Laserfiche WebLink
August 22, 1977 Page 19 <br />Administrator Achen pointed out that in addition to the B -3 zoning and conditional <br />use permit, the Council must remember the conflict between the planned use and <br />Comprehensive Plan and that case history supports the Comprehensive Plan. <br />MSP (Baumgartner - Ziebarth) to deny the conditional use permit for a convenience food <br />establishment at the James Refrigeration property at 2741 Highway 10, the reason <br />being safety. The traffic generated by this type of establishment would create a <br />hazard with the increased traffic on Red Oak Drive. It is also in conflict with the <br />Comprehensive Plan which indicates the area should be of a multiple high density <br />residential usage. <br />A rollcall vote was taken: <br />Councilmember Ziebarth - aye <br />Councilmember Hodges - aye <br />Councilmember Baumgartner - aye <br />Councilmember Rowley - aye <br />Mayor Pickar - aye <br />Attorney Meyers stated that the courts will usually say that any use will increase <br />traffic. <br />5 ayes <br />Mayor Pickar pointed out that a request was denied for a gas station across the <br />street about 4 years ago due to the intense traffic on Highway 10. <br />Mr. Novak asked if the request would be approved if they used china and if they could <br />get a building permit. Attorney Meyers replied that a development agreement would <br />have to be entered into. <br />Councilmember Rowley stated that the major concern was with the safety during the <br />major hours that the restaurant would be in use. She pointed out that those are <br />also the hours when the traffic is heaviest and that safety wise, it is a bad loca- <br />tion for the amount of traffic on Red Oak Drive and on Highway 10. She stated that <br />she would not object to the restaurant in a different location. <br />Mr. Risso stated that he would be willing to bring in the studies he had presented his <br />figures from for the Council's verification. Administrator Achen stated that those <br />studies should have been submitted with the application in order to give the Council <br />a chance to review them. <br />Mr. Bergstrom asked Mr. Risso if he was a resident of Mounds View. Mr. Risso replied <br />that he lived in Minnetonka and that his house was up for sale and he wasn't sure yet <br />where he would be moving. Mr. Bergstrom stated that he felt business owners in Mounds <br />View should live in Mounds View, not across town. <br />Mayor Pickar stated that the request was denied upon taking into consideration the <br />Comprehensive Plan for reference to the desired use of the property. <br />Administrator Achen pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan was adopted with adequte <br />legal notice and legal procedures for any land owner to speak up against it. <br />Mr. Gale reminded the :Council that one of the very first questions asked the City was <br />if the zoning was 6 -3 and they were given the understanding it was. Thus, a proposed <br />plan should not have greater standing than an actual law. <br />Administrator Achen recommended that something be decided about what the Council should <br />do about the conflict between the present zoning and the Comprehensive Plan. <br />Mayor Pickar adjourned the public hearing and reopened the general meeting. <br />