Laserfiche WebLink
<br />1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />II <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />45 <br />46 <br />47 <br /> <br />Extract of Minutes from Planning Commission meeting of February 14,2001: <br /> <br />b. Plannine File 3290: A request by Border Foods and Heritage Real Estate <br />to amend Planned Unit Development # 1199 to allow increased hours of <br />operation (until 2 am) and additional signage (18.5 square feet on north <br />face) for the Taco Bell located at 1101 Larpenteur Avenue. <br /> <br />Chairman John Rhody opened the public hearing and requested city planner Thomas <br />Paschke to provide a verbal summary of the project report dated February 14,2001. <br /> <br />Thomas Paschke explained the PUD amendment process. The hours of operation of nearby <br />restaurants were reviewed. (No fast food stores are nearby). Staff completed an 18-month <br />review in June 2000. There were no major policing problems. Staff recommended approval <br />of the drive-through only, with annual review for two years. <br /> <br />Thomas Paschke explained the signage request. The PUD allowed for 20 square feet of <br />signage on the south and west. The applicant requested an additional identical 20 square <br />foot sign for the north side of the building. Staff recommended approval. <br /> <br />Member Mulder noted that the "drive-through only" is a request of the applicant. He noted <br />that the other request (signage) should be dealt with in two separate motions. <br /> <br />Member'Duncan noted that there are bars along the south side of Larpenteur. <br />Member Olson asked for a comparison with other restaurants along Snelling Avenue (no <br />comparison was done). The requirements at the Taco Bell are in place because of the PUD. <br /> <br />Member Olson asked if the St. Paul residents were notified. Thomas Paschke explained that <br />staff had provided notice; one call and one comment letter were received. The phone call <br />expressed concern regarding noise and traffic. <br /> <br />Chair Rhody noted the surrounding area is business except for the south side CSt. Paul) <br />parallel streets where the uses are residential. <br /> <br />Member Mulder asked for traffic by hour or peak hours of use. Deb Bloom noted that the <br />increase in hours would not impact the peak hour traffic. <br /> <br />Jim Erickson, representing Taco Bell and Heritage, suggested that the sign issue is most <br />important and straightforward. The north wall looks naked, like something is missing. The <br />police and land use records indicate favorable conduct, and Taco Bell serves a late night <br />niche. This added customer load should not affect the neighborhood. The dining area <br />closes at 10:00 p.m.; only the dr~ve-through is open from 10:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.. <br /> <br />Peter Anderson, 1105 California Avenue West, noted that he was present at the initial <br />approval and continues to oppose the expanded hours, particularly in the weeknights. <br />Thomas Paschke explained pass-by traffic is existing traffic. Mr. Anderson said the <br />increased traffic would be "bar traffic". His block is elderly and young children. Mr. <br />Anderson said his property has become a trash dumping ground from Taco Bell, which will <br />