My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Planning Commission - 10/05/2006
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Planning Commission
>
2006
>
Minutes - Planning Commission - 10/05/2006
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/19/2025 3:52:52 PM
Creation date
11/14/2006 8:56:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
10/05/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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 />Chairperson Nixt stated the other concern is the access to the building through the private interior <br />road, which has not been changed from the 24-foot width. The City's street standards for private <br />roads with parking on one side are 28 feet, and 32 feet with parking on both sides. <br /> <br />Mr. Dale Campbell, John Oliver Engineering Firm, stated they reviewed this base sketch for 15 <br />units. The way he understands this site, there will seldom ever be a semi-truck in this drive. For <br />the fire protection design of this and the trucks to be able to negotiate the exterior perimeter of <br />this site, 26 feet is the amount of land left over for the road. He clarified the width of the road is <br />26 feet, not 24 feet. There would be enough room to park one semi, possibly two. The parking <br />on the site would likely be more delivery van type of parking. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt commented the 26-foot wide road is less than a standard private street with <br />parking on one side. He expressed concern that the road width is. very narrow for the number of <br />units that will be on the site. It is not known how many trucks there will be. It needs to be <br />anticipated that the use will be moderate to heavy, and the road design is a little short on that use. <br /> <br />Commissioner Van Scoy commented the PUD's the Commission has reviewed in the past have <br />had a public road through the PUD with private roads off of the public road. <br /> <br />Associate Planner DaInes explained a public road through the middle of this site would cul-de- <br />sac at a dead end. It made more sense to have a narrower, private street for fire, as the public <br />street would not serve any public purpose. <br /> <br />Commissioner Trites Rolle asked if the center drive aisle is intended to be one way. <br /> <br />Mr. Walz responded in the affirmative. He indicated there will be additional space in back of <br />units 16, 5, 12 and 9 that will be paved. If there is a need to have a truck pull up behind <br />lengthwise, it will still leave enough room to get off the main drive and have trucks go through. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt inquired about the configuration of units 10 and 11 with the way the rear <br />elevation is laid out and how it is anticipated that deliveries will occur. He asked whether the <br />trucks will be parallel with the overhead door or at a 90-degree angle, and whether the trucks will <br />back in. <br /> <br />Mr. Campbell replied the trucks could be parallel or at a 90 degree angle. <br /> <br />Mr. Walz explained these are not loading docks, they are drive in doors with a 12 foot height. <br /> <br />Mr. Campbell indicated if additional space is added the additional landscaping requested by staff <br />will be lost. <br /> <br />Commissioner Cleveland noted there is a lot of greenery in front of the railroad tracks. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/October 5, 2006 <br />Page 14 of20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.