My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
PC 09.08.22
Hugo
>
Community Development
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Minutes
>
2022 PC Minutes
>
PC 09.08.22
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2024 11:48:33 AM
Creation date
3/21/2024 10:05:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commissions
Meeting Date
9/8/2022
Document Type
Minutes
Commission Name
Planning
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
July 28, 2022 PC Minutes <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />Commissioner Petty asks about the purpose of subdividing the property into 4 lots compared to the 2 <br />proposed development phases. Juba responds that master planned sites will often have multiple lot <br />owners with cross-access and parking easements. Petty asks when in the process parking will be built <br />with each lot, and Juba replies that lots will be built in accordance with each phase . <br /> <br />Commissioner Arcand asks if parts of the boardwalk would be built with each phase, Juba says yes. <br />Arcand asks to clarify whether the dock will be built over the lake or up to the lake, Juba replies that <br />the boardwalk will be built up to the property line and not over the lake. <br /> <br />Commissioner Arcand says that public access to Egg Lake shouldn’t be considered a benefit of the PUD <br />flexibility, citing the private ownership of the shore line. <br /> <br />The applicant, Denny Trooien of White Bear Lake, MN approaches the Planning Commission. Trooien <br />expresses the excitement he and his team feel for having gotten to this stage, and introduces the <br />members of his development team in attendance. According to Trooien, the sketch plan ideas for the <br />project after several drives past the site plus a kayak excursion onto Egg Lake. Trooien says that parking <br />can come after the rest of the design process. Originally, the plan had 90,000 square feet of <br />commercial space, whittled down to the proposed 63,000 square feet. Trooien states that his <br />consultants have done an analysis of shared parking based on differing uses and that their study <br />concluded that 245 could work but his team agrees with staff that a building-by-building analysis is <br />best. Trooien is of the opinion that parking ordinance is too high, and offers to answer questions from <br />the Commissioners. <br /> <br />Commissioner Derr asks about building elevations, and whether the buildings will be noticeably <br />propped up above Highway 61 due to fill. Juba responds with the 35-foot maximum building height in <br />the C-1 zoning district, and that the tallest building in the project is proposed to rea ch 27 feet. Pete <br />Keely, architect with Collage Architects, answers the question about fill, stating that the buildings will <br />be placed upon piling rather than fill, and highlights that rooftop mechanical equipment will be <br />screened by the roofing itself. <br /> <br />Chair Kleissler asks about the response from the DNR and their feedback regarding setbacks from the <br />lake. The applicant responds highlighting several items. First the mitigating factors the team has built in <br />intended to ease issues with wetland delineation, including redacting the plans to use fill. They stated <br />that the decking would not go beyond the ordinary high-water mark, Trooien highlights that only the <br />dock has an extension into Egg Lake. Lastly, Trooien expresses his wish to be able to build a dock with a <br />more commercially-suitable size, and hopes to continue working with the DNR to find an agreement. <br /> <br />Chair Kleissler opened the Public Hearing at 7:50 PM <br /> <br />Ann Brosse, of 5965 138th Street North, speaks that she is concerned about the DNR’s response and <br />the overreaching shoreland development. She is concerned about the encroachment up to the <br />property line on Egg Lake and the need to preserve the shoreline. Brosse is also concerned that the city <br />was disregarding the recently adopted shoreland overlay district setback requirements. Brosse states <br />that she wishes to protect and conserve water and other natural resources as the city grows.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.