11-23-2005 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• The storefront is located at the intersection of County Road C (a regional A -Minor Arterial) and Little Canada Road (a collector street). Traffic volumes past the door seemed reasonably high in the hours I plan to be open, but not congested. • The location has nearby freeway access; it is one block from the interchange of Little Canada Road and I -35E. Only two other locations in Little Canada had similar highway access — Rice Street and Highway 36 and Rice Street and I -694 — and there was nothing suitable in either location. • The parking should be adequate for my volume of business and is near the front door, a convenience for my customers. • The parking lot is well -lit, which provides an added measure of security for my clients. • The zoning matches the client characteristics of my business. B -3 zoning provides for "commercial and service activities which draw from and serve customers from the entire community or region." • Lastly, my wife and I live in Little Canada and it's convenient to our home. My wife, an Architecture student at the U, plans to work part -time at the studio when it opens. The intersection of County Road C and Little Canada Road is poorly lit at night. Actually, it is probably the best -lit non - freeway intersection on County Road C -Little Canada Road between Rice Street and I -356. In addition to the standard 30 -foot pole- mounted sodium vapor intersection light, there are two 15 -foot low -level sodium vapor ornamental lights on Little Canada Road terminating the Little Canada Road ornamental lighting project. Three area lights illumine the parking lot in front of the proposed location during business hours and two 30 -foot pole- mounted sodium vapors provide security lighting in the rear of the building. The proposed studio may be a magnet for gang members. Someone at the Planning Commission meeting said he'd seen signs of gang presence or activity in the area. Since gang members sport tattoos, there was a concern that the studio might attract gang members. I couldn't respond to the comment at the meeting except to say "I don't do gang tattoos." My father -in -law called the Ramsey County Sheriff's Office to see if they could verify the report. He told me the Sheriff's Office told him that it hadn't received any such reports related to the area around Little Canada Road and I -35E. That office then referred him to the Gang Strike Task Force. "Jennifer" at GSTF indicated that their office hadn't received any reports of gang activity in the vicinity of Little Canada Road and I -35E, either from the Sheriff's Office or the public. She didn't rule out the possibility of gang presence, but thought the person at the meeting might have confused graffiti or "tags" with gang symbols. She indicated that usually gang tattoos were done by other gang members, so- called "street tattoos." Later, my father -in -law talked with Joel Hanson, Little Canada City Administrator, who sits on a Ramsey County Sheriff's committee. Mr. Hanson agreed to check with the Sheriff's Office about reports of gang activity or presence in Little Canada. According to my father -in -law, Mr. Hanson also volunteered to get an incident map of crimes reported in the broader area centering on I -35E and Little Canada Road for the following categories: gang, loitering, assaults, disorderly conduct, and suspicious person. I presume Mr. Hanson will have this map available for your review prior to the November 23rd public hearing. The proposed use is close to single - family homes. The group of storefronts in which the studio would be located lies across Lake Shore Avenue from a single - family zone, specifically three homes. All B -3 zones lie adjacent to either residential or PUD zones in Little Canada. Four of the seven 3 -3 zones lie adjacent to R -1 zones; businesses in three of the seven 6-3 zones lie adjacent to or across the street from single - family residences. I suppose the question really is: does my business pose a real or perceived threat to those living in nearby single - family homes and, if so, what is the nature of that threat? Can that real or perceived threat be adequately addressed and managed through the conditional use permit and /or licensing processes? That topic will probably come up at Wednesday's public hearing as it did at the Planning Commission hearing on November 10th. 7-