My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-07-2003
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
05-07-2003
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/4/2018 7:27:05 AM
Creation date
9/4/2018 7:04:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
5/7/2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
57
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
LandCor PC Report <br />May 7, 2003 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />Parking <br /> <br />The PUD establishes the parking requirement for an office use at one space per 250 <br />square feet. The proposed office would consist of a maximum 15,000 square feet of gross <br />space. With that much area, a total of 60 parking spaces would be required. ADA <br />requirements indicate that of the 60 spaces, three need to be handicap accessible. The <br />plans show a total of 54 spaces, two of which are marked handicapped. To comply with <br />the PUD, either 6 additional stalls would need to be shown or 1,500 square feet would <br />need to be eliminated from the building. If the setback for parking along Long Lake Road <br />were 20 feet rather than 30 feet, three to four more stalls could be added to the site plan. <br /> <br />Access & Circulation <br /> <br />There is one access driveway shown from Long Lake Road; no access is shown onto <br />County Road 10. The absence of an access onto County Highway 10 is consistent with <br />the goals established in the corridor redevelopment and revitalization plan adopted by the <br />City Council. The Long Lake Road access is offset to the north of Moundsview Drive by <br />about 100 feet. No traffic conflicts would be anticipated because of this. The circulation <br />within the development is not optimum however there is sufficient space in the drive aisles <br />and there is adequate space provided to back out of all parking spaces. <br /> <br />Lighting <br /> <br />The applicant has submitted a photometric analysis of the site, however it is not known if <br />the analysis complies with City Code as the foot-candle readings are provided only for the <br />parking lot area. (The City Code indicates that foot-candle measurements shall be shown <br />up to the centerline of any abutting street right of ways.) Additionally, the photometric <br />analysis does not indicate the lighting fixtures to be used, the pole height or the individual <br />lumens specifications. Any building mounted lighting would also need to be shown and <br />figured into the photometric analysis. The attached resolution includes this provision. <br /> <br />Drainage <br /> <br />The plans indicate that the site would be serviced by a series of catch basins linked <br />together by a storm sewer which empties into the existing NURP pond at the rear of the <br />property. (The existing pond was constructed with the original development to <br />accommodate the future build-out of the site. Permits would need to be obtained from <br />Rice Creek Watershed District before the City will issue any building permits for the project. <br />The applicant and any utility subcontractors shall meet with the Public Works department <br />for final utility plan approval. <br /> <br />Garbage Enclosure <br /> <br />As shown on the site plan, the garbage enclosure would be located on the south side of <br />the property. No details were provided regarding the enclosure’s construction, however <br />the PUD indicates that the enclosure shall be of the same construction as the building with <br />solid, opaque, latching gates. Chain link is not an acceptable gate material. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.