pf_01515 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

0 ITEM 19E APPLICANT'S STATEMENT • As indicated, the building was located with aro0d esignsetback required aa30i0 foot Avenue, while the code and the previouslyapproved ppved setback. The error in location was the result fthe survey crwasu in0.g hetold right-of-way line rather than the new right-of-way closer to the proposed building location. sThe monthserror after the errorvocecurred�i the building was complete, and at least ix The substantial snow cover early in the wintermade sidewalk wasstartedin May. mterror less obvious. It was not discovered until work to install The objective of the modified site plan is to provide the same access to the he building as was propose d in the origtordderal dtoireduce dthe visual to make himpact anges ioftthe building and in the setback area in reduced setback. The east access to the building (on HamlineAtheu buiidingimaTheymainto paccc�s to for handicap access to the second floor level of the building, adjacent to the parking areas, Is pro%.1 ded atthe rsoutampatand west sides. The original design provided for a handicap pedestrian entrance of the building. The modified plan provides the same access using the same slope and provides the same route and access from the parking area. The basic changes which are proposed are described in the following: 1. The brick wall that encloses the upper ramp area and stop area has been removed. The removal of the wall has two positive effects. it provides an additional 3.0 feet of usable space to accoe odatethe e Secondly,athenremovaleo 1ai between the building floor and the street the brick wall results in a significant reduction In the visual impact, or the impression that the building (t wasse to the a significantayextensionwfrompthe viously emphasized that image a building into the setback area. 2. The pedestrian ramp is moved 3.0 feet closer to tho building, anditfeIs aligned so that no retaining walls are required toseparate elevation levels. It is felt that rr retaining walls would uld tend to theagrain has emphasize the closeness of the building. not been modified. 0 feet 3. It is proposed to place the "public sidTheeS�Ok" along feet galnediwtglAbenusod•to closer to the road than is normal. the reduce the slope between the building �ndb�he street. necessary tofconstructwankl8sinch not relocated as requested, it will h high retaining wall adjacent to tWalsidewalk hafor e the effoctiofhagain hempha- Hamline Avenue frontage. Such a sizinr the location of the building and its closeness to the roadway. The fact that the sidewalk is proposed will be 5.0 feet closer to the roadway, will not, in any way, restrict the City and EvenCifnay52f01t is ever wide roadwaytwemened that Hamline Avenue should be widened.re constructed. (Lexington Avenue is only 48.0 feet In cosprison),idwalk t erb)would still be a boulevard area (the open space poles and sr,uw storage. 7.0 feet. That space is adequate for signs, p