Laserfiche WebLink
Page 3 <br />Mrs. Jovita Baker whose home at 2412 33rd Avenue N.E. is east of the <br />site, asked how close the new building would be constructed to her <br />home and what screening would be provided. Mr. Lien assured her the <br />parking area would not be visible from her home. Mrs. Baker said she <br />felt there were already plenty of gas stations in the neighborhood. <br />Mr. Joe Sroga, who operates the Standard Station at 3102 Stinson <br />Boulevard, questioned whether the proposal provided enough parking <br />spaces to accomodate customers who would buy gas and go into the <br />store to buy groceries at the same time. He wanted to know where <br />the gas pumps would be vented and how snow disposal would be provided. <br />He pointed out his own experiences with the lack of caution displayed <br />by drivers approaching a gas station and said there would be additional <br />hazards for small children who frequent the store who will now have to <br />cross the traffic lines into the gas pumps. John Sroga operator of <br />Sroga's St. Anthony Union 76 related a gas explosion incident at his <br />station which had been caused by a careless smoker. <br />Mr. Bowerman said he did not feel the Board could consider the <br />possibility of Sroga's business being hurt by competition from the <br />new gas dispensing service. Mr. Bednarz pointed to Sroga's many <br />years as city businessman. <br />A letter of opposition to the gas operation from Kenneth F. Boots, <br />3214 Stinson Boulevard, a resident of the area for 33 years was <br />also presented to the Board. <br />There was much discussion among the Board members about what action <br />they could take regarding the proposal since they did not have the <br />final plans to consider and the proposal seemed to fit into the <br />existing zoning. <br />When the question was asked of Mr. Lekson why the Board had to <br />consider the matter since there were no variances to be granted, he <br />told them that the Council had indicated they wanted all commercial <br />and light industrial development in the community looked at before a <br />building permit is issued and Mr. Johnson cited a previous incident <br />where the Council had returned a similar case to the Board saying <br />their judgment was required. <br />Mr. Fornell said he would have some reservations about the gas dispens- <br />ing request in the proposal. He felt that even though the project <br />met the basic requirements of the existing and proposed zoning <br />ordinances, the Board might be able to question the reasonableness <br />of the addition of the gas operation to the site due to possible <br />adverse effects on the health, safety and welfare of the area. <br />Mr. Letourneau said the fact that two separate businesses were now <br />going to replace the one for which the original commercial zoning <br />had been granted was a basis for questioning whether the permit <br />should be granted. <br />Mr. Hiebel and Mr. Cowan did not feel the matter was judgemental in <br />view of the existing zoning. Stating that they felt there were many <br />unanswered questions about insurance rates, whether the combustible <br />nature of the proposed addition would meet fire and safety standards, <br />