CCP 09-29-2003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

() () 43,560 sqJtJacre)),The amended POD would provide for a landscape lot area of 39% (830,430 sqJlJ (48.6 acres x 43,560 sqJ'L/acre)), 9, Building Setbacks. The Zoning Ordinance in Section 5, F, 8, describes the minimum building setback for the parcel in the I-I zoning district Those setbacks can be summarized as follows: Re uired Setback 55 feet 20 feet 50 feet 100 feet The amended POD shows no change in building setbacks, Building H as proposed will not meet the required setback from the property, If the parking ramp is considered a building, it is accessory and follows accessory structure setback regulations, Since, in this case, the parking setback regulations are more stringent than for an accessory structure so they are used to evaluate the proposaL A 60' fire lane is required around the existing AlBIC joined buildings, A 60' wide drive aisle must be kept between the existing building and parking ramp for fire access, If they are joined, there may be sprinkling requirements at the time of building permit review, 10, Parking Setbacks, The Zoning Ordinance in Section 6, F, 1, d, outlines the minimum parking setbacks along property lines and public streets, Those setbacks can be swrunarized as follows: Setback Required Existing PUD Proposed PUD Setback Setbacks Setbacks Public Street 20 feet 7 feet 7 feet (Hamline Avenue & (Hamline Avenue) (Hamline Avenue) COIDlty Road F) 30 feet 34 feet (Parking Ramp, (parking Ramp, County Road F) Countv Road F) Rear & Side 5 feet 10 feet 10 feet (Femwood Avenue & Residential) The proposed parking ramp meets the minimum requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for parking setbacks, If, in the future, the surface parking area is reconstructed or relocated, it will have to meet the 20' setback requirement from the property line abutting Hamline Avenue. As it is currently existing, it has nonconforming rights until which time it is changed, 5 . . .