My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2011-09-07_PC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
201x
>
2011
>
2011-09-07_PC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/20/2011 2:33:41 PM
Creation date
12/20/2011 2:33:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
9/7/2011
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Regular Planning Commission Meeting <br />Minutes – Wednesday, September 7, 2011 <br />Page 3 <br />At the request of Member Wozniak, Mr. Paschke advised that the Conditional Use for a <br />98 <br />drive-through would stay with the property; or until ACR Homes eliminated it. <br />99 <br />Member Wozniak questioned if this created any concerns in approving it for this use with <br />100 <br />limited operations, but opening up the door for a future use that could be more active or a <br />101 <br />higher volume use. <br />102 <br />Mr. Paschke opined that staff was not concerned with such a scenario; and reiterated <br />103 <br />that this was part of the rationale for staff monitoring of such Conditional uses; and further <br />104 <br />noted that staff would become alerted of any future use or tenant improvement through <br />105 <br />application for a Building Permit; and allow review of the drive-through situation at that <br />106 <br />point. <br />107 <br />Member Wozniak clarified that he was not concerned with the drive-through for this use, <br />108 <br />but only for future uses that may need consideration. <br />109 <br />Public Comment <br />110 <br />Mary Imgrund, 2497 Woodbridge Street <br />111 <br />Ms. Imgrund addressed the significant traffic issues in the morning in her immediate <br />112 <br />neighborhood, with school buses waiting on that corner between Transit Avenue between <br />113 <br />Woodbridge Street and Rice Street N for pick-up and drop-off of children, many of whom <br />114 <br />are Kindergarteners. Ms. Imgrund opined that traffic onto Rice Street was already <br />115 <br />impossible; and questioned why another coffee shop was needed if there was an existing <br />116 <br />one already. <br />117 <br />Mr. Paschke advised that this was the same coffee shop, and that the purpose of this <br />118 <br />request was to consider a drive-through amenity for that same coffee shop. <br />119 <br />Ms. Imgrund expressed frustration; and opined that residents tried to keep the area <br />120 <br />clean, and that this only seemed to create more transit problems; and that the area <br />121 <br />seemed to continue going downhill. Ms. Imgrund noted that she lived closer to the end of <br />122 <br />cul-de-sac on Woodbridge Street; but expressed her pity for those on Woodbridge Street <br />123 <br />who lived closer to or actually lived on Transit Avenue, such as in the twin homes. Ms. <br />124 <br />Imgrund questioned whether it would be annoying for them if a menu board was installed <br />125 <br />and was glaring at all hours. Ms. Imgrund expressed her frustration and concern that <br />126 <br />more traffic has to go through creating further delays and congestion, in addition to the <br />127 <br />safety issues with school children that she previously addressed. <br />128 <br />Member Strohmeier sought information from the applicant on the hours intended for a <br />129 <br />menu board, and whether it would be flashing beyond 10:00 p.m. <br />130 <br />Mr. Nelson advised that it was not anticipated that the operation would be late at night; <br />131 <br />and reiterated their intent to capture commuter business to and/or from work; with the <br />132 <br />drive-through focused primarily on the morning commute; and opined that he would be <br />133 <br />surprised if the drive-through was open past 8:00 p.m.; with even some discussion of it <br />134 <br />not open beyond 5:00 p.m. <br />135 <br />Responding to traffic concerns expressed by Ms. Imgrund, Mr. Nelson advised that for <br />136 <br />commuters stopping at the drive-through and going back on to Rice Street, through <br />137 <br />striping of the drive-through lanes and the overall lot, and signage, they would encourage <br />138 <br />their customers to not go to Transit Avenue, but to exit onto Rice from the parking lot or <br />139 <br />head north to County Road B-2 where there was a stoplight. <br />140 <br />Member Boguszewski noted that if someone was driving east on Transit today and <br />141 <br />intended to turn left, or north, onto Rice Street it was difficult; and if this application was <br />142 <br />approved, they could then turn right to go through the drive-through and be encouraged <br />143 <br />to jog right to Ida onto County Road B-2. <br />144 <br />Mr. Nelson concurred that they would be encouraged to go right on Rice Street. <br />145 <br />Member Boguszewski opined that by their going east on Transit Avenue, this could serve <br />146 <br />to reduce left-hand turns going north on Rice Street. Counter concerns noted by Member <br />147 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.