1/12/59 MThVTES OF! THE #EGUL& MEETThtG OP THE MTNA VILLAGE
<br />COUNCTL,- HELD !!ONDAY',' YANUARY 12, 1959, Ai' 7!00 P.M.,
<br />AT THE EDINA VILLAGE HALL
<br />Members answering Rollcall were Beim, Dickson, Kohler, Tupa and gredesen. c
<br />Minutes of the Regular Iieeting of December 22, 1958, were approved as submitted,
<br />by motion Tupa, seconded by Gohler and carried.
<br />PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED REZONIRG FROM OPEN DEVELOPhWST DISTRICT TO OFFICE
<br />EUILDIKG DISTRICT - LOT 4, BLOCK 3, EDENKOOR ADDITION. This Public Hearing
<br />was conducted pursuant to "Notice of Hearing" published in Edina-Morningside
<br />Courier December 31, 1958 and January 8, 1959, posted on official village
<br />bulletin boards January 2, 1959, and mailed to owners of property within 500
<br />feet of affected property. Hearing was instituted upon the petition of MS.
<br />Ralph Overholt, for the rezoning of this lot for the purpose of constructing
<br />an office building thereon; and was a supplement to the public hearing held
<br />on October 27, 1958. Messrs. Maurice Hessian and Overholt presented their
<br />case for the rezoning, by showing pictures of the property proposed to be
<br />rezoned, together with the neighboring community store, commercial and resi-
<br />dential property.
<br />an insurance business employing few people and having very few customers
<br />calling the traffic at this point will not be aggravated; that the building
<br />should prove to be an excellent buffer between community store-commercial and
<br />residential properties and should add to, rather than detract from, the
<br />attractiveness of the area. Mr. Desmond Pratt, 5241 Richwood Drive, led a
<br />delegation of some 30 neighbors, protesting rezoning on grounds that - 1.
<br />It is not the function of the Council to find a use for this property; 2.
<br />There is no community need for this business;
<br />that Sherwood Road is the only entrance to the Richmond Hills residential area;
<br />4. That because of the bad existing traffic pattern at the Shernood-Highvzy #169
<br />corner, an additional business would further endanger children getting school
<br />buses, and vehicular traffic entering #169 from Sherwood Road.
<br />Johnson, 5338 Sherwood Road, whose property abuts the proposed of.fice building
<br />on the South, stated he does not want a commercial enterprise so near his
<br />residence; that it will devaluate his property, and that he will be able to
<br />see the building from his windows, which will be unpleasant to him.
<br />Francis McGuire, 5333 Hwy. #169, whose property also abuts the proposed
<br />office building, objected to further encroachment of business upon residential
<br />properties; stating he believes Sherwood Road should be the buffer line.
<br />Frank Larson, 5244 Richwood Drive, reiterating Ab. McGuire's statements, added
<br />he feels Sheraood Road is not sufficiently wide to take any additional traffic
<br />or parking. Mr. H. R. Reinhardt, 5240 Richwood Drive, stated he believes this
<br />property could be put to a better use to effect some control of traffic. On
<br />rebuttal, Mr. Hessian stated that petitioners are completely agreeable to the
<br />establishment of a no parking zone on Sherwood Road; and Mr. Overholt stated
<br />that the "ridge" on the property will remain, to a great extent, and that there
<br />will be planting on the ridge, to screen the office building from residential
<br />property for their ovm uses; and I&. Pratt replied they would be willing to
<br />consider the matter, and promptly. At a question from Mr. Bredesen as to
<br />whether he would be willing to sell, Ab. Overholt's reply was, "Perhaps, for
<br />a price." Considerable discussion was had by Council and Mr. Overholt as to
<br />the placing of the building on the lot, placement of entrance drives and parking
<br />lot. ltlayor Bredesen then told the audience that, contrary to hk. Pratt's first
<br />statement, the Village Council does have the problem of finding a use for the
<br />property, because of increase in tax base; that, unless this use is made of the
<br />property there will be continued hearings on rezoning petitions, for the reason
<br />that the property is not adaptable to residential use; that, in the Council's
<br />opinion (and that^ of the Planning Commission, which has recommended favorably
<br />on the petition) this type of building will be less objectionable to neighboring
<br />residents, and will offer more in the way of taxes without services than any
<br />other type.
<br />District, with the understanding that there will be no entrance or exit from
<br />Sherwood Road, no parking on Sherwood Road, and that ridge will be retained and
<br />landscaped, was seconded by Beim and unanimously carried. Dickson then offered
<br />the following Ordinance, moving that Council dispense with second reading and
<br />adopt Ordinance as submitted:
<br />They told the Council that because the building will house
<br />3. This is a unique area in
<br />Mr. W.L.
<br />Trustee Tupa asked objectors if they would be willing to purchase the
<br />Dickson's motion, that the property be rezoned to Office Euilding
<br />ORDINAKCE NO. 261-42
<br />MI ORDIIWGE AMENDIRG THE ZON1b.G ORDINARCE OF
<br />EDIRA BY ESTABLISHIKG AN OFFICE
<br />BUILDING DISTRICT
<br />THE VILLAGE COUPXIL OF THE VILLAGE OF EDIIA, P.II!GESOTA, ORDAINS:
<br />Section 10, Office Building District, of Ordinance No. 261 of
<br />the Revised Ordinances of the Village of Edina, is hereby amended by adding at
<br />the end of Paragraph 1 of said Section 10 a sub-paragraph,(a), as follows:
<br />Section 1.
<br />(a) - Lot 4, Block 3, Edenmoor Addition
<br />Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect upon its passage and publication
<br />according to law.