07/11/2001 P&Z Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• • Planning & Zoning Board June 13, 2001 Page 5 informed that the City was requiring the 65 -foot roadway easement. He asked when the purchase agreement was signed the agreement stated if the roadway was ever to be used as a dedicated public road, then they would give up the 65 -foot easement, but until that time, it would remain as it was. He stated Mr. Iverson had agreed to that and had signed the purchase agreement. He indicated now Mr. Iverson was asking for a 66 -foot easement. He stated if this did not get resolved, the property might be not closed on. Chair Schaps stated it appeared Mr. Walton and Mr. Iverson did not see eye to eye and the Planning and Zoning Board had no authority to enter into this type of a dispute. Mr. Walton replied he understood that and he requested the 66 -foot easement be struck from the recommendation to the City. Mr. Brian Iverson stated he had not figured anything out yet, but whatever the City wanted to do was fine with him. Mr. Powell noted that if Mr. Iverson wanted to develop it in the future, a right -of -way easement would be required. Ms. Lane made a MOTION to approve the minor subdivision, without any additional easement other than what was already platted, and was supported by Mr. Lyden. Motion carried 4 -0. C. Item Deleted D. Lino Lakes Family Dentistry, Apollo Drive, Site Plan Review Staff presented the application by explaining applicant had submitted site and building plans for construction of a 5,067 square foot medical office building on property located on Apollo Drive. The subject site was approximately 65,340 square feet in size. The property was guided for future commercial development by the Comprehensive Plan and was zoned GB, General Business District. Medical office uses were allowed within this District as a permitted use Development of a commercial use was subject to site and building plan review as provided for by Section 2, subd. 5 of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff presented its analysis of the request by explaining the only issue was that the drive aisle on the west side of the building was set on the property line and not back 10 feet as required. This driveway was within a parking easement established over the common lot line with the property to the west and was indicated to be temporary. Staff indicated the footprint was approximately 4,792 sq. ft. The building was a single story structure with a pitched roof and a height measured to be 19' high. Staff stated the elevations featured cultured stone on the forward part of the south elevation and a lap siding of "cement board" on the remaining portion of the south elevation, as well as the sides and rear of the building. Additional cultured stone accents were provided at the corners of the • building. The peaks of the pitched roof also used the plank material. Section 3, Subd. 4.B allowed for use of decorative concrete panels for commercial uses. Provided that the "cement boards" were consistent with this classification of material the exterior of the building would conform to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.