Laserfiche WebLink
Page 3 <br />! Mr. Joseph Sroga, Sr. , 3207 Stinson Boulevard , also questioned <br /> • whether the 9 parking spaces planned in front of the market would <br /> be sufficient for both operations and reiterated the potential <br /> to children who shop at the market. <br /> Mr. Glockzin replied to these objections by saying he had run the <br /> present Jiffy Market with only two robberies and had prevented his <br /> store being used as a hangout for gangs. He said all market studies <br /> bore out the feasibility of combining a grocery market with gas <br /> service saying most of the 7-11 and Tom Thumb markets were going <br /> that route. He said he had no intention of carrying on a gas war <br /> with any other station .and never contemplated keeping his store <br /> or gas pumps open past 11: 00 P.M. because of the threat of robberies . <br /> He was surprised at the complaints regarding trash from .his present <br /> store saying they were the first that had been expressed to him. <br /> Mr. Roger Sax,310 Endicott Building, St. Paul , an attorney for the <br /> Schroeder Milk Company, said the proposal was in compliance with <br /> the City' s zoning ordinance and represented a legally permitted <br /> usage. He said the owners had gone out of their way to meet any <br /> possible objections to the proposal from the neighbors and he and <br /> Mr. Claypool both contested the premise that only young hot rodders <br /> use self service stations. He said it was not possible for this <br /> proposal to solve all the problems which the neighbors have ex- <br /> perienced for years with the other two gas stations on that corner. <br /> • Mr. Marks said he did not feel it was up to the Board to determine <br /> whether the proposal was economically feasible but did feel it was <br /> the responsibility of the Board to maintain the residential character <br /> of St. Anthony while at the same time allowing the necessary mix of <br /> commercial development. He said the services which are allowed do <br /> build the character of a community and believed the plans for the <br /> new market was a definite improvement of the old facility and would <br /> be an asset to the neighborhood. He commended the proponents for the <br /> excellent planning which had gone into the proposal . He was , however , <br /> concerned that the gas dispensing operation might eventually result <br /> in further blight of that corner . It was his contention that the <br /> .'lark Station across 33rd Avenue was clearly a violation of the <br /> residential nature of that particular neighborhood and did not want <br /> the Board to endorse a perpetuation of that violation. <br /> Mr. Johnson agreed with him that the Board should not try to determine <br /> whether the proposal was economically viable and he was impressed <br /> with the improvements in the plans for curb cuts which he felt would <br /> provide better traffic control. However, though the proposal seemed <br /> to meet the letter of the law, he did not feel the Board should <br /> endorse a heavier commercial use for that predominately residential <br /> area. <br /> Mr. Hiebel said the proposal met all the marketing indications he <br /> had seen and said a mixture of residential and commercial are necessary <br /> to support any muncipality. He said the character of the neighborhood <br /> • _ had been established a long time ago and problems experienced with <br /> commercial in the area were to a great extent the responsibility of <br /> another municipality. He also observed that there were approximately <br /> 19 of the signers of the petition who live on the west side of Stinson . <br /> 1 <br />