Laserfiche WebLink
PLANNING REPORT <br />DATE: <br />CASE NUMBER: <br />APPLICANT: <br />LOCATION: <br />ACTION REQUESTED: <br />PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: <br />5 March 1986 <br />1647 <br />Fairview Development Co., <br />Inc. <br />North of County Road C2, <br />Westerly of Langton Lake (see <br />sketch) <br />Approval of Preliminary Plat, <br />Variance to Sideyard and <br />Public Street Frontage <br />Requirement <br />1. The preliminary plat proposed by the applicant is Intended to create a <br />2.43 acre lot on the north end of the existing structure on the west <br />side of Langton Lake. This new lot would be separated from the <br />existing property to the south and would have access to County Road <br />C2 via a 60 foot easement on the west side of the existing structure. <br />It Is proposed to then construct a 32,000 square foot office warehouse <br />buildinq on the lot created. Please note the attached letter dated 7 <br />February 1986 from Mr. Lund. <br />2. The configuration of this lot is indicated on the first sheet of the <br />attached three drawings submitted by the applicant. The footprint of <br />the proposed structure is indicated by the black pattern on the drawing. <br />The proposed lot on this drawing Is indicated as Lot 1 and the <br />remaining lot (occupied by the existing building) is indicated as Lot 2. <br />You will note Lot 3 to the east side of the property. This Is a 60 <br />foot wide strip of property consisting of .54 acres to be dedicated to <br />the City and added to Langton Park which is contiguous on the east <br />side. The additional drawings attached indicate the proposed use of the <br />site for the structure, parking, and landscaping. The third drawing <br />illustrates the proposed elevations of the structure, utilizing 8 by 8 <br />stacked block. <br />3. The plat <br />proposal is unusual in <br />as much as the <br />proposed building <br />site <br />does not <br />have frontage on the <br />public street as <br />required by ordinance. <br />Obviously, <br />the lot could remain <br />as it is and, in <br />addition, put on <br />the <br />existing structure <br />to the south. <br />There is, of course, some merit <br />to <br />building a <br />new building which hopefully will be more attractive than <br />the <br />existing building. <br />4. A variance is requested to the <br />setback for parking on <br />the south side <br />of <br />the newly proposed lot since <br />the lot line will be <br />in the roadway <br />between the two structures. <br />Likewise, a variance <br />is requested <br />to <br />provide for the 60 foot access easement rather than <br />the required <br />100 <br />feet of frontage on a public <br />street in an industrial <br />district. As <br />you <br />