My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5.5
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Packets
>
2000-2005
>
2001
>
02-27-2001
>
5.5
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/7/2018 11:20:17 AM
Creation date
5/7/2018 11:20:14 AM
Metadata
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
fiiindariiels <br /> • .. t � r � r J <br /> 2145 Ford Parkway, Suite 201 <br /> Saint Paul, Minnesota 55116 <br /> Phone 651.690.5525 <br /> Fax 651.690.5545 <br /> www.finn-daniels.com <br /> February 19, 2001 <br /> City Of Elk River <br /> 13065 Orono Parkway <br /> P.O. Box 490 <br /> Elk River, MN 55330 <br /> Attn: Scott Harlicker <br /> Senior Planner <br /> Re: Proposed Site Development <br /> Precision Tune Auto Care and Leasehold <br /> Elk River, MN <br /> Enclosed with this letter you will find a revised civil plan "C-1" in response to your site plan review. <br /> . In this letter is an itemized response to that same plan review of February 5th, 2001. <br /> 1. We firmly believe that there shouldn't be any problem in administrating the occupancies and <br /> the square footages allowed in a mixed-use facility as it relates to the parking requirements. <br /> This certainly can be controlled though the application for building permits. Surely there are <br /> other developments within the city that have a mixed use in which some areas or lease <br /> spaces require more parking based on their square footage than others. Parking <br /> requirements are often determined based on what function different areas are designed for. <br /> As an example, a restaurant in a retail center or office building would require more parking <br /> than the remainder of the building due to the higher occupant load expected. If the restaurant <br /> would want to expand, I am sure an evaluation of the parking on the site would be necessary <br /> to make sure that the proposed expansion would not throw the building into non-conformance <br /> with the zoning code. Therefore, the control through building permit application of what <br /> function/business is allowed what square footage, based on the parking requirements is a <br /> system that must already be in place. We are asking that you look at this leasehold space <br /> with the same criteria. <br /> Based on the parking provided with the Precision Tune Auto Care taking 3025 S.F: <br /> 5200 S.F. could be leased to a function that requires 200 S.F. per stall (such as retail) <br /> 3260 S.F. must be leased to a function that requires no greater than 300 S.F. per stall (such <br /> as auto related or professional office) <br /> Working the problem backwards: <br /> If we had a auto related tenant signed up to take the entire building at this point there would <br /> be more than enough parking to comply with the zoning ordinance. If 5 years down the road <br /> that auto related tenant downsizes to 3260 S.F. would we be denied being able to lease the <br /> remaining 5200 S.F. to a retail tenant? The parking would comply. <br /> 1111 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.