Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976.02.11 PC Minutes:a r � MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HUGO PLANNING COMMtISSION FEBRUARY 11, 1976 Public Hearing The public hearing regarding the request of Grace Development Co- mpany for rezoning of 91 acres at Foxhill Av. N and Egg Lake Road, from SFE to SFU, and plat approval for Valley View Terrace, Second Addition, opened at 7:10 PM by Chairman Spitzer. The Public Hearing notice was read. Present were Spitzer, Peloquin, Peltier and Ehret, Brian ,Amundson representing the City Engineers office, Charlie Johnson, City Attorney, and Dennis Welsch, representing the Washington County Planning Depart- ment. Marvin La Valle of the City Council, was also in attendance. William Meyer, of Suburban Engineering presented Grace Development's plans for Valley View Terrace, Second Addition. He explained that Grace Development'Company eventually plans to plat the entire parcel similiarly to the presently proposed Second Addition. There is a proposed total of 60 lots - 55 of which meet the 10,400 sq. feet minimum for SFU zoning, and would be serviced by sanitary sewer facilities, and five lots which would be one acre, SFE and would be serviced by on-site sewage systems. He noted that certain lots along Egg Lake Road would probably have drive- way restrictions on them; limiting construction to a manner in which a limited number of driveways would front onto Egg Lake Road. Drainage ditch would be improved at developer's expense, basements would be con- structed at least 1i feet above the 100 year flood plain, houses in area nearest drainage way would be split entry type -ground level slightly be- low basement level - some homes would be built by developer - some lots would be sold without homes on them. Amundson said it appeared that Lots 15-26,, Block 2 would require two to three feet of fill. Meyer said if they are built as walkouts, there would be no need for fill. Amundson said as many driveways along Egg Lake Road as possible should be eliminated. He also said the Eng- ineerls office would like additional soil borings in the roadways and estimation of costs regarding the ditch and indication of who would pay for this, and regarding financing, the ordinance requires an agreement would have to be made with the city for financing the improvements. Johnson said he is concerned with the public right of way border- ing the existing Valley View 1st Addition and the exception to the new plat. He said they will present problems if there are future road imp- rovements along Egg Lake Road. Regarding the exceptions, he feels that property should be attempted to be entered into the plat. It would be reasonable to re -plat the existing lots in Valley View 1st Addition, since there are no homes there, and brine them into conformance with the present plat. From a planning standpoint, he said, it is desireable to have the public utilities in the public right of way rather than on pri- vate easements. Also questioned cul de sacs on Foxhill Avenue North and Geneva Avenue North. If they are temporary, it is his recommendation that lots on the cul de sacs would not be buildable until the cul de sac Is eliminated. Regarding linear park, it would be appropriate to det- ermine what kind of walk -ways, etc., concerned with future maintenance of drainage ditch; what about downstream improvements; does the city want a drainage ditch as part of a park system? Regarding utilities, he felt that the developer and his engineer provide projected construction costs -2- and schedule of how it would be constructed. Meyer said estimate by Suburban Engineering for laying and exten- sion of sewer, extension of water, storm sewer and ditch improvement and street grading is 1238 000 for construction only adding contingencies would run $340,000 to J40o,000. These figures were based on constructing bituminous curb and gutter; if concrete was required, figures would have to be adjusted. Johnson said the access to County 8A is a concern of the County Engineer. If there are any alternative layouts, it would be desireable to rearrange the layout with less driveways coming onto 8A. The exist- ing Valley View lst Addition has existed for several years, and Johnson doubts the feasibility of developing such a large new addition; it might be more desireable to develop it in smaller stages instead of taking such a big step at once; too many more people making a large impact on the city at once, needing more services, etc. Dennis Welsch said they are substantially in accordance with the subdivision ordinance. He feels drainage way is not a significant park dedication and other approaches should be looked at. questioned on-site sewage systems for Lots 1-5, Block one. Stated Martin Ziebel's report shows soil mottling at 4' in that area. Meyer said results of soil borings tatken August 9, 1968, were on record at the County Planner's office. Welsch agreed with Engineer that sewer should be kept in ded- icated right of way but if sewer is extended to the second phase of this project it should be made certain that a non=descriptive meandering ease- ment should be maintained so that in due time sewer could be extended. Feels concrete curb and gutters should be utilized rather than bitumin- ous, and Rice Creek Watershed must give approval. Meyer made following comments: Grace Development would dedicate 17' making a total of 50' on existing Valley View Terrace; they are work- ing on obtaining an easement for additional right of way for the except- ion to the new plat. They have examined the idea of putting the sewer right of way along Egg lake Road but it is more destreable for that plat to place it where it can:-.be utilized better. 0n Egg Lake Road it would benefit others more than Grace Development and should become a public assessment. Meyer said if soil mottling is present and on-site sewage systems were not allowed, sanitary sewer could be extended to these lots if a proposed lift station was constructed to the south of Block 1. Spitzer asked Welsch to check with County Highway Department regard- ing driveways entering 8A from Valley View 1st Addition. Tschida said Grace Development is willing to commit itself to orderly phasing. Meyer said they would still like to ask for variance for bituminous Curb and gutter. Amundson said similiar types are being used now but don't know if they could be considered a permanent arrangement. Spitzer opened discussion to audience. Gerald Bramstedt, 6104 N. Egg Lake Road: Is is possible to recess so audience may get better look at map? Spitzer: Yes, we will recess for 10 minutes. Recessed at 8:10 PM. Reconvened at 8:22PM. Ed Waugh: 13863 N. Forest Blvd.: Is that the ditch that borders our property - will it increase the flaw of drainage? Meyer: Yes, it is the ditch; ponding areas in our development will help reduce the flowage but yes, there will still be an increase. If an easement can be obtained, the ditch size will be increased thru Mr. Waugh's property at Grace Development's expense. By deepening and widening the ditch, it will generally decrease the size of the flood plain. Nothing on the north side of 8A will be increased. -3- Bramstedt : If the sewer is not run down 8A what will happen in later years to the people on the south side of 8A that he is selling lots to. If only an 8" line is put in will they later be assessed to have the line increased? Meyer: The proposed line running along 138th Street will be a 15" line. It will eventually continue south to a proposed lift station. Cost of lots sold would include cost of sewer and water. Bramstedt: Where does the 15" sewer line end? Meyer: Presently at Geneva - could later be extended to Goodview. Every lot with the exception of Lots 1-5, Block 1, will have to be ser- viced by sewer before any houses can be built. Bramstedt : Is a 3 to 1 slope on a ditch moveable? Spitzer: Yes, it is. Meyer: The ditch will be about two fdet deep and will have a gen- eral slope to the property line. Joseph Monno, 5773 Egg Lake Road: Is the ditch you are referring to, the same ditch that runs across my south boundary? Spitzer; There are several ditches there and the ditch in question, Is further south. Marvin La Valle, 5297 145th Street: Do you plan any type of control structure? T" _9 Meyer: The water will be collected at Outlot A and Outlot B. 61? La Valle : Do you know the condition of the ditch to the west of Hwy. Meyer: The 36" culvert should be adequate to handle the flow. La Valle : I think that the additional water flow will flood the area west of Hwy. 61. Meyer: Our computations indicate they will not increase the flow of water there. Grace Development will have adequate ponding on their prop- erty. There was no additional comments and the hearing closed at 8:50PM. Meeting The meeting was called to order by Chairman Spitzer at 8:50PM. Members present were: Spitzer, Ehret, Peloquin and Peltier. Also attending were Dennis Welsch, representing the Washington County Planner's Office, Charlie Johnson, City Attorney, Brian Amundson, City Engineer's office and Marvin La Valle, City Council. Motion made by Peltier, seconded by Ehret, to approve the minutes of the January 14, 1976 meeting as sent out. Motion carried. Motion made by Peloquin, seconded by Peltier to approve the minutes of the special meeting of January 28, 19790 as sent out. Motion carried. Valley View Terrace Spitzer told Tschida that Chapter 290-8, Subdivision C, Paragraph 2, of the City's Ordinance, provides that no subdivider shall be permitted to start work on any other subdivision without special approval of the governing body if he has previously defaillted on work or commitments to perform physical improvements or satisfy requirements of a subdivision development. Spitzer said th?t there are a number of requirements that have not been fulfilled regarding the Bald Eagle Industrial Park, and the Planning Commission will require an opinion from the City Council that Grace Development is not in fact in default before further con- sidering this application. Tschida was told to obtain this opinion be- fore the March 10th meeting. The Planning Commission does not have on -4 - file, a plan for the remainder of the 91 acres not included in Valley View Second Addition. Before allowing a rezoning, we must know what the planned development for the entire parcel will be. (It was noted that the City Attorney, Engineer and Washington County Planner do have such copies on file.) Such a copy should be submitted to the Planning Commission post haste. Spitzer said there is a question regarding the access roads along South side of Egg Lake Road. The Washington County Planning Department is being requested to obtain a written recommendation from the Washington County Highway Department before we will proceed, and there is a question of soil borings in Block One. Mr. Ziebel doesn't feel they meet the re- quirements for SFE and Planning Commission recommends Tschida meet with Ziebel to work this out . Asked Tschida if he is prepared to make an escrow deposit of $400,000 if the plan is approved. Tschida was also told to oonisder that the City may Insist on concrete curb and gutter. Tschida said the location of the 15" line is very important regard- ing the staging of the program. Spitzer said the Planning Commission and City Council would meet soon to formulate a joint resolution re- garding this matter. Spitzer saiq- :they have not yet provided an alter- nate plan for the park program if the city doesn't accept the park plan. Tschida agreed to furnish. Peltier asked if 138th Street will ever be extended to Goodview and will the people living to the South of the drainage ditch be assessed to help pay for it? Meyer said it is a permanent cul de sac and there would be no assessment; the cost for enlarging will be borne by Grace Develop - m ent . Peltier inquired why Tschida hasn1t applied for variance for lots that aren't minimum lot size? Spitzer said if the plat is accepted, and there are undersized lots, these lots are automatically accepted. Tschida said that some of the lot sizes have been changed and now conform. He was told to bring his application up to date. Spitzer asked Meyer to estimate what the flaw rate hitting the cul- vert on Egg Lake Road would be and Meyer said it would not be increased over what the 100 year flood is. Peloquin feels Lots 1-5 are too low for on site sewage systems, should be serviced by Sanitary Sewer and feels the project is too large for our small ommmunity and should be programmed in small segments, over possibly, a ten year period. Ehret asked if Valley View 1st Addition could be replatted as part of Valley View 2nd Addition to get rid of some of the driveways. Tgchida said he had met with Schwab and felt they had worked out this problem satisfactorily. He feels an easement should fulftll their needs. Meyer said they have considered replatting but have not been able to find a destreable solution. Spitzer said the Planning Commission is extremely interested in the staging of the development, which will depend on the staging of the sewer, how financing will be handled, where the walk- outs will be built and is interested in recommendation regarding County road access from County Engineer. Motion made by Peltier, seconded by Peloquin, to table the matter until the March 10, 1976 meeting. All voted aye. Motion carried. Eugene Peltier Eugene Peltier presented necessary exhibits prior to hearing sched- uled for February 25th. Everything in order. Washington County Planning Department requested to have a report ready for hearing. Neil Peltier Neil Peltier appeared with engineerin report. Motion made by Peloquin, seconded by Gret, that the Planning -5 - Commission recommend to the City Council that Neil Peltier's site plan, as amended, for a 42 x 40 building for cold storage only, be approved subject to approval of the drainage plan by the City Engineer. Voting for: Spitzer, Peloquin, Peltier, and Ehret. Motion carried. Shepherd of Fields Mr. Peloquin brought in items requested at last meeting; proof of ownership, record of easement from Peloquin to Twin Pines Trailer Park for water drainage, and an up to date survey of property, showing storm sewer. Welsch commented that, in general, a church is a very suitable use for the area but further information is needed prior to the hearing. They will need to furnish a sketch showing demensions, and parking, land- scaping and paving. Spitzer informed them to have this information ready for the hearing on February 25th. Meetinx Scheduled A joint meeting between the Hugo City Council, the Hugo Planning Commission and Martin glebell, Washington County District Soil Conser- vationist is scheduled for Wednesday, February 25th following the pub- lic hearings. Secretary to inform clerk to close agenda to any other business. Motion made by Peloquin, seconded by Peltier, to adjourn at 10:40PM. Motion carried. Mary 7'an B ,boo cks Secretary Hugo Planning Commission