Improvements to the existing driveway would also be
allowed.
Motion made by Barnes, seconded by Senkler to recommend approval of the
amended special use permit for L-6 Properties to continue the use of
temporary office space and allow for installation of a new driveway if the
existing drive was closed subject to the following special conditions.
1. That the special use permit shall expire 5 years from approval by the
City Council.,
2. That any accesses to the site in question be subject to the approval
of the Burlington Northern Railroad and Minnesota Department of
Transporation.
3. Any and all conditions of this special use permit must be met within
90 days unless otherwise stipulated in this permit. If these
conditions are not met, the permit will be null and void.
4. All driveways built over ditches or drainage areas must include the
installation of 15" diameter corrugated metal culverts installed in a
manner acceptable to the city's building inspector.
5. No significant deviations from the approved site plan shall be
permitted unless reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council
followed by an amended special use permit'
6. The site must be policed and maintained on a regular basis with regard
to on-site nuisances.
Planning Commission May 25, 1988 Page I.
7. All fees related to the review and issuance of this permit shall be
paid by the applicant including the cost of recording this permit with
Washington County.
8. Any exterior lighting for activities proposed on this site must be
approved by the city building inspector.
9. Any exterior storage on site related to the activities of this special
use permit must be confined to a secured area with proper screening.
10. No fences, structures, or vegetation may be placed in on-site
easements.
11. The activities on site will not cause the altering of any watercourse,
ditch, or drainage system.
12. All activities on site shall be limited to those permitted in that
zoning district.
13. Property owner shall permit access to the referenced site for periodic
inspection by the city code enforcement officer to assure conformance
with this special use permit.
14. Any change in the railroad bed shall comply with future development of
use of the railroad bed.
15. After construction of the office building the temporary office
structures shall be removed by applicant.
16. There shall be only one access from Highway 61.
All aye, motion passed.
Chairman Senkler requested that Mr. Huber review the application with the
commission and residents. Mr. Huber stated that a public hearing was
scheduled for this evening to hear the request of Mr. Byron Anderson to
subdivide a 49 acre plus tract of land into five lots of approximately
9.99 acres per lot. The property in question is zoned agricultural and
has road frontage on Jeffrey Avenue and 152nd Street. The site is located
in the N 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of Section 14, T31N, R21W, Washington County,
Minnesota. The applicant intends to serve the site in question with
utilities by the use of on-site septic systems and private water wells.
The surface water drainage plan has been submitted to the Rice Creek
Watershed District for their review and approval. The variance requests
submitted in conjunction with this subdivision involves the approval of
9.99 acre tracts and authorization to construct a single family dwelling
within 100' of the water's edge on Lot 3 (200' is required). If the Hugo
Planning Commission recommends approval of this preliminary plat, we would
suggest that said approval be subject to special conditions.
Mr' Jeff Hughes, Wild Wings Game Farm was present and stated that in view
of the fact that Minnesota statutes prohibit the discharge of firearms
within 500' of a dwelling, he felt prospective buyers should be made aware
that there is a game farm operating across the road.
Mr. SenkIer advised Mr. Hughes that he should try to negotiate an
alternate site for the home on lot 5 to meet the required distance for
shooting guns. Mr. Huber spoke to Steve Woods from Rice Creek Watershed
and they have no objection to the project. Mr. Huber stated that a bounce
level will be required to determine the water elevation. Mr. Anderson
stated that perc tests have been done for all lots. He also informed the
commission that he is not removing any material from the lots and has no
plan for excavating.
Planning Commission May 25, 1988 Page 5
Motion made by Henry, seconded by Senkler to recommend approval of the
major subdivision by formal plat for Byron Anderson to subdivide 49 acres
into 5 lots and allow a variance on lot 3 to build a single family
dwelling to within 100' of the wetland subject to the following
conditions.
1. The preliminary plat must be submitted to the City Council for
approval within 120 days of the Planning Commission's recommendation
or the plat must be returned to the Planning Commission for review.
2. The applicant shall secure approvals from the Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources and Rice Creek Watershed District prior to final
plat approval.
3. All deeds and abstracts used for the conveyance of lots identified in
this plat must reflect those lot located in the floodplain zone -B.
4. All property lines on site must be identified by the applicant to
assure proper building setbacks when buildings are to be constructed
if required by the building inspector.
5. No commercial or industrial use of the property in question shall be
permitted.
6. Driveways or drainage areas must include the installation of minimum
15" diameter corrugated metal culverts in a manner acceptable to the
city.
7. No building permits shall be issued to lots identified on this plat
unless building locations and construction is compliance with the
city's floodplain and shoreland regulations.
S. All fees relating to this subdivision approval shall be paid by the
applicant including the cost of recording documents with the
Washington County Recorder's Office'
9. Any driveway permits requiring access to highways or county roads may
not be issued until permits secured from Washington County or the
Minnesota Department of Transportation.
10. The use of this property shall not be in violation of any existing
restrictive covenants.
11. On-site activities permitted as a result of this subdivision shall not
cause the altering on any watercourse, ditch, or drainage system in
this area.
12. Percolation tests are to be submitted to the city prior to final plat
approval.
13. All parkland dedication fees are to be paid by the applicant prior to
recording of this plat.
14. Issuance of deed approvals or building permits shall be subject to
compliance of the above listed conditions.
15. No landlocked parcel of land shall be created by the approval of this
subdivision.
16. Any improvements to the roadways serving this property shall be made
at the property owner's expense.
17' The applicant shall submit an approved design for access to Lot 3 over
the wetlands area prior to final plat approval.
18. All easements identified on site shall be accessible to the
appropriate governmental agencies by public roadway.
All aye, motion passed.
Planning Commission May 25, 1988 Page 6
Chairman Senkler asked Mr. Huber to review the application with
commissioners and the public. Mr. Huber stated that a public hearing was
scheduled for this evening to consider the petition of Mrs. Irene Arcand
and Keystone Builders to rezone a 160 acre tract of land from agrilcutural
W RR2 (minimum 5 acres). The property in question is generally described
as the E 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of Section 33, T31N, R21W and the western 1/2
of the SW 1/4 of Section 34, T31N, R21W. According to the attorney for
the applicant, it is their intent to construct 32 residential units on the
site in question consisting of custom homes exceeding $150,000 in value.
Earlier this year, the applicants submitted a request to rezone the same
tract of land to RR1 (3 acre minimum), and said request was subsequently
denied by the City Council. The property in question abuts on an RR2
zoning district to the north and is in close proximity to 700 acres of RR2
property located to the east and northeast. The request in question
appears to be consistent with the city's comprehensive plan, land use
section, policy 2B (page 32). RR2 zoning districts allow for single
family residences and urban agriculture as permitted uses. The question
before the Planning Commission was 1) is the request in question
consistent with the comprehensive plan, 21 consistent with other zoning
districts in the area and 31 is the type of land use appropriate for the
site in question. Property owners were concerned that this development
would decrease the integrity of the area by changing the rural character.
They also felt that the property was primarily unsuitable for building.
Residents felt this would set a precedent for additional subdivisions in
the area. Kathy Scobie stated that in 1985 the Metro Council requested
that Hugo maintain a 10 acre minimum throughout the city. Mr. Senkler
advised those concerned that the issue is one of land use change and if
approved the detail of how this property would be subdivided and developed
would be handled through the formal platting process.
Motion made by Senkler, seconded by Barnes to recommend approval of the
subdivision request for Irene Arcand/Keystone Builders for the rezoning of
160 acres from Agriculture to RR2 (5 acre minimum).
All aye, motion passed.
Motion made by Senkler, seconded by Sonnenfeld to adjourn at 10:04.
All aye, motion passed
Carole LaBelle, Secretary
Hugo Planning Commission