Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988.12.28 PC MinutesIs MINUTES OF THE HUGO PLANNING COMMISSION December 28, 1988 The regular meeting was called to order by Chairman Senkler at 7:00PM. PRESENT: Thoreson, Henry, Jesinski, Barnes, Senkler ABSENT: Sullivan Motion made by Jesinski, seconded by Henry to approve the minutes of November 22, 1988 as amended. All aye, motion passed REZONING REQUEST - HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT Chairman Senkler requested Administrator Huber review this application with the planning commission. Mr. Huber stated that Heritage Development of Minnesota, on behalf of Vern Peloquin, Mary Christianson, and Philip Greenwaldt, have made application to the City of Hugo for the rezoning of three parcels of land to Single Family Urban. It is the intent of Heritage Development to assemble approximately 47 acres for residential development in an area southwest of Oneka Lake and east of Geneva Ave. on Oneka Lake Blvd. The sites in question are currently zoned SFE and Conservancy. The developers are desirous of zoning the entire parcel SFU for residential development purposes. Parcel A abutts SFU zones to the east and south, Parcel B abutts SFU zones on the west and north, and Parcel C abutts SFU zones on the west. The developers understand that if the sites are improved to accommodate single family residential dwellings, they will need to extend utilities and conform with the city's subdivision regulations at the time of plat review. The proposed sites are within the urban service area of the City of Hugo. In that part of the project area located within a floodplain zone B, we would want to clarify that approving the rezoning of property does not necessarily imply that the city will allow subdivision of all of the tracts in question to 10,400 sq. ft. lots. The rezoning in question appears to be consistent with the comprehensive plan and abutts on other districts zoned for single family urban. Mr. Dennis Johnston representing Heritage Development was present and stated that they realize all of the property will not be subdivided into homesites, but they do expect to have several lots on the south side of Oneka Lake Blvd. Chairman Senkler requested comments from the general public. Mr. Ron Cressman from the Oneka Lake Watershed Association was concerned with the possibility of standing water near Oneka Lake and creating additional flooding in the north area of the subdivision. Mr. Senkler informed Mr. Cressman that this was a subdivision issue and would be dealt with at the time of subdivision. Mr. Joe Taylor from Hubbard Broadcasting questioned whether there could possibly be any tall structures to impede the reception at their satellite stations north of the proposed subdivision. He was told that the maximum building height in the SFU zone is 35' which should not have any effect on their equipment. Chairman Senkler closed the public hearing. Commissioner Jesinski stated he saw no objection to the rezoning at this time but may have some reservations at the time of subdivision review. 1 Motion made by Senkler, seconded by Barnes to recommend approval of the rezoning request of Heritage Development to rezone three parcels of land (A, B, and C) on survey provided from Conservancy or SFE to the SFU zone. Described as follows: Parcel A: The west 1/3 of the south 1/2 of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter Section 17, T31, R21, Washington County, MN. Parcel B: That part of the west 1/2 of the east 2/3 of the northeast 1/4 of the northeast 1/4 of Section 20, T31W, R21W, Washington County, MN lying osutherly of the centerline of Qneka Lake Blvd. Parcel C: The east 1/3 of the south 1/2 of the southeast 1/4 of the southeast 1/4 of Section 17, T31, R21, Washington County, MN and that part of the north 596 ft. of the east 1/3 of the northeast quarter of the northeast 1/4 of Section 20, T31, R21, Washington County, MN lying north of Oneka Lake Blvd. All aye, motion passed. SPECIAL USE PERMIT - J. DOTTE Chairman Senkler requested that Administrator Huber review this application with the planning commission. Mr. Huber stated that James and Robert Dotte have made application to the City of Hugo for a special use permit to allow for the removal of black dirt for landscaping purposes and create two ponding areas for waterfowl on a 20 acre tract of land. The property in question is located at the northeast corner of Fenway Ave. and 165th St. and consists of two parcels identified as Parcels A and B of the enclosed site plan. The property is currently zoned agricultural and Mr. Dotte has been removing black dirt from the area in question for some time without the proper permits. Mr. Dotte states on his enclosed site plan that approximately 18" to 24" of black dirt will be removed from the ponding areas identified. Once all black dirt is removed the areas will be seeded for erosion control and wildlife habitat. Mr. Dotte also notes that following the black dirt removal and seeding it is his ultimate intent to construct single family residential structures on the sites in question. The property adjacent to the site is zoned agricultural and conservancy. If the planning commission recommends approval of this special use permit we would suggest that said approval be subject to special conditions. Chairman Senkler opened the hearing for public comments. Residents were concerned with the area becoming more of an eyesore than it is already, more standing water encroaching on their property, the storage of heavy equipment on site, and the additional traffic on 165th St. Mr. Bob Dotte stated they intend to take a total of 18" to 24" from the ponding areas including soil already removed from the area. Dotte's stated they would haul approximately 10 to 15 loads per day maximum and estimated that the dirt would be mined within a two year period. They would limit on site storage to one caterpillar. Their neighbor, however, is storing some equipment on their property that would be removed. Jim Dotte stated that the ponding area on the north is not as close to the property line as indicated on the drawing. He also stated they are willing to work with the Rice Creek Watershed and DNR to comply with their recommendations. Mr. Dotte stated that the city inspector is welcome on site at any time to assure permit compliance. Jim Dotte felt they will retain more surface water on site after the excavation than they are currently. 2 Chairman Senkler questioned whether this SUP for mining of black dirt would allow other activities permitted by a mining permit, such as bituminous manufacturing. Administrator Huber assured the commission that this permit specifically allows for the removal of black dirt only. Several planning commissioners felt that a two year permit would eliminate the forum for residents to be heard, should there be a problem with the operation and members felt the city should be able to give area residents some assurance that the applicants would comply with all conditions of the permit if granted. Motion made by Barnes, seconded by Henry to recommend approval of the Special Use Permit application for James and Bob Dotte to remove black dirt and create duck ponds on their property described as All that part of the southwest 1/4 of the northwest 1/4 of Section 8, T31N, R21W lying north of the following described line: commencing at the northwest corner of said 1y4 1/4; thence south along the west line of said 1/4 1/4 for a distance of 417.42 ft. to the point of beginning of the line to be described thence east at right angles to said west line, to the east line of said 1/4 1/4 and there terminating except the west 616.13 ft thereof/ and also all that part of the said southwest 1/4 1/4 lying south of the following described line; Commencing at the northwest corner of said 1/4 1/4; thence south along the west line of said 1/4 1/4 for a distance of 417.42 ft. to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence east at right angles to said west line to the east line of said 1/4 1/4 and there terminating except the west 820.45 ft. thereof. Subject to the following special conditions: 1. Review and securing of any required permits from the RCWD. 2. Review of this site plan by the Minnesota Dept. of Natural Resources. 3. No dumping or stockpiling of construction materials or other landscape materials will be permitted on site with the exception of the stockpiling of black dirt removed from the ponding area. 4. Removal of soils may only be permitted within the ponding areas identified on site plan. 5. No soil materials shall be removed within 50' of the property lines of the site in question. 6. Soil materials removed from the site shall be limited to 18" to 24" of black dirt as indicated on the site plan. 7. The area to be mined must be improved as a wildlife pond with the seeding of the ponding areas to be done annually. B. All access driveways to the site must be installed and maintained complying with the city's driveway permitting process and culverts must be installed where required. 9. All spring roadway restrictions must be adhered to with regard to activities taking place on the site. 10. The property owner shall be responsible for all illegal dumping on site and all illegally dumped materials must be removed and disposed of in an approved sanitary landfill. 11. This permit shall be issued for a period of one year beginning January 1, 1989 and extending through December 31, 1989. 12. At the expiration of this permit all seeding shall be accomplished and the site shall be left in a safe and acceptable condition. City code enforcement officer shall be permitted access t o the site in question to assure compliance with this permit. 13. All nuisances on site are to be abated pursuant to Chapter 200 of the city code. 3 ~ 14. Gates shall be provided at all accesses to the site and "no trespassing" marked signs shall be installed adjacent to all roadways. 15. Submittal of topographic maps of the site shall be provided to city prior to resumption of activities on site. 16. A financial deposit in the form of a letter of credit or certified check in the amount of $2,000 may be required if the applicants fail to comply with the conditions of this permit and fail to do the seeding of the ponding areas and proper maintenance of the site. 17. The property lines on the site must be identified by the applicants to assure proper setbacks are met if required by the city code enforcement officer. 18. All on site activities permitted as ex result of this activity shall not cause the altering of any watercourse, ditch, or approved drainage system unless authorized by the Rice Creek Watershed District. 19. No structures, signs, or lighting shall be placed on the site without first securing the required permits from the City of Hugo. 20. The operation of heavy equipment on site shall be done between the hours of 7:00AM and 7:00PM, Monday through Saturdays. 21. Inspections of the activities on site may be conducted by the city twice annually. 22. No activities will be permitted on site other than those specifically identified in this special use permit. 23. Any violation of the terms or conditions of this special use permit shall be grounds for immediate termination as per city ordinance. Members voting AYE: Thoreson, Henry, Jesinski, Barnes Members voting NAY: Senk1er Motion passed. Administrator Huber informed the Dotte's that this permit will give them the opportunity to prove their performance and they may apply for an amended SUP next year if they wish to continue the operation. REZONING REQUEST - MARGARET DOERRER Administrator Huber reviewed the application with the planning commission at the request of Chairman Senkler. Mr. Huber stated that Margaret and Nancy Doerrer have made application to the City of Hugo for the rezoning of a 20 acre tract of land from conservancy to agricultural. The property in question is located south of 185th St. approximately 1/2 mile west of Highway 61. The property abutts an industrial zone at it's east and south borders and abutts on conservancy zones on the north and west. Ms. Doerrer indicates that the ultimate intent is for the parcel in question to be subdivided into two ten acre tracts for future development. If the planning commission deems this request appropriate for the area and the rezoning request in question is recommended, it should be pointed out to the applicant that the rezoning does not necessarily constitute an approval of the subdivision. To properly subdivide the property in question an application for subdivision must be submitted and all of the provisions of our ordinance must be complied with. There was no one from the general public to comment. Ms. Doerrer understands that the subdivision of the property is another process which she will begin after approval of the rezoning. 4 Motion made by Thoreson, seconded by Senkler to recommend approval of the request of Margaret and Nancy Doerrer to rezone 20 acres from Conservancy to agricultural. Legally described as the west 725.0 ft. of the north 1201.65 ft. of the northeast 1/4 of the southwest 1/4 of Section 8, T31N, R21W, according to the United States Government survey thereof, Washington County, Minnesota All aye, motion passed. MINOR SUBDIVISION - DON VALENTO Chairman Senkler requested Administrator Huber review the application with the planning commission. Mr. Huber stated that Mr. Don and Janet Valenta have made application for the subdivision of a 42 acre tract of land located north of County Road 8 between Elmcrest Ave. and Everton Ave. in the City of Hugo. The property in question is located in the south half of Section 18, T31N, R21W, Washington County, Minnesota. The Hugo Planning Commission held a public hearing on this request November 22, 1988 at which time this matter was tabled pending the submittal of additional information regarding the location of Everton Ave. Mr. Valenta has submitted a revised preliminary survey identifying three tracts of land which shows the relationship of Everton Ave. to Tracts B and C of the proposed survey. Mr. Dave Torgersom of Milner Carley indicates that when they surveyed the exact location of the road, it shows that Everton Ave., as it currently exists, abutts on both tracts B and C of the proposed survey giving Mr. Valenta public roadway access to both tracts. At the previous meeting Mr. Valenta stated that he would have the 16' X 26' shed removed from Tract A which is located on the easement line of a proposeddriveway. It should be noted that the northern property line of Tract A is the center line of the easement which eliminates the north half of the easement in question from the survey. If the planning commission now feels that the information provided is satisfactory and they wish to recommend approval of this subdivision to the city council we would recommend that it be subject to special conditions. Mr. Valenta stated that in view of the fact that the survey indicates he has road access to parcel C he would like to eliminate the proposed easement between Parcel A on the north border and the residual lot. Mr. Valenta stated he will dedicate the 33' easement for roadway purposes as requested in the special conditions. Area residents indicated their concern that they have a survey indicating that Everton Ave. is completely on the Peltier property. Administrator Huber informed the residents that if at any time the survey provided by Mr. Valenta is proven to be incorrect, the subdivision approval granted could be negated. Residents felt the planning commission was arbitrarily choosing which survey they felt was correct. Commissioner Barnes informed the public that there is no conclusive proof that there is a conflict in the two surveys. Mr. Huber provided a copy of the survey done by Milner Carley to Leroy Peltier who will have it compared to his survey done by Hult and Assoc. to determine if there is a discrepancy in the location of Everton Ave. as traveled. Motion made by Jesinski, seconded by Barnes to recommend approval of the subdivision request of Don and Janet Valenta to subdivide 61.82,acres into 3 lots and one residual lot subject to the following special conditions. 5 1. The prelimnary survey be submitted to the city council within 90 days of the commission's recommendation and the revised survey incorporate the recommendations of the staff, Rice Creek Watershed District, and other governmental agencies. 2. The preliminary survey will not be submitted to the council until all legal, engineering, and staff recommendations have been incorporated into the survey. 3. All fees relating to the subdivision shall be paid by the applicant including the cost of recording documents with Washington County. 4. Developer pay fee in lieu of parkland dedication at the time of final survey approval. 5. A drainage plan including holding ponds and ditches must be approved by the watershed district and maintained by the property owner with the method of maintenance to be reviewed by the city engineer. 6. Mailbox locations shall be approved by the United States Postal Service. 7. Developer shall install one tree per lot of a minimal size within the subdivision development as per city regulations. 8. Approved driveways or drainageways, must include the installation of a minimum 15" diameter, corrugated metal culvert acceptable to the city if required by the city building inspector. 9. The developer shall secure Rice Creek Watershed district approval of their on site drainage plan prior to approval of the final survey by the city council. 10. Percolation tests must be completed on each of the buildable lots and must be submitted to the city for review prior to final survey approval. 11. Lot lines within the subdivision must be identified to determine proper building setbacks if required by the building inspector. 12. The 16' X 26' shed located on the north border of Tract A be removed prior to the stamping of any deeds for conveyance of Tract A. 13. Mr. Valento shall deed to the City of Hugo the easterly 33' of Tracts B and C and the westerly 33' of Tract A and the residual lot north of Tract A for right-of-way purposes. 14. The Rice Creek Watershed District shall establish the proper building elevations for residential construction in Tracts B and C of this survey. 15. The primary access to all sites identified on this survey shall be directly from a public roadway. All aye, motion passed. Mr. Valento agreed to be placed on the city council agenda January 17, 1989 to give Mr. Peltier time to gather his information regarding the roadway location. Mr. Huber informed the planning commission that any suggestions for changes in the zoning ordinance should be submitted as soon as possible. Chairman Senkler enthusiastically volunteered for the position on the Board of Zoning Adjustments. Chairman Senkler and commissioners wished Tom Jesinski good luck in his new position as councilman and thanked him for his time and contributions to the planning commission. Motion made by Senkler, seconeded by Jesinski to adjourn at 9:20PM. Carole LaBelle, Secretary Hugo Planning Commission 6