Laserfiche WebLink
• approval processes would have to be capable of <br /> responding to changes in federal regulations. <br /> At that time, we configured the site plan <br /> that essentially had every imaginable compo- <br /> nent and a lot of items that you might even <br /> consider as wish list items. It was a worse <br /> case scenario that we looked at. We identi- <br /> fied a larger site. In going to a larger site <br /> than the City currently owns, the land acqui- <br /> sition to the south of the existing property <br /> and relocating the community ditch was iden- <br /> tified. Another item that drove this larger <br /> site requirement was the county setback <br /> requirements. The property is annexed now, it <br /> is within the City limits and would come <br /> under the code timing requirements of the <br /> City versus the County. The County require- <br /> ment was a 150 foot setback from the center <br /> line of the state- highway. That essentially <br /> rendered a major portion of the site non- <br /> usable. With the current City codes, build- <br /> ing codes and planning codes we could re- <br /> address that issue so that it would back up <br /> to the existing City owned property. <br /> (See attachement) If you look at the current Predesign Site <br /> Plan you will see that we've pulled the below <br /> grade facilities back up closer to the high- <br /> way to meet the City setback of nearly 30 , <br /> feet versus the 150 feet. We've also taken <br /> into account, which was a major change on our <br /> original plan, access to the site from State <br /> Highway 170. We have previously envisioned <br /> access more towards the east end of the <br /> parcel. Our meetings with the State Highway <br /> Department indicated that is not really a <br /> cost effective location in that it encumbers <br /> some of the on-site facility, increasing on- <br /> site paving. Accel/decel lane requirements <br /> were substantially different from what we are <br /> showing currently. The compromise was that <br /> we would locate the site access to meet site <br /> distance requirements for turning as well as <br /> the accel/decel performance the State Highway <br /> Department will impose. We moved the site <br /> access to the crest of the hill. The road <br /> inset drops away from this point to the east <br /> as well as to the west. That allowed us to <br /> approach the overall layout in a more compact <br /> configuration as opposed to stretching out in <br /> the east/west direction, increasing usable <br /> on-site area. <br /> 3 <br />