2019.06.17 CC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Hugo City Council Meeting Minutes for June 17, 2019 Page 3 of 4 Juba responded that the grading and stormwater management plan had been approved by the City and grading of additional ponding areas will be done with development. City Engineer Mark Erichson added that the vast majority of the 80 acres was not serving a drainage purpose, just providing the City an easement for access. There would be no effect to drainage on other properties. Miron made motion, Klein seconded, to approve the notice to vacate the drainage and utility easement located over Outlot B, Adelaide Landing. All Ayes. Motion carried. Update on Monument Sign Community Development Director Rachel Juba presented information from the Beautification Subcommittee, who had been working on the location and design of a new City of Hugo entry monument sign. The committee had decided to focus on the north entry to the City, and there were also discussions on how to modify the existing entry monument along CSAH 8 to incorporate the new City logo, be more legible, and install additional landscaping. Juba noted there was money in the budget to complete this project. The committee looked at th several locations including the corner of Highway 61 and 120 Street, which was once to be developed as commercial, there was an agreement to use that location for a sign. As the property develops, staff will evaluate that option for an entry sign. At the northern gateway, the th committee identified a location south of 180 Street in the MnDot right-of-way. An existing slope may require a retaining wall, and there is no City water for landscaping. Juba showed the Council concepts that were provided to the Beautification Subcommittee stating the Committee preferred the more vertical sign made of precast concrete pillar and a red brick pattern approximately 13 feet tall with a four foot panel. Juba stated that the materials and durability of the sign would need to be evaluated. If it was unacceptable, it was recommended to move forward with their second option, which is similar to the existing sign. Juba recommended Council authorize staff to finalize the design and receive cost estimates for the new north entry monument sign and resurfacing the existing western monument sign. Council discussed both options and did not have a strong opinion either way. Things considered were the similarity to the existing monument, durability of the vertical sign the committee recommended, and the cost. Klein, who was a member of the committee, explained the committee picked the vertical monument sign because of lack of space in the right-of-way and the steep embankment. Klein made motion, Petryk seconded, move approval to receive cost estimates for both signs prior to final approval. Council discussed the cost of getting two estimates and agreed it was best to move forward with the recommend concept and make sure the materials were durable. Petryk rescinded her seconded to the motion, and Klein rescinded his motion.