Laserfiche WebLink
2145 Ford Parkway; Suite 201 <br />Saint Paul, Minnesota 55116 <br />Phone 651.690.5525 <br /> Fax 651.690.5545 <br /> www.finn-daniets.com <br /> <br />February 19,2001 <br /> <br />City Of Elk River <br />13065 Orono Parkway. <br />P.O. Box 490 <br />Elk River, MN 55330 <br /> <br />Attn: Scott Harlicker <br /> Senior Planner <br /> <br />Re: <br /> <br />Proposed Site Development <br />Precision Tune Auto Care and Leasehold <br />Elk River, MN <br /> <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 /> <br />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 throWthe 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 a.~.this leasehold space <br />with the same criteria. <br /> <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 /> <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 /> <br /> <br />