Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION <br />March 11, 1992 <br /> <br />Paget <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />DISCUSSION <br /> <br />Issues discussed included restrictions on exterior storage and use <br />of vacuum cleaners and the storage of trailers on the site. <br /> <br />MOTION <br /> <br />Roberts moved and Thomas seconded a motion to continue BCHPS <br />Properties request for special use permit for an automobile rental <br />agency at 2310 W. County Road D until the April 8, 1992 Planning <br />Commission meeting because the applicant was not present. <br /> <br />Roll Call: <br /> <br />Ayes: <br /> <br />Wietecki, Thomas, Roberts, Stokes, <br />Goedeke <br /> <br />Nayes: <br /> <br />None <br /> <br />The Planning commission meeting recessed at 9:05 p.m. <br /> <br />The Planning Commission meeting reconvened at 9:10 p.m. <br /> <br />Other Business <br /> <br />Sketch plan review of Amoco oil Company request for PUD Amendment <br />to allow an Amoco gasoline service station, food shop and car wash <br />facility at the northeast corner of Lexington Avenue and Highway <br />36. <br /> <br />Presentations <br /> <br />Shardlow summarized the site, proposed improvements, and history of <br />past City actions concerning the site. Shardlow pointed out the <br />City's policy to limit commercial use of property along Highway 36. <br /> <br />Kris Kristofec highlighted the proposal including the previous <br />proposals on the site, detailed design including the neighborhood <br />meetings which were held. <br /> <br />Fred Hoisington presented the results of his study of the land use <br />question which found that the proposed Amoco station would be <br />appropriate because it would not change the level of service on <br />adjacent roads, because of the poor office market, would not <br />increase City service costs, would provide a needed service to the <br />neighborhood, and because it would not set a precedent because the <br />site is the only site available along Highway 36 which could be <br />developed commercially. <br /> <br />DISCUSSION <br /> <br />Issues discussed included traffic volumes and turning movements on <br />Lexington, whether the proposed private road could handle the <br />proposed traffic, pedestrian traffic from the high school, the <br />different types of uses allowed in B-1, B-2, and B-3 zoning <br />