06-17-2002 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

conducive to a basement or underground parking without substantial fill to raise the grade. The proposed one level building with no basement would appear to be a good use uiulcr these site conditions. There are no mapped wetlands on the site. However, applicant is advised to meet with the MCWD and determine whether a wetland delineation is necessarv*, to avoid any surpnses. Site l.ayout and Circulation Developing a suitable building design and site layout has been a demanding process for the applicants. Factors afTccting the la>out have included: • size of the site • size of building proposed and required parking stalls and driving lanes • access allowed only along north boundary' (potential future connection to east adjacent lot ‘ is a factor also) • existing bike/hike trail within the property boundaries limits usable area - preferred front entry orientation tow ard 12 0ld Crystal Bay intersection • necessity of a loop drop-off due to dental orthodontist high-volume uses - access for deliveries and trash pickup - attempting to maintain approximately 25°o green space (this was a B-6 requirement but appears to have been eliminated during recent B-6 landscaping amendments...) The building has been oriented at an angle to take advantage of the visibility from the intersection to the southwest as well as to make use of natural lighting for certain treatment rooms. Primary vehicle access to the site is at the midpoint of the north line. This appears to provide adequate separation from the Kcllcy/CXTB Rd. intersection. A secondary access at the NE comer of the site is proposed as in-only, primarily to serve scr\ ice vehicles (delivery and trash removal) A one-way road along the SE perimeter would serv c 4 parking stalls and provide full access around the building, but at the expense of a significant amount of green space According to the City fire marshal, tins perimeter drive is not required for fire access purposes because the building will be provided with fire supression sprinklers. 1 hcreforc. at the loss of 4 parking stalls, a significant amount of green space could be gained. Absent the perimeter lane, access for garbage trucks under the current layout will be tight, but staff believes the trash and loading^dclivcry area could be rearranged to avoid backing problems. Parking & Driving Lane Requirements The site limitations noted above have resulted in a somewhat *squcc/ed ’ parking arrangement. It appears to meet the 20''22 ’ 20 ’ minimum ‘stall driv ing lane stall’ standard for opposing stalls; all areas w here there is one row of stalls must meet a 20 ’/25 ’ minimum. The most recent site plan indicates 15.000 s.f. (gross) building envelope. Net of hallways, utility space and storage, the building is approximately 13,500 s.f. w hich w ould require 5 stalls per 1.000 s f. or a total of 68 stalls. •02-271} Profrttlunal Proptrlirt of Orooo VU> 17. 2002 Fate 4 of 7