Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987.05.04 CC Minutes47 MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HUGO CITY COUNCIL May 4, 1987 The regular meeting was called to order by Mayor Atkinson at 7:00 PM. PRESENT: Peltier, Potts, Olson, Vail, Atkinson City Attorney, Charles Johnson City Engineer, Howard Kuusisto City Administrator, Ken Huber Motion made by Peltier, Vail seconded, to approve the minutes of April 20, 1987 as amended All aye. Motion Carried. Motion made by Potts, Peltier seconded, to approve the General Claims for May 4, 1987 in the amount of $9,611.19. All aye. Motion Carried. Motion made by Peltier, Vail seconded, to approve the Utility Claims for May 4, 1987 in the amount of $3,616.48. All aye. Motion Carried. 6.A Special Use Permit (School District #624) On behalf of ISD #624, Mr. Dave Van Orsdell has made application to the City of Hugo for a SUP to expand Hugo Elementary School by the addition of six classrooms and a gymnasium. The property is generally described as part of the NWS of the NWS of Section 20, T31N, R21W (aka 14895 Francesca Avenue). The city staff has reviewed the site plan for this project, and the three major issues of concern on this site are as follows: 1. The handling of additional stormwater runoff as a result of the construction of this addition. 2. The use of drywells for roof drainage and surface water drainage into the storm sewer. 3. Access to the site for public safety equipment, and the need for additional off- street parking on site. Mr. Van Orsdell and Ray Haen reviewed their proposal at the public hearing before the Planning Commission on April 22,1987. Mr. Haen submitted a revised plan reflecting the addition of 61 surfaced off-street parking stalls on site to relieve the parking problem in this area. The school also agreed to the prohibiting of on -street parking on the east side of Francesca Avenue in front of the school building. They also agreed to delete the proposed parallel parking in front of the school building. The Rice Creek Watershed District denied the school district a permit to drain water from the new addition roof into the storm sewer system. Rice Creek did, however, allow surface water on the site to be drained into the storm sewer system. To resolve this problem, the school district has installed a catchbasin on site east of the new addition that will drain the field area into the storm sewer system. Water from the roof will be drained into three 6 x 13 foot drywells located east of the new addition. After hearing property owner input, the Hugo Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the SUP subject to certain conditions agreed upon by the school district. Representatives of the school district,as well as the architectural and engineering firms working on the project, were present at the Council meeting to review the plans for the addition, plans for handling of stormwater runoff, and the revised parking plans. Drainage from the roof will drain into the new drywells. Overflow from the 48 May 4, 1987 drywells will result in the overflow moisture draining to a ponding area, and piping from the pond into the storm sewer. The drywells are equipped with hinged manhole covers that "pop" with the drywells overflow. The ponding area will hold no more than 1 foot of water and only temporarily during rain. The school district has verbal approval from the RCWD for their drainage plan. Vern Peloquin, adjoining property owner, asked whether the school's water would end up on his fields. The engineer working on the school's addition assured Mr. Peloquin that the school would hold its own water. Representativesfrom the school district stated that it would be their responsibility to maintain the newly installed drywells. Motion made by Potts, Vail seconded, to approve the Special Use Permit for the Independent School District #624 for the addition of six classrooms and a gymna- sium on property generally described as Part of the NW4 and NEy, Section 20, T31N, R21W (aka 14895 Francesva Avenue) Hugo Elementary School. This approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Any and all conditions of the SUP must be met within 120 days unless otherwise stipulated in this permit. If these conditions are not met the permit will be null and void. 2. A building permit will be applied for within 120 days of permit approval and substantial construction of any building and improvements must be underway within 120 days of permit issuance. 3. Any commercial or industrial use of said property not specifically permitted in this zoning district by the zoning ordinance shall be strictly prohibited. 4. No building permits will be issued until the require permits are secured from the appropriate watershed district where applicable. 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. Site must be policed and maintained on a regular basis with regard to litter and site nuisances. 7. All fees relating to the review and issuance of this permit shall be paid by the applicant including the cost of recording this permit with Washington County. 8. No fences, structures, or vegetation may be placed in on-site easements. 9. Property owner must provide access to the site for periodic inpsections by the city to assure compliance with the SUP. 10. No parking in front of the school building (along sidewalk). 11. Applicant will install "NO PARKING" signs by fire hydrants. 12. Provide an additional 61 parking stalls on site (northeast of site). 13. No parking on Francesca Avenue in front of the school. 14. Roof water to run into new, additional drywells. 15. Surface drainage to go into storm sewer and catch basin. 16. Review of storm water drainage by the city engineer. All aye. Motion Carried. 6.B Subdivision Request (Lengyel/Achman) Messrs. Mike Lengyel and Sam Achman have made application to the City of Hugo for the subdivision of a 40 acre tract of land and waiver of the formal subdivision require- ment. The property in question is generally described as the SWy of the SE4 of Section 35, T31N, R21W. The property is zoned Agriculture, and it is the intent of the petitioners to subdivide the property into two lots, one containing 10 acres and the other 30 acres. Both parcels of land comply with zoning requirements, and percolation tests have been completed on Tract A along with a design of a septic system and drainfield. The RCWD has indicated their approval of the subdivision of land. At the April 22, 1987 Hugo Planning Commission meeting, action was taken unanimously recommending approval of the subdivision request, and waiver of me May 4, 1987 formal subdivision requirements subject to nine special conditions agreed upon by the applicant. City Administrator, Ken Huber, stated that since the Planning Commission meeting of April 22, 1987, Mr. Sam Achman submitted a final survey and that the Council could approve as a final survey. survey Motion made by Olson, Peltier seconded, to approve the final , / and waiver of the formal subdivision requirements for the Lengyel/Achman subdivision (SW4 of the SE4, Section 25, T31N, R21W) subject to the following conditions: 1. The property line must be identified on site by the applicants to assure proper setbacks when buildings are to be constructed. 2. Any commercial or industrial use of said property, not specifically permitted in this zone by the city zoning ordinance, shall be strictly prohibited. 3. All driveways or drainage areas must include the installation of 15" diameter corrugated metal culverts in a manner acceptable to the city. 4. No building permits to be issued until the required permits are secured from the appropriate watershed districts where applicable. 5. All fees relating to this subdivision approval shall be paid by the applicant including the cost of recording these documents with Washington County. 6. Any driveway permits requiring access to highways or county roads may not be issued until permits are secured with Washington County or MNDOT. 7. The use of this property not to be in viohtion of any existing restrictive covenants. 8. The activities on site will not cause the altering of any water course, ditch, or drainage system in this area. All aye. Motion Carried. 6.0 Subdivision Request (Harley Johnson, Sr.) Mr. Harley Johnson, Sr., has made application to the City of Hugo to resubdivide a 20 acre parcel of land consisting of two lots in an RR1 zoning district. This property was subdivided by its owner in June, 1978, and the property owners would now like to combine a portion of one lot with another lot. At the April 22, 1987 regular meeting of the Hugo Planning Commission, action was taken unanimously recommending approval of the subdivision request and the waiver of formal subdivision requirements subject to special conditions. Motion made by Peltier, Vail seconded, to approve the preliminary survey for Harley Johnson, Sr., and H. Johnson, Jr., and waiver of the formal platting procedure for the following described property (That part of the SE4 of Section 19, T31N, R21W, lying north of the south 970' except the east 50' of the south 229.2' thereof subject to Fenway Avenue, Together with the north 455' of the south 970' of the E4 of the SE4 of Section 19, T31N, R21W, except the east 787.58' thereof according to the U.S. Gov't Survey, Washington County, Minnesota). This subdivision approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. A final survey be prepared and submitted to the City Council for approval within 90 days of Council approval of the preliminary survey. 2. Property lines must be identified by the petitioner to assure proper building setbacks when buildings are to be constructed. 3. Any commercial or industrial use of said property, not specifically permitted in the zoning district by the city zoning ordinance, shall be prohibited. 4. All driveways built over ditches or drainage areas must include the installation of a minimum 15" corrugated metal culvert installed in a manner acceptable to the city building inspector. 50 May 4, 1987 5. No additional buildings will be permitted on the site until the required permits are secured from the appropriate watershed districts where applicable. 6. All fees relating to the review and issuance of this survey approval shall be paid by the applicant including the cost of recording this survey with Washington County. 7. Activities on site shall not cause the altering of any watercourse, ditch, or drainage system. All aye. Motion Carried. 6.D Subdivision Request (Wolkerstorfer/Raiola) Messrs. Joe Walkerstorfer and Joe Raiola have made application to the City of Hugo to subdivide a 27 acre tract of land into two lots, one consisting of approximately 10 acres and the other 17 acres. The property in question is zoned Agriculture as a result of rezoning approval by the city earlier this year. At the April 22, 1987 regular meeting of the Hugo Planning Commission, action was taken unanimously recommending approval of this subdivision requirements subject to special conditions. The easement indicated on the survey was created by Mr. Maurice Gessner to allow for access to the back property. Mayor Atkinson emphasized to Mrs. Ruby Loos, present at the meeting for this matter, that this easement does not preclude the city requirements for road frontage. Mrs. Loos stated that her property abuts Jeffrey Avenue for about 1200' so road frontage would not be a problem. Motion made by Potts, Olson seconded, to approve the final survey for the Wolker- storfer/Raiola subdivision and waiver of the formal platting procedure for the following described parcel of land (The east 827' of the NE4 of the NE4 of Section 11, T31N, R21W, except therefrom the following: The South 2 of the West 331.0 ft of the East 827.0 ft of the NE4 of the NE4 of Section 11, T31N, R21W, containing 5.0 acres, and an easement for agress, ingress, and utilities over and across the South 33 ft of the East 496.0 ft of the said NE4 of the NE4. The South z of the West 331 feet of the East 827 ft of the NEr of the NE41 of Section 11, T31N, R21W, Together with an easement for ingress, egress, and utilities over and across the South 33 ft of the East 496 ft of the said NE4 of the NE4, according to the U.S. Gov't Surevey thereof. The South 810.51 ft of the West 107.47 ft of the East 934.47 ft of the NEr of the NE4 of Section 11, T31N, R21W). The approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Property lines must be identified by the petitioner to assure proper building setbacks when building are to be constructed. 2. Any commercial or industrial use of said property not specifically permitted in the zoning district by the city zoning ordinance shall be prohibited. 3. All driveways built over ditches or drainage areas must include the installa- tion of a minimum 15" corrugated metal culvert installed in a manner acceptable to the city. 4. No additional building will be permitted on the site until the required permits are secured from the appropriate watershed districts and DNR where applicable. 5. All fees relating to the review and issuance of this survey approval shall be paid by the applicant including the cost of recording this survey with Washington County. 6. Activities on site shall not cause the altering of any watercourse, ditch, or drainage system. All aye. Motion Carried. 51 May 4, 1987 6.E Special Use Permit (ZAP Games, Inc.) Messrs. Tony Caron and Dan Santanni have made application to the City of Hugo for a SUP to conduct a paintball games recreationin an Agricultural zone. The applicants in question received a SUP previously in the immediate vicinity of the site in question, and are requesting to expand their business to another location several hundred feet from the current site. The property is genrally described as the NE4 of the NE4 of Section 33, T31N, R21W. Mr. Caron will be leasing the above referenced property from Mr. Santanni to conduct the activities proposed. Mr. Caron has assured the city that there will be no buildings constructed on site with the exception of the portable sanitation facilities required. Although no public hearing on this request was re- quired, notices of the SUP were sent to all property owners with 300' of the site prior to Planning Commission review. The city has received no complaints from property owners or others regarding the activities of ZAP Games, Inc., to date. At the April 22, 1987 regular meeting of the Planning Commission, this matter was discussed and several members of the Commission indicated their concerns regarding the expansion of this commercial, recreational activity. Those concerns included, but were not limited to, the following: 1. An increase in traffic on Goodview Avenue. 2. Expansion of a commercial use of property in an agricultural zone. 3. A more intense use of agricultural property than was originally intended for this type of zoning district. Mr. Rick Lessard appeared at the PC meeting, and indicated his philosophical objection to the type of games being played at these sites. The PC chairman Harry Rudisill, questioned whether this type of commercial, recreational use should have ever been permitted in an Agricultural zone in the first place. Following a lengthy discussion by the Commission, and the establishment of a number of special conditions, a motion was placed on the floor to approve the SUP subject to special conditions. The motion to approve the SUP failed on a 3 to 2 vote of the Commission, and this permit request comes to the City Council without the PC's recommendation for approval. Councilman Potts stated that ZAP Games is a shooting type of facility, and that the city is asking the city attorney to remove trap shooting from city ordinances. He stated that the city has a long history of opposing gun facilities, and that this type of activity is not in the best interest of the city. Mayor Atkinson stated that these games use air -powered guns, and mentioned the fact that they operated within the city for one year without a permit, and no complaints had been received. The games have operated in the city at two separate sites, and there have been no complaints (SUP's issued for Marty Wegleitner and Chris Molitor sites). Motion made by Atkinson, Peltier seconded, to approve the Special Use Permit for ZAP Games, Inc., to operate a commercial recreational activity at the following described property (the NE4 of the NE4 of Section 33, T31N, R21W, Washington County, Minnesota). This approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Any and all conditions of the Special Use Permit must be met within 60 days, unless otherwise stipulated in this permit. If conditions are not met, the Special Use Permit approval will be null and void and a new application must be completed. 2. All participants will be required to wear eye and ear protection. 3. The number of participants on any field at any given time to be limited to 30. 4. No alcoholic beverages or drugs, and anyone intoxicated will not be allowed to participate. 52 May 4, 1987 5. Off-street parking shall be provided for all participants. 6. Satellite or equal type of facilities to be provided. 7. Liability insurance, in the amount of $300,000.00, shall be kept in force at all times games are operating. 8. No one under 18 years of age will be allowed to participate. 9. No trespassing signs shall be installed on the perimeters of the playing areas,and operators shall instruct participants to confine their games to the approved areas. Failing to do this, the city reserves the right to require fencing at some future date if damage to surrounding property becomes a problem. 10. No game shall be allowed when the temperature is 320 or lower. 11. Applicants shall draft a hold -harmless agreement in favor of the City of Hugo to indemnify and protect the city against lawsuit arising out of these activities. 12. The Special Use Permit shall be void if the majority of the City Council deems that it is inconsistent with development of surrounding areas. 13. This permit shall run with the applicants (Tony Caron and Dan Santanni), not with the land. 14. The activities on site will not cause the altering of any watercourse, ditch, or drainage system. 15. Hours of operation shall be from 7:00 AM to 7:30 PM. 16. Offensive odors, glare, smoke, or noise is prohibited, and must not be offensive to neighboring property owners. 17. This permit is subject annual review at the discretion of the City Council. VOTING AYE: Peltier, Olson, Vail, Atkinson VOTING NAY: Potts Motion Carried. 7.A Hugo Meadows Feasibility Report In July of 1986, the Harstad Companies made application to the City of Hugo for the subdivision of approximately 27 acres zoned SFU into 48 buildable homesites. The property in question is generally described as a part of the NE4 of Section 29, T31N, R21W, in the City of Hugo. the Hugo Planning Commission reviewed this matter at their August 13, 1986 regular meeting, and said Commission unanimously recommended approval of the preliminary sketch plan subject to completion of an engineering feasibility study for this project. This matter was then reviewed by the Hugo City Council, and the Harstad Companies were directed to have a feasibility report prepared, addressing, at a minimum, the following: 1. Plat compliance with the city's subdivision regulations. 2. Parkland dedication. 3. Control of stormwater runoff on site. 4. Impact of stormwater runoff on drainage ditch downstream. 5. Extension of water and sewer to the site. 6. Estimated cost of utility installation. A copy of the engineer's report, prepared by Howard Kuusisto, was submitted to the City Council for review at their April 6, 1987 regular meeting. Mr. Dick Wedell of Harstad Companies has been in continual contact with the city with regard to what steps he now has to take to move this project forward. Mr. Wedell has stated that they have revised their stormwater control plan, as well as on-site ponding, to the satisfaction of the RCWD. We have suggested that Mr. Wedell pro- vide the city with written documentation that their plans for stormwater control, 53 May 4, 1987 and handling of the wetlands in that area, meet with the approval of the RCWD and the DNR. We have requested that the City Engineer be present at this meeting to review the feasibility report with the Council. When considering how this matter has been handled by the city to date, it would appear that the appropriate steps to move this project forward would be as follows: 1. Accept the feasibility report as prepared. 2. Require that the developers comply with the recommendations in the report. 3. A preliminary plat be prepared by the developers complying with the engineering report, and said plat be submitted to the Planning Commission for their review. 4. The staff be directed to prepare a preliminary development agreement for this project 5. The City Council decide on whether or not it will be picking up any of the over - sizing costs to extend utilities to the site for ultimately serving areas beyond this site. 6. The stormwater runoff issues and concerns be addressed with the use of holding ponds and existing ditches subject to the approval of the RCWD, the DNR, and the city engineer. 7. The acceptance of parkland dedication or a fee in lieu of parkland dedication. Engineer Kuusisto reviewed his feasibility with the Council, with Mr. John Johnson of Merila and Associates present representing Harstad Companies. The estimated cost of the project would be $572,000.00, with the cleaning of ditches and its effect on adjoining property owners not addressed. Councilman Vail inquired about access to County Road 8A, and Mr. Johnson stated that they are willing to comply with any county requirements. Engineer Kuusisto stated that he would like to have the roads within the development remain gravel until the project is near completion then at that time blacktop the roads. It was stated that the previous City Council opted for acquisition of parkland rather than the parkland fee. Mayor Atkinson stated that it was his personal opinion that he was not sure the city needed that swampland and a fee would be better used. After a verbal discussion, it was deter- mined that the majority of the Council would accept parkland and money for park improvements. Motion made by Atkinson, Peltier seconded, that the City Council accepts the feasibility study as prepared by Howard Kuusisto. Harstad Companies shall obtain preliminary plat approval from the Planning Commission, and work with city staff for preparation of the Development Agreement. After submission of this motion, Councilmember Peltier receive water in her backyard from this development. this development will retain runoff from this project water problem prior to the development, it will not be the development. VOTING AYE: Potts, Olson, Vail, Atkinson VOTING NAY: Peltier Motion Carried. asked is she was going to Engineer Kuusisto stated that on site, and if there was a intensified as a result of 7.B Proposed Amendment to Mining and Excavating Ordinance At the April 6, 1987 regular meeting of the Hugo City Council, Mrs. Ann Munthe presented the Council with a petition from Hugo residents requesting an amendment to the city's mining ordinance, Chapter 170. The petition was signed by a large 54 May 4, 1987 number of Hugo residents stating that their request to adopt a new mining ordinance was for the following reasons: 1. To protect the health, safety, and welfare of the residents. 2. To establish reasonable and uniform limitations, safeguards, and controls in a community that is in transition from agriculture to urban. 3. To control noise, dust, hazards, effects on adjacent property, and other factors related to an active mining operation. 4. To provide for control of mining operations compatible with the surroundings. The proposed ordinance submitted by Mrs. Munthe was referred to the city's engineer and attorney for their review and comments. The City Council invited both the petitioners and the gravel pit owners/operators to attend tonight's meeting to discusss their concerns regarding this proposed ordinance. The following people were present at the meeting to express opposition to the proposal to amend the existing mining ordinance: Dean Atkinson, Richard Schuh, John Waller, Fran Miron, George Miron, Bill Wolfe, Kip Wolf, Gerald Hanson, Darrell Hanson, George Indykiewicz, John Erickson (Anderson Bros), Gerald Rehbein, Vern Peloqin, and Andy Goiffon. The following people were present to lend their support to the proposal: Sandy Malaski, Betty Cammack, Malcolm Cammack, Ann Munthe, and Sonja Irlbeck. Opponents of the proposal used the following reasoninfg: need of gravel for city roads, gravel pits have been there for a long timeU on y a seasonal operation thereby necessitating the need to operate long hours, benefits of pit exceed any complaints, obligation to provide gravel. Proponents stated the following: use of pit during'bummer hours" that conflict with their use of property, noise pollution, odors, and dust, "right" of homeowner to enjoy country living, allow commercial uses in basically a residential area. Sonja Irlbeck emphasized that it was not their intent to shut down the gravel pit operation, only make life more livable for people affected by the operation. The Council decided to take each proposal individually and decide for or against the proposal. Motion made by Peltier, Atkinson seconded, that 170-2, Subd. B(4) not be amended. VOTING AYE: Peltier, Potts, Vail, Atkinson VOTING NAY: Olson Motion Carried. Motion made by Peltier, Vail seconded, to not add Item 10 as suggested (170-2, Subd. B). VOTING AYE: Potts, Peltier, Vail, Atkinson VOTING NAY: Olson Motion Carried. Motion made by Potts, Peltier seconded, to enter "Mining shall not include blasting" as Item 10,(170-2, Subd. B), VOTING AYE: Potts, Olson, Vail, Atkinson VOTING NAY: Peltier Motion Carried. May 4, 1987 55 Motion made by Atkinson, Peltier seconded, that the suggested change to 170-3, Subd. C, not be incorporated. All aye. Motion Carried. Motion made by Atkinson, Peltier seconded, that the suggested change to 170-4, Subd. B, not be incorporated. All aye. Motion Carried. Motion made by Atkinson, Peltier seconded, that the following addition be made to 170-5, Subd. A: "and the Governing Body may give notice to the operator or owner to abate the same in accordance with the procedures and requirements of the Nuisance Ordinance, Chapter 200." The proposed Subdivision B shall be deleted, and Subdivi- sion C shall be retitled "C". All aye. Motion Carried. Motion made by Atkinson, Peltier seconded, that the proposed change to 170-6, Subd. A, not be incorporated, but the following language be used: "A fee, as determined by Council resolution, shall accompany each application". All aye. Motion Carried. Atkinson made motion, Potts seconded, that the proposed change to 170-6, Subd. B(7) not be incorporated, and #7 remain the same. All aye. Motion Carried. Motion made by Atkinson, Peltier seconded, that Item 8 of 170-6, Subd B, remain the same. All aye. Motion Carried. Motion made by Atkinson, Peltier seconded, that the proposed change to 170-7, Subd. A (4) not be incorporated, but the Council consider the following at the annual renewal time: require the locking of gates at Irish Avenue entrance as well as some fencing and posting at the north side of gravel pit. All aye. Motion Carried. Motion made by Atkinson, Peltier seconded, that the proposed change to 170-7, Subd. C not be incorporated, but the following numbers shall be inserted: "Refrain from mining below grade closer than 50 feet to the boundary of any zone where such operations are not permitted, or closer than 50 feet to the boundary ......... community clerk". All aye. Motion Carried. Motion made by Atkinson, Peltier seconded, that the proposed change to 170-7, Subd. D not be incorporated, but the following language shall be inserted: "Inspections will occur twice annually. Such inspections will be recorded via written documentation listing areas to be corrected." The balance of the sentence should be deleted. All aye. Motion Carried. 56 May 4, 1987 Motion made by Atkinson, Peltier seconded, that 170-7, Subd, D, second paragraph, be amended to read as follows: "The inspection fee to cover the cost of periodic inspections shall be based on actual costs incurred or as set by Council resolution. The method of determining the inspection fee shall follow Schedule A as outlined below." Schedule B, as outlined, shall be deleted. All aye. Motion Carried. Motion made by Atkinson, Peltier seconded, that the proposed change to 170-7, Subd. G, not be incorporated, but changedto read as follows: "Carry bodily injury and property damage, public liability in the amount of $300,000.00 for any one person and $600,000.00 for any occurrence naming the community as an additional insured." All aye. Motion Carried. Motion made by Atkinson, Olson seconded, that the proposed change to 170-7, Subd. H, not be incorporated, but changed to read as follows: "Maintain and operate all equipment to meet all applicable Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's standards." All aye. Motion Carried. Motion made by Atkinson to amend 170-7, Subd. I to read as follows: Conduct opera- tion only between the hours of 7:00 AM and 5:00 PM, Monday through Saturday.... Motion died for lack of second. Motion made by Peltier, Atkinson seconded, to extend the meeting passed 11:00 PM. All aye. Motion Carried. Motion made by Potts, Vail seconded, to amend 170-7, Subd. I, to read as follows: Conduct operation only between the hours of 7:00 AM and 6:00 PM, Monday through Saturday..... motion Olson made substitution/to amend 170-7, Subd. I, to read as follows: Conduct operation only between the hours of 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM, Monday through Thursday, 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM, Fridays, and no operation shall be allowed on Saturdays, Sundays or holidays. Motion died for lack of second. ORIGINAL MOTION VOTING AYE: Potts, Vail, Atkinson VOTING NAY: Peltier, Olson Motion Carried. Motion made by Atkinson, Vail seconded, that the proposed change to 170-7, Subd, P, not be incorporated. All aye. Motion Carried. 57 May 4, 1987 Motion made by Atkinson, Peltier seconded, that the proposed change to 170-8, not be incorporated, but changed to read as follows: "Any firm, person, or corporation who violates any of the provisions of these regulations shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense." All aye. Motion Carried. Motion made by Atkinson, Peltier seconded, to adopt ORDINANCE 1987-243,.AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 170 OF THE HUGO CITY CODE ENTITLED "MINING, EXCAVATING, AND GRADING". VOTING AYE: Peltier, Potts, Olson, Vail, Atkinson VOTING NAY: None Motion Carried. Motion made by Peltier, Potts seconded, to adjourn at 11:30 PM. All aye. Motion Carried. Mary n Creager, City Cl City f Hugo