My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6.1. SR 02-16-2010
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2000 - 2010
>
2010
>
02-16-2010
>
6.1. SR 02-16-2010
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/1/2010 3:49:16 PM
Creation date
2/12/2010 9:24:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
2/16/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
Cily of I <br />Elk <br />River <br />130~~ Orono Parkway <br />ilk River, IAN ~533~ <br />I~ecem~e~ 23, 2009 <br />Lake~a~ad Pl~opertie~, LLC <br />Attu; I~en:~is ~ha~~p <br />X0907 93`~ .Avenge <br />~~~eo, NON 553G9 <br />R.e: Elk R~ive~ ~oa~ Sto~ra~e, Staff Comments <br />Dear M~. Shat.•p, <br />A.t the Site Plan Revieur Committee na.eeting on December 8t'', staff ~e~rieured yau~ <br />application anal has the following comments: <br />Time~ab~e <br />~} Staff anticipates this item being ~evieu~ed by the Plannitag Comm~.ssion on January 12~', <br />and the City Council on January 190'. Note this is a Tuesday due to the N1a~t~. Luther I~in.g <br />J~, holiday, <br />En ineerin <br />2~ <br />a} Regarding the drain field site; no design talcs to prove it is large enough and how will it be protected <br />uritll a building 7 feet away. <br />b} ~laere is the well proposed and does it need protecting since almost ever~rtlauag is paved or building? <br />c} the existing easements that need to be extinguished. <br />d} the NPDES SWPPP is ok but needs the contractor sig~~ature before starti~~g work when he is selected <br />e} the d~:ainage talcs are ok <br />~} there is a small drainage Swale on tl~e south side of the building that slightl~r dosses the lot line. Tlae <br />drainage talcs slow this area takes a small amount o£ drainage from each lot. This area needs to <br />covered bar an additional D/U easement because tlae lO foot one on the plat is probably too small, <br />Also we should get proof in our files even though Sharp zna~r still own both lots that lae lags the right <br />to grade on the adjacent lot, <br />g} The erosion control plan is acceptable but there is a soil embankment area shown on the grading plan <br />that needs to have restoration also, The restoration plan doesn't Show seeding the emba~alunent area. <br />Landsca ins/ye~etatio~ <br />3~ Lan.dscaping ~~equifeinents aye based on the site pe~:itnete~, 2,11 o feet ~equ:~es 53 trees, '/z <br />o£ those ove~-sto~.y ~~7}, ~/4 o~natnental ~13~, anal ~/~ eve~g~:een X13}, Please adjust the site plan <br />to include these tees, The plan must be p~epa~•ed by a landscape architect. Avoid la.ng <br />lin.ea~ ~oWS of a single vafiet~T of tree, The landscaping plan. should p~.•avide screening and <br />~risual interest. <br />thane: 7G3,G3~,1a0a <br />fax, 7G3.G3S,1o9Q <br />WwW.Cl,elk°I'l~'EI',IT1Il.115 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.