HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988.06.06 CC MinutesMINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS FOR THE C I T Y COUNCIL_ MEETING OF JUNE 6, 1.928
The regUiar meeting was called to order by Mayor Atkinson at 7:()0 PH.
PRESENT: Olson, Peltier, Potts, Vail, AtEinson
City Administrator, F:::en Huber
City Attorney, Charles Johnson
City Engineer, Howard t-:uusisto
City Clerk:, Mary Ann Creager
Motion made by Peltier, Vail seconded, to approve the minutes of May 16,
1988, as amended.
All aye. Motion Carried.
Motion made by Olson, Peltier seconded, to approve the General Claims for -
June 6, 1988, in the amount of $109,684.71.
All aye. Motion Carried.
Potts made motion, Peltier seconded, to approve the Utility Claims for
June 6, 1988, in the amount of $5,146.?4.
All aye. !`lotion Carried.
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (INGERSOLL AVENUE
Pursuant to Chapter 4229 of the Public Improvement Code, residents on
Ingersoll Avenue, east of Sunset Lak:e, have petitioned the City of Hugo
for the improvement of said street, from County Road 10 north
approximately 3-1700 feet, by the improvement of bituminous surfacing. The
feasibility report, prepared by the city engineer, accept -ed by the City
Council, and a public improvement hearing ordered for June 6, 1988 at 7:05
PM. The appropriate legal notices were published in the Forest Lat;e
Times, and notices were sent to affected property owners. The estimated
cost of this project is $55,000.00 plus financing expense. The
petitioners have requested that the assessments be spread equally to each
benefiting property owner as opposed to being assessed on a lineal foot
basis. The petitioners have also requested that Ingersoll Avenue not be a
through street, and that it be blocked off at its north termination
approximately 3700 feet from County Road 10. The engineering design for
this improvement does not meet approved standards for a road of this
type. Because of the limited right-of-way and unusual topography of the
site, the engineer has indicated that the roadway width will be limited to
22' to 18'. The purpose of the public hearing is to secure input from
affected property owners and answer questions regarding the technical and
financial aspects of this project. If after reviewing all input on this
project, the City Council chooses to proceed, the appropriate action would
be to pass a resolution ordering the improvement and preparation of plans
and specifications. The city engineer described the project stating that
the estimated total cost of the project to be $60,000 including all
administrative, engineer, and legal costs. City Administrator, Fen Huber,
stated that the total estimated cost per parcel would be $2,900, payable
over 10 years, at an interest rate of 9 1/2% per year, plus or minus 10%.
A firm cost cannot be determined until bids are received for the total
project. The assessment will be calculated on a per -parcel basis rather
than by lineal foot as requested by the property owners.
M,
,
City Council meeting of June 5, 1988
Page 2
A resident inquired about a property owner on Ingersoll AvenUe who drives
an empty dump truck: to and from work: for his employment., and asked what
impact this would have on the bituminous surface. Engineer-
stated that the road would be a 5 ton roadway with a 3 ton limit during
road restrictions. He stated this situation would be a similar use of the
road by rubbish haulers and school buses. Cathy Scobie and Jerome Jesson
inquired about the possible connection of Ingersoll Avenue with 130th
Street and the longevity of a 2" bituminous surface. The Council received
no objections to this proposed improvement. The public hearing was closed
at 7:20 PM.
Motion made by Olson, Vail seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION 1988-24, A
RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND FLANS FOR INGERSOLL AVENUE/SUNSET LAk::E
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT #5-2-88(A).
VOTING AYE: Olson, Peltier, Potts, Vail, Atkinson
VOTING NAY: None
Motion Carried.
AUTHORIZE CONNECTION TO METRO SEWER INTERCEPTOR
City engineer, Howard L::uusisto, is recommending Council authorization to
permit a connection to the Metro Waste Control Commission's facilities to
serve the Bald Eagle Estates development. The MWCC requires formal action
by the City Council in the form of a resolution to authori-ze this
connection to insure compliance with the city's plans to sewer the Hugo
area. It should be noted that approval of the required resolution does
not constitute an approval of the subdivision plat or future development
of the property. This type of resolution has been used by the City
Council in the past for other subdivision developments that require
connection to the Metro _sewer interceptor.
Atkinson made motion, Peltier seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION 1.958-25, A
RESOLUTION REQUESTING CONNECTION TO THE METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL_
COMMISSION FACILITIES.
VOTING AYE: Olson, Peltier, Potts, Vail, Atkinson
VOTING NAY: None
Motion Carried.
ROAD & BRIDGE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
The city's annual agreement with the Washington County Public Works
Department expires on July 1, 1988. The Public Works Department has
assured the city that the agreement is identical to last year's contract
with the exception that schedule B (equipment rates) are generally lower
than those used in 1987.
Potts made motion, Peltier seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION 1988-25, A
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF HUGO TO ENTER INTO A ROAD AND BRIDGE
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY.
VOTING AYE: Olson, Peltier, Potts, Vail, Atkinson
VOTING NAY: None -
Motion Carried.
City Council meeting of June 6, 1988
Paqe 3
SPECIAL USE PERMIT (M. PERRAULT)
Mr. Mike Perrault has made application for a special use permit and
variance for a home occupation at 1780ZN Henna Avenue North. The property
in question is zoned agricultural, and is approximately 1.16 acres in
size. The property is located in the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section .?,
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 198• allowing the three -car garage to be constructed within 27' of the
road right-of-way. Mr. Perrault has assured the city, in his narrative
letter, that all activities on site will be limited to those requested in
his application. Mr. Perrault informed the Planning Commission that his
business office is located in Roseville, and it is only his intent to
store the band equipment in the garage and allow members of the band to
park their vehicles in his driveway when they meet there to pick up their
equipment. 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 closer to the property line than required by
ordinance. The city staff recommended to the Planning Commission that Mr.
Perrault consider locating the proposed storage building no closer to the
property line than the existing personal workshop. The Planning
Commission, in its recommendation for approval, disagreed with the staff
recommendation, and recommended approval of the special use permit and
granting of the variance for the front yard and side yard -setback as
requested, subject to special conditions.
Atkinson made motion, Peltier seconded, to approve the request of Michael
Perrault for a special use permit for a home occupation at 17803 Henna
Avenue, subject to the following 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 harzard, 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.
City Council meeting of June 6. 1988
Page 4
7. The use does not display, either inside or outside the dwellinq,
materials, goods, supplies, or equipment related to the home
occupation.
8. The use is continuous, in contrast 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.
Councilman Potts questioned whether the city could approve a home
occupation in an accessory building citing Chapter 320-3, Subd. B(41).
Atkinson withdrew his motion and Peltier her second.
Mr. Perrault was advised to apply for site plan approval for the
construction of a 40' x 50' accessory building to store his band
equipment. Mr. Perrault withdrew his application for a special use permit
for a home occupation which was accepted by the City Council.
Atkinson made motion, Peltier seconded, to approve the variance request of
Michael Perrault, 17803 Henna Avenue North, located in the NE 1/4 of the
NW 1/4 of Section 3, T31N, R21W, Washington County, Minnesota, to
construct a 4i►' x 5c_►' storage building within 16' of the north property
line (20' required) and no closer than 27' of the road right-of-way (40'
required).
All aye. Motion Carried.
SPECIAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT (LAMETTI CONSTRUCTION)
On behalf of L-6 Properties, Ms. Cheryl Lametti has made application to
the City of Hugo 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 SE 1/4 of the Section 8.T31N, R21W, lying west of the
right-of-way of the Northern Pacific Railroad. The special use permit
request is to allow continued use of two temporary trailers, and to attach
wooden structures, to -be used for temporary off.ice facilities for an
extended five-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 for an additional access from
Highway 61 as noted on the site plan. Two 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 existing
buildings are located in the southeast corner of the property and just
City Council meeting of June 6, 1988
Page 5
north of the existing access from Highway 61 to the site. The Hugo
Planninq Commission questioned just how long the temporary buildings would
be allowed, but felt that a five-year period might be acceptable, but an
extension after that time may not be acceptable. The Planning Commission
seemed in agreement that a second access to Highway 61 should not be
approved, but improvement of the existing access would be acceptable. The
Commission also felt that abandoning the existing access, and providing a
new entrace to the site, would also be acceptable. The Hugo Planning
Commission recommended approval of the amended special use permit allowing
for a five-year extension of the permit subject to special conditions.
Mayor Atk::inson wanted to put Lametti & Sons on notice that this would be
the last extension that would be approved by the city.
Atkinson made motion, Olson seconded, to approve the request of L-6
Properties for an amended special use permit on their property located at
16028 Forest Boulevard North, Hugo, Minnesota, described as the SE 1/4 of
Section 8, T•31N, R21W, lying west of the right-of-way of the Northern
Pacific Railroad. The special use permit will allow continued use of two
temporary trailers, and two attached wooden structures to be used for
temporary office facilities for an extended five-year period, subject to
the following conditions:
1. The special use permit shall expire five years from approval by the
City Council.
�. Any accesses to the site in question be subject to the approval of the
Burlington Northern Railroad and Minnesota Department of
Transportation.
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.
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.
B. 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.
City Council meeting of ,lune 6, 1988
Page 6
1.3. Property owner shall permit access to the referenced site for periodic
inspection by th 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 a new office building, the temporary office
structures shall be removed by applicant.
16. There shall be only one access from Highway 61.
All aye. Motion Carried.
INDUSTRIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW (LARRY L01:'EN)
Mr. Larry Loken has made application to the City of Hugo for industrial
site approval to construct a 40' x 78' building in an industrial zone
containing approximately 1.1 acres. Mr. Loken has apparently purchased
the property in question from Donald Sempel, and it is his intent to use
the building for cold storage of automobiles. Based on Mr. Loken's
specific request for automobile storage, the staff can see no objections
to the site plan as submitted, however, if the use of the building
changes, the site plan requirements may change. The staff recommended
approval of the site plan and driveway entrance as requested, with the
understanding that if the building use changes, the owner will be required
to comply with the following:
1. Provide additional off-street parking.
2. Provide on-site utilities and restroom facilities as per city
standards.
3. Provide screening and on-site security.
4. Limit on-site activity to those permitted in industrial zoning
districts.
The Council agreed that the above listed conditions would not be required
for this site plan approval, only if there was any change.in Mr. Lot --.en's
site plan at some later date.
Vail made motion, Peltier seconded, to approve
Loken to construct a 40' >; 78' building in an
the West 225' of the North 213' of the NW 1/4
T31N, R21W, Washington County, Minnesota. The
cold storage of automobiles.
All aye. Motion Carried.
REZONING REQUEST (ARCAND/KEYSTONE BUILDERS)
the site plan for Larry
industrial zone described as
of the SE 1/4 of Section 8,
building is to be used for
Mrs. Irene Arcand and keystone Builders have made application to the City
of Hugo for the rezoning of .160 acres from agriculture to RR2. 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. The applicants have informed the city that it is their intent
to construct 32 residential dwelling units on the site in question
consisting of custom homes exceeding $150,000 in value. Earlier this
6 s�
City Council meeting of June b, 1388
Page 7
year, the applicants submitted a request to rezone the same tract .-'If land
to RR1, and said request was subsequently denied by the Ci.ty Counci1.. .1_h
property in question abUtS on an RR2 zoning district to the north, and isin close proximity to 700 acres of RRA' property located to the east and
northeast. In a memo to the Hugo Planning Commission, the city staff
noted that the request in question appears consistent with the city's
comprehensive plan, land use section, policy 2B (page 2). RR2 zoni.nQ
districts allow for single family residences, and urban agriculture as
permitted uses.
Mr. Mike Massie appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of
residents in the area, and he indicated his concern regarding this type of
development. He stated that he disagreed with the staff and commission
assessment that the property in question was consistent with the
comprehensive plan. He stated that a more detailed study should be done
on the site to determine whether the site is capable of handling this type
of density. Mrs. Kathy Scobie addressed the Planning Commission and
stated that when the City Council adopted its comprehensive plan in 1985,
that the Metropolitan Council recommended ten acre dwelling sites outside
of the urban service area as opposed to the five acre sites approved b,,.,
the City Council. Most of the arguments made in opposition to the
rezoning request were similar to those made at the previous public hearing
regarding the rezoning to the RR1 (`3 acre lot size). The applicants
argued that the request in question is consistent with the comprehensive
plan, and the lot sizes proposed are larger than many of the lots in the
areas west of Sunset Lake and Round Lake. They stated that the proposal
in question is definitely rural in nature, and the land in question is not,
regarded by Washington County as farmland, and is more appropriate for
residential development than agricultural uses. Following a. lengthy
public hearing, the Hugo Planning Commission (5 members present)
unanimously recommended approval of the rezoning stating that they now
feel that the proposal in question meets the criteria usually cons-iderec
for requests of this nature. The Planning Commission chairman reminded
the audience that the questions raised regarding roads, lot. layout,
wetlands,and whether the site would pass percolation tests, will be
addressed at the time a development plat-, or subdivision plat is submitted
for city review.
Mayor Atkinson stated that the Council would allow a maximum of 'ti minuten
for the spokespersons, pro and con, to make their comments. Steve
Sondrall, legal counsel for k::eystone Builders, reiterated the following
comments supporting their request for rezoning:
1. Rezoning to 5 acres would not adversely change the environment or the
community.
2. Rezoning to RR2 is consistent with comprehensive plan.
3. The applicants can demonstrate that the site is capable of handling
on-site septic systems and wells for approximately 32 building sites.
Mike Massie, speaking in opposition to the rezoning, stated that the city
had failed to notify Grant Township of the proposed rezoning, and his
comment was noted for the record. He and Kathy Scobie expressed concern
City Council meeting of June b, 1988
Page 8
about soil suitabil.i.ty, possible traffic problems, and whether five acre
building sites would protect the health, safety, and welfare of the Sur-
rounding Community. The city administrator noted that Grant Township h:�cl
been notified of the rezoning request to RR1., and tltr Township had no
objections. The staff has contacted the Township clerk::, and she indicated
they preferred the b acre zoning to the .V acre proposal.
Atkinson made motion, Vail seconded, to adopt ORDINANCE 88-249, AN
ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 7'20 OF THE HUGO CITY CODE BY AMENDING THE
ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM AGRICULTURE TO
RR2.
VOTING AYE: Olson, Potts, Vail, Atkinson
VOTING NAY: Peltier
Motion Carried.
The above rezoning was approved based on the following facts:
1. The request in question is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
2. The request in question is consistent with other zoning districts in
the area.
The type of land use proposed is appropriate for the site in question.
4. There was no documented evidence submitted demonstrating that the
proposal would be detrimental to the health, safety, and general
welfare of the community.
PETITION FOR ROAD I MPF�:OVEMENT ( JOE STANEi-::
The city received a letter from Mr. Lloyd Grooms requesting that the city
take steps to establish a roadway location and install a road to serve
property owned by Mr. Joe Stanek:. In earlier correspondence with Mr.
Stanek::, the city informed him of the steps necessary to proceed with
petitioning for roadway improvements. When reviewing the letter, the
staff noted that it is not signed by Mr. Stanek::, the petition is not in
the proper form, and does not appear to comply with Minnesota Statute
Chapter 429 regarding this type of request. The city has had a
long-standing policy that requests for road improvements on non -collector
streets be done consistent with Chapter 429, and that the improvements be
paid for by the petitioner or benefiting property owners. The\staff would
suggest that Mr. Stanek:: be sent copies of the appropriate petition, forms,
and that the procedures be followed as per city policy.
Mayor Atkinson directed city staff to submit a letter to Mr. Grooms, along
with a proper petition for improvement, stating that all items listed in
his letter would be addressed in conjunction with the petition. The
matter of the fence could be handled separately from the request for road
improvement if the Council so chooses.
MISCELLANEOUS
The city received a letter from James Moberg, legal counsel. for Gene and
Lisa Sampson, regarding a claim on the city for relocation/closing costs.
City attorney, Charles Johnson, was directed to respond to Mr. Moberg's
letter and discuss this matter with Dave Magnuson.
City Council meeting of June L, 1988
Page 4
Mr. and Mrs. Rick: Flanagan, 6119 175th Street., were present at the meeting
to discuss recent contacts made by the city about certain vehicles parked
at their property, particularly a hydro -seeder. After a lengthy
discussion, Mr. Flanagan agreed to have the hydro -seeder removed from his:
property site after .30 days from this meeting date (6-6-88) and to comply
with all conditions of his approved special use permit.
FIRE SERVICE ACREE_.MENT
Vail made motion, Olson seconded, authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk: to
sign the Capitol City Mutual Aid Association Reciprocal Fire Service
Agreement, effective for a five year period commencing 1/i/se.
All aye. Motion Carried.
LMCIT - CERTIFICATE OF PARTICIPATION
Atkinson made motion, Potts seconded, to authorize the Mayor to sign the
Certificate of Participation with Employee Benefit Association on behalf
of the City of Hugo for continued health and dental insurance effective
July 1, 1988. It was noted that the health premiums increased by
All aye. Motion Carried.
Vail made motion, Potts seconded, to adjourn at 9:40 PH.
All aye. Motion Carried.
tlary n + Creager, C' Clergy::
City C Hugo