CC 08-11-1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minutes of Regular Council Meeting, August 11, 1986 Page 3 In discussion, Exley was asked if they would build the Tom Thumb store if not permitted to dispense gasoline. Exley explained that the trend today is for convenience stores with self-service gasoline. Exley said most of the concerns at the Planning meeting were that of competition for the existing businesses in the area; stated that competition tends to increase business for all and will provide additional employment opportunities in the neighborhood. Exley explained that they demolished the building that was on the site to end the vandalism experienced since the property was purchased. . It was noted by Miller that another concern expressed by the neighborhood and residents was drainage which has apparently been a problem in this area in the past. Exley said Tom Thumb will work with the City Engineer to assure that the site drainage is done properly and does not impact the neighboring properties adversely. Hansen expressed concern for residents' safety with a gas station so close to residential; noted that no one at the hearing spoke in favor of the proposal; reported she received several calls in opposition. Attorney for Tom Thumb said they are asking for a use this property had in the past -- dispensing gasoline; noted the convenience store is permitted in the B-2 District; explained that Tom Thumb is trying to bring self-service gas to their convenience store outlets; noted that full-service stations are rare today; said they feel this meets a need in this area and, once built and service is available, it will become a part of the neighborhood. He stated that they are a little perplexed since gas was dispensed from this site in the past. Hansen said there are several places where gas and groceries can be purchased within about 2 miles of this location; does not see the need for another service station or grocery outlet; stated that just because gas was dispensed there in the past, does not make it right now. Representative of Tom Thumb said they are a high quality operation and have experienced no complaints of litter, noise, odor, etc. which were concerns expressed at the hearing. Exley explained that the close proximity of one Tom Thumb store to another depends on traffic patterns; noted that many are within a mile or 2 of another Tom Thumb outlet. Hansen noted that she is aware of complaints about a certain Tom Thumb located near a school where children loiter, skipping school, and of neighborhood complaints of a litter problem. Exley said they have never lost a license of any kind; have corporate store supervisors who see that the stores are maintained inside and outside. Woodburn asked what assurances they have the store will be a Tom Thumb in a year or so; asked their success rate. Exley said their failure rate is almost non-existent; of the outlets started, 90% to 95% are still in operation; stated that this would be a corporate store. Woodburn noted that it is not Council's obligation to either protect or help start a business; both should have equal footing. . Hicks moved, seconded by Hansen, that Council deny the convenience store/service st~tion development based on the potential noise, glare, odors, and other nuisance characteristics which are incompatible and detrimental to adjacent Single-family residences and because the site is of insufficient size to buffer the proposed use from the adjacent residential district. In discussion, Mr. Rademacher (Tom Thumb representative) noted that no matter what you put on this lot, it will require a setback variance; noted that the only variances requested are the two addressed by the Planner (75' from residential boundary). Rademacher said they build a quality facility that will enhance the neighborhood. Exley said the proposed store would probably include a. "cold deli"; is not large enough to accommodate a "hot deli". Exley said they do hire a lot of young people in their stores, which is an asset to the community. Motion carried (Hicks, Hansen, Peck, Woodburn voting in favor of the motion; Sather abstained). (4-0-1)