HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991.09.16 CC MinutesMINUTES FOR THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER_16, 1991
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Stoltzman at 7:00 PM.
PRESENT: Brunotte, Jesinski, McAllister, Miron, Stolt man
City Administrator, Ken Huber
City Engineer, Howard Kuusisto
City Clerk, Mary Ann Creager
Jesinski made motion, Brunotte seconded, to approve the minutes for the
City Council meeting of September ._., 1991, as amended.
All aye. Motion Carried.
Miron made motion, McAllister seconded, to approve the claims for
September 16, 1991 in the amount of $21,419.36.
All aye. Motion Carried.
COUNTS( ROAD J ROAD PROJECT
In 1987, the City Council authorized participation, by the City, with
White Bear Township and Ramsey County for the improvement of 120th Street,
from Highway 61 to a point approximately 112 mile to the east. In 1988,
the City entered entered into a Joint Powers Agreement with White Bear
Township to proceed with this project. Thip appropriate public hearings
were held, and the City set aside the financing for their share of the
project. The City's share of this project was to be approximately
$68,000, while the Township would be paying approximately $156,000, and
the balance coming from the Ramsey County federal aid urban account. To
avoid duplication of effort, and coordination of the project effort, the
City of Hugo appointed the engineering firm of Toltz, King, Duvall, and
Anderson as the engineer for this public improvement. This project has
moved along rather slowly because of the many agencies involved and the
requirements that need to be met. Mr. Bob Toddie of Tk::DA appeared before
the City Council to review the status of this project, and outline what
steps are now necessary to bring this project to a point where
construction can beqin.
Mir -on made motion, Jesinski seconded, to approve the plans for the County
Road J Project, and authorize Tolt" King, Duvall, and Anderson to proceed
with negotiations to obtain the required right-of-way needed to proceed
with the project.
All aye. Motion Carried.
AMBULANCE CONTRACT
The City of Hugo is in the last year of a 5 -year contract with the City of
White Bear Lake for ambulance service. As ,-equested by the City Council,
the City Administrator met with the White Rear Lake and Forest Lake
ambulance services, and prepared background information and a
recommendation for Council consideration. Fire Chief, Ron Istvanovich,
recommended that the City retain WBL_ for ambulance service. Jack: Lannon
and Dan Beyers from District Memorial Hospital were present to again
explain their service and answer any questions from the Council.
City Council meeting of September 1(u, 1991
Page ?
McAllister suggested that contracts be negotiated with baoth ambulance
providers, and then the Council could hold a public hearing and decide on
which provider they preferred. Mayor Stoltzman and Fran Miron indicated
their concern regarding the large service area that Forest LaF::e covers,
and that they might be spreading themselves "too thin". After a lengthy
discussion, the following motion was made:
Jesinski made motion, McAllister seconded, to award the ambulance service
contract to District Memorial Hospital for a two-year period, and
authorize the Mayor to sign said contract on behalf of the City of Hugo.
Approval is based on the Administrator's recommendation, as follows:
1. There shall be no ambulance service subsidy from the City's general
fund.
2. Customer billing shall be handled by the ambulance service provider.
3. The City shall utilize a single provider service.
4. The Citv Administrator and Finance Director shall be authorized to
negotiate the terms of a multi-year contract with the provider
.selected.
VOTING AYE: Brunotte, Jesinsk.i, McAllister
VOTING NAY: Miron and Stoltzman
Motion Carried.
PARE•:: USE POLICY
Miron made motion, McAllister seconded, to table this matter until the
City Council meeting of October 7, 1991.
All aye. Motion Carried.
ORDINANCE VIOLATIONS COMPLAINT (MUNGER)_
As per Council direction, this matter has been placed on the agenda for
formal discussion by the City Council. Mr. Art Munger appeared before the
City Council on September 3, 1991, and issued a formal complaint regarding
the activities of one of his neighbors. The City Building Inspector had
forwarded a letter to Mr. Jim Dotte on June 19, 1991, pointing out that a
building had been placed on his property at 16-1th Street and Fenway, and
that the appropriate City permits had not been issued. Mr. Dotte informed
the City that the house mover was to secure the appropriate permits before
the building was to be moved onto the site. Mr. Dotte has secured
building permit forms, and has indicated he will be mak-ing application for
a building permit, which will be followed by an inspection of the
building. Mr. Munger feels that the City has not been aggressive enough
in pursuing this issue. He stated his major concern was with SUP'
compliance rather than the house being moved on to the site.
Miron made motion, McAllister seconded, requesting Code Enforcement
Officer, John Benson, to review the conditions of the previously issued
Special Use Permit, and report his findings to the City Council as to
whether or not these conditions have been met.
Motion and second withdrawn.
City Council meeting of September 16, 1991
Page ._ti
Miron made motion, McAllister
Ordinance Violations Committee
Code Enforcement Officer.
All aye. Motion Carried.
MINOR SUBDIVISION (ANDERSON)
seconded, to refer this matter to the
using the report from the John Denson, the
Mr. Robert H. Anderson of 141217 Fondant Avenue North has made application
to the City of Hugo for a minor subdivision, and waiver of the formal
platting requirements, for a 1/2 acre tract of land located on the
southwest corner of 141st Street and Fondant Avenue. The property is
generally described as part of Lot 38, Auditor's Plat #7, Parcel No.
35135-0040 (aka as 14127 Fondant Avenue). The Hugo Planning Commission
reviewed this matter at their June 26, 1991 meeting, and recommended
approval subject to special conditions, and compliance with stipulations
of the certificate of survey.
McAllister made motion, Stolt man seconded, to approve Certificate of
Survey #9-16-91, and waiver of the formal platting requirements, for Mr.
Robert Anderson of 14127 Fondant Avenue, to subdivide a .5 acres (Parcels
35135-0040, 35135-8850, and 35135-875=) into two parcels. The property is
described as part of Lot 38, Auditor's Plat #7, Parcel #.35135-0040.
Approval is subject to the following special conditions:
1. All conditions of survey approval must be met prior to the stamping of
any deeds for recording by the city clergy; unless otherwise permitted
by council action.
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. All lots must be properly staked.
3. Proposed driveways or drainage areas within the development must
include installation of a minimum 15" diameter corrugated metal
culvert where applicable.
4. No building permits shall be issued until the survey has been approved
and recorded with Washington County.
5. All fees relating to this subdivision shall be paid by the applicant
including the cost of recording documents with Washington County.
6. The lowest floor elevation of any structure in this Subdivision shall
be 2 feet above the 100 year flood elevation or 4 ft. above the high
ground water mark, whichever is greater.
7. All property owners shall be responsible for maintenance of drainage
areas on their property.
G. Developer shall comply with all requirements and restrictions
applicable to identified wetlands.
9. Developer agrees that lots to be abutting on cul. -de -sac or termination
turnarounds of streets shall be provided with adequate off-street
parking such that the city could prohibit on street parking if deemed
necessary for safety or maintenance purposes.
10. No significant deviations from the approved preliminary Survey shall
be permitted unless reviewed by the planning commission prior to
council approval.
City Council meeting of September 16, 1991
Paqe 4
11. The developer shall permit access to the referenced site for periodic
inspections to assure conformance with the special conditions.
12. Legal descriptions of all parcels to be subdivided shall be provided.
All aye. Motion Carried.
FINAL PLAT (BIRCH TREE FONDS 3RD ADDITION)
Mr. James R. Merila of 8401 73rd Avenue North, Suite 631 Brooklyn Pari;,
Mn., has made application to the City of Hugo for final plat approval of
BIRCH TREE PONDS 3RD ADDITION. The property in question consists of 25.:
acres, and is to be subdivided into 15 single family residential lots and
one outlot. The property is zoned SFU, and is located south of 138th
Street and west of Freeland Avenue. The property is legally described as
Outlot A of Birch Tree Fonds 2nd Addition. The final proposal is
consistent with the preliminary plat for Birch Tree Ponds previously
approved by the Hugo City Council and Planning Commission. City Engineer,
Howard k;uusisto, stated that he had reviewed the submitted documents, and
had no problem with the request.
Miron made motion. Jesinsk:i seconded, to approve the final plat of BIRCH
TREE PONDS 3RD ADDITION, as submitted by Mr. James R. Merila, to subdivide
25.3 acres into 15 single family residential lots and one outlot. The
property is legally described as Outlot A of BIRCH TREE FONDS 2ND
ADDITION. Approval is subject to the following special conditions:
1. The final plat must be recorded with Washington County within 60 days
of plat approval or said approval shall be null and void.
2. Final plat approval shall be contingent upon compliance with grading,
storm water drainage, and utility plan approval by the city engineer.
3. All applicable conditions of plat approval must be met prior to the
recording of the final plat at the Washington County Recorder's
Office.
4. The property lines identified on the plat must be identified by the
applicants to assure proper setbacks when buildings are to be
constructed, if required by the building inspector.
5. No building or other permits shall be issued until the final plat has
been recorded with Washington County, and Utility/road improvements
are substantially completed (see developer's agreement).
b. The required permits from the Rice Creel:: Watershed District and DNR
must be approved and submitted to the City prior to the signing of the
final plat.
7. All fees relating to this subdivision shall be paid by the applicant
including the cost of recording documents with Washington County.
8. Payment of the required fee in lieu of park land dedication shall be
made prior to signing of the final plat.
9. Installation of required roadways, including streets, curb and gutter,
storm water control, and utilities shall be installed at the
developers expense as per the developers agreement and approved plans.
10. Plat approval shall be contingent upon full compliance with the
developer's agreement.
11. No improvements, landscaping, or grading shall be permitted in defined
drainage areas without the express written authorization of the City
and the appropriate watershed district.
City Council meeting of September 16, 1991
Page
12. All property owners shall be held responsible for maintenance of
drainage areas within the easements on their property and deed
restrictions shall limit activities permitted in these drainage areas.
13. Developer shall deposit with the City $5,000 to cover legal,
engineering, administrative, and other costs related to this
development.
14. Developer agrees that lots abutting on cul-de-sacs or termination
turnarounds of streets shall be provided with adequate off street
parking, such that the City could prohibit on street parking if deemed
necessary for safety or maintenance purposes.
15. Developer shall provide a financial guarantee, in the amount of
$110,556, to assure the required public improvements will be
installed, as per the Developer's Agreement. Said guarantee to be
provided before recording of the plat.
16. Developer shall be responsible for street signing, seal coating,
identifying mailbox locations, providing as -built drawings, and
installation of trees and culverts within the development, as
required.
17. Any exterior lighting or advertising activities on site must be
approved by the City.
18. Drainage and erosion control methods proposed for this development
shall be complete prior to the City accepting the roadway or public
improvements serving this development.
19. The developer shall comply with the permit from the DNR establishing a
ditch profile with elevations and provisions for future maintenance of
the drainage area.
20. The developer is to provide a westerly roadway extension at the time
of final plat approval of Phase 4. Future plat phasing must be
consistent with the approved preliminary plat of February 5, 1990.
21. The lowest floor elevation of any structure in the plat shall be a
minimum of 2' above the 100 -year high water mark, or 4' above the high
ground water mark, whichever is greater, or as specified on the
preliminary plat.
All aye. Motion Carried.
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT (BIRCH TREE PONDS 3RD ADDITION)_
The proposed Development Agreement has been accepted by Mr. Jim Merila,
and assures the proper development and improvements in conjunction with
Birch Tree Ponds 3rd Addition.
McAllister made motion, Stotlzman seconded, to approve the Development
Agreement for BIRCH TREE PONDS 3RD ADDITION, between the City of Hugo and
James R. Merila, and authorize the Mayor to sign said Agreement on behalf
of the City of Hugo. Approval is subject to Mr. Merila providing the
required letter of credit (Subd. 6) and payment of all fees.
All aye. Motion Carried.
SPECIAL USE PERMIT - PUD (WEGLEITNER/KENCO)
Pursuant to Chapter 320-5, Subd. K* of the municipal code, Martin and
Sandra Wegleitner have made application to the City of Hugo for a Special
City Council meeting of September 16, 1991
Page 6
Use Permit (SUP) to construct a Planned Unit Development (PUD) east of
Geneva Avenue and north and south of 145th Street. The property in
questions is currently zoned SFE, and the proposal is for 120 residential
lots. The City Council reviewed this request at their August 5, 1991
regular meeting, at which time said matter was tabled until seven areas of
concern were addressed. The developers now feel that the areas of Council
concern have been addressed and reviewed by the City Engineer. The
property in questions is described as the SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section
20, T31N, R21W, Washington County, MN., and the East 1,321' of the N 1/2
of Govt Lot 2, Section 20, T31N, R21W, Washington County, MN. The site
contains approximately 60.27 acres, more or less. The developers are
approaching their proposal from a density stand point, taking into account
the Council's previous concerns regarding the number of dwelling units
that would be allowed if the property were rezoned to SFU. The density
approach being used is predicated on the position that duplexes are
allowed in SFE zoning districts by SUP, and that if density is a real
concern to the Council, two dwelling units per acre should be an
acceptable proposal. The City Engineer was present to review his report
with -the City Council, and answer any questions regarding this project.
Mayor Stolt man indicated concerns with the ditches leaving the ponding
areas. Engineer k::uusisto stated that those ditches would be walked as
soon as the ground was dry enough, and a majority of the concerns raised
by the Council would be addressed in the Development Agreement. Two
letters were read by the Mayor, from residents, indicating no objection tr
the project. Ms. Floreen Meyer spoke against the project.
McAllister made motion, Stolt man seconded, to approve the request of
Martin and Sandra Wegleitner for a Special Use Permit to construct a
Planned Unit Development for 120 residential lots. The property is
legally described as the SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 20, and the East
1,321' of the N 1/2 of Govt Lot 2, Section 20, all in T31N, R21W,
Washington County, MN. Approval is subject to the following special
conditions:
1. Any and all conditions of the Special Use Permit must be met within
180 days of Council approval, unless otherwise stipulated in this
permit or the Developer's Agreement. If these conditions are not met.,
the permit will be null and void.
2. Platting of Phase 1 of the plat must be completed within 180 days of
SUP approval, in a manner consistent with the approved site plan, or
said approval shall be null and void.
3. Any commercial or industrial use of this property, not specifically
permitted in the zoning district by the City Zoning Ordinance, shall
be strictly prohibited.
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 building inspector.
?. No advertising signs shall be permitted in this Zoninq district unles,
specifically identified in the development proposal approved by the
City Council.
6. This proposal shall not move to the final platting staqe until the
appropriate permits are secured from the Rice Creet=_ Watershed District
and the DNR where applicable.
City Council meeting of September 16, 1.991
Page 7
7. No significant deviations from the approved proposed site plan shall
be permitted.
8. The site must be policed and maintained on a regular basis with regard
to litter and on-site nuisances during project construction.
9. Development on site shall be limited to 1210 residential lots and 120
dwelling units.
10. All fees relating to the review and issuance of this permit shall be
paid by the applicant including parkland dedication fee, sealcoating
fee, street signs, and other costs, as identified with the
administrative deposit.
11. All street lighting in the development shall be as per City policy.
1. All recreation areas and outlots shall be dedicated to, and maintained
by, the homeowners association to be established for this development.
13. Restrictive covenants shall be developed for this site identifying
minimum floor elevations, protection and maintenance of wetlands,
number and location of accessory buildings, exterior storage of
equipment and unlicensed motor vehicles, connection to municipal
utilities, and compliance with City ordinances.
14. No fences, structures, or vegetation, other than grass, may be placed
in on-site easements.
15. Activities on site may not cause the altering of any watercourse,
ditch, or drainage system, and must be consistent with the grading
plan.
16. Property owners shall permit access to the referenced site for
periodic inspections to assure conformance with this SUP.
17. The developers shall be required to enter into a formal Development
Agreement with the City, which shall incorporate the PUD requirements,
shall set timing requirements, and identify all phasing and
development issues, as well as providing the necessary financial
security, as per City Council policy.
18. All infrastructure improvements on site shall be constructed
consistent with the City's subdivision ordinance, the City engineer's
recommendations, and special conditions identified in this permit.
19. At least 15% of the total project size will be set aside for private
open space and recreational use. We would recommend, however, that
the developer make a payment in lieu of parkland dedication, as per
City policy or Chapter 320-5, SUbd. K 4A of the City's ordinance.
'��. All common areas within the development shall be placed under the
ownership of the home owner's association.
21. All utilities, including electricity and telecable, shall be installed
Underground, where possible.
?. If the City Council approves the concept of this SUP for a PUD, the
applicant shall notify the City Council and Planning Commission within
45 days of its intention to proceed with the total unit de-,relopment
plan (preliminary plat).
223. Soils and compaction tests to be prepared on each building -pad area,
and approved by the City Engineer.
Councilman Miron stated that he could not vote in favor of this motion
because of his concern with the lot size and the drainage issue.
VOTING AYE: Jesins4:i, McAllister, Stoltaman
VOTING NAY: Brunotte and Miron
Motion Carried.
City Council meeting of September 16, 1991
Palle 8
PRELIMINARY FLAT AP'P'ROVAL ( RICE LAKE MEADOWS)
The preliminary plat of Rice Lake Meadows was submitted contingent upon
previous approval of the PUD by the City Council. The preliminary plat is
consistent with the development plan, and approval would be subject to all
of the conditions of SUP approval, as well as conditions of plat
approval. The preliminary plat calls for an additional five lots to
accommodate the zero --lot line, twin home development; however, the total
of 120 planned units has not changed. The subdivision request includes
approval of the variances requested in the SUP, with the exception of the
side yard setback requirements of at least 10' for the 110 single family
residential lots, as previously recommended by the staff. The variances
would allow for 50' of road right-of-way for the new roads within the
subdivision development, minimum lot areas of 9000 square feet, and
minimum lot depth of 125'. The 120 unit density will be adhered to, and
the three outlots, as well as drainage areas, will be the responsibility
of the homeowner's association.
McAllister made motion, Jesinski seconded, to approve the preliminary plat
of RICE LAKE MEADOWS for Martin and Sandra Wegleitner, to subdivide
approximately 60.27 acres into 120 residential lots. Approval is subject
to the following special conditions:
1. Compliance with all special conditions of the PUD -SUP approval.
2. Interior roadways are approved at 50' wide; minimum lot depths
approved at 125', and minimum lot areas are approved at 9,000 square
feet, with the exception of the lots approved for the twin homes, as
identified on the approved preliminary plat.
3. The developer proceed with final plat approval of Phase 1 within 180
days of preliminary plat approval.
4. The restrictive covenants and homeowner's association documents be
submitted for City review prior to final plat approval.
5. Phasing of the subdivision development shall be consistent with the
drainage and grading plans, as approved by the City Engineer.
6. The appropriate fees are paid, and financial deposits made with the
City to assure conformance with all agreements.
7. Front yard setbacks shall be 35' adjacent to 50' street widths.
8. Utility easements for water and sewer shall be widened where possible,
as recommended by the City Engineer.
VOTING AYE: Jesinski, McAllister, Stolt man
VOTING NAY: Brunotte and Miron
Motion Carried.
INTERN EMPLOYMENT EXTENSION
The employment arrangement with Mr. Scott Holm, who is servinq as an
assistant to our Building Inspector, will expire at the end of this month.
Because of the current wort:: load and staffing needs, we are requesting
that this internship be extended through October 31, 1991.
Miron made motion, Jesinski seconded, to extend the employment arrangement
with Scott Holm through October 31, 1991.
All aye. Motion Carried.
City Council meeting of September 16, 1991
Page 9
DRIVEWAY PERMIT REQUEST (B. SCHROEDER)
Mr. Urian Schroeder of 3115 Johnson Street, Mpls., MN., has made
application to the City of Hugo for a driveway permit to allow him access
from his property in Grant Township to Isleton Avenue North in Round Lake
Addition. Normally, the City staff handles permits of this nature,
however, the unusual circumstances involving this request necessitate
Council direction. Earlier this year, Mr. Schroeder contacted the City,
and informed the staff that he owned a 45 acre tract of land south of
Round Lake Addition, and wanted to know if he could secure a driveway
permit to Isleton Avenue so that he could construct a home on his
property. Mr. Schroeder was told that a single access driveway permit
would probably be acceptable, but could not be issued until after the City
let its contract for the paving of Isleton Avenue. Isleton Avenue was
designed, and is being constructed to accommodate a 7 -lot subdivision. On
September b, 1991, Mr. Schroeder appeared at City Hall with his request
for a driveway permit, and said request and plan were inconsistent with
what -was originally discussed. The tract of land in question is only nine
acres in size, and reflects a road easement connected to the cul-de-sac at
Isleton Avenue North. Although Mr. Schroeder has assured us that it is
not his intent to subdivide the property, a nine acre lot has already been
approved by the Grant Township board, and the development agreement would
allow for the creation of three more residential lots adjacent to the road
easement. It has also been brought to our attention that there is a
development proposal, before the Grant Township Board, to create a 27 -lot
subdivision development with access to Ironwood Avenue in Grant Township,
and Isleton Avenue in the City of Hugo. City staff has informed the
Township that the roadway in Round Lake Addition was not designed to
accommodate the kind of traffic being proposed, and that we could not
recommend a road connection to Isleton Avenue North. Althouqh we would
have no objections to the granting of a driveway permit to serve a single
family residence on Parcel A, our concern is that we may be opening the
door to allow additional traffic to outlet on to Isleton Avenue. Grant
Township has agreed to provide language in the Development Agreement,
between the Township and Mr. Schroeder, and his partner, Glen Bjornson,
that indicates the City of Hugo would have to approve any road plan for
future development of the area.
Mr. Schroeder appeared before the Council, and stated that it this time,
any future development was questionable. Although there has been
speculation of the development of approximately 370 areas of south
Schroeder's property, all he was interested in was obtaining a driveway
for his future residence. There were a number of Hugo residents living,
or owning property, on Isleton Avenue in attendance at the meeting. There
was concern with the possibility of Isleton Avenue serving as an exit for
a large number of homes in Grant Township. The Council also was concerned
that if a driveway permit was issued to Mr. Schroeder, there would be
nothing Hugo could do to prevent connection of future development to
Isleton Avenue.
Miron made motion, McAllister seconded, directing the City staff to
process the Brian Schroeder driveway permit for a single family residence
noting that in no way does the processing of this permit endorse a road
City Council meeting of September 16, 1991
Page 10
easement. The Development Agreement between Brian Schroeder, Glen
Bjornson, and Carol Bjornson, and Grant Township be executed, and Grant
Township be notified of the City's concerns.
Miron made motion, McAllister seconded, to amend the previous motion that
no driveway permit be issued until City Attorney, Charles Johnson, has had
an opportunity to review this matter to determine if, in fact, we are not
acknowledging the 66' easement or jeopardizing the City's position
regarding the roadway questions.
McAllister stated that he was unwilling to compromise in this matter, and
wanted to review Grant Township's comprehensive plan as it relates to
their transportation plan for that area.
VOTE ON AMENDMENT:
VOTING AYE: Brunotte, Jesinsk.i, Miron, Stolt man
VOTING NAY: McAllister
Motion Carried.
VOTE ON ORIGINAL MOTION:
VOTING AYE: Brunotte, Jesinski, Miron, Stolt man
VOTING NAY: McAllister
Motion Carried.
LETTER REQUESTING SCHOOL HUS SIGNS
The City received a letter from Lisa Kees requesting School Bus Stop signs
along County Road 8A (140th Street) and Isleton Avenue.
Miron made motion, McAllister seconded, directing the City staff to
contact Washington County Public Works requesting that they look into the
signage of County Road 9A and Isleton Avenue.
MISCELLANEOUS
Miron made motion, Brr_rnotte seconded, to set a special meeting (executive
session) of Hugo City Council for Thursday, October .3, 1991, at 7:00 PM to
discuss the David Schumann litigation with the City's attorney, Jeff
Carson.
All aye. Motion Carried.
Councilman Miron received a card from a resident regarding early/late
operations at the gravel pit. Miron suggested that mining permit holders
be fined for violations of permit. The Planning Commission should
consider this option at renewal time.
Councilman Miron requester) City staff review Grant Township's dog
ordinance, and the City of Hugo's ordinance, as it relates to City
liability and compliance with changes in State law.
City Council meeting of September 16, 1991
Fuge 11
Shanna Larson, 16-year old resident of Hugo, admonished the Council for
what she considered to be "dirty politics". She was thanl::ed for
expressing her opinion.
Miron made motion, Hrunotte seconded, to adjourn at 10:55 FM.
All aye. Motion Carried.
Mary n Creager, C' ClerE;
Cit f Hugo