CCP 07-13-1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

--------- ~ ~ planning ccmnission Meeting 2 7-01-92 PUBLIC HEroUN; - DEVEWPMENl' MORA'l'ORItlM (<::.'an'INllED1 Member Dave Carlson expressed his support of the moratorium for a period . of 6 months instead of one year. '!here was discussion of the length and contents of the moratorium and what is most beneficial to the public and the City. winiecki moved, Mo3raw seconded, to recommend to Council to proceed with the moratorium for a period of one year. (winiecki, piotrowski, Probst, Mo3raw voting in favor; Carlson opposed) . (4-1) PUBLIC HEroUN; - C1lSE #92-06: SUP 1\MENI:MENl' WITH VARIANCES. 1306 W. CO. ROllD E. AMJCO OIL <XJoIPANY winiecki moved, seconded by piotrowski to reconsider Case #92-06, SUP l\mendment with Variances, 1306 W. Co. Road E, Amoco oil Corrpany. Motion carried unaniInous1y. (5-0) . Chair Probst opened the public hearing at 7:49 p.m.; Case #92-06, SUP l\mendment with Variances, 1306 W. Co. Road E, Amoco oil Corrpany. Acting Clerk Administrator Catherine Iago confinned the publication of the Notice of Hearing in the New BriClhton Bulletin and mailed to affected property owners on Wednesday, June 24. Planner Berg1y referred to his report dated 7-01-92, and explained the Amoco request was thoroughly discussed at the June 3 Planning Commission . meeting . Options discussed were for a car wash location to the rear and west end of the building, and a proposal for the east er.1. 'Ihe Applicant requested approval or denial of the application as suhnitted without considering the options. Action to deny the request was to be sent to the Council. 'Ihe Applicant suhnitted a request that the Case be pulled from the Council agenda to provide additional time to view an optional plan. '!he Planner reviewed the findings listed in his report and stated since the June meeting, the Applicant, the Architect, Chairman Probst and the Planner have reviewed a revised scheme that addresses most of the concerns of the Planning Commission. The key issues discussed were: 1. Intensitv: 'IWo setback variances were requested to squeeze the building, drives and parking onto an already heavily used site. Response : '!he revised Plan has the new building to the southwest of the existing station; the traffic pattern proceeds clockwise around the rear of the station, into the carwash and exits on the west drive that connects the restaurant to County Road E. 'Ihe drive and building are depressed approxilllately 3 feet creating a lower profile building situated to the rear of the site. 2. Conoestion: Traffic circulating to and from the carwash cut directly through the already congested site. Response: 'Ihe new Plan brings all carwash traffic around the south and west ends of the site - existing from the west drive . directly to County Road E. -----