Laserfiche WebLink
<br />size may need to be reduced. The applicant is not seeking a variance on this condition and has <br />expressed the accessory building will be in compliance with the I-P regulations (Note: This shall also <br />include setback requirements for accessory buildings and building materials.) The permitting of a <br />waste water disposal does not require official action or review by the Planning Commission. Staff is <br />merely mentioning this component because it is part of the site review. On-Site Sanitation has been <br />working with Bill Dircks, Public Works Director and the Metropolitan Council for this permit. <br />The following comments are from Mr. Dircks in order to provide further explanation on this system: <br /> On-Site is proposing to install a wastewater discharge facility on the site to use for emptying <br />port-o-potties rather than using the Metropolitan Council facility in St. Paul. The proposed <br />facility is in an enclosed building and would grind up all materials and separate solids from <br />liquid. The solids would be deposited into dumpsters and the liquid waste would flow into the <br />City’s sanitary sewer main on South Owasso Boulevard, flow east to Spruce Street, where it <br />would discharge into the Met Council interceptor. <br />This facility requires a permit from the Metropolitan Council and it would not be granted until <br />all permit requirements have been met. The requirements and expectations have been provided <br />to On-Site so they are aware of what they need to do but no permit has been issued yet. One of <br />the conditions of the permit is City approval. The previous discharge site that On-Site used at <br />its Woodlynn property had numerous problems including odor complaints and sewer backups <br />caused by items that were discharged by On-Site. The old facility was just an open pipe and <br />had a long run through the City sewer system before reaching an interceptor. The proposed <br />facility will hopefully grind up any solid objects that could cause problems and the distance <br />traveled in the City sewer main is much shorter. <br />The principal building setback is shown to be in compliance on the concept renderings (accessory <br />building setback needs to be verified - required 10 feet side and rear property line). Below are the <br />setback requirements in the I-P District: <br /> <br />918.050.C - Setbacks: <br />1. Front Yards: Not less than forty (40) feet. <br />2. Side Yards: Not less than fifteen (15) feet on any side, nor less than forty (40) feet on <br />the side yard abutting a public street. <br />3. Rear Yards: Not less than twenty (20) feet. <br />4. Yards abutting residentially zoned property: Not less than forty (40) feet on any yard <br />abutting residentially zoned property. <br /> <br />No specific detail is provided on parking lot design other than they anticipate room for 84 parking <br />spaces. The code requirements based on the uses as described are provided below for determining the <br />number of spaces required. The applicant has also indicated off-street parking design and number of <br />spaces will be installed per code requirements. It appears 84 spaces may be sufficient based on the <br />concept plans, but without specifics staff is unable to confirm. <br /> <br /> Office Buildings, Medical and Dental Clinics, Animal Hospitals and Professional Offices. <br />Three (3) spaces plus at least one (1) space for each two hundred (200) square feet of floor area.