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 b'e provided. Mr. Lien assured her the <br /> parking area would not, be- visible. from herr-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 .di-sposal 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 rel-ated `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.Ietter 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 prpposal 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 Vas judgemental in <br /> view of the existing zoning.. Stating that they felt there were many <br /> • unanswered questions about nsurance'rates, whether the combustible <br /> nature of the proposed addition would- meet fire and safety standards, <br /> I <br />