Agenda - Council - 09/13/2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilmembers Cormolly, Hendriksen, And6~S~n, and Zimmerman. Voting No: None. Case #4: Request for Site Plan Review Case of City Wide Door Community Development Director Frolik stated that the City of Ramsey'~ii~eceived .a r~:q~Ubst for site plan review from City Wide Door Company. The plan proposes t¢/dSmtruct a and showroom addition onto an existing building. The site is !od:a~bSiTat 68'/~:~*i?Highway #1 City Wide Door Company is proposing a 7,200 square foot addfi~'on(6 ~ existing building in the Highway Business District. The addition would consist of;~2~50 squ~¢} foot showroom and a 4,950 square foot storage addition. The proposed additjofi!:hhd existingbuilding complies with the 35% building coverage restriction and all setback :ff~rements. '~'exter/or finish on the building is proposed to consist of a beige rockface .ebh6~*et~iblock and:~:~ii~¢brick to match the existing building. In accordance with City'Code, a su'fficier~f':~fimber::~:dff'~:tr~'et parking spaces are provided. All thirty-nine parking spaces are currently or Witl;'~oe~:~aved and finished with B- 612 concrete curbing. The applicant is asking for a waiver to th~'~ing requirement along the west portion of the property where RV Wholesalers currently 3~ktes. ~:tCi~ Wide Door Company has a future redevelopm,e?:.~lm for the site that would requ'i~b'i~'e~°~'al of the paved RV display area. The landscape pl~ is }~n~!yYacceptable. The Parks S'~isor is requesting that two additional trees be pla~t~ g6ng Hi~a7i:#~ and inctudidg]'~ndscaping along the north property, line. The submi~al is d~tS~ent of exte~i~:t2ig~ting ~p~/fications and it should be noted on the site plan if the applicant pi~ on add~:'any '~ ~terior lighting fixtures. A tempora~ modular structure is located o)~:~e prO~:~ and is'~t~g used by RV Wholesalers (a tenant of City Wide Door Co.). The moddi~i:g~tUre is not"~'~'iegal permitted structure and has not received the;:n~a~:.permits from th~i:'City. The applicant has agreed to remove the modular structure:before COiiktructing the pr6~ised addition. The drainage plan is proposing to discharge .~:-'~ detention p~o'nd located on thd:,adJS ihg property to the east (Deal Commercial Center);:i! ~i~ Wide Door:C3~pany is requir~ ~~ provide evidence of sufficient capacity and perm/'ss~n::t°":direct storm~ter,runoff to.:~!4~edimentation pond on Deal Center before any buildir~g pe~{~;will b~'~ed;ii~:.~k~5~i~g Commission met on Aug-ust 1, 2000 to' review the site plan. Disc~sibh Occurred on th~'~fE'fidscape and drainage plans in order to verify that City -::;!~'C6des are being Counciln/:~ber Zimmer'an i~¢rea if the drainage plan is sufficient. City Engnee~'!~owsl~(~':~ated that his concern was whether or not the use of the adjoining detention pond!i~;ould have any legal ramifications, and according to the City Attorney if the landowner of t~e adjacent property is in agreement that the use would be permissible. The other issue was to ihsure that the pond would be adequate for storage of both properties which will be ':': 4 ~ de~ermin ed:ThY'the WMO. CoUnc/_l~ember Anderson inquired as to when a determination should be made as to if the pcm~g is adequate in size ! I ! I I I I i I I I I I I I I I -t06- City Council/August 22, 2000 Page 8 of 18