Laserfiche WebLink
July 28, 2022 PC Minutes <br />Page 4 <br /> <br /> <br />James Gregoire, of 16720 Henna Avenue North, asks several questions. The first was whether adjacent <br />city-owned properties could be purchased to accommodate extra parking. The second is whether <br />stormwater would be drained into Egg Lake directly, causing runoff issues. The third was about how <br />the rear of the buildings would appear from Highway 61, concerned about seeing a blank side of a <br />building. <br /> <br />Juba responded to the first question by mentioning that the option of purchasing the adjacent city- <br />owned properties had been discussed, but ultimately the applicant had only signed a p urchase <br />agreement on this particular property. Juba also responded to the third question by highlighting the <br />proposed articulated architecture which intentionally makes all four sides of the building have visually <br />pleasing design. <br /> <br />Paul Schroeder, the project engineer from SRF Consulting Group, addresses Mr. Gregoire’s second <br />question by explaining the design of the porous pavement to allow stormwater to soak into sand and <br />other porous soils, with a small portion draining into the storm sewer system on Hig hway 61, and <br />draining into Egg Lake. <br /> <br />Chair Kleissler asks about whether the proposed semi-pervious surface is classified as pavement or <br />open. Schroeder states that it can go either way but it is considered pervious because water is allowed <br />to soak in and flow under. <br /> <br />Commissioner Andress asks about how snow removal affects that style of pavement. Schroeder <br />responds saying that it still needs to be plowed, but that in the spring the surface may warm up more <br />quickly than conventional pavement surfaces. Additionally, Schroeder mentions that the lot can’t be <br />sanded to aid in ice melt and needs to use salt or other methods. <br />Commissioner Petty asks if salt is detrimental to lake. Schroeder says he doesn’t want to answer <br />definitively but highlights that salt will stay on site. <br />Schroeder makes a final remark about how the buildings won’t be noticeably higher in elevation <br />compared to the rest of the Highway 61 corridor. <br />No one else spoke. <br />Chair Kleissler closed the Public Hearing at 8:03 PM <br />Commissioner Arcand asks Juba to clarify if technical evaluation panel approved the dock, deferring <br />cooperation to DNR. Juba explains the background and duty of the technical evaluation panel. <br /> <br />Commissioner Derr asks to view the PUD flexibility requests and items in exchange. Commissioner <br />Petty says that request on PUD flexibility is pretty standard and that the items given in return make <br />sense. Chair Kleissler agrees.