My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
12-04-2023 Council Work Session Packet
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2023
>
Searchable Packets
>
12-04-2023 Council Work Session Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/8/2023 10:52:33 AM
Creation date
12/8/2023 10:30:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Packet
Meeting Date
12/04/2023
Council Meeting Type
Work Session Regular
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
355
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Per the applicant’s narrative revised building elevations, the proposed exterior materials consist <br />of rock faced block, glass smooth integral cream colored CMU, smooth flint blend (grey) colored <br />brick, hollow metal doors, and prefinished overhead doors. Three (3) colors are shown on the <br />elevations (red, tan and gray). Each unit has a window. <br /> <br />The proposed building height is 18’ 2” to the top of the wall. The proposed height is less than <br />the maximum allowed 45ft. <br /> <br />Staff Comments <br /> <br />1. The building shall meet the minimum 75% exterior materials of at least two different <br />class 1 or class 2 materials. <br />a. To be counted as a primary material, the product must comprise at least 5% of <br />the wall surface. <br />b. Actual material percentages shall be provided to confirm to the proposed class 1 <br />glass material and class 2 rock faced block material). <br />c. The revised plans appear to meet City requirements. Is Council okay with smooth <br />integral colored CMU? <br />2. Restroom facilities are required based on the tenant user examples. <br />a. Per the revised plans, restrooms have been provided. <br />3. Upon further review, staff recommends the building be “flipped” so the unit and self- <br />storage doors are facing west and not Lake Drive. This would give opportunity to create <br />a stronger building façade along Lake Drive. <br />a. Per the applicant, “After we evaluate the bldg. being flipped, so the 3 bays on <br />the west side & entry to the self-storage area, vehicle maneuverability didn’t <br />work. Plus, our client doesn’t want these 3 leased spaces that will have company <br />signs on the back of the building and he is hoping that row of proof of parking <br />doesn’t need to be built & can be left as green space.” <br />b. Staff still has concerns regarding the indoor self-storage staging area blocking <br />vehicle, pedestrian, and ADA access to the 3 bays. Emergency response would <br />also be hindered. The Fire Department Connection (FDC) is also located in the <br />southeast corner of the building. The 3 bays also face existing residential <br />development. <br /> <br />Additional Comments <br /> <br />1. Upon further review, staff has concerns regarding the increased mix of different users <br />(industrial employees, customers, delivery vehicles, trash haulers, etc.) on site and <br />potential conflicts. Staff suggests consideration that the building be designed for indoor <br />self-storage only. This would reduce the number of required parking stalls, <br />vehicle/pedestrian/emergency vehicle conflicts etc. An indoor self-storage facility is a <br />less intense industrial user vs a contractor’s shop. <br />2. Only one (1) ground sign is allowed for the entire parcel. The “new pylon sign for Phase <br />2” would not be allowed. <br />101
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.