2 /25 /63
<br />MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
<br />EDINA VILLAGE COUNCIL, HELD MONDAY,
<br />FEBRUARY 25, 1963, AT 7:OO P.M., IN '
<br />THE EDINA VILLAGE HALL
<br />Rollcall was answered by MacMillan, Tupa and VanValkenburg.
<br />VanValkenburg presided in Mayor Bredesen's absence.
<br />Mayor Pro Tem
<br />MINUTES of the Regular Meeting of February 11, 1963, were approved as submitted,
<br />by motion Tupa, seconded by MacMillan and carried.
<br />ACTION TABLED BY COUNCIL ON WALLACE KENNETH PETITION FOR REZONING FROM OPEN
<br />DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT TO MULTIPLE RESIDENCE DISTRICT--TRACT OF LAND LYING EAST
<br />OF. COUNTY ROAD NO. 18, BETWEEN PEDERSON DAIRY AND NINE-MILE CREEK,
<br />Affidavyts of Publication and Posting of "Notice of Hearing" , publication having
<br />been in Edina-Morningside Courier February 14 and 21, 1963.
<br />approved as to form and ordered placed on file; and, pursuant to said Notice,
<br />Public Hearing was held on the petition of Mr. Wallace Kenneth for the Rezoning
<br />from Open Development District to Multiple Residence District of certain properties
<br />lying East of County Road No. 18; and between Pederson Dairy and Nine-Mile Creek,.
<br />Planning Director Hite reviewed in detail the Kenneth proposal, explaining
<br />the topography of the land proposed for rezoning of this 60-acre tract.
<br />reported the Planning Commission is considering a substantial revision of the
<br />present "Multiple Residence District" section of the Zoning Ordinance-which
<br />will set standards for some five different types of "multiple residence" zoning;
<br />and is recommending that this area be rezoned "R-3" (residences containing three
<br />through ten dwelling units, at a density of approximately ten through twelve units
<br />per acre) at its eastern boundary and as shown on the visual aids presented by
<br />Mr. Hite, with the area toward County Road No. 18 being zoned "R-4" (residences
<br />containing five or more dwelling units, at a density of approximately sixteen
<br />through eighteen dwelling units per acre). In both recommended districts the
<br />buildings would have a height of not more than two stories.
<br />Commission recommends an "R-2" (double bungalow) zone between the Kenneth property
<br />and the present Parkwood Knolls plat. Mr. Hite reported on the road pattem,
<br />saying thalt: in no instance (except for possible extension of Interlachen Road
<br />to County Road No. 18) would there be a link between single-family and multiple
<br />residence zones,
<br />the Kenneth plans but are not intended to be exact plans.
<br />Planning Commission has asked for Council hearing on the matter in order to have
<br />some criterion as to what to expect on additional proposals of this type,
<br />Mr, George May, 6645 Parkwood Road, told Coun-cil he and his neighbors think
<br />the development of the proposed "R-4" area abutting County Road No. 18 would be
<br />a very good thing, but that they are not in accord with the "R-3" district as
<br />proposed by Mr. Kenneth and to the East thereof; that they believe this would be
<br />undesirable for Parkwood Road residents. He said he feels some consideration
<br />should be given to development of a buffer strip so that single family homes will
<br />not abut apartment buildings, and suggested a small park as such a buffer. Mr,
<br />V.L, Oliver stated he feels the proposal extends too close to Parkwood Road and
<br />will devalue property valtles and work a hardship on the Parkwood Road residents.
<br />Petitioner Kenneth reported that same of the land he proposes to develop is
<br />swamp, with 30 feet of peat; that County Road No. 18 will eventually be raised
<br />slightly, which will require additional €ill; that the buildings must be piled-
<br />that in working with Edina an attempt has been made to conform with the requiped
<br />road pattern, and that every attempt has been made to set standards for a
<br />development in which anyone would wish to live; that these will be first-class
<br />apartments, with balconies, patios, concealed parking, five swimming pools; that
<br />while no definite plans have been completed as yet, there will be a plan to set
<br />aside certain properties for plantings; that, should any part of the 60 acres
<br />be chopped up into buffer zones it would not be possible for anyone to develop
<br />the property, considering soil problems, special assessments, etc,
<br />Mr, May told Council Mr, Carl Hansen (developer of the Parkwood Knolls area)
<br />feels that if apartments are put into the "R-3" area, he must put apartments and
<br />duplexes in as a buffer to protect his own property.
<br />Mr. Lou Crosby, 6644 Parkwood Road, stated it is the general reaction that a
<br />buffer zone between the Parkwood Knolls area and the "R-4" area would be good,
<br />particularly as this/iSlow area and could be preserved for wild life refuge, thus
<br />enhancing the value of both Parkwood Knolls and the Kenneth property,
<br />later in the meeting, he would suggest rezoning the Kenneth property R-P along
<br />County Road 18,
<br />Mr. Carl M, Hansen reported he feels just as the Parkwood Knolls neighbors
<br />do; that if there is to be a 200 to 300-foot buffer between apartments and his
<br />land, no harm is done--but that if apartments are built up to his line, he will
<br />have to build apartments and doubles, too.
<br />Clerk presented
<br />Affidavits were
<br />Mr. Hite stated the
<br />He presented building plans which he stated are typical of
<br />He added that the
<br />He added,
<br />with the Eastern portion rezoned R-2, rather than R-3,