Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> . Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Planning Camlission Meeting, 6-03-92 <br /> Page 5 <br /> Cl\SE #92-06 (cx:tn"DI: <br /> Member Carlson stated his concerns relating to the intensity of use of the <br /> station. He suggested Amoco oil Company and the city meet to discuss the <br /> development of the lot. <br /> Chair Probst asked if there was anyone present to speak in favor of or opposed <br /> to this matter. Hearing no response, the public hearing was closed at 8:25 p.m. <br /> Petersen moved, seconded by piotrowski that Commission recommend to <br /> Council denial of Case #92-06; SUP Amen::lment with variance, 1306 W. Co. Road E, <br /> Amoco oil Company, as suhnitted with Option A, based on the fact there does not <br /> appear to be an identifiable hardship to warrant the variance request. Motion <br /> carried unanimously. (6-0) <br /> PUBLIC HEl\RIN3: <br /> C1lSE #92-11; SPECIAL USE PEmUT, 1212 RED FOX ROlID, TWIN CITY PET SUPPLY CO. , <br /> IN::.: <br /> Chair Probst opened the meeting at 8:25 p.m. for the purpose of a public hearing <br /> on Case #92-11, Special Use permit to allow sale of pet supplies, club meetings, <br /> . pet seminars and dog training in the B-4 District, 1212 Red Fox Road, Twin city <br /> Pet SUpply Co., Inc. <br /> Acting Clerk Administrator Catherine Iago confirmed the publication of the <br /> Notice of Hearing in the New Briahton Bulletin on Wednesday, May 20, and mailing <br /> to affected property owners on Tuesday, May 19, 1992. <br /> Planner Bergly reviewed his report dated June 3, 1992, relating to Special Use <br /> Permit to allow dog training in the B-4 District, 1212 Red Fox Road, Twin city <br /> Pet SUpply Co., Inc. <br /> Bergly explained that the Applicant has requested a proposed use not listed as <br /> a permitted use or use by Special Use Permit in the list of District uses. He <br /> stated the Zoning Ordinance (Section V, C) provides a means whereby the <br /> Commission and Council can determine whether it falls within a permitted or <br /> Special Use category. The Commission reviewed this issue at the May 6 meeting <br /> and recommended it be treated as a Special Use requiring a Special Use Permit. <br /> '!he Planner reviewed the background of the Applicant I s request and stated that <br /> parking is more than adequate and no site plan or exterior building changes are <br /> proposed . He further stated this would qualify as a transitional use even if the <br /> uses were not permitted in the new B-4 District but permitted in the previous 1-2 <br /> District. <br /> Bergly reviewed the findings listed in his report and stated that this issue is <br /> a use where no single use is predominant and no single use is clearly accessory. <br /> . He stated the training area is the only segment of the use that would not be <br /> considered a permitted use in the B-4 District. <br /> ---..- <br />