My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10.1. SR 06-06-2016
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2011 - 2020
>
2016
>
06-06-2016
>
10.1. SR 06-06-2016
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2016 2:01:09 PM
Creation date
6/3/2016 7:17:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
6/6/2016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
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
ELK RIVER COMMUNITY CENTER <br /> CONCEPTUAL SOLUTIONS <br /> SITE OPTION 2: <br /> PINEWOOD GOLF COURSE <br /> 1Pint:�vt,c�r.; <br /> ERiser~ <br /> +s <br /> The Pinewood Golf Course site made the shortlist of sites as it is a large parcel of land that the city already owns, and also has <br /> existing infrastructure and services on or near the site. The biggest hurdle with the Pinewood site is that, althoug it is a large parcel of land, <br /> it is bisected by a residential street, meaning that the parcel is not contiguous but rather broken into two parts. The two conceptual layout <br /> options explored using the southernmost section as it is the larger of the two. Being that the land is two smaller halves, it makes fitting the <br /> required building footprint and parking onto one section rather tight. The resulting building would encroach quite close to the existing <br /> residential neighborhood propoerties. The fact that the project would need to be shoehorned onto the land makes the Pinewood site a poor <br /> candidate for a potential site. Other negatives to this site include the fact that is is the farthest site from the center of the community and the <br /> project here would not fit in well with the surrounding buildings. One positive aspect of the site is that since it rests on a corner, the site could <br /> have multiple access points which would be convenient for vehicles and pedestrians. However with the residential neighborhood consuming <br /> the west and north borders of the site any large building here would really only be able to put its main entrance facing east as shown in the <br /> option 1 layout. This layout works well for the entry but does not fit in well with the angular border of the residential neighborhood. Option <br /> 2 better aligns with the residential neighborhood but faces the primary entrance and community spaces toward the southeast,which would <br /> reduce their visibilty from the north and reduce the effective accessibility. <br /> 32 SITE ANALYSIS FIA <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.