2006.05.11 PC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Minutes — May 11, 2006 Page 2 was granted for the entire site for a campus development which allowed for the construction of multiple buildings on one parcel. An amendment to the current CUP was needed because the CUP was specific to the old site plan. The applicant had submitted a new site plan to construct a 19,240 square foot office warehouse building on the east side of a 4.16 acre parcel and a future site for a building approximately 8,000 square feet in size. The plan complied with building and lot coverage, building heights, setbacks, fencing and parking requirements. A full lighting plan and a revised landscape plan needed to be submitted to the City. Infiltration was satisfactory as reviewed by the City Engineer. The plan showed mechanical units being screened by placing prefinished metal panels over the units. Staff recommended to the applicant to raise the parapet wall to cover the mechanical unit instead of covering it with panels. The applicant was also working with the pipeline for encroachment into their easement for a monument sign. Schumann opened the public hearing. Tim Stockness, TDS Development, was present to answer questions. Schumann asked if there would be screening on the fence and Stockness said there would be. Rosenquist asked about the use of the building and when they wanted to get started. Stockness explained it would be for storage of trucks and trailers for his construction company and they hoped to begin construction of the building within the next 30 days. The Commission had concerns about the screening of the rooftop unit and preferred the parapet wall. Stockness indicated he would rather install a low -profile unit and cover it with panels. Rosenquist made motion, Weidt seconded, to recommend approval of the site plan with the condition the applicant continue to work with staff on lowering and screening the mechanical units. All Ayes. Motion carried. Amendment to Hugo City Code, Chapter 320 for Notice Requirements The Commission held a public hearing to consider amendments to the notification requirements beyond what is required by State Statute. During the March 6, 2006 City Council meeting, Council Members were presented with the issue that the 350 feet area notification requirement for public hearings may not be adequate in the rural areas of the City. Staff was directed to provide a draft ordinance and have a public hearing at a Planning Commission meeting to discuss possible amendments to the ordinance where the notification requirements were specified. The CDD explained the reason for the discussion on notice requirements was that in rural areas of the City, properties tend to be larger and the notification was only sent to a small number of owners in the area. In the rural areas the impact of a proposed planning application could extend to property owners beyond the 350 foot notification range. State statue required notices to be mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the subject site. The City mailed notices to property owners within 350 feet from the site. In addition, public hearings for certain applications were published in the White Bear Press as the City's legal publication and sometimes in the Neighborhood News at no cost. Staff checked with other Cities and found some extended the 300 feet required by law but none differentiated between rural and