11-18-1996 Planning PacketC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #2197 November 14, 1996 Page 4 that his site planning should incorporate such a pedestrian/bike path within the corridor currentl) defined by the Navarre Lane right-of-way. Park Commission did not suggest that the \acation should not occur, but that applicant should be prepared to grant a bike trail easement of sufficient width to serve that intended purpose, and should plan his site accordingly. No conclusion was reached as to whether applicant should be responsible for constructing the trail. Applicant noted that creating a ramp within the Lafayette Ridge half of the right-of-way would potentially impact his stormwater ponding, would potentially be expensive, and would certainly require the cooperation of the Lafayette Ridge property owners. He suggested an optional routing around the stormwater pond might be feasible with less cf an impact on his site plan (See Exhibit J). Impact of Pedestrian/Bike Path on Proposed Site Plan A pedestrian/bike path (maybe we should be calling it a sidewalk) located between the two p<uking lots will have specific impacts on applicant's site plan; Entire Phase 2 site plan will shift northward 10-12 ’, to allow an 8' trail plus a few additional feet on either side for parked vehicle overhang. Landscaping between the two parking lots will be more difficult to establish. Lighting placement between the two parking lots will be more difficult. The creation of a sloping ramp down to Navarre Lane for bicycles will require some amount of fill and may require a ver>- wide side slope, impacting potential use of the remaining portions of right-of-way for stormwater ponding purposes, reducing the benefit of the vacation to the property owuer. Exhibit J shows a few route options for consideration. General Site Plan Impacts of Vacation vs. No Vacation If the right-of-way is vacated, applicants will gain ownership of the right-of-way. The proposed site plan includes a connection of the parking iot for the bank building to the restaurant parking lot, providing for traffic movement between the two sites. Further, the site plan for the proposed bank indicates 18 parking spaces located within the right-of-way to be vacated. If the vacation is not approved, applicant may not use the right-of-way for parking lot purposes, and must maintain a setback from it (10 ’ yard requirement for side yard adjacent to a street in B-5). Also, the Phase 1 and Phase 2 parking lots must remain unconnected unless the City chooses to allow their connection across the right-of-way. Loss of the 18 parking spaces noted above w’ould result in a need to downsize the building or a request for a variance to parking