My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10.1. SR 07-05-2016
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2011 - 2020
>
2016
>
07-05-2016
>
10.1. SR 07-05-2016
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/1/2016 8:15:18 AM
Creation date
7/1/2016 8:14:14 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
7/5/2016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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 /> RIF"t <br /> IN <br /> w <br /> E <br /> �.K <br /> fi <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, although it is a large parcel of <br /> land, it is bisected by a residential street, meaning that the parcel is not contiguous but rather broken into two parts. The two conceptual <br /> layout 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 <br /> the required building footprint and parking onto one section rather tight. The resulting building would encroach quite close to the existing <br /> residential neighborhood properties. 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 it 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 visibility from the north and reduce the effective accessibility. <br /> 34 SITE ANALYSIS <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.