Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />• <br />• <br />Planning & Zoning Board <br />June 13, 2001 <br />Page 7 <br />Staff stated the proposed site was to be served by sanitary sewer and water services located <br />within the Apollo Drive right -of -way. Service to the future development of the eastern portion <br />of the subject site would have access to the planned connection lines. The submitted plans <br />included a grading and drainage plans for review regarding runoff control and water quality. All <br />utility and grading plans were subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. <br />Staff indicated park dedication requirements for medical offices were $200.00 per 1000 sf of <br />commercial building. Based on a 4,792 square foot building, the park dedication requirement <br />would be $958.40. <br />Staff stated the proposed site plan for Family Dentistry was generally consistent with the <br />performance standards outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. Minor changes to the site plan were <br />required to provide required parking stalls, improve parking lot circulation and comply with <br />setbacks for the west driveway. <br />Staff stated provided these issues were addressed, staff recommended approval of the application <br />with the following conditions: <br />a. The site plan is revised such that all driveways dparking areas <br />Mr. Lyden read the Environmental Board's concerns rega <br />Powell noted this site was served by a regional pond, <br />system was routed to this pond. <br />ter flow from the site. Mr. <br />to the storm sewer <br />Chair Schaps invited applicant to make com _ n <br />Mr. Scott Maurer, Progressive Architecture, 27 •' "'m Street, Suite 530, St. Paul, stated he <br />represented the owners of the prope e gave brief history of the property. He stated this <br />building was a rural design. He a larific on regarding the easement. He stated they <br />were trying to respond to what was s a�K b,; ` veloped on the west side of the development. <br />He asked there be no curb o *de, that it be flat asphalt. Chair Schaps replied he <br />had understood that and <br />Mr. Maurer pointed out wher <br />lot to the east. He asked if this <br />irrigation to the site to the east. <br />ting would be located. He asked about the irrigation of the <br />Id be irrigated. Mr. Brixius stated they were not looking for <br />Chair Schaps asked for clarification on the parking stalls. Mr. Maurer replied right now they <br />were just building the clinic portion of the building and not the storage area, and they had <br />adequate parking spaces available with just the clinic. He stated they wanted to leave options <br />open for any developments to the east and west. He asked it be approved with the stipulation <br />that the additional stalls would be required once development occurred. <br />Mr. Brixius stated one of the things they could look at was the rear of the property providing <br />some additional stalls. <br />Mr. Smyser stated on the western side of the property staff was comfortable with the driveway <br />back there, but it was normal to have a full curb and they needed to find a reason why this would <br />not be required for this development. <br />