HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005.10.13 PC MinutesMINUTES
HUGO PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 13, 2005
Call to Order
Chairman Schumann called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
PRESENT: McRoberts, Rosenquist, Schumann, Weidt
ABSENT: Bailly, Hoffbeck, Kleissler
ALSO PRESENT: Bryan Bear, Community Development Director (CDD)
Michele Lindau, Community Development Assistant
Andrew Gitzlaff
Minutes of September 8, 2005
McRoberts made motion, Weidt seconded, to approve the Planning Commission minutes of
September 8, 2005 as submitted.
All Ayes. Motion carried.
Zoning Text amendment for General Zoning District for Commercial Kennels
The Commission considered an amendment to Hugo City Code, Chapter 320, Section 1135,
GENERAL INSUTRIAL DISTRICT (I-3) and Section 1195-370 KENNELS -COMMERCIAL,
to allow commercial kennels in the General Industrial Zoning District by Conditional Use
Permit.
The Community Development Intern explained that at the City Council meeting on August 15,
2005, Council accepted the EDA's recommendation to approve a purchase agreement for the sale
of a City owned parcel in the Bald Eagle Industrial Park to Guy and Cindy LaBarre, owners of
the Oneka Pet Resort. Oneka Pet Resort is a commercial pet kennel that provides pet pampering
services and boarding facilities for the dogs and cats of pet owners. Under the current ordinance,
commercial kennels are not permitted in the General Industrial Zoning District and the Bald
Eagle Industrial Park is zoned General Industrial. The ordinance amendment would allow
commercial kennels as a principle use in the General Industrial Zoning District by a Conditional
Use Permit.
Staff further proposed that the performance standards for kennels should be modified to require
Planning Commission Minutes — October 13, 2005
Page 2
structures be set back 100 feet from a residential property line. The current language stated that
all structures used for the confinement, care, or breeding of animals shall be setback a minimum
of 100 feet from any property line.
McRoberts asked for clarification on what was considered an exterior structure and said he
wanted to see fencing and pens specifically stated in the ordinance.
Schumann suggested it include all appurtenances.
Guy LaBarre, owner of Oneka Pet Resort, stated he was in favor of the ordinance amendment.
Jeff Olson, owner of Olson Tool located at 13449 Fenway Boulevard Circle North, said he
understood that Oneka Pet Resort would have a 4,000 square foot fenced area and wondered
about the noise effecting the resale of his property.
McRoberts asked why the proposed 100 setback would be from residential property only.
The CDD explained the nature of the industrial park was different and less sensitive to the noise
issue.
Schumann asked if dog barking was address in the dog ordinance, and the CDD explained that
the nuisance ordinance would come into effect.
McRoberts pointed out that there could still be an odor issue. The CDD said the way the
ordinance would be administered would be by a Conditional Use Permit and the City could
always reject the CUP request if it was not compatible in the area. Each application would be
considered separately.
Rosenquist commented that animal rights activists would not allow for dirty kennels.
Weidt said he had no problem with approving the ordinance amendment.
McRoberts made motion, Rosenquist seconded, to approve the ordinance amendment to allow
commercial kennels in the General Industrial Zoning District with the added condition that all
structures, including pens and fences and all materials used for the confinement, care, or breeding
of animals meet the 100 foot setback.
All Ayes. Motion carried.
Oneka Pet Resort Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan
The Commission held a public hearing on the request of James Faulkner, Faulkner Construction,
2350 County Road J, White Bear Lake, for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan approval for
the construction of a 6,400 square foot pet kennel building on Lot 3, Block 1 of Bald Eagle Industrial Park,
51h Addition.
Planning Commission Minutes — October 13, 2005
Page 3
The CD Intern explained to the Commission that Guy and Cindy LaBarre of Oneka Pet Resort
purchased the property from the City. According to the agreement, Oneka Pet Resort has until
September 2006 to construct a building on the site. The building would serve as a commercial
kennel that provides boarding facilities and additional pet pampering services for the dogs and
cats of pet owners. He explained that the CUP and site plan would be contingent on the approval
of the preceding text amendment by the City Council.
The proposed building would include a 150 square foot enclosed waste, recycling and storage
structure and a 4,000 square foot outdoor pet exercise and play area. The play area, located to the
exterior of the building, would be enclosed by a 10' foot high wall constructed of the same
materials and matching colors as the principle structure. The rear and side yard would be
surrounded by a six foot high chain link fence. The proposed fence would meet all setbacks and
height and building material requirements as outlined in the City's fencing ordinance and the
restrictive covenants for the Industrial Park.
The Intern explained that the parking ordinance did not address parking spaces for kennels. Staff
calculated the required amount of spaces on 2,400 square feet of office space and the 4,000
square feet of warehouse space, which resulted in approximately 24 spaces. The proposed site
plan showed 26 spaces.
The landscape plan showed the appropriate quantities of trees but did not show the sizes and
types. Staff recommended, as a condition of approval, a complete landscape plan be submitted
as well as a revised grading and utility plan showing infiltration on the site. The Intern also
noted that they needed to provide a screening plan for the rooftop mechanical units.
Rosenquist questioned why an incomplete application was brought before the Commission. The
CDD explained that staff was working with the applicant on outstanding issues.
Rosenquist questioned the location of the dumpsters, which appeared to be blocking parking
spaces, whether the dumpsters were covered, and asked where the infiltration on the site would
take place.
The area on the plan where the dumpsters where shown was not being counted as a parking space
and the dumpsters were not to be covered. The Intern showed on the plan where the infiltration
area would be and said the City Engineer indicated that infiltration on the site would be no
problem.
McRoberts requested that applications be complete prior to coming to the Commission for
approval, and asked for affirmation that there were no adjoining residential parcels. The CDD
assured him there were not.
Schumann opened the public hearing.
Andy Faulkner, Faulkner Construction, said they were looking into what types of trees and
shrubs could withstand the conditions of a kennel and he showed the line of site drawings for the
Planning Commission Minutes — October 13, 2005
Page 4
rooftop mechanical units.
Schumann suggested there be more concentration of landscaping around the fence. Guy LaBarre
explained there would be evergreens blocking the front of the fence where dogs would be on a
leash and the play area would be surrounded by a ten -foot block wall. The kennels would be
located in the center of the building.
Rosenquist asked how the septic runoff would be handled. LaBarre explained a drain would be
located in the center which would automatically flush, and solid waste would be picked up by pet
technicians and double bagged.
Schumann asked what the hours would be. LaBarre said there would be staff on duty from 6
a.m. to 10 p.m. All kennels are isolation kennels where they are blocked from view of other dogs.
Troy Livgard, engineer on the project, said he had been in conversation with WSB regarding the
infiltration on the site and was confident it could be done. Livgard said he did three other
buildings in the Industrial Park where there were no infiltration requirements.
The CDD explained that since the City became the LGU, they needed to follow the Rice Creek
Watershed District's requirements where the infiltration requirement recently fell under a rule
change.
Livgard showed their plan for handling the water from the site and possible amendments to the
plan where infiltration could take place. He explained how they would handle a 100 year flood
event.
Falkner said they had concerns about getting the parking lot in prior to the closing of the asphalt
plants which has historically been around the Thanksgiving weekend.
There were no other comments and Schumann closed the public hearing.
The Commission indicated they did not want to recommend approval of an application they felt
was incomplete because of lack of complete landscape and infiltration plan.
Rosenquist made motion to send the application to Council without a recommendation.
McRoberts asked the applicants if they would prefer sending it to Council without a
recommendation from the Commission to having the application tabled.
Cindy LaBarre apologized for not getting the information to them and Guy LaBarre added that
they had no idea that infiltration was needed. The applicants indicated that they would like to
take the application to the City Council without the Commission's recommendation.
McRoberts seconded the motion made by Rosenquist to forward the application to the Council
without a recommendation.
Planning Commission Minutes — October 13, 2005
Page 5
All Ayes. Motion carried.
Pearson Mechanical Site Plan
The Commission considered the request of R.A. Pearson & Associates, 12575 Lockridge Street,
Stillwater, for site plan approval to allow for the construction of a 45,000 square foot
warehouse/office building on Lot 1, Block 1 of Bald Eagle Industrial Park, 5th Addition.
The CD Intern explained that Pearson Mechanical, Inc had purchased the property from the City
and had until September 2006 to construct a building on the site. Pearson was proposing a
warehouse and office complex to house the headquarters of Pearson Mechanical Inc. &
Associates, which is a mechanical contractor company specializing in HVAC system
construction. The proposed building will consist of 33,800 square feet of warehouse space and
9,600 square feet of office space. Part of the office and warehouse space may be leased out to
another contracting company.
Staff calculated a total of 75 parking spaces required by ordinance for a building of that size.
The proposed site plan identified the construction of 48 parking spaces with 27 additional
parking spaces identified as future parking. Staff considered the proposed amount of parking
spaces to be adequate for their operation. Pearson Mechanical did not intend on occupying the
entire building immediately. Much of the office space was to be reserved for future growth and
the additional 27 spaces would be needed at a later date if Pearson Mechanical expanded its
operations or if the building is occupied by another business.
The Intern also noted that the building met all setback requirements and staff would continue to
work with the applicant on lighting, landscaping and screening issues on the site.
McRoberts questioned what would trigger the construction of the additional spaces and Weidt
suggested that it may be cheaper to do it now.
Schumann opened the public hearing.
Steve Mueller, Jafvert, Mueller Architects, Inc., said they would prefer to build only the
necessary 48 stalls now to save on money and the plan showed where additional parking could be
constructed in the future.
McRoberts left at 8:30 p.m.
The applicant discussed trash enclosures, parking and access to the parking lot. Mueller
indicated that there would be approximately a dozen pickup trucks parked there at night.
Rosenquist suggested the trash enclosures be covered.
Weidt said he would like to see all the parking done now and Rosenquist suggested the additional
parking be installed as soon as the other end of the building was being occupied.
Planning Commission Minutes — October 13, 2005
Page 6
Rosenquist made motion, Weidt seconded, to recommend approval of the site plan with the
added condition that the remaining parking spaces be installed when any additional office space
is added to the building in the future.
All Ayes. Motion carried.
Multi Family Design Guidelines Joint Meeting
The CDD reminded the Commission of a joint meeting with the City Council on October 25,
2005 at 3:00 pm to discuss multi -family design guidelines.
Adjournment
Rosenquist made motion, Weidt seconded, to adjourn at 8:45 p.m.
All Ayes. Motion carried.
Michele Lindau, Secretary
Planning Commission