HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC PACKET 01.12.23If you need accommodations for the Planning Commission meeting please contact
Rachel Juba at (651) 762-6304 or rjuba@ci.hugo.mn.us, thank you.
Agenda
Hugo Planning Commission
Thursday, January 12, 2023
Hugo City Hall
7:00 PM
Oath of Office:
• Michael Kelly
• Michael Granger
A. ROLL CALL: Andress, Arcand, Derr, Granger, Kelly, Kleissler, Lessard, Petty
B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. December 8, 2022
D. PUBLIC HEARING
1. Ordinance Amendments – MS4 Requirements.
E. NEW BUSINESS
F. OLD BUSINESS
1. Oneka Commons – Revised Sketch Plan
2. Review and Approve 2023 Goals
G. ADJOURNMENT
Minutes for the Planning Commission Meeting of Thursday, December 8, 2022
Chair Kleissler called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm.
PRESENT: Andress, Derr, Granger, Kelly, Kleissler, Petty
ABSENT: Arcand, Lessard
STAFF: Rachel Juba, Community Development Director
Max Gort, Associate Planner
Pledge of Allegiance.
Approval of Minutes for the Planning Commission Meeting of November 10, 2022
Commissioner Petty requested a correction to the minutes on the 4th page, changing the word
referring to the proposed future zoning classification from “industrial” to “residential.” Associate
Planner Gort noted the correction.
Commissioner Petty made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Derr, to approve the minutes for the
Planning Commission meeting of November 10, 2022.
All ayes. Motion carried.
Public Hearing: Oneka Prairie – Preliminary Plat and PUD
Staff provided background on the requested Preliminary Plat and PUD applications for a residential
development to be known as Oneka Prairie. The property is located at 16345 Everton Avenue North,
directly to the north of the existing Oneka Place development. The preliminary plat includes 59 single-
family residential lots and 7 outlots. The PUD General Plan will be for all 24.83 acres of the property
and is proposed to be rezoned from Future Urban Service (FUS) to Planned Unit Development (PUD).
The property includes 3.92 acres of wetlands for a total buildable acreage of 20.28 acres. The net
density for the development is 2.9 units per acre, meeting the density requirement for the land use
classification. The applicant is requesting PUD flexibility on the minimum lot size, lot width, side yard
setbacks, and the minimum right-of-way. Staff and the City Engineer will continue to work with the
applicant to ensure quality design in their stormwater infiltration and reuse system. A trunk sanitary
sewer lift station is proposed to be constructed at the northwest corner of the development, and will
have the capacity to extend City sewer services to neighboring properties as they develop. The
maintenance of the stormwater reuse system will be described in the development agreement as the
responsibility of the development’s Homeowner’s Association. Generally, Staff is of the opinion that
the proposal exceeds city standards, and that the applicant used creative and efficient methods for
planning the site. Staff recommended approval of the preliminary plat and PUD for Oneka Prairie.
December 8, 2022 PC Minutes
Page 2
Commissioner Petty asked if a water reuse system such as the one proposed has ever failed, and how
much responsibility the HOA would have to bear. Juba responds that drought would be the only
concern for the viability of stormwater reuse, and options such as using the city’s water for irrigation as
a backup exist.
Commissioner Andress asked if similar PUD flexibility had been extended to the Oneka Place
development, and for details on the differences between the trails and sidewalks. Juba stated that
similar flexibility on lot width and setbacks had been extended to Oneka Place and several other
developments in the city. Juba added that the trails will be 8 foot wide bituminous surface, and that
sidewalks will be 5 foot wide concrete surfaces.
The applicant, Larry Alm of Southwind Holdings, LLC. addressed the Planning Commission, stating that
he was prepared to answer questions.
Commissioner Andress asked for the extent to which Oneka Parkway would be built. Alm stated that
the road will be built to align with the northwest corner of the property, with the location of the
proposed lift station. Commissioner Andress also asked why the alignment was to the west of the
property line. Juba explained the 100 foot right-of-way easement that the city acquired on the
adjacent property for the purpose of eventually extending Oneka Parkway to 165th Street.
Commissioner Granger asked if the HOA will maintain landscaping in the development, and if the City
monitors the provided maintenance. Juba stated that, per the development agreement, the HOA
would maintain the entrances to the development and the out lots, while homeowners will be
regulated to maintain their own lots, and the City will maintain the park.
Chair Kleissler opened the Public Hearing at 7:23 PM
Jeff Oliver, attorney with Burns and Hansen, P.A. and representing Lee Ann and Glenn Steffens, owners
of the property to the west of the development, spoke. Oliver stated that his clients wanted to
maximize development opportunity on their property, and wished that changes to the alignment of
Oneka Parkway be made such as abutting the east property line, extensions of stub streets to the west,
and extension of Oneka Parkway all the way to 165th Street. Oliver further stated that his clients’
lessees who farm the southern portion of their property would not have access with Oneka Parkway
being barricaded at its current proposed extent. Lee Ann Steffens, of 1898 Birchside Ave. White Bear
Lake, restated the desire for their lessee to access the southern portion of the property from the north,
and stated that the entire 100 feet of the easement shouldn’t be used for a 60-foot road.
Mhonpaj Lee, who owns the properties at 4635 165th St N and 4782 Empress Ave N, stated that the
165th Street property is currently used as a family farm, which they use the existing Everton Ave. to
access. Lee stated concern with the lack of space in the Oneka Place area for her kids to play, and
stated that the property proposed for development is where they currently snowmobile, and believed
that economic factors for farmers along 165th Street were not being considered. Lee stated that she
wanted the City to consider a longer time period to allow for remaining 165th Street properties to
develop, and for more recreational space in the general area.
December 8, 2022 PC Minutes
Page 3
Juba responded to Mr. Oliver’s concerns, first stating that shifting the Oneka Parkway alignment as far
to the east as possible would place the trail immediately adjacent to homeowners’ property lines,
which is not an ideal situation as frequent unintentional trespassing would occur. Juba stated that the
developer is being asked to provide utility stubs to the west to allow for development of such property,
and that the current property owners and lessees will still be able to use the existing Everton Ave. to
access the property, but an actual street connection will not be made to avoid funneling traffic onto
the gravel road.
Juba stated that the area to the east of Oneka Place is currently a passive park with trails to be mowed
next summer, and the Parks Commission will consider an active feature in the upland portions. Juba
explained that the properties along 165th Street are all zoned Future Urban Service (FUS), which allows
for agricultural uses with eventual sewer and water service to be extended.
Chair Kleissler asked to clarify the width of Oneka Parkway as proposed. Juba stated that the roadway
is 32 feet wide from face-to-face of the curb, plus the rear of the curb, buffers, sidewalks, and trails
adding extra width, and that details will come with the final plat.
Commissioner Petty asks about the barricade from Oneka Parkway to the existing Everton Avenue.
Juba states that the barricade will prevent vehicle traffic from entering the gravel road as a means to
cut through to 165th Street, which neither road is designed to handle at this time from a traffic
engineering standpoint.
Chair Kleissler asked the applicant if he would agree with the request from the Steffens’ to stub streets
to the west, and if there’s an ability to address alignment concerns. Alm states that they’ve been
meeting what is required of them without extras added on, and Juba states that utilities will be
stubbed even if the streets won’t be.
Oliver states that road stubs are provided to the north and east, arguing that stubs ought be provided
to the west with 4 way intersections rather than leaving potential for staggered intersections along
Oneka Parkway. Oliver restated the requests to shift the alignment of the road and allow access from
Everton Avenue.
No one else spoke.
Chair Kleissler closed the Public Hearing at 8:03 PM.
Commissioner Petty stated that developers already have to pay for their own project, and doesn’t feel
that Mr. Alm should need to pay for stubs to the west which aren’t on his property, highlighting that
the stubs to the north and east come to an end within the property lines of the development. Petty
also states that vacation of a portion of the right-of-way easement should be considered when future
development comes on the Steffens’ property. Petty states that most people would not want a trail to
be abutting their property line.
December 8, 2022 PC Minutes
Page 4
Commissioner Granger asked if the north and east stubs are both to service new developments as well
as service the homes on those streets. Juba states that connecting neighborhoods is encouraged by the
Comprehensive Plan.
Chair Kleissler asked why the proposed trail inside the development wouldn’t connect to the proposed
park. Juba points to alignment with the existing trail on Fairoaks Avenue, and the desire to minimize
street crossings.
No further discussion.
Commissioner Petty made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Derr, to approve the Preliminary Plat
and PUD for Oneka Prairie.
All ayes. Motion Carried.
New Business
Juba reminded the Commissioners that the next meeting will be held on January 12, 2023.
Old Business
None.
Adjournment
Commissioner Petty made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Granger, to adjourn the meeting at
8:12 PM.
All ayes. Motion Carried.
Respectfully Submitted,
Max Gort, Associate Planner
Memorandum
To: Hugo Planning Commission
From: Rachel Juba, Community Development Director
Date: January 5, 2023, for the Planning Commission Meeting of January 12, 2023
Re: Public Hearing – MS4 Ordinances
1.BACKGROUND:
In reviewing the city’s Municipal Separate Stormwater Sewer System (MS4) General Permit,
staff has found the need to pass two ordinances to comply with permit requirements. An MS4 is
defined as a system designed or used for the collection or conveyance of stormwater that is
owned or operated by a public entity, is not a combined sewer, and is not part of a publically
owner treatment works. MS4 systems must satisfy general permit requirements if they meet
certain population criteria. Hugo’s MS4 must follow general permit requirements since the city
has over 10,000 residents. The MS4 general permit is designed to reduce the amount of sediment
and pollutants entering state waters from stormwater systems. The Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA) issued its most recent MS4 permit in 2020 which mandates new requirements.
For these reasons, staff is proposing City Code amendments to comply with the 2020 MS4
general permit requirements.
2.OVERVIEW OF CITY CODE REVISIONS:
Removal and disposal of dog waste
According to section 18.5 of the MS4 General Permit, permit holders must require pet owners to
remove and properly dispose their pet’s feces if said excrement is on the permittee’s owned land
areas. Pet waste left uncontrolled can pollute stormwater systems with pathogenic bacteria and
other parasites that are harmful to local ecosystems.
Most of the proposed amendments pertain to section 10-38 (Sanitation) of the City Code. Three
major additions are proposed. First, animal owners would be required to immediately remove and
dispose of their animal’s waste in a sanitary manner on public and private property. Second,
animal owners would be required to dispose of their animal’s waste through bagging, flushing
and burial, and prohibits disposal in storm drains and composts. Third, violators could be fined
up to $300 unless their animal is exempt from penalty. These provisions are intended to decrease
pollution by reducing the amount of animal waste within the city’s limits.
Minor changes are proposed for sections 10-1 (Definitions) and 10-39 (Penalty). For section 10-
1, terms from section 10-38 were added to improve clarity. For section 10-39, section 10-38 was
added to list violations of that section as petty misdemeanors.
D.1
2
Salt storage at commercial, industrial, and institutional facilities
According to section 18.6 of the MS4 General Permit, permit holders must require proper salt
storage at commercial, institutional, and non-NPDES permitted industrial facilities. Runoff from
salt piles can increase the chloride concentration in the water supply, leading to toxic conditions
for the local ecosystem. Sodium from salt piles can compromise nearby soil structures, reducing
its water retention capacity and increasing the probability of erosion.
The creation of a new section within the City Code is proposed to include the MS4 salt storage
requirements. This section, titled Salt Storage at Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional
Facilities, is numbered 90-182 and located underneath the Environmental Protection article of
the Zoning and Land Use chapter.
The proposed section has three major additions. First, deicing materials must be stored indoors if
possible and be on an impervious surface. If stored outdoors, a permanent roof or impermeable
cover must be placed over the pile. Second, salt storage facilities must be in close proximity to its
use, and be away from salt-vulnerable natural areas. Third, practices must be implemented to
prevent exposure when transferring salt piles. A definitions list is included at the beginning to
improve clarity. These provisions are intended to decrease salt collection from runoff to reduce
its impact on the local ecosystem.
3. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendments to Sections 10-1, 10-38 and 10-39 of
the City Code related to the proper removal and disposal of animal waste and the proposed
amendments to Section 90-182 of the City Code related to salt storage at commercial, industrial,
and institutional facilities.
Staff recommends the Planning Commission open and hold a public hearing and take any and all
comments.
Attachments:
1. Ordinance 2023-520
2. Ordinance 2023-521
3. 2020 MS4 General Permit requirements
3
ORDINANCE 2023-520
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 10, ARTICLE I, SECTION 10-1
DEFNITIONS, AND ARTICLE II, SECTION 10-38 SANITATION AND SECTION 10-39
PENALTY FOR THE PROPER REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL OF ANIMAL WASTE
THE CITY OF HUGO ORDAINS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Hugo does hereby amend Chapter 10, Article I,
Section 10-1 to add definitions and to amend Chapter 10, Article II, Sections 10-38 and 10-39 to
state the following:
10-1 DEFINITIONS
Animal means dog, cat or other animal kept for amusement or companionship.
Soil/defile/defecate means to make unclean from excrement.
Waste means solid matter expelled from the bowels of the pet, excrement.
10-38 SANITATION
(1) Animal Waste. It is unlawful for any owner or custodian of any animal to cause or allow
such animal to soil, defile or defecate on any public property or upon any street, sidewalk, public
way, play area or common grounds owned jointly by the members of a homeowners' or
condominium association, or upon private property other than that of the owner, unless such
owner immediately removes and disposes of all feces deposited by such animal in a sanitary
manner.
a. Any person who owns, keeps or harbors any dog must remove all dog feces, on a
daily basis, from all enclosed dog runs or kennels, and must remove, on a daily basis,
any accumulations of dog feces which are visible from any location outside the
borders of that person’s property.
(2) Disposal. Proper disposal of animal waste shall be limited to burial where lawfully permitted,
flushing in the toilet, bagging for disposal in the owner or keeper's waste receptacle, and bagging
for disposal in a waste receptacle in a public park or park area. Disposal of animal waste in storm
drains and public composts is prohibited. (3) Violations. Violation of this section may be subject
to a forfeiture of no more than $300.
a. Any peace officer, animal control officer, park ranger, any duly authorized assistant,
any duly authorized agent, or any person authorized by the animal control officer is
responsible for issuing the citations.
b. The provisions of this section shall not apply to the ownership or use of any properly
identified service or tracking animals when used by or with the permission of the
appropriate authorities.
4
10-39 PENALTY
Any person found to be in violation of the provisions of sections 10-30, 10-33 and 10-38 of
this article shall be guilty of a petty misdemeanor. Any person found to be in violation of the
provisions of any other section of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
Section 2. Severability. In the event that a court of competent jurisdiction adjudges any part of
this Ordinance to be invalid, such judgment shall not affect any other provision of this Ordinance
not specifically included with that judgment.
Section 3. Effective Date. This amendment shall take effect upon its passage and publication.
ADOPTED by the City Council this __ day of ___, 2023.
______________________________
Tom Weidt, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Michele Lindau, City Clerk
5
ORDINANCE 2023-521
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 90, ARTICLE V, SECTION 90-182
RESERVED FOR PROPER SALT STORAGE AT COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND
INSTITUTIONAL FACILITIES
THE CITY OF HUGO ORDAINS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Hugo does hereby amend Chapter 90, Article V,
Section 90-182 to state the following.
90-182 SALT STORAGE AT COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND INSTITUTIONAL
FACILITIES.
(1) Definitions. The following words, terms, and phrases, when used in this section, shall
have the meanings ascribed to them in this subsection, except where the context clearly
indicates a different meaning:
(a) Anti-icing means the application of a liquid deicer prior to the onset of a snow event.
(b) Deicer means a substance used to melt snow and ice or used for its anti-icing effects.
(2) Storage of Deicing Materials.
(a) Indoor operations for the storage of deicing materials must be provided whenever
possible in order to prevent such material from being affected by rain, snow, or melt
water.
(b) All salt, sand, and other deicing materials stored outdoors must be located on
impervious surfaces and be covered at all times. When not using a permanent roof, a
waterproof impervious, flexible cover must be placed over all storage piles. The cover
must prevent runoff and leachate from being generated by the outdoor storage piles.
The cover must be secured to prevent removal by wind or other storm events. Piles
must be formed in a conical shape and covered as necessary to prevent leaching.
(3) Facility siting.
(a) The facility must be in close proximity to the area in which the deicing materials are
to be used, if practical.
(b) Salt vulnerable natural areas should be avoided as storage facilities to the extent
possible. Where they cannot be avoided, specific measures should be instituted to
protect vulnerable areas. Salt vulnerable areas include, but are not limited to:
I. Areas with salt sensitive vegetation
II. Areas serving as a source of drinking water (surface water and
groundwater)
III. Areas with bodies of water with low dilution, low volume, or salt sensitive
species
IV. Areas associated with groundwater recharge zones or shallow water table,
with medium to high permeable soils.
6
(4) Transfer of Materials. Practices must be implemented in order to reduce exposure when
transferring salt or other deicing material.
Section 2. Severability. In the event that a court of competent jurisdiction adjudges any part of
this Ordinance to be invalid, such judgment shall not affect any other provision of this Ordinance
not specifically included with that judgment.
Section 3. Effective Date. This amendment shall take effect upon its passage and publication.
ADOPTED by the City Council this __ day of ___, 2023.
______________________________
Tom Weidt, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Michele Lindau, City Clerk
7
17.7 The permittee must document the following information:
a. all relevant written input submitted by persons regarding the SWPPP;
b. all responses from the permittee to written input received regarding the SWPPP, including any modifications made
to the
SWPPP as a result of the written input received;
c. date(s), location(s), and estimated number of participants at events held for purposes of compliance with item
17.3;
d. notices provided to the public of any events scheduled to meet item 17.3, including any electronic correspondence
(e.g., website, e-mail distribution lists, notices, etc.); and
e. date(s), location(s), description of activities, and estimated number of participants at events held for the purpose of
compliance with item 17.6. [Minn. R. 7090]
17.8 The permittee must conduct an annual assessment of the Public Participation/Involvement program to evaluate program
compliance, the status of achieving the measurable requirements in Section 17, and determine how the program might be
improved. Measurable requirements are activities that must be documented or tracked as applicable to the MCM (e.g.,
public input and involvement opportunities, etc.). The permittee must perform the annual assessment prior to completion
of each annual report and document any modifications made to the program as a result of the annual assessment. [Minn. R.
7090]
18.1 MCM 3: Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination (IDDE). [Minn. R. 7090]
18.2 New permittees must develop, implement, and enforce, and existing permittees must revise their current program as
necessary, and continue to implement and enforce, a program to detect and eliminate illicit discharges into the MS4. The
permittee must incorporate Section 18 requirements into their program. [Minn. R. 7090]
18.3 The permittee must maintain a map of the permittee's MS4, as required in Section 14. [Minn. R. 7090]
18.4 To the extent allowable under state or local law, the permittee must develop, implement, and enforce a regulatory
mechanism(s) that prohibits non-stormwater discharges into the permittee's MS4, except those non-stormwater discharges
authorized in item 3.2. A regulatory mechanism(s) for the purposes of the General Permit may consist of contract language,
an ordinance, permits, standards, written policies, operational plans, legal agreements, or any other mechanism, that will be
enforced by the permittee. The regulatory mechanism(s) must also include items 18.5 and 18.6, as applicable. [Minn. R.
7090]
18.5 For cities, townships, and counties, the permittee's regulatory mechanism(s) must require owners or custodians of pets
to remove and properly dispose of feces on permittee owned land areas. [Minn. R. 7090]
18.6 For cities and townships, the permittee's regulatory mechanism(s) must require proper salt storage at commercial,
institutional, and non-NPDES permitted industrial facilities. At a minimum, the regulatory mechanism(s) must require the
following:
a. designated salt storage areas must be covered or indoors;
b. designated salt storage areas must be located on an impervious surface; and
c. implementation of practices to reduce exposure when transferring material in designated salt storage areas
(e.g., sweeping, diversions, and/or containment). [Minn. R. 7090]
18.7 The permittee must incorporate illicit discharge detection into all inspection and maintenance activities conducted in items
21.9, 21.10, and 21.11. Where feasible, the permittee must conduct illicit discharge inspections during dry-weather
conditions (e.g., periods of 72 or more hours of no precipitation). [Minn. R. 7090]
18.8 At least once each calendar year, the permittee must train all field staff in illicit discharge recognition (including conditions
which could cause illicit discharges), and reporting illicit discharges for further investigation. Field staff includes, but is not
limited to, police, fire department, public works, and parks staff. Training for this specific requirement may include, but is
not limited to, videos, in-person presentations, webinars, training documents, and/or emails. [Minn. R. 7090]
1 Oneka Commons Sketch Plan 2023
CITY OF HUGO COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Planning and Zoning Application
Staff Report
TO: Hugo Planning Commission
FROM: Rachel Juba, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Peter Stalland - Oneka Commons Sketch Plan
DATE: January 4, 2023, for the Planning Commission meeting of January 12,
2023
REVIEW DEADLINE: Review Deadline Waived by Applicant
1.BACKGROUND:
The Planning Commission and EDA reviewed a different sketch plan from the applicant in
October 2022. The Commission’s did not like the idea of changing the land use to allow the
apartment in the location proposed. The stated that it is proposed to be a key intersection in the
City and highly visible and best fit commercial uses. They encouraged the applicant to find a
better place on the property, behind the commercial areas for an apartment use.
The applicant has taken the feedback from the Planning Commission and the EDA and is
proposing a new sketch plan for review.
2.DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:
The properties are generally located in the area south of Frenchman Road/CSAH 8 and west of
TH 61. The property owner, Marvin LaValle, as signed a contact with the applicant, Peter
Stalland to develop the property.
The applicant revised the sketch plan from the comments received from the EDA and Planning
Commission. The applicant is requesting review and comments on a sketch plan for development
of the properties with residential and commercial uses. These are informal nonbinding comments
to the applicant on the plan.
F.1
2 Oneka Commons Sketch Plan 2023
3. CONCEPT PLAN:
Current Zoning
The property is zoned Central Business (C-1), with a very small portion zoned General Business
(C-2) to the west.
The purpose of the central business zoning district (C-1) is to provide for the establishment of a
downtown which is a blend of cultural, recreational, civic, entertainment, retail sales, and office
uses. Businesses requiring exterior storage for processing, retail sales, or wholesale activities are
not permitted in this district.
Current Land Use
The property is guided Mixed-Use the 2040 Land Use Plan, with a very small portion to the west
guided Commercial (COM).
Mixed-Use (MIX)
The Mixed-Use designation provides opportunities for multiple compatible uses on a single site.
These uses can include residential, commercial, office, retail, and public/quasi-public uses. The
MIX land use designation allows residential development at a minimum density of 10 units per
net acre and maximum density of 60 units per net acre.
General Layout
The applicant is showing development of parcels of land approximately 23 acres into a mixed
use development with residential and commercial uses. The uses proposed are apartments
various commercial business. In discussions with the applicant the proposed apartments, would
be the first phase. The total number of number of units for the proposed apartments is 150. The
apartments are located on approximately 7 acres with a density of 25 units per acre. The plan
shows accesses into the site from Frenchman Road/CSAH 8.
The applicant has not clarified if they will be applying for a Planned Unit Development (PUD),
but it is likely. PUDs offer flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal
zoning district standards. The use of PUD zoning can allow for a greater variety of uses, internal
transfers of density, construction phasing and a potential for lower development costs. In
exchange for this flexibility, the City has the expectation that the development plan will result in
a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the
use of other, more standard zoning districts. PUD approval may be granted if the applicant can
demonstrate compliance with the following criteria:
1. The establishment of PUD zoning districts in appropriate settings and situations, to create
or maintain a development pattern that complies with the City's comprehensive plan.
2. The mixing of land uses within a development when such mixing of land uses could not
otherwise be accomplished.
3 Oneka Commons Sketch Plan 2023
3. Variations to the strict application of the land use regulations in this chapter in order to
improve site design and operation, while at the same time incorporating design elements
(e.g., construction materials, landscaping, lighting, open space, etc.) that exceed the City's
standards to offset the effect of any variations.
4. A more creative and efficient approach to land use within the city, while at the same time
protecting and promoting the health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability, and
general welfare of the City.
5. Preservation and enhancement of natural features and open spaces, including but not
limited to the width expansion of greenway corridors, conservation of wooded areas,
development of buffer areas, reduction of impervious surface, and utilization of joint
facilities and utilities.
6. Maintenance or improvement for the efficiency of public streets and utilities.
7. Establishment of appropriate transitions between differing land uses.
Compliance with City Code, Comprehensive Plan, and Downtown Design Guidelines
The areas that are guided mixed-use are within the boundaries of the downtown plan and are
subject to the downtown design guidelines. The areas that are guided mixed-use are in highly
visible areas of the City and, consequently, development in these areas will be expected to
provide a higher level of site design and architectural design than other areas of the City.
Typically, mixed-use development includes a combination of retail, office, cultural, or
entertainment uses with the ability to integrate higher density residential uses as part of an
overall master planned development.
Downtown Design Guidelines should be met by the development. The intent of the guidelines is
to provide a baseline for quality in order to revitalize and expand the downtown business district.
The downtown plan shows a mixed-use development blending commercial/office and multi-
family housing uses in a master plan development. Some of the guidelines for downtown Hugo
include:
• Blending of commercial and residential development as a master planned mixed-use
development.
• Creating a sense of arrival in downtown by placement of gateway elements.
• Enhancement of the public realm to maintain a pedestrian-oriented downtown.
• High quality architecture, with specific emphases on French architectural elements,
traditional downtown design and/or relating to existing buildings in the downtown.
The proposed sketch plan vision for a mixed-use development that blends the uses together.
There is an effort to integrate the residential uses together with common spaces and amenities,
such as walking loops, gazebo, and gathering areas. The main entrances and focal point at the
southwest corner of Highway 61 and Frenchman Road/CSAH 8 starts to form gateway elements
with landscaping, building architectural features, and art. The plan shows pedestrian oriented
elements with access to public features, such as hardwood creek trail.
4 Oneka Commons Sketch Plan 2023
Architecture and Building Orientation
The applicant has indicated that the design of the buildings in this area would be consistent with
the downtown design guidelines. They have stated the architectural theme would be required for
all buildings in the proposed sketch plan. The applicant did not provide a narrative on how the
buildings would meet the design guidelines or what materials would be use on the buildings.
Although it seems the buildings will be designed to be cohesive, the developer shall provide a
design palette, including elevations, colors, and materials for the buildings, to ensure they are
compatible and meet the guidelines.
Commercial Buildings
All commercial buildings are required to meet the Commercial and Industrial Design Guidelines
and if the downtown area, the Downtown Design Guidelines. The applicant has shown a general
building rendering examples for the commercial uses. All of the buildings within the project
shall have four sided architecture, with equal treatment and visual qualities, and shall meet the
requirements of the guidelines. The buildings seem to relate mostly to the traditional main street
or Prairie style architecture encouraged in the downtown design guidelines. Prairie style
architecture includes, hipped roofs, low and spreading with deep overhangs and eaves. With
modifications to the elevations and using quality materials, it seems like the buildings could meet
the intent of the design guidelines.
The commercial buildings are oriented towards the streets as encouraged in the design
guidelines. The commercial areas have pedestrian gathering spaces with connections to
Hardwood Creek Trail.
Multi-Family Residential/Apartments
The applicant has provided building renderings for the two-story/three-story apartment building.
All of the buildings within the project shall have four sided architecture, with equal treatment
and visual qualities, and shall meet the requirements of the Multifamily Design Guidelines. The
building rendering shows the building design with horizontal and vertical projections. Although
the applicant did not provide information on the building material, it looks like there would be
varying materials and colors. The guidelines encourage using a mix of materials and the
ordinance states that the exterior of three-story structures shall have a high percent of brick,
stone, or comparable material. With modifications to the elevations and using quality materials,
it seems like the buildings could meet the intent of the design guidelines. The apartment includes
underground parking.
The building orientation has a large wall massing towards the residential development to the
south. From the renderings it looks like in that area the first floor would be parking, making it a
three/four story building on the south side. The applicant should work on reducing the large
massing on that side. From the site plan it looks like there is a breezeway between two buildings.
It would help to have truly two buildings with open space between to break up the long walls.
The applicant is showing the access to the underground parking on the south side of the buildings
and is likely to impact the residential development with noise and lights from the vehicles. Staff
recommends the access to the underground parking be further evaluated for a new location.
5 Oneka Commons Sketch Plan 2023
Parks/Trails
Because of the residential density proposed and proximity to future businesses special attention
should be paid to the trails and sidewalks for both recreation and transportation purposes.
Additionally, the development is adjacent to the Hardwood Creek Regional Trail, which
connects many of Hugo’s trails and parks. According to the Parks, Trails and Open Space Plan
trails and sidewalks are to be built with new developments that connect the community and
ensure safe access to parks, downtown, and other important areas in the City.
The developer is proposing meandering trails connecting to the Hardwood Creek Regional Trail
along the ditch. This would provide a scenic and desirable recreational amenity. There are other
connections to the trail proposed in the development.
There is a trail on the west side of Fenway Avenue North in the Oneka Estates neighborhood to
the south. According to the Existing and Proposed Trails Map, this trail is planned to be
extended to Frenchman Avenue with the extension of the roadway. This needs to be included in
the development plans. Additionally, the planned trail on the south side of Frenchman Avenue
needs to be included in the development plans. Sidewalks have been constructed along both sides
of Victor Path, which should continue as it goes west of the roundabout.
Park dedication is required for all residential development. The land dedication requirement
percentage goes up as the residential density goes up. In lieu of land dedication, the Parks
Commission could recommend the fee of $3,400 be paid per unit. The developer has a proposed
park shown on the plan. The park does not show any amenities such as playground equipment.
The area where the park is located does not look like there is much usable space. The land
dedication shall be usable land for the Parks Commission to give credit for park dedication. The
park system and dedication proposal should be further evaluated by staff and the Parks
Commission for the needs in the area.
Landscaping and Screening
The plan shows placement of some existing trees, particularly along the ditch to the south, and
some new landscaping within the gathering spaces and along the streets. The plan shows
landscaping within the roundabout and around the monument sign at the main entrance creating a
feel that you’re entering the development.
The ditch to the south has several mature trees along the edges. Ditches get maintained
periodically which includes removal trees. The applicant should install additional landscaping
along the south side of the property to provide screening/buffers, in case the trees are removed
with ditch maintenance.
Streets and Access
Generally the proposed access locations and street locations meet the intent of the
Comprehensive Plan. The applicant is showing a right-in/right-out access to Frenchman
Road/CSAH 8 that is not on Washington County’s corridor plan and would need to be approved
6 Oneka Commons Sketch Plan 2023
by the County. Washington County plans show future traffic signals at the prosed access points
along Frenchman Road/CSAH 8 at Fenway Boulevard and Oneka Parkway. Developer
contributions to the cost of the traffic signal will be considered with the development of the
property.
There is a roundabout show on the plans for access to the property. Generally staff is
comfortable with the roundabout, however the location may need to be moved further to the
south to provide proper separation from the full access on CSAH 8. Additionally, the plans show
a proposed gas station entrance that is close to the CSAH 8 access. The access location could
cause impacts to the future signal location and roundabout. The access should be relocated to
Victor Path.
The development of this property result in in the construction of a portion of Victor Path
(frontage road) and Fenway Boulevard. This would require connecting to Fenway Boulevard to
the south to the Bald Eagle Industrial Park and easements acquisitions will be required.
Although a phasing plans has not been provided, the developer has indicted that the apartments
would be the first phase of the development. The applicant has indicated that the access to the
apartments would be constructed. The roundabout should be constructed with the first phase of
the development. The parking for the apartments and the amenities should be constructed with
the first phase. It’s unclear in the plan how and when the other streets would be constructed.
A traffic study will likely be required for the development to determine the road phasing and
required traffic improvements.
Stormwater Management/Water Reuse
The plan is not showing how stormwater management would be handled. The applicant has
indicated that regional stormwater management for the site, instead of individual stormwater
management for each site as it develops. This will allow for efficient use of property and is
encouraged for the properties. Staff has not evaluated if the stormwater management, but is
supportive of regional stormwater management.
Conditions for stormwater reuse for the site is ideal and should be incorporated into the
development. Stormwater reuse can aid in meeting the stormwater management requirements for
the development. The applicant has not indicated if stormwater reuse would be incorporated into
the development.
Utilities
Sewer and water is available to the site in several locations. The applicant should work with the
City Engineer on the connection locations and watermain loops.
7 Oneka Commons Sketch Plan 2023
4. CONCLUSION/ RECOMMENDATIONS:
Generally the sketch plan is on the right track for creating a mixed-use development that meets
the general guidelines for development in the downtown area. There are several details and
expectations to work out with the applicant as the project moves forward. The development
phasing will be very important with the project.
Staff recommends the Planning Commission provide unbinding informal comments to the
applicant on the proposed sketch plan, including the following:
1. General layout
2. Building architecture and orientation
3. Streets and Access
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Engineer’s Memo
3. Letter from Washington County
4. Letter from MnDOT
5. Applicants Narrative
6. Applicants Updated Sketch Plan and Building Elevations
7. Downtown Plan and Design Guidelines
Forest Boulevard NorthFrench
m
an R
oad
140th Street North
145th Street North
Finale Avenue North141st Street North
Flay Avenue N
orth
146th Street North
Fenway Avenue NorthFerrara Avenue North142nd Street North
Fenway Boulevard NorthFondant Avenue North141st Circle NorthFlay Avenue NorthFinale Avenue NorthOneka C ommons Sketch Plan
Location Map
Hugo, MN
Parcel Boundary selection
Roads
Hugo Border
Parcel Boundary
¯Document Path: S:\Mapping\Site Maps\2023 Site Maps\Oneka Commons Sketch Plan.mxdSite
S:\Users\R_Juba\DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS\Oneka Commons\Sketch Plan 2022\Engineer Memo\Engineers Memo Oneka Commons Sketch Plan Review
01.06.23.docx 178 E 9TH STREET | SUITE 200 | SAINT PAUL, MN | 55101 | 651.286.8450 | WSBENG.COM January 5, 2023
Ms. Rachel Juba
Community Development Director
City of Hugo
14669 Fitzgerald Avenue North
Hugo, MN 55038
Re: Oneka Commons
Concept Plan Review
WSB Project No. 021674-000
Dear Ms. Juba:
We have reviewed the concept plan submittal for the Oneka Commons located west of Highway
61, east of Everton Avenue and south of Frenchman Road. In particular, we have reviewed the
following plans related to this particular request:
• Concept Sketch Plan submitted by Knut Development for a multi-family residential site
southwest of Frenchman Road at 145th Street prepared by G-Cubed, Inc. and dated
11/08/22.
Based on the review of these documents, we offer the following comments related to this concept
plan:
Grading, Phasing, Street, and Utility Plans
1. Both MCES and City of Hugo has sanitary sewer adjacent to the site. Project phasing will
help determine the best means to service the site. The City of Hugo can provide the
applicant with the utility base map and appropriate as-builts for all adjacent sanitary sewer
and watermain.
2. There are multiple watermain stubs provided to the property. These are located at Victor
Path, Oneka Parkway, Fenway Avenue, and along Frenchman Road. 12” watermain will be
required to be extended from the end of the existing 12” watermain within Victor Path, east to
the existing 12” stubs located within Oneka Parkway, and continue east, making connection
to the existing 12” watermain stub located within Fenway Avenue and sub along the south
side of Frenchman Road.
3. The overall roadway configuration is consistent with the comprehensive plan and vision for
this area.
4. Groundwater Separation: 4-feet of separation is required from the bottom of structures to
groundwater elevation. Soil borings or piezometer readings will be required to determine
groundwater elevations.
5. Lowest openings of structures must be 3-feet above the Atlas 14 100-year HWL for all
waterbodies and BMP’s and 1-foot above any EOF.
Ms. Rachel Juba
January 5, 2023
Page 2
6. Erosion Control will be required to meet requirements for the NPDES stormwater permit and
SWPPP requirements.
Stormwater Management
7. Volume Control: Stormwater BMPs must be provided to meet a volume of 1.1 inches from
new and reconstructed impervious surfaces. Infiltration BMPs and water reuse will receive full
credit. Other BMPs such as filtration must incorporate a TP removal factor found in Table C1
of Rule C of the RCWD rules. Water reuse is the preferred BMP for residential developments.
8. Water quality requirement will be considered met if volume control is met. At a minimum, 85%
of the impervious onsite is required to be treated.
9. Rate Control: Proposed discharge rates must be less than existing rates for the 2, and 10-
year Atlas 14 rainfall event. Proposed 100-year Atlas 14 discharge rates be reduced to 0.1
cfs/acre for the site.
10. Two filtration basin locations were shown on the concept plan however overall sizing of the
stormwater management needs has yet to be reviewed. Once appropriate submittals are
provided as part of the preliminary plat process, staff will review for compliance with
requirements.
11. Conditions for stormwater reuse for the site is ideal and should be incorporated into the
project if feasible to meet volume reduction requirements. Stormwater reuse can be used to
aid in meeting stormwater management requirements for the site.
12. An update on the proposed CLOMR/LOMR in the area should be provided as information on
the LOMR has not been reviewed since June 2022. Approval from the MnDNR/FEMA of any
modifications to the floodway/floodplain will be required. Typically, no habitable structures are
allowed to develop in the floodway.
13. RCWD rules prohibit fill within the floodway. City Ordinance states no structure will be
allowed in the floodway that will increase the base flood elevation or cause an increase in
flood damages in adjacent reaches.
14. Fill within the floodplain requires compensatory storage per RCWD Rule E.
15. Proposed modifications to the public drainage system (Judicial Ditch 3) will require additional
permitting with RCWD. A RCWD Rule I permit will be required for any proposed crossings of
Judicial Ditch 3, and a RCWD Rule G permit will be required for any proposed crossings on
regional conveyance systems (excluding public drainage systems). Rule G and Rule I permits
are administered through RCWD rather than the City.
Wetland
16. Approved wetland boundaries are shown correctly on the sketch plan.
17. The plan does show direct (fill) impacts to a portion of the wetlands, so this would require a
replacement plan and most likely qualify for sequencing flexibility. However, these are sloped
wetlands, so the developer would need to think about how to provide hydrology (from
stormwater) so as not to result in drainage which would be an impact.
Ms. Rachel Juba
January 5, 2023
Page 3
18. Wetlands on this site may be ACOE jurisdictional and should be a consideration moving
forward. A preapplication meeting would be beneficial.
19. A full understanding of the existing drain tile system will be helpful to as phasing of
construction occurs as not to damage or remove portions of the system that are integral.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this project. Additional comments may be
necessary following the review of the responses to these. If you have any questions, please do
not hesitate to contact me at 651-286-8463.
Sincerely,
WSB
Nick Guilliams, PE
Project Manager
cc: Scott Anderson, Public Works Director (email only)
Liz Finnegan, Senior Engineering Technician (email only)
PUBLIC WORKS
Wayne Sandberg, P.E., Director, County Engineer
Frank D. Ticknor, P.E., Deputy Director
January 5, 2022
Rachel Juba
Community Development Director
City of Hugo
14669 Fitzgerald Avenue North
Hugo, MN 55038
Comments on Oneka Commons Concept Site Plan
Dear Rachel,
Thank you for the opportunity to review and provide comments on the application for the concept site
plan for the property located at the intersection of County State Aid Highway 8 and Trunk Highway 61.
Our development review team has reviewed the plan and offers the following comments.
The site plan proposes a mixture of commercial and residential apartment buildings, and proposes a new
right-in/right-out access point located approximately 550 feet west of the intersection of CSAH 8 and TH
61. CSAH 8 is currently classified as an “A-Minor Connector” roadway. The Washington County 2040
Comprehensive Plan contains access criteria for county roads related to spacing, sight lines, and
availability of local road connections. The County would not allow any new access onto CSAH 8 between
TH 61 and the existing median opening. New access onto CSAH 8 at the existing median opening would be
allowed but will require a County Access Permit that would require some minor signing/striping work. The
City should be aware that a traffic signal may be required in the future, which would include city cost
share proportional to the number of legs of the intersection which are owned by the City. It may be
beneficial for the city to require a traffic study as a condition of development, in order to determine if
traffic signal warrants might reasonably be expected to be met.
The site drawings indicate a roundabout on the northwest of the plan that is located approximately 300
feet from the access to CSAH 8. Additionally, the drawing indicates a proposed gas station entrance that is
located approximately 120 feet from the CSAH 8 access. While access to the city street is a City decision,
the County is concerned regarding the proximity to CSAH 8. The access location could cause impacts to
the future signal and the proposed roundabout. The City should look to provide access to the gas station
solely off of Victor Path, the frontage road that is planned south of CSAH 8. We also recommend that the
City or developer provide a traffic study that provides information on potential queue lengths at the
roundabout and for the northbound approach to CSAH 8.
The County prefers a trail on the south side of CSAH 8 as opposed to the sidewalk the plans show.
Washington County recommends that the proposed facility along CSAH 8 should be built 10 feet in width
with a minimum boulevard between the trail and the roadway curb of 10 feet, matching the existing trail
on the north side of CSAH 8.
A great place to live, work and play…today and tomorrow
Government Center | 14949 62nd Street North | P. O. Box 6 | Stillwater, MN 55082-0006
P: 651-430-6001 | F: 651-430-6017 | TTY: 651-430-6246
www.co.washington.mn.us
Washington County is an equal opportunity organization and employer
The Washington County Regional Rail Authority (WCRRA) manages the right-of-way for the Hardwood
Creek Regional Trail, which is approximately 100 feet in width. The WCRRA manages the corridor to
preserve former and current railroad right-of-way for continued and future transportation use. The
WCRRA accomplishes this by limiting or not allowing for encroachment and development in the right-of-
way. The WCRRA has the goal to permit interim recreational trails and the County would like to thank the
applicant for proposing internal trails connecting to Hardwood Creek Regional Trail through the site.
These connections allow pedestrians to conveniently access the trail and connect to amenities throughout
the trail.
However, while the WCRRA welcomes the trail connections, the landscaping and patio shown within the
WCRRA right-of-way are more permanent encroachments that the WCRRA would not allow. All
encroachments to the WCRRA right-of-way would need to go through a permit process at a fee of $1.50
per square foot paid annually.
Thank you again for the opportunity to provide comments on the concept site plan. We look forward to
continuing to work with the City of Hugo to ensure that this project is well-served by the transportation
network for all users. If you have any questions, please contact me at 651-430-4307 or
daniel.elder@co.washington.mn.us.
Sincerely,
Daniel Elder
Planner II
c: Wayne Sandberg, Public Works Director/County Engineer
Frank Ticknor, Deputy Director Public Works
Lyssa Leitner, Public Works Planning Director
Joe Gustafson, Traffic Engineer
Kevin Peterson, Design Engineer
Mitch Bartelt, Assistant Traffic Engineer
Metropolitan District
Waters Edge Building
1500 County Road B2 West
Roseville, MN 55113
MnDOT Metropolitan District, Waters Edge Building, 1500 County Road B2 West, Roseville, MN 55113
Page 1 of 4
January 9, 2023
Rachel Juba
Community Development Director
City of Hugo
14669 Fitzgerald Ave. N.
Hugo, MN 55038
SUBJECT: MnDOT Review #S22-048 (revised)
Oneka Commons
SW Quad US 61 & Frenchman Road
Hugo, Washington County
Dear Ms. Juba:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the site plans for Oneka Commons. MnDOT has
reviewed the documents and has the following comments:
Noise:
MnDOT's policy is to assist local governments in promoting compatibility between land use and
highways. Residential uses located adjacent to highways often result in complaints about traffic
noise. Traffic noise from this highway could exceed noise standards established by the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and
the U.S. Department of Transportation. Minnesota Rule 7030.0030 states that municipalities having
the authority to regulate land use shall take all reasonable measures to prevent the establishment of
land use activities, listed in the MPCA's Noise Area Classification (NAC), anywhere that the
establishment of the land use would result in immediate violations of
established State noise standards.
MnDOT policy regarding development adjacent to existing highways prohibits the expenditure of
highway funds for noise mitigation measures in such developed areas. The project proposer is
required to assess the existing noise situation and take the action deemed necessary to minimize
the impact to the proposed development from any highway noise.
If you have any questions regarding MnDOT's noise policy please contact Natalie Ries in Metro
District’s Noise and Air Quality Unit at Natalie.Ries@state.mn.us or 651-234-7681.
Right-of-Way (ROW):
The plans show trees planted in MnDOT right-of-way (ROW). This will not be permitted.
Questions regarding this comment should be addressed to Michael Lynch, MnDOT Right of Way,
Mike.Lynch@state.mn.us. or telephone: 651-234-7558.
MnDOT Metropolitan District, Waters Edge Building, 1500 County Road B2 West, Roseville, MN 55113
Page 2 of 4
Development Access:
MnDOT strongly recommends that a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) be completed for this development
and that these results be shared with MnDOT. MnDOT Guidelines for TIS’s is located at Resources
- Access Management - MnDOT (state.mn.us) , Chapter 5.
According to the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, this
development could produce approximately 7,600 new trips per day. If a development produces
more than 2,500 new trips per day, or more than 250 new trips per peak hour then MnDOT Access
Management Guide recommends that the City require a TIS. MnDOT is concerned about the
impacts of this substantial increase in traffic to US 61 & Frenchman and also US 61 & Egg Lake
Road.
Additionally, there will be impacts to the signals at US 61 and Frenchman. The high volume of
traffic entering and exiting the site will have impacts to the signal conduits, loop detectors and hand
holes on the west leg of the intersection. There will need to be modifications to the fiber, the
Flashing Yellow Arrow (FYA) operations, and the Pan Tilt Zoom (PTZ) cameras at the intersection.
The City may also want a crossing on the south side of Frenchman. Currently the signal is a split
phase operations-which will need to be removed if a second pedestrian crossing is added. Further
details concerning signal design can be found on the attached .pdf entitled “Signal Design
Comments”.
Questions regarding these comments should be addressed to Kaare Festvog, MnDOT Traffic, 651-
234-7814 or kaare.festvog@state.mn.us.
Pedestrian/Bicycles:
Please ensure that all the sidewalks and trails on the site allow for a minimum pedestrian access
route of 4 ft and that all pedestrian ramps meet American with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards.
MnDOT also recommends that the sidewalk along the north side of the property remain level, with
the driveway from Frenchman Rd sloping up to meet it. A number of destinations exist on the east
side of US 61, such as the St John the Baptist church directly northeast. Hugo’s comprehensive plan
also depicts a potential trail along the western shore of Egg Lake. Thus the pedestrian crossings at
US 61 and Frenchman are important and may see increasing volumes in future years. Please
consider coordinating with MnDOT and Hugo to ensure crosswalk striping is current. Ideally any
future project would also involve the realignment of the crossing at Frenchman to make the
pedestrian route straighter and safer to follow. Currently the trail and ramp at the SW corner does
not align with the crossing.
Please direct questions regarding these comments to John Zehnder of MnDOT Multimodal 651-
775-0405 or john.zehnder@state.mn.us.
Maintenance:
MnDOT has concerns about the area available for snow storage in the winter, as well as the
drainage of the melt-off. There is only one small pond shown and the development results in a lot of
new impervious surface. Additionally, the new trees and other plantings along the US 61 shoulder
are so close to the roadway that snow thrown from the plows will cover and most likely damage or
kill any vegetation so close to the roadway.
MnDOT Metropolitan District, Waters Edge Building, 1500 County Road B2 West, Roseville, MN 55113
Page 3 of 4
For questions about MnDOT Maintenance policies, please contact Michael Kowski, MnDOT
Maintenance at michael.p.kowski@state.mn.us or telephone: 651-234-7924.
Water Resources:
A MnDOT drainage permit will be required to ensure that current drainage rates to MnDOT right-
of-way will not be increased. The actual HydroCAD models will need to be provided for review,
not just project summaries.
The drainage permit application, including the information below, should be submitted online to:
https://dotapp7.dot.state.mn.us/OLPA/
The following information must be submitted with the drainage permit application:
1) A grading plan showing existing and proposed contours.
2) Drainage area maps for the proposed project showing existing and proposed drainage
areas. Any off-site areas that drain to the project area should also be included in the drainage area
maps. The direction of flow for each drainage area must be indicated by arrows.
3) Drainage computations for pre and post construction conditions during the 2, 10, 50 and 100
year rain events.
4) Time of concentration calculations.
4) An electronic copy of any computer modeling used for the drainage computations.
5) See also the attached Drainage Permits Checklist for more information.
Once a drainage permit application is submitted, a thorough review will be completed and
additional information may be requested.
Please direct questions concerning drainage issues to Jason Swenson (651-234-7539) or
Jason.Swenson@state.mn.us of MnDOT’s Water Resources section.
Permits:
In addition to the Drainage permit mentioned above, a Miscellaneous work permit is required for
the water connection with the MN 95 ROW. Additionally, any other use of, or work within or
affecting, MnDOT right of way will require a permit.
Permits can be applied for at this site: https://olpa.dot.state.mn.us/OLPA/. Please upload a copy of
this letter when applying for any permits.
Please direct questions regarding permit requirements to Buck Craig of MnDOT’s Metro Permits
Section at 651-775-0405 or Buck.Craig@state.mn.us.
Review Submittal Options
MnDOT’s goal is to complete reviews within 30 calendar days. Review materials received
electronically can be processed more rapidly. Do not submit files via a cloud service or SharePoint
link. In order of preference, review materials may be submitted as:
MnDOT Metropolitan District, Waters Edge Building, 1500 County Road B2 West, Roseville, MN 55113
Page 4 of 4
1. Email documents and plans in PDF format to metrodevreviews.dot@state.mn.us. Attachments
may not exceed 20 megabytes per email. Documents can be zipped as well. If multiple emails are
necessary, number each message.
2. PDF file(s) uploaded to MnDOT’s external shared internet workspace site at:
https://mft.dot.state.mn.usmetrodevreviews.dot@state.mn.us. Contact MnDOT Planning
development review staff at for uploading instructions, and send an email listing the file name(s)
after the document(s) has/have been uploaded.
If you have any questions concerning this review, please contact me at (651) 234-7797.
Sincerely,
Cameron Muhic
Senior Planner
Copy sent via E-Mail:
Buck Craig, Permits Lance Schowalter, Design
Jason Swenson, Water Resources Michael Lynch, Right-of-Way
Kaare Festvog, Traffic Kim Zlimen, Transit
Adam Josephson, Area Manager Ryan Coddington, Area Engineer
Natalie Ries, Noise Michael Kowski, Maintenance
John Zehnder, Multimodal Jed Hanson, Metropolitan Council
Bethany Brandt-Sargent, Metropolitan Council
ENGINEERING
SURVEYING
PLANNING
14070 Highway 52 Southeast, Chatfield, Minnesota 55923
Phone 507-867-1666 Fax 507-867-1665 www.ggg.to
December 28, 2022
City of Hugo
Attn: Rachel Juba, City Planner
14669 Fitzgerald Ave. North
Hugo, MN 55038
RE: Knut Development LLC - Sketch Plan
Dear Ms. Juba,
You requested a narrative of the project/sketch plan for the LaValle property. Following your
formatted request:
Specific Vision for the overall plan:
In concert with prior planning and studies by the City of Hugo, provide a development which
provides commercial and residential development opportunities. The anchor project being a
multistory apartment building with understory parking in the area depicted for mix use
applications. Commercial uses are anticipated to include a gas station/convenience store,
restaurants and retail commercial. Buildings would be a combination of stand-alone structures
and multi-tenant buildings.
Proposed Land Use Changes and Proposed Uses:
The plan as depicted closely matches the City’s 2040 Comp Plan. The current zoning does not
match the Comp Plan so rezoning applications will need to be processed. These can be applied
for as the project proceeds and internal street alignments are confirmed to be acceptable by the
different departments which review the plans. For instance, all land east of the main access off
Frenchman Road would meet the mixed use and land west of the access would meet the
commercial use as defined by the City Zoning and Comp Plan.
Phasing Plan:
Phase one would include the main access off Frenchman Road and the streets, whether public or
private, to access the apartment building and parking lot. The entire mixed use area east of the
roundabout would likely be graded but not fully surfaced until commercial buildings in the
mixed use are realized. The area of the gas station/convenience store would also be graded as
that project would likely be one of the first commercial sites developed.
Infrastructure - Sanitary sewer, watermain connections and storm sewer piping would be
designed to serve the apartment building as well as the entire commercial depicted in the mixed
use area and the gas station. Depending on interest in the commercial lots, that infrastructure
may be deferred to a later installation date provided the surfacing required for the streets/parking
would not be disturbed.
Roads - The access off Frenchman Road would be constructed towards the round-about and to
the apartment building. The actual surfacing of the round-about could be phased to make the
G-Cubed Inc., 14070 Highway 52 Southeast, Chatfield, Minnesota 55923
Phone 507-867-1666 Fax 507-867-1665 www.ggg.to
first phase of construction more affordable as the function of the round-about would not be
required until there is more traffic than just the apartments and a couple of commercial tenants.
The overall traffic plan will require additional discussion with reviewing agencies and to
determine the timing of the signalization of the intersection with Frenchman Road.
Stormwater Management - Initial stormwater management planning provides for a component of
the water quality volume to be provided in greenspace area in the mixed use area with piping of
larger storm events to be directed to the west where a regional pond can be constructed which
will serve as much of the development as is determined feasible.
Parkland: The parkland area depicted ties the pathway along Highway 61 into the development
where a pathway could be run paralleling the Met Council sanitary sewer line. Near the
roundabout is an area that we do not anticipate can be developed but would provide a nice
greenspace area that ties pedestrian facilities together. The park that can be created will need to
be discussed with staff and residents to ensure the dedication and improvements provide a
community benefit matching the needs. Our initial vision is that the park would be more passive
recreation (trails and assembly infrastructure) than active recreation (ball fields).
Thank you,
Mark R. Welch, PE
Cc: Peter Stalland
APARTMENTS
PHASE 2
62 UNITS
62200 SF
142 SURFACE
PARKING
STALLS
APARTMENTS
PHASE 1
88 UNITS
85900 SF
2 STORY
BLDG
1
STORY
3 STORY
BLDG
CLUBHOUSE
AND AMENITIES
AMENITY
DECK
5000 SF
3 STORY
BLDG
GAS STATION
BLDG A
5900 SF
RETAIL
BLDG C
6400
RETAIL
BLDG D
3400 SF RETAIL
RESTAURANT
COMMERCIAL
BLDG F
21800 SF
PATIO
PATIO
GAZEBO
PLAYGROUND
DOG
RUN
PARK
T
RAI
L
P
ARK
T
RAI
L
BLDG SIGN
FRENCHMAN RD
HIGHWAY 61PATIOGAR
AGE
E
NT
R
Y150
P
AR
K
I
NG
PARK
160 COMMERCIAL
PARKING STALLS
BLDG E
9600
FILTRATION
BASIN
FILTRATION
BASIN
2 STORY
BLDG
MONUMEN
T SIGN
91 COMMERCIAL
PARKING STALLS
RESTAURANT
BLDG B
6400 SF
PATIO
C MOMENTUM DESIGN GROUP LLC
D0
ONEKA COMMONS - CONCEPT SITE PLAN
HUGO, MN
11/30/22
22070
ONEKA COMMONS
1" = 60'-0"
.
N
12/09/22
2022
C 2022 MOMENTUM DESIGN GROUP LLC
D7
CONCEPT PERSPECTIVE APARTMENT
HUGO, MN
11/30/22
22070
ONEKA COMMONS
Apartment Viewed from Bike Trail
Apartment Viewed from Highway 61
C 2022 MOMENTUM DESIGN GROUP LLC
D11
CONCEPT PERSPECTIVE RETAIL
HUGO, MN
11/22/22
22070
ONEKA COMMONS
Retail Viewed from North Parking Lot
Retail Viewed from Center of Site
C 2022 MOMENTUM DESIGN GROUP LLC
D12
CONCEPT PERSPECTIVE RETAIL
HUGO, MN
11/22/22
22070
ONEKA COMMONS
Retail Viewed from Intersection of Frenchman Road and Highway 61
Retail Viewed from Interior Parking Lot
C 2022 MOMENTUM DESIGN GROUP LLC
D13
SITE FEATURES
HUGO, MN
11/30/22
22070
ONEKA COMMONS
City of Hugo
Downtown
Plan
& Design
Guidelines
April 10, 2007
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 1 of 23
Credits & Acknowledgements:
We would like to thank the City of Hugo’s citizens – the residents and
business owners – who attended the workshops and meetings, sent in
their comments and gave their time to participate in the planning process.
Their input has been invaluable in developing a master plan and design
guidelines for the downtown area.
We would like to thank the City of Hugo’s City Council, Planning
Commission, City staff and consultants for leading this planning process.
Funding for development of the downtown design guidelines and the
preparation of this document was provided by a Livable Communities
Opportunity Grant from the Metropolitan Council in 2004.
City Council
Fran Miron, Mayor
Becky Petryk, Council Member Ward 1
Frank Puleo, Council Member Ward 2
Chuck Haas, Council Member Ward 3
Mike Granger, Council Member At Large
Planning Commission
Dave Schumann, Chairperson
Bronwen Kleissler
Tom Weidt
Ron McRoberts
Victoria Hoffbeck
Bob Rosenquist
Kelly Bailly
City of Hugo
Mike Ericson, City Administrator
Bryan Bear, Community Development Director
Michele Lindau, Community Development Assistant
Mary Ann Creager, City Clerk
Jay Kennedy, City Engineer (WSB)
Kendra Lindahl, City Planner (Landform)
Planning & Urban Design Consultant
Carolyn Krall, AIA
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 2 of 23
Hugo Downtown Planning Framework
Incorporated in 1906, Hugo is a rural small town with a family-oriented feel. As Hugo grew,
the intersection of Forest Boulevard (now Highway 61) and Frenchman Road (now 145th
Street) became the center of town. With a train depot and an active feed mill, this was the
ideal location for local, small businesses. A downtown neighborhood began to grow into a
comfortable, rural village. It is this small village familiarity that the residents of Hugo wish to
preserve.
Aerial Photograph of Hugo in 1974
Minnesota Historical Society
The Hugo Downtown Framework Plan and Design Guidelines are intended to provide direction
to new development in downtown Hugo and, where needed, to shape plans for
redevelopment. The Plan illustrates the type of commercial and residential development, civic
and community facilities, and amenities envisioned by the citizens of Hugo. The Plan extends
beyond the central commercial business district (CBD) to illustrate the entire downtown
commercial area of Hugo, both existing and envisioned in the future. This vision of future
development in Hugo encourages commercial growth, while seeking to concentrate that
growth, around the downtown area.
The Planning Process
The Hugo downtown plan and preliminary design guidelines were originally developed in 1998
to address redevelopment of the downtown commercial “Main Street” on Forest Boulevard
(Highway 61). But the County Road 8 improvements and rerouting required that the original
plan be revisited. The new plan was needed to address the developable area along County
Road 8 and to consider the impact of the new County Road 8 and Highway 61 intersection.
This planning process began in the fall of 2003 and included workshops with the City Council
and downtown business and property owners. A community-wide open house was held in
May 2004 to encourage public input on the final plan. In August 2004, the City was awarded
an Opportunity Grant from the Livable Communities Demonstration Account to develop design
guidelines for the downtown area to assist in implementation of the downtown plan. The
process for developing these guidelines has continued through 2005-2006 with significant
public participation in the planning process.
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 3 of 23
The Influence of Transportation Improvements
A major influence on the plan is the County’s re-alignment and improvement of County Road
8. The county’s plan will widen and reroute the road to the south, connecting to Highway 61 at
approximately 143rd Street.
The County Road 8 re-
alignment will have a
significant impact on the
downtown, offering
opportunities for growth,
improved vehicle and
pedestrian access around
the downtown area, and the
potential for redevelopment
to make improvements to
the core of the downtown
CBD and surrounding public
and civic spaces. It is vital
that the CBD not be cut off
from County Road 8 and
from the high volume of
traffic which will use this
route to access the interstate.
Highway 61 is planned to continue to run north
and south through downtown and the CBD.
Despite projections of increased traffic
volumes, this highway should not be widened
beyond four lanes except to provide for turn
movements. Instead, improvements to the
roadway and access improvements can help
accommodate the increased volumes.
The downtown plan
recommends
improvements to
improve street
access and
connectivity within
downtown, as well
as enhancements
to pedestrian
access and
walkability.
The plan also calls for extending the regional trail south across County Road 8 on the existing
railroad bed and allows for the possibility of future commuter transit within this corridor (in the
railroad ROW or on Highway 61). If Hugo is to continue to have a healthy downtown, it is
important to plan for these future transportation changes.
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 4 of 23
Defining Downtown
The downtown CBD in Hugo has always been located on Forest Boulevard (Highway 61) on
both sides of the main traffic signal at 145th Street. But over time, the commercial area has
grown and extended north and south along Highway 61, and the new development has been
less compact and more auto- or highway-oriented than the older, more traditional downtown
CBD. Without planning controls, this same pattern of commercial development could be
expected to occur along the improved and upgraded County Road 8.
While the core downtown central business district (CBD) is focused along Forest Boulevard-
Highway 61 from County Road 8 to 147th Street, the Downtown Plan extends north to the Post
Office and 150th Street, south to 140th Street, and from the shores of Egg Lake on the east to
the bend in County Road 8 to the west.
One of Hugo’s planning goals is to maintain a more compact and concentrated downtown
CBD. This goal will be achieved by encouraging new development in and around the core of
the downtown area, while planning for limited but well-ordered commercial development in
specific areas along other commercial routes such as Highway 61 and County Road 8.
Community feedback has consistently supported new CBD uses which complement downtown
(such as restaurants and entertainment) and suggest that larger, single-use development and
auto sales/service businesses, for instance, be located in commercial areas planned closer to
I-35.
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 5 of 23
To create a sense of arrival in downtown, the plan recommends placing gateway elements – a
landscaped sign, monument, or other feature – at these key entry points into downtown. While
the plan doesn’t specify the elements at each location, when you enter downtown you should
know that you are downtown. New development at these “gateway” locations should be
planned not only to allow for these gateway elements but to convey the sense of quality and
character that the downtown plan envisions.
Proposed monument sign, Nov. 29, 2004
RSP Architects for Contractor Property Development Company
The Downtown Plan
The plan is a tool to help the City of Hugo create a pedestrian-friendly downtown and
concentrates new development and redevelopment around the existing intersection of 145th
Street and Highway 61. As Hugo continues to develop, the actual projects built may differ
from the Illustrative Downtown Plan in the details of the development of any specific block or
site, but the primary elements of the plan, including the public infrastructure (roads, parks,
trails, open space) and the quality and character which makes this plan unique to Hugo are
expected to be maintained.
Gateway elements – signs, flags or
monuments – should be included in
the new downtown area to
welcome a resident or visitor into
an established and thriving
downtown. Elements depicting the
quality and character of downtown
Hugo are displayed based on the
historical and current architectural
elements of Hugo.
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 6 of 23
The Downtown Plan
City park with trails, gazebo,
dock, pedestrian bridge
Shared public parking
Carpenters on the Lake
Additional downtown
senior housing
Walkable community spaces
along trail ROW
Proposed trail connections
New mixed-use
development blending
office and multi-family
housing uses
New mixed-use
development with
housing, offices and
complementary
retail/commercial uses
Traditional
residential blocks
Improved park with future
community center
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 7 of 23
Design Guidelines
The intent of the Hugo Downtown Design Guidelines is to provide a baseline for quality in
order to revitalize and expand the downtown business district. These guidelines are written to
meet the community’s goals:
Goal 1: Preserve the rural small town character of Hugo
Goal 2: Establish a threshold or baseline for design and quality
Goal 3: Maintain a harmonious visual environment within the existing architectural context
Goal 4: Communicate the community's high expectations for new development in Hugo
Objectives
The specific objectives for downtown Hugo design guidelines are:
• To establish a clear definition of urban design standards that informs property owners,
developers, builders and decision-makers.
• To serve as a tool that planners and designers can use and incorporate into their plans
to achieve and support the City’s design objectives.
• To act as a basis for a uniform and consistent review of development and
redevelopment proposals by the City Council and Planning Commission.
The design guidelines which apply specifically to the CBD also include principles that can be
broadly applied to the entire Hugo Downtown Area.
Downtown CBD
The Design Guidelines apply specifically
to the central business district or “Old
Downtown” concentrated around Highway
61, from 147th Street to the new County
Road 8 intersection. The guidelines
provide more detailed definitions of
requirements for site planning, placement
of building mass, materials, architecture,
lighting, signage, and design of the public
realm.
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 8 of 23
Framework Principles for Downtown Hugo
1. Preserve and celebrate Hugo’s small town
character.
2. Enhance the public realm, to maintain a
pedestrian-oriented downtown.
3. Expand civic space and uses around City
Hall.
4. Add new retail which complements
existing businesses and shops and
supports downtown neighborhoods.
5. Encourage unique small businesses to
locate downtown and larger, single-use
developments closer to the I-35 corridor.
6. Provide life-cycle housing to encourage
senior-living in the downtown area.
7. Provide recreational uses for diverse age
groups in the downtown area.
8. Improve downtown access and circulation
with improvements to Highway 61 and
downtown intersections (147th, 145th,
County Road 8).
9. Reduce the impact of development close
to Egg Lake to improve lake quality and
preserve wildlife habitat.
10. Build upon unique assets such as the
church, feed mill and City Hall with
complementary design and materials.
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 9 of 23
Downtown District Design Guidelines
General Design Standards
• These design guidelines are intended to apply to the Downtown District CBD, but include
principles that can be broadly applied to the greater Hugo Downtown Area (as indicated
on the Downtown Plan), including the Central Business, Future Central Business and
Central Residential zones If the CBD development extends beyond this boundary, the
Downtown District boundaries may need to be extended accordingly.
• On all streets in the downtown district, the guidelines are intended to apply to street
frontage properties on both sides of the street.
• New downtown development shall provide for pedestrian as well as vehicular circulation
and shall create linkages to existing and proposed sidewalks and trails.
• All new development should be sensitive to existing downtown neighborhoods and
residences in the design and location of new uses and buildings with respect to shading,
views, light or noise pollution; where necessary appropriate screening or buffering shall
be provided.
• All new development shall be designed to value, respect, and preserve identified natural
features and resources.
• A sense of City history should be
encouraged, and landmarks such as St.
John’s Cemetery and St. John’s Church
should be preserved as important
contributors to Hugo’s character.
• Key points which have been identified as
primary entrances to downtown Hugo
should be designed as “gateways” to the
City; gateway elements could include
open space, unique landscaping, walls or
gates, water features and City identity signage.
These points include:
• From the west – the bend in the County Road 8 at the western edge of Hugo;
• From the east – At Egg Lake and the intersections where 147th and 140th meet
Highway 61;
• From the south – Where 140th meets Highway 61;
• From the north – Where 147th meets Highway 61.
• Along the west side of Highway 61, new downtown development will need to be designed
to integrate with the railway corridor as it comes through the center of town: as a public
open space, supporting the proposed trails, and considering future uses.
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 10 of 23
General Land Use
• Downtown development should be appropriate for a traditional downtown area: mixed-
use buildings combining retail, commercial, and residential uses, and encouragement of
multi-story buildings in the downtown.
• Neighborhood retail, service, and commercial buildings and uses which support
downtown residential neighborhoods such as drug stores, banks, and specialty markets
or small grocers are encouraged.
• Destination retail, restaurant and entertainment uses, particularly mixed with compatible,
complementary, or other synergistic uses, are highly encouraged.
• New auto-dominated commercial development such as fast food, auto service, or similar
high traffic drive-through facilities and large, single-use developments are discouraged in
the downtown CBD.
• Uses appropriate to the downtown area such as banks, coffee shops and pharmacies
which enhance their business by providing drive-through services may be permitted
provided they are designed to minimize impact on local downtown traffic circulation and
pedestrian access.
• Parking lots should only be allowed as an accessory use, except for municipal or public
district parking; larger parking areas should be broken up into smaller areas to reduce the
overall area of paving and promote a friendlier pedestrian environment.
• New residential development should provide for the full range of life-cycle housing,
offering choices of housing types (single-level flats, condominiums or lofts, single-level
and multi-story townhouses, and single-family attached or detached), styles and prices, at
a density appropriate to the downtown area.
• New residential development should be sensitive to existing residential neighborhoods
and incorporate well-designed transitions from multi-family to existing single-family
residential areas.
• Traditional neighborhood design (TND) based on a traditional street grid is a desirable
option for downtown, medium-density areas. Single-family homes (detached or attached)
or row townhomes should line the street with front porches and stoops, front yards,
sidewalks and boulevards with regularly spaced trees and street lights.
TND example with traditional street grid and
porches facing the street
Garage access at rear of house
Sidewalks and boulevards on both sides of the
street with regularly spaced street trees
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 11 of 23
• All downtown residential developments should be planned and designed to minimize
paving for driveways and surface parking. Garage-forward or “snout-house” homes or
townhomes are highly discouraged.
Streets, Public Space & Amenities
• Forest Boulevard (Highway 61) and 145th Street should be restored to be closer to their
original, traditional downtown “Main Street” form, lined with street trees and planters,
pedestrian street lights, and street furniture including benches and trash receptacles. The
fixtures that are selected for these streets should be required continuously within the
downtown CBD district and highly encouraged throughout the downtown commercial area
for visual continuity.
• Downtown intersections should be designed to be safe for pedestrians; enhancements to
safety include use of textured-colored paving or striping to mark crosswalks, narrowed or
throated intersections, pedestrian-oriented street lighting, planted center medians or
landscaped boulevards, and warning signage at busy crossings along Highway 61, such
as 147th, 145th and County Road 8.
Highly Discouraged:
Example of Garage-forward
design, dominating view
from sidewalk and street.
Change in paving or striping marks the
safe crossing zone for pedestrians at
major crosswalks.
Planted center medians or landscaped
boulevards provide resting points for
pedestrians at major crosswalks, facilitate
turning movements, and help calm traffic
speeds.
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 12 of 23
• The City street grid is a vital part of the way the downtown functions, so restoring streets
or adding new streets that connect to the existing street grid are encouraged;
disconnected streets and cul-de-sacs are highly discouraged.
• Forest Boulevard (Highway 61) and 145th Street are the original “Main Streets” of
downtown and, to an extent, the few remaining brick buildings along these streets should
be preserved, renovated, or restored to productive use; new buildings close to these older
structures warrant careful attention to design and detailing in order to relate well to the
original structures.
• The small park which is planned on Highway 61 across from City Hall is intended to act
as a Town Square or Village Green – a community focal point with passive uses (green
space, gardens, historical markers) and active uses (a gazebo, lake overlook, Farmers
Market) incorporated into the design. Civic and mixed-use buildings should be located
adjacent to the Town Square or Village Green, welcoming visitors to downtown Hugo.
• The plan proposes a future pedestrian bridge over Highway 61, connecting the park and
Egg Lake to City Hall and the bulk of the downtown area. This bridge, if well-designed,
could also act as a visual cue to drivers to reduce speed and could create a sense of
arrival and welcome for the downtown CBD.
To be safe for both pedestrians
and vehicles, downtown Hugo
should include street
improvements: narrowed
intersections, pedestrian lighting
(top left), planted medians (top
right and bottom left), and visible
signs warning of pedestrian
crossings/vehicular speed
decrease (top right).
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 13 of 23
The edge along the railroad ROW and the Hardwood Creek Regional Trail along the west side
of Highway 61 should be maintained as an open-space corridor connecting City Hall and the
CBD to new development to the south. This edge should include:
• trail connections for bicycles and winter sports uses
• landscaping to act as a year-round buffer;
• pedestrian-oriented trail and street lighting;
• places to rest with benches, planters and trash
receptacles.
• On downtown streets where retail and commercial uses are proposed, on-street parking
is encouraged; streets should be designed with the parking lane designated either by
curbing or with a change in paving materials.
• Downtown district streets should allow for public right-of-way between the curb and the
building wall, a minimum 10’-12’ wide. This area should be “zoned” to provide for street
signs, landscaping and street trees, and both street and sidewalk lighting closest to the
curb. There should be a clear pedestrian walking path in the center, and then an area
designated for seating or other street furniture (trash receptacles, bus benches, etc) and
commercial opportunities
(including newspaper boxes).
Where necessary, such as
where the street ROW does
not allow for a wider sidewalk,
these amenities may need to
be accommodated within the
parcel boundaries.
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 14 of 23
Minimum ROW
from curb to building
(10’-12’)
5’-6’ Walking Area
Defined 8’ parallel
parking lane
2’-3’ Shop related
furniture & amenities
3’ Public Area:
trash receptacles,
newspaper stands,
streetlights, signs
& street trees planted
where sidewalk widens
another option is a defined 20’
head-in angled parking zone
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 15 of 23
Architecture
• Architecture of new buildings should be respectful of the existing historical structures which
enhance the character of Hugo; design which reflects the elements of vernacular “Main
Street”, Hugo’s French trading post roots, or mid-western “prairie style” architecture is
encouraged:
Entry feature; well distinguished and covered
from the weather
Well defined roof line
1st story with glazed
display windows
Cornice or roof
line
distinguishes
1st story from
2nd story
Awnings with accent
lighting and graphics
instead of applied signs
Building base
expressed with
masonry
Early trading post and mill buildings in rural
Minnesota were often made of stone with a simple
gabled roof and expressed chimney.
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 16 of 23
Prairie Style:
roofs are hipped, low and spreading with
deep overhangs and eaves; Hugo City Hall
has many of these elements.
Traditional Main Street style building:
flat roofs, often an extended or false parapet
on “front” side or marking the main entrance.
Hugo was once a French trading
post, and many residents have
expressed a desire to reflect those
roots in the architecture of the
downtown. Appropriate
architectural elements include:
steeper or mansard roofs with
dormer windows, open storefronts
with awnings, and exterior plaster,
stone and brick.
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 17 of 23
• Architecture of new buildings should be built
upon Hugo’s existing assets such as the
church, the feed mill, and the new City Hall,
with complementary design and sense of
scale.
• Buildings should be designed to relate well to the existing natural and man-made
environment and stay within context in massing, materials, style and color; design of the
landscape and hardscape should be coordinated and harmonious with the building design
and materials.
• Buildings should be constructed and maintained for permanence and longevity; therefore
durable, maintainable materials (brick, stone, etc.) should be used; temporary buildings,
metal sheds, etc. shall not be permitted.
• Building entries should be visible from the street, well lit, covered or protected from
weather, and include significant glazing and glass doors where the public will be entering
buildings.
New “Main Street” buildings
should complement an
established downtown through
their architectural character.
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 18 of 23
• Awnings, overhangs and arcades are encouraged where pedestrians are expected to
walk and shop ; flat awnings are preferred (no barrel awnings) with adequate clearance
above sidewalk.
• Building design elements should include an expression of a building base (of brick or
stone), a middle, and a top with cornice elements at the top of the first floor and the top of
the building.
• Buildings should be designed with “four-sided architecture”, using the same quality
materials on all sides:
• all facades shall be articulated with a variety of materials, glazing, awnings, or other
details to add visual interest;
• roof lines and cornice details shall be completed in a three-dimensional manner so that
the features on the back of the roof or similar unfinished areas are not visible;
• the front façade may have a unique design or more significant glazing.
• Buildings should be oriented to the street with fully articulated street facades based on
traditional storefronts (doors and display windows) along the sidewalk.
• Zero Lot Line commercial buildings are allowed and highly encouraged on all streets
within the downtown district.
• Along CR 8 and Hwy 61, entrances may be oriented to a side or rear parking lot, as long
as the entry also has good pedestrian access and visibility from the street, and any
building wall along these streets must contain significant amounts of “real” windows.
• Equipment, mechanical systems, transformers, trash enclosures, etc. must be screened
from view in a way that is integral to the architecture of the building with similar materials:
• metal fencing or a mechanical vent screen alone is not sufficient;
• access to these service areas needs to be provided at the alley, side or rear of the
building.
Rooftop equipment shall be
screened from the line of site
of pedestrians and integrated
into the design and massing of
the roof form
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 19 of 23
Parking & Service Areas
• Within the downtown CBD, shared parking is encouraged to take advantage of varying
parking demands between mixed uses.
• Businesses are encouraged to establish or participate in a municipal parking district
providing shared, public parking with reductions in required on-site parking.
• Parking should not be located between a building and the street or main road the
building faces and be distributed around the building, especially to the side and back of
buildings.
• Parking adjacent to the street should be minimized;
• Where a parking lot is located along a street, the same zero-lot-line or setback
conditions of the adjacent buildings should be maintained with a wall, ornamental
fence, or similar landscape elements to continue the built edge along the street.
• Where a parking lot is located along a street, it should be well landscaped and
screened with a combination of fencing or wall plantings along the street edge.
Landscaped edge combines fence
with trees, low shrubs and ground
cover for parking lot screening and
buffering along the street
6’ zone between parking and
sidewalk with fence or wall
centered in zone
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 20 of 23
• Larger parking areas (over 25 vehicles) should be planned with internal landscaping,
pedestrian sidewalks or walkways and be divided into smaller areas where possible:
pedestrian walkways provided in larger parking lots should be landscaped, include
path lighting, and provide direct access for pedestrians to an entrance of a
commercial building;
walkways should be raised, paved areas or defined paths distinguished by striping
or a change in paving provided that pedestrians are kept safe from vehicular travel
on the route to an entrance of a commercial building.
Pedestrian walkways through
busy parking lots are
important because they
provide a safe, well lit, direct
access to the entrance of a
building. Larger parking lots
should have pedestrian
walkways that are clearly
identified and combined with
landscaping to break up
large areas of pavement.
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 21 of 23
• Buildings should be oriented to minimize views of service areas and loading docks
from the street; service areas should be buffered with a combination of landscaping
and screening; mechanical equipment and trash areas must be fully enclosed and
integrated into the architecture using the same materials as the building:
• metal fencing or a mechanical vent screen alone is not sufficient;
• access to these service areas needs to be provided at the alley, side or rear of the
building.
• Residential buildings (single-family homes and multi-family buildings) should be
oriented to minimize views of garages and parking areas from the street:
• free-standing or detached garages should not be allowed for multi-family
residences.
• parking should be located below buildings or underground where possible.
Below-grade parking: side or rear
access. Garages should not be as
invisible from the street as possible to
create a traditional neighborhood feel.
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 22 of 23
Signage
• Downtown signage is critical to the character of the area, especially at night; all downtown
signage is subject to careful review with the City and must comply with all zoning and
ordinance requirements for size, placement, materials, etc;
• Signage and graphics should be integral to the building architecture or used as a
decorative design element. Back-lit, box signs are not acceptable downtown.
• Decorative neon, moving or other decorative sign types are desirable only when
displayed within storefront window interiors of downtown buildings.
• Corporate chains are encouraged to customize their architecture to express their design
“brand” within a design, context, and material appropriate to the character of downtown
Hugo.
Projecting or
Hanging
Sign
Wall Sign
integrated
into the
building
design
Awning sign should be located on the
awning face or fringe
Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines
Page 23 of 23
Open Space and Storm Water Management
• New development should provide both private and public usable open space, plazas
etc; these spaces should be connected to existing or proposed trail and sidewalk
networks.
• The downtown area should plan cohesively for storm water management and for
improving the water quality of Hugo, however, where possible rain gardens or similar
infiltration and holding areas should be integrated into the design of parking areas;
design which harmonizes more groomed and landscaped areas with more natural
landscape is encouraged:
• Storm water ponds, rain gardens and other storm water management or holding areas
shall be designed to be attractive in both flooded and dry conditions; use of native
plants for filtration around pond and wetlands and other sustainable design approaches
to site and landscape design are encouraged:
More formal
and groomed
landscape
Trail or
Sidewalk
Egg Lake
Filtration
Vegetation
Swales planted as a rain garden; plants
and soil provide filtration
Trail or sidewalk
2023 Goals
Planning Commission
Approved by the Planning Commission at its Thursday, January 12, 2023 meeting.
•Discuss zoning language and geographic considerations for high
density residential apartment projects in the City
•Evaluate adoption of a mixed use zoning district
•Evaluate the solar energy systems ordinance
•Review and evaluate the Commercial and Industrial Design
Guidleines related to new trends for building materials
•Schedule regular Ordinance Review Committee (ORC) meetings
Land Use and Design Topics
•Monitor trends in planning and developments
•Keep updated on land use related topics
•Develop methods of communicating planning related issues
to the public
•Use the City's website to keep the public informed of
projects completed and in development
Training/Presentation Topics
•Implementation of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan
•Update ordinances/policies to be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan
•Stay informed of the Highway 61 Vsioning Study
•Discuss small area planning on 165th Street and Highway
61
2040 Comprehensive Plan
F.2