Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC 09.08.22 Minutes for the Planning Commission Meeting of Thursday, September 8, 2022 Chair Kleissler called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. PRESENT: Andress, Arcand, Derr, Kleissler, Petty ABSENT: Lessard STAFF: Rachel Juba, Community Development Director Max Gort, Associate Planner Pledge of Allegiance. Oath of Office New Planning Commissioner Steve Andress introduced himself to the Commissioners and those in attendance, giving some background on his previous volunteer involvement in the city. Mr. Andress took the Oath of Office at 7:02 PM Introduction of Max Gort – Associate Planner Community Development Director Juba introduced the newly hired Associate Planner, Max Gort, to the Commissioners and those in attendance. Approval of Minutes for the Planning Commission Meeting of July 28, 2022 Commissioner Derr made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Petty to approve minutes for the meeting of July 14, 2022. Ayes: Andress, Arcand, Derr, Kleissler, Petty Motion carried. Public Hearing: Dennis Properties LLC – “Downtown Hugo” Preliminary Plat and PUD Staff provided a background on the proposed “Downtown Hugo” project from Dennis Properties LLC. The applicant is requesting approval of a preliminary plat and planned unit development (PUD) to subdivide and master plan the property to allow 5 buildings for a total of approximately 63,000 square feet. The PUD general plan is proposed for the entire 4.2 acres of the property and is will replace the previous PUD General Plan that was approved in 2020. The property is located on the east side of Highway 61 in downtown along Egg Lake. The property includes wetlands along the lake for a total of 4 July 28, 2022 PC Minutes Page 2 buildable acres. The property is currently owned by the City of Hugo and the applicant has a purchase agreement to purchase the property in phases. The PUD General Plan includes 5 buildings totaling 63,000 square feet, which includes 24,732 square feet for a second story of a couple buildings. The mix of uses are restaurants (18,000 square feet), retail (25,000 square feet), and office (20,000). The plan includes a downtown main street concept, promenade in the center, and a waterfront boardwalk intended to give residents and guests views of Egg Lake. The preliminary plat includes four lots that will generally have a building on each lot with cross access and parking agreements. A property owners association will be required to be created to maintain the private drives, landscaping, lighting, and other common areas. The applicant is requesting flexibility from the shoreland, parking and setback regulations. In exchange for this flexibility the applicant is providing a landscape plan that exceeds ordinance standards, design standards and architecture that exceed ordinance standards, creation of a main street atmosphere in the Central Business District, and public access to Egg Lake. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan shows the land use being Mixed-Use (MIX). The PUD is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in terms of land use. It is in staff’s opinion that the PUD general plan has offered a creative and efficient method to planning the site, all which meets the intent of the PUD ordinance. The preliminary plat includes 4 lots. The development is proposed in phases. Lot 1, Block 1 is proposed as the first phase and is proposed to be a restaurant. The applicant will be required to apply for a PUD final plan and final plat for each lot in the PUD. The applications meet the criteria for approval and are also consistent with the downtown plan and design guidelines. Staff recommended the Planning Commission approve the PUD and preliminary applications, subject to the conditions listed in the resolutions. Commissioner Petty asks Staff about the trash enclosure being located facing a nearby residential property. Juba responds that location of the trash enclosure will be further discussed with the applicant due to nearby residents and eventual goals of cross-access with other downtown commercial developments. Commissioner Arcand asks about the long-term effects of compromising on parking, especially if the development becomes popular. Staff is of the opinion that the required 380 spaces isn’t ful ly necessary, but also that the proposed 245 spaces is not enough. Due to phasing, the final PUD plan will have individual use evaluations for parking as they’re reviewed. Arcand says he is concerned about the possibility of reducing building square footage in order to reduce parking, and Commissioner Andress remarks that there is no proposed overflow parking. Juba states that parking will be evaluated as each individual building is evaluated, and that the appropriate amount of parking will be dictated by the use of each building. July 28, 2022 PC Minutes Page 3 Commissioner Petty asks about the purpose of subdividing the property into 4 lots compared to the 2 proposed development phases. Juba responds that master planned sites will often have multiple lot owners with cross-access and parking easements. Petty asks when in the process parking will be built with each lot, and Juba replies that lots will be built in accordance with each phase . Commissioner Arcand asks if parts of the boardwalk would be built with each phase, Juba says yes. Arcand asks to clarify whether the dock will be built over the lake or up to the lake, Juba replies that the boardwalk will be built up to the property line and not over the lake. Commissioner Arcand says that public access to Egg Lake shouldn’t be considered a benefit of the PUD flexibility, citing the private ownership of the shore line. The applicant, Denny Trooien of White Bear Lake, MN approaches the Planning Commission. Trooien expresses the excitement he and his team feel for having gotten to this stage, and introduces the members of his development team in attendance. According to Trooien, the sketch plan ideas for the project after several drives past the site plus a kayak excursion onto Egg Lake. Trooien says that parking can come after the rest of the design process. Originally, the plan had 90,000 square feet of commercial space, whittled down to the proposed 63,000 square feet. Trooien states that his consultants have done an analysis of shared parking based on differing uses and that their study concluded that 245 could work but his team agrees with staff that a building-by-building analysis is best. Trooien is of the opinion that parking ordinance is too high, and offers to answer questions from the Commissioners. Commissioner Derr asks about building elevations, and whether the buildings will be noticeably propped up above Highway 61 due to fill. Juba responds with the 35-foot maximum building height in the C-1 zoning district, and that the tallest building in the project is proposed to rea ch 27 feet. Pete Keely, architect with Collage Architects, answers the question about fill, stating that the buildings will be placed upon piling rather than fill, and highlights that rooftop mechanical equipment will be screened by the roofing itself. Chair Kleissler asks about the response from the DNR and their feedback regarding setbacks from the lake. The applicant responds highlighting several items. First the mitigating factors the team has built in intended to ease issues with wetland delineation, including redacting the plans to use fill. They stated that the decking would not go beyond the ordinary high-water mark, Trooien highlights that only the dock has an extension into Egg Lake. Lastly, Trooien expresses his wish to be able to build a dock with a more commercially-suitable size, and hopes to continue working with the DNR to find an agreement. Chair Kleissler opened the Public Hearing at 7:50 PM Ann Brosse, of 5965 138th Street North, speaks that she is concerned about the DNR’s response and the overreaching shoreland development. She is concerned about the encroachment up to the property line on Egg Lake and the need to preserve the shoreline. Brosse is also concerned that the city was disregarding the recently adopted shoreland overlay district setback requirements. Brosse states that she wishes to protect and conserve water and other natural resources as the city grows. July 28, 2022 PC Minutes Page 4 James Gregoire, of 16720 Henna Avenue North, asks several questions. The first was whether adjacent city-owned properties could be purchased to accommodate extra parking. The second is whether stormwater would be drained into Egg Lake directly, causing runoff issues. The third was about how the rear of the buildings would appear from Highway 61, concerned about seeing a blank side of a building. Juba responded to the first question by mentioning that the option of purchasing the adjacent city- owned properties had been discussed, but ultimately the applicant had only signed a p urchase agreement on this particular property. Juba also responded to the third question by highlighting the proposed articulated architecture which intentionally makes all four sides of the building have visually pleasing design. Paul Schroeder, the project engineer from SRF Consulting Group, addresses Mr. Gregoire’s second question by explaining the design of the porous pavement to allow stormwater to soak into sand and other porous soils, with a small portion draining into the storm sewer system on Hig hway 61, and draining into Egg Lake. Chair Kleissler asks about whether the proposed semi-pervious surface is classified as pavement or open. Schroeder states that it can go either way but it is considered pervious because water is allowed to soak in and flow under. Commissioner Andress asks about how snow removal affects that style of pavement. Schroeder responds saying that it still needs to be plowed, but that in the spring the surface may warm up more quickly than conventional pavement surfaces. Additionally, Schroeder mentions that the lot can’t be sanded to aid in ice melt and needs to use salt or other methods. Commissioner Petty asks if salt is detrimental to lake. Schroeder says he doesn’t want to answer definitively but highlights that salt will stay on site. Schroeder makes a final remark about how the buildings won’t be noticeably higher in elevation compared to the rest of the Highway 61 corridor. No one else spoke. Chair Kleissler closed the Public Hearing at 8:03 PM Commissioner Arcand asks Juba to clarify if technical evaluation panel approved the dock, deferring cooperation to DNR. Juba explains the background and duty of the technical evaluation panel. Commissioner Derr asks to view the PUD flexibility requests and items in exchange. Commissioner Petty says that request on PUD flexibility is pretty standard and that the items given in return make sense. Chair Kleissler agrees. July 28, 2022 PC Minutes Page 5 Commissioner Arcand says that 8 feet off of Hwy 61 doesn’t seem like much, asks what they’ll do with it. Juba explains the corridor project with Washington County and regional rail authority. Arcand commends the work put into the site and recognizes that the site is difficult to make something work on. No further commissioner discussion. Commissioner Petty makes a motion, seconded by Commissioner Arcand to approve Dennis Properties LLC’s Preliminary Plat and PUD applications for the “Downtown Hugo ” project. All Ayes. Motion carried. New Business City-Wide Bus Tour: Juba gives background on the event taking place on October 1st. Those interested in attending should contact City Clerk Michele Lindau to RSVP. Old Business None Adjournment Commissioner Petty made a motion, Commissioner Derr seconded, to adjourn at 8:11 PM. All ayes. Motion carried. Respectfully Submitted, Max Gort, Associate Planner