My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
PC Packet 08.09.18
Hugo
>
Community Development
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Agendas/Packets
>
2018 PC Packets
>
PC Packet 08.09.18
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/7/2018 10:59:54 AM
Creation date
12/6/2018 2:29:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commissions
Meeting Date
8/9/2018
Document Type
Agenda/Packets
Commission Name
Planning
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Planning Commission <br />July 26, 2018 <br />Page 6 <br />Giguere describes the sketch plan submitted by MWF Properties. The applicant would like to receive informal <br />comments about the sketch plan prior to formal approval. The applicant is proposing a three story, multifamily <br />apartment complex within an 18 acre parcel. Giguere explains that although the applicant has stated that 4.5 <br />acres of the site is buildable, the site contains wetland and will require a wetland delineation to determine the <br />site's wetland boundaries. The apartment complex is in compliance with the city's 2030 comprehensive plan in <br />terms of providing affordable housing options for residents. <br />Giguere goes on to state that although the elevations provided by the applicant show some architectural details <br />in terms of building design, staff has recommended that the applicant add additional elements to the building. <br />These additional elements include larger overhangs, a wainscot, a larger break-up of building and roof <br />elevations, as well as window shutters. <br />Ryan Shwickert approaches the podium. Shwickert states that the applicant is willing to cooperate with the City <br />in terms of the site plan and building design. Shwickert explains that the applicant focuses on section the 42 tax <br />credit program. Shwickert assures the council that the applicant keeps its developments well maintained. <br />Commissioner Arcand asks why the development only has 45 units. <br />Shwickert responds by stating that more units would make this particular project more risky because the <br />demand for affordable housing within the Hugo area is largely unknown. <br />Commissioner Luchsinger states the importance of having a development that fits in well with the surrounding <br />environment and that the design of the building is the aspect that is still in question. <br />Because the applicant relies on tax funds, the design of the building is budgeted in a manner that may not allow <br />extensive architectural design. However, the applicant is willing to add additional designs to the building <br />elevations to make it more aesthetically pleasing. Shwickert suggest that the best way to ensure that the building <br />possesses pleasing architecture while remaining within budget would be to add more detail to the most visible <br />side of the building and less detail on the less visible, back side of the building. <br />Shwickert goes on to explain that window shutters are not as modern as other designs. The engineers who <br />designed the building feel as though window shutters are not necessary. <br />Arcand explains that if there is another way the building could be "dressed up", the commission would be <br />willing to make compromises. <br />Shwickert states that screening mechanical equipment will not be a major concern due to the fact that most of <br />the mechanical equipment will be installed within the building itself. <br />Chair Kleissler states that she is unsure about the dimensions of the building. She would like to know the <br />measurements of the outcrops and breaking shown on the exterior elevations. <br />Shwickert states that he is not sure what the depth is of the elevations but he and the applicant will work on that <br />aspect. <br />Juba addresses Chair Kleissler by stating that when the applicant submits a site plan and applies for a <br />conditional use permit, measurements and a variety of viewing angles showing the depth of the building design <br />will be included within the new elevations. The details do not yet exist within the sketch plan. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.