Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974.02.27 PC Minutes MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE HUGO PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 27, 1974 The meeting was called to order at 8:05 P.M. by Chairman Larry Ehret. Members present were: Spitzer, Norden, Ehret, Leroux, Johnson, Peloquin and Rosenquist. Also present were Irene Leroux, City Council Member, and Bill Schwab, City Planning Consultant. Motion made by Spitzer, seconded by Johnson, to dispense with the reading of the minutes of February 12, 1974. Motion carried. Motion made by Spitzer, seconded by Norden, to approve minutes of February 12, 1974 meeting. Motion carried. WHITE BEAR ROD & GUN CLUB Mr. Ehret read letter from ,the Rice Creek Watershed stating they approved the permit application for the White Bear Rod and Gun Olub with the suggestion that annual reclamation of the lead shot be incorporated into the final design. Mr. Ehret read letter received from the City Attorney regarding his legal opinion regarding appropriate applicable ordinances regarding the application of a Special Use Permit by the White Bear Rod and Gun Club. Ordinances covered were Oneka Ordinance No. 1, Old Oneka Township Ordinance No. 6;00, and Old Oneka Township Ordinance Number 7.00. He also directed attention to Minnesota Statutes Section 609.74 entitled "Public Nuisance". Mr. Ehret read letter submitted by the White Bear Rod and Gun Club which stated: 1. It was not the intentions of their present Board of Directors to make the facilities of the club available for rental purposes. 2. It is the intention of the club to light a maximum of two fields. 3. The Board would propose the fencing discussed at the previous meeting. Mr. Spitzer stated that according to the position noted on the map, that were requested by Mr. Perron at the last meeting of February 12, if you fire the gun directly east and west, the sound level would be 3 Db above the measured level of the eastern level. Mr. Ehret read letter from the City Planning Coordinator in which he stated in his opinion that the entire operation as proposed can be made subject to .a special use permit. He also stated he felt that the general land use is ia conformance with our Compre- hensive Land Use Plan. Mr. Perron stated at the last meeting that he discussed the sound level test results done by the International Acoustical Testing Laboratories, Inc, with the Pollution Oolutrul Agency and balky states the test results did meet their requirements. sir. Perron was asked by provide us with a letter from the PCA reaffirming their position but Mr. Perron stated the PCA did not want to approve something that they did not do the testing themselves. Mr. Spitzer asked Mr. Schwab why he recommended fencing on the North boundry. Mr. Schwab said because this is the direction the shooting will be done. He was mainly worried about shooting done after dark. It was the ctnsensus of the Planning Commission that the North boundry would almost be impossible to fence tht warning signs should be posted. Mr. Spitzer asked Mr. Perron if it would cause a hardship if hours were restricted from 10:00 A.M. to 10s00 P.M. or one hour after sunset, which ever came first. Mr. Perron stated it would be a hardship during the winter months. They normally close at 9:00 during the week and at 6:00 P.M. on weekends. He also stated that lighting shows way beyond the shot fallout area. Mr. Johnson stated he believed there should be warning signs on the north line or 100 feet beyond the fallout line. Mr. Rosenquist asked if theta was a possibility of building a fence inside the boundry line but outside the fallout area. Mr. Perron stated the area is the same from about 15' past the traps to the north boundry. The floor was given to Mr. Crawford, an attorney from West St. Paul, representing interested property .ewnerk ice. the area. Mr. Crawford stated these property owners were concerned with their own property and the Planning Commission should make practical considerations to: nuisance, noise, traffic, lights, and what effect a gun club would have ea the value of their homes and land that is not yet developed. Hi also stated the retrieval of the lead shot is a serious question. Mr. Crawford said in his opinion their was no provision in the Ordinance #1 for a special use permit or variance. He stated this is a residential district and a Gun Club is definitely a nuisance. _3_ Dr. Chapman stated we do not have a gun control ordinance to protect the town. Mr. Wailer explained how a fence could be installed in the bog. Irene Leroux asked how many years the White Bear Rod and Gum Club had been in existence. Mr. Perron said from 1938 or 39. How many times have people wandered onto your property. They have never seen it happen. Mrs. Leroux said the White Bear Police Department never had complaints against the White Bear Rod and Gun Club except for one instance with a rock band. Mr. Perron stated this is the reason they have docideCinotc,ct' to rent the club out. Motion made by Spitzer, seconded by Norden, recommending the approval of the Special Use Permit with the following conditions: 1. The east and west property lines should be fenced with a woven, non-climbable type fence and the south property line could be fenced with the same type or a decorative wood fence such as a wood rail type. 2. That all requirements imposed by the Rice Creek watershed District be made a part of this special use permit. 3. Shooting hours be limited to starting not before 10:00 a.m. and stopping not later than 10:00 P.M. 4. The use of the club limump be limited to members and guests for activities that are normally associated with a gun club. 5. The driveway and parking areas shall be black-topped. 6. Prior to any issuance of building permits, the gun club shall obtain a driveway access permit from the Washington County Engineer. 7. At any time should the standards of the Pollution Control Agency as they relate to noise be exceeded the gun club shall have ninety (90) days from the date they are notified they exceed these standards to prepare and submit to the City Council and Planning Commission plans for the abatement of noise so that it is brought within the required standards. Once these plans are approved by the City Council, the gun club will have six (6) months to start construction in accordance with approved abate- ment plans and all construction in accordance with the abatement plans shall be completed one (1) year from the date they are apprOYAI4 by the City Council. 8. Prior to the installation of any lighting facilities, the gum club shall submit and have approved by the Hugo Planning Commis- sion a detailed lighting plan. • -4- 9. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the club house facilities, the gun club shall submit to the Building Inspector a set of construction drawings for the on-site sewer disposal system that does meet the minimum requirements of the Minnesota Department of Health. 10. This special use permit shall be reviewed by the City Planning Commission on an annual basis to insure ,that all conditions of the permit and being complied with. IY during this review, the Planning Commission feels additional conditions should be added to the special use permit they may call a public hearing to amend the permit. 11. Should any of the conditions of the special use permit be vio- lated the City Council may suspend the permit after a public heati�ig has been held by the Planning Commission and a report from them has been received by the City Oouncil. 12. warning signs indicating that shooting is taking place on the property shall be posted every three hundred (300) feet along the east and west property lines and all fences and such signs shall be properly maintained. Warning signs shall be posted every 150' within 150' of the fallout area on the north boundry. The fences and warning signs shall be installed within one (1) year of the date this permit is issued. 13. Where there are particular difficulties and unnecessary hard- ships resulting from the application of the strict letter of the . conditions of the special use permit, an appeal may be made and a variance may be granted. Members fors Ehret, Johnson, Spitzer and Norden. Leroux and &osenquist voted no and Peloquin abstained. ZONING ORDINANCE Mr. Ehret read letter submitted from Carl Dale with his recommenda- tions for the new zoning map. Mr. Spitzer made acception to Mr. Dale's statement in Item #1 & 2 stating the Comprehensive Municipal Plan had not as yet been approved by the City Council. Mr. Norden recommended a 3 acre minimum lot size for the whole area. Mr. Ehret said the Metropolitan Council would not go along with this. Mr. Leroux said they needed a proposal they could sell to the people and give them something they could use. Motion made by Ehret, seconded by Spitzer, that the Planning Commission recommend a 10 acre minimum zone for agricultural. Members for: Spitzer, Ehret, Peloquin, Leroux Rosenquist � Johnson . Norden abstained for further stud. J _5_ Mr. Schwab stated that if we zone 10 & 3 that we should stress the point at the public hearing that this is the minimum size and there is not much possibility of rezoning to a lower zone. Meeting adjourned at 10:35 P.M. /1/12c24 Marie Jansen, Secretary HugoPlanning Commission