2007_0409_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

1 � � 4 5 � ,� � f� � [� 1L 1� 13 ]� 1� 1 [� 1� 1� 1 �? �� 27 �� Regular City Council Meeting Monday, March 26,2007 - DRAFT Page 25 a need to add a turn lane to accommodate traffic, and increasing difficulties in navigating access points; and incompatibility of the proposed use with contiguous properties; in addition to noise pollution from garbage collection. Councilmember Kough concurred with the comments of and findings by Councilmember Ihlan, and spoke in support of the motion. Councilmember Roe spoke in opposition of the motion to deny the request; opining that relative impacts and balance issues needed to be considered with CUP's; and while there were impacts related to the proposed project, further opining that none of the arguments were strong enough to provide criteria for denial. Councilmember Roe, in addressing the concerns of the neighbors and taking them seriously, opined that he was sufficiently satisfied with the proposed screening, site plan traffic flow, garbage monitoring and dumpster screening, and other conditions applied to support approval of the CUP. Councilmember Roe observed that the Citv of Roseville. unlike the City of Falcon Heights and their recent ordinance adoption preventing drive- thru's, already had a number of drive-thru businesses, and opined that deny- ing the CUP on that basis would not be an appropriate decision. Council- member Roe further observed that traffic was an issue already, whether or not the drive-thru was approved. 2� Councilmember Pust clarified several issues, observing that the "proximity" �� of the residential neighborhood was actually across the street from the pro- �� posed commercial property, and didn't represent the first or only such drive- �� thru approved for a commercial property adjacent to residential properties; �'r and questioned what the actual issue was. Councilmember Pust noted that '�� she had been the one to initially raise the issue about the daycare, after hear- �� ing citizen concerns, and was willing to hear their opinion. Councilmember �� Pust noted the written comment provided by the Director of the daycare fa- � 1 cility, speaking in support of the project; opining that their personnel would �� presumably have the best interests of the children in mind. �3 �� Councilmember Pust questioned the validity of quantifying data regarding �� the stacking of vehicles, and sought City Attorney opinion. �� �� City Attorney Anderson stated that, in past case law and findings of fact in �� court decisions, with five such cases available for Council review at their :�i� discretion, the court only considered legally sufficient evidence in the �r�-