My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12-30-1985 CC MIN
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Minutes
>
City Council 1974 - Present
>
1980-1989
>
1985
>
12-30-1985 CC MIN
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:34:45 AM
Creation date
4/13/2005 3:04:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
CCM
date
12/30/1985
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br />PAGE 3 <br /> <br />CITY COUNCIL MINUTES <br />DECEMBER 30, 1985 <br /> <br />Mayor Hinkle reopened the public hearing. <br /> <br />The City <br />agreement <br />reviewed <br />requiring <br /> <br />Administrator <br />pertain to <br />by the City <br />the screening <br /> <br />noted that the two changes in the developers <br />landscaping - requiring the landscaping plan to be <br />Engineer and City Council, and trash receptacles - <br />of such receptacles. <br /> <br />Discussion was held on whether or not the pedestrian access was necessary. <br />Mr. Ken Barthel noted that the shopping center has changed since the <br />original concept. and felt the pedestrian access was not necessary. It <br />was the consensus of the City Council that the sidewalk was a hazard and <br />was virtually useless and therefore should be eliminated from exhibit C. <br /> <br />The City Administrator indicated that the City Engineer had reviewed the <br />plat and the utilities plan and found no problems with either. <br /> <br />rne City Administrator noted that the location of the fire hydrants was <br />reviewed with the Building Inspector and the Fire Chief. He noted there <br />was no hydrant anywhere in front of the building and felt it was important <br />that one be located somewhere in the vicinity. The City Administrator <br />further noted that final approval for the utilities will have to be given <br />by the City Engineer before a certificate of occupancy was issued. He <br />further noted that this would be looked at more closely before the <br />building permit issuance. <br /> <br />The Building Inspector reviewed the parking requirements for the Pamida <br />Store with the City Council. He noted that according to a similar use for <br />retail store 103 parking spaces are required. He indicated that if you go <br />by the 5.5 parking spaces per 1.000 square feet of floor area, which would <br />be in accordance with the rest of the shopping center. then 220 parking <br />stalls would be required. the plan shows 249 spaces which far exceeds the <br />required 103 or 249 parking spaces. <br /> <br />The Building Inspector discussed future parking expansion of the shopping <br />Center. He noted that there are currently 28 excess parking spaces in the <br />original shopping center parking lot. He further noted that between the <br />existing parking lot and Freeport Avenue some of the green space would be <br />made into parking spaces for future expansion which would bring the number <br />of spaces to the required 121. The Building Inspector noted that Barthel <br />had indicated they would like to use some of the excess parking stalls <br />which Pamida has for Dore future expansion. rne City staff indicated that <br />the lot would be owned by Pamida and some type of agreement would have to <br />be entered into with Barthel and Pamida in order to do this. <br /> <br />Steve Rohlf, the City's Building Inspector noted that the fire lane on the <br />Highway 169 side should be left open and the connection to the sprinkler <br />system be left in the fire lane. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.