My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2014.01.14 EDA Agenda Packet
Hugo
>
Community Development
>
EDA
>
EDA Agenda/Packets
>
2014 EDA Packets
>
2014.01.14 EDA Agenda Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/11/2016 10:56:43 AM
Creation date
1/11/2016 10:11:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commissions
Meeting Date
1/11/2014
Document Type
Agenda/Packets
Commission Name
EDA
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
78
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
5 <br />CITY OF HUGO <br />Community Development <br />Planning and Zoning <br />Staff Report <br />TO: Hugo Economic Development Authority <br />FROM: Rachel Juba, Planner <br />SUBJECT: Mark Wold, O'Reilly Auto Parts Sketch Plan — 14777 Forest <br />Boulevard North <br />DATE: January 10, 2014, for the EDA meeting of January 14, 2014 <br />ZONING: Central Business (C-1) <br />1. JANUARY 9, 2014, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING UPDATE: <br />At its January 9, 2014, meeting the Planning Commission reviewed and provided <br />informal comments on the sketch plan. <br />The applicant explained to the Planning Commission that they realize the site is tight, but <br />they like the location. He stated that they have not been able to meet the guidelines in <br />regards to building orientation or placement. He stated that he has presented other <br />building orientations and placements to O'Reilly's Real Estate Committee, as staff has <br />suggested, and they have stated that will not work.. <br />The Planning Commission generally agreed that the building was too large for the site <br />and they were uncomfortable with all the proposed variance requests. They encouraged <br />the applicant to reduce the building size to eliminate the yard setback variances and to <br />provide an adequate amount of parking for a typical retail user. <br />The Planning Commission discussed the building placement and stated that they <br />understand the desire for a retail user to place the building in that location, but questioned <br />whether it met the downtown design guidelines. One Commissioner questioned whether <br />having buildings placed at the street is a good idea in downtown because most of the <br />users will have the back side of the building towards the street. There was also discussion <br />on reviewing the downtown plan and design guidelines in regards to building placement <br />and how it will affect site plans on other properties in downtown. The Planning <br />Commission recognized that this project is key on what will be expected in the rest of <br />downtown. <br />There were also concerns about the buffering from the adjacent residential uses, snow <br />removal, and landscaping. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.