My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
PC Packet 05.28.20
Hugo
>
Community Development
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Agendas/Packets
>
2020 PC Packets
>
PC Packet 05.28.20
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/6/2020 4:21:53 PM
Creation date
8/6/2020 4:16:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commissions
Meeting Date
5/28/2020
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.
/
56
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
QA W S <br />Pet <br />Hospital <br />Rachel Juba <br />Community Development Director <br />City of Hugo <br />14669 Fitzgerald Avenue North <br />Hugo, MN 55038 <br />Re: Victor Place Development <br />Rachel, <br />P.A.W.S. Pet Hospital, PLLC <br />4644 Victor Path <br />Hugo, MN 55038 <br />2020 March 12 <br />We are aware of the proposed Victor Place development next door to our business, P.A.W.S/ Pet <br />Hospital. The developer has informed us of the proposed City of Hugo requirement to connect the <br />parking lots of the proposed development and P.A.W.S. We have numerous concerns regarding this: <br />• Concerns with the additional traffic passing through our parking lot, with customers and their <br />pets' safety in mind. <br />• The loss of at least three parking stalls from our lot may affect the ability of our customers and <br />staff to park in direct relation to our business. This is especially concerning when we have <br />deliveries <br />• The additional vehicle and truck traffic funneling through our site and street entrance will cause <br />additional maintenance requirements to the P.A.W.S. parking lot. This will also create an issue <br />concerning which property owner is responsible and maintaining those areas. <br />• The aesthetics of combining our concrete parking lot with the developers proposed asphalt <br />parking lot would not be visually appealing in the transition area, which by virtue of location <br />would seem to likely happen on our property, in addition to the loss of landscaping along our <br />west parking lot/property edge that the city required. <br />Our site and parking lot, at present, function fine for our business. Any requirement to connect the <br />parking lots has only negative consequences for us. The proposed development has two proposed <br />entrances from Victor Path, which ensures their site can function independently from ours. Victor Path <br />is not a heavily traveled road, it can certainly handle the two new site entrances proposed by the Victor <br />Place development. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.