<br />MAYOR BREDESEN'S BIRTHDAY CELEBRATED.
<br />recessed for a few minutes while Mayor Bredesen received felicitations (in song
<br />and verse) on the occasion of his birthday.
<br />CLAIMS PAID.
<br />List.dated February 17, 1964, was seconded by Tupa and carried:'
<br />General Fund, $9,075.81; Park, Park Sinking Fund and Golf Course Fund,
<br />$31,550.35; Waterworks Funds, $28,179.12; Liquor Dispensary Fund, $54,496.95;
<br />Sewer Rental Fund, $353.98; Improvement Funds, $627,210.76; Poor Fund, $154.90-
<br />TOTAL, $751,021.87.
<br />The formal business of the Council was
<br />MacMillan's motion for payment of the following Claims as!per Pre-
<br />Meeting's agenda's having been covered, Tupa moved for adjournment.
<br />by MacMillan and carried.
<br />Motion second'ed
<br />Adjournment at 9
<br />MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA
<br />VILLAGE COUNCIL, HELD MONDAY, MARCH 2, 1964,
<br />AT 7:OO P.M., AT THE EDINA VILLAGE HALL.
<br />Members answering Rollcall were MacMillan, Rixe,'Tupa; VanValkenburg and Bredesen.
<br />MINUTES of the February 3rd and 17th, 1964 Meetings were approved as submitted, by
<br />VanValkenburg, seconded ,by Rixe and carried.
<br />COUNCIL AUTHORIZES BUILDING OF APARTPENT AT SOUTHWEST CORNER OF VALLEY VIEW ROAD
<br />AND WOODDALE AVENUE UNDER PROVISIONS OF "COMMUNITY STORE DISTRICT" PORTION OF
<br />ZONING ORDINANCE. Mayor Bredesen announced that Council would conduct Public
<br />Hearing--continued from Hearing of February 17--on the proposed Rezoning from
<br />Community Store District to R-5 Multiple Residence District of the area at the
<br />Southwest Corner of Valley View Road and Wooddale Avenue, -He reviewed for Council
<br />and audience the communication dated February 27, 1964, from Mr. Kenneth W. Green,
<br />attorney for the proponents of the 80-unit apartment building proposed to be
<br />constructed on this site.. Letter stated that Mr. Green's clients "do not need
<br />and do not.desire rezoning from community store district to R-5--that they desire
<br />that the zoning continue as community store; they simply request the Council's
<br />approval and request the granting of a building permit for the erection of an
<br />apartment building under the current zoning of community store district". The
<br />letter went on to state that proponents are willing to eliminate the penthouses
<br />from the apartment to reduce the height, and are willing to meet the 40' height
<br />requirement of the cornunity store district by such excavation or other adjust-
<br />ments as are needed.
<br />Bredesen as to whether "the building will be basically the same, with the exception
<br />that the penthouses will be eliminated and building will be lowered to aeet the
<br />Mr. Green was present, and at a question from Hayor
<br />. 40-foot median at Valley View Road", he replied, lgBasically, yes."
<br />Mr. Flaskamp, attorney for the apposition,told Council that if proponents
<br />have decided to ask for permit under present zoning there is nothing for his
<br />group to say.
<br />build right up to the street.
<br />be the same as that formeUy proposed when rezoning to R-5 was being considered,
<br />Ppopanents said nothing to the contrary,
<br />constructed under the R-5 Multiple Residence requirements, but that inasmuch as
<br />proponents now wish to comply with Community Store requirements rather than
<br />attempt further to overcome neighbors' objections to the R-5*, there is little
<br />Council can do require R-5.
<br />a great deal since this particular property was rezoned ttComunity Store"; that
<br />there are only a very few parcels of undeveloped property in the Village zoned
<br />in.this manner.
<br />permit for building apartment at Southwest Corner Valley View and Wooddale Avenue
<br />under the conditions outlined in Mr, Green's communication dated February 27, 1964,
<br />and MacMillan so moved.
<br />A question was asked as to whether this action means that proponents may
<br />Manager Hyde said he presumes the setback will
<br />Trustee MacMillan informed audience that there may have been a better building
<br />Village Attorney Hasselquist added that village zoning ordinance has changed
<br />Mayor Bredesen entertained a motion instructing Building Inspector to issue
<br />Motion seconded by Rixe and carried.
<br />PEARCE SISTERS REQUEST REPORT ON ASSESSMENT FOR STORM SEWER: TO BE MADE MARCH 16.
<br />At a request from the Misses Katherine and M.E. Pearce, and Mr. A.C.Godward, that
<br />they be given a full report as to the status of their storm sewer assessment (the
<br />Pearces maintained they are being assessed $25,000 for a storm sewer for which their
<br />property receives no benefit; and Mr. Godward added that at one time, in about 1960,
<br />one plan showed storm drains on crosstown highway land, extended to take care of
<br />the Southdale and Pearce properties; that ibis plan was referred to him, and he
<br />reported that proposed assessment .was fair-but that this plan was later abandoned)
<br />Council referred matter to Village Engineer Hite for report at the meeting of
<br />March 16. Miss Katherine Pearce had told Council that pursuant to the statement
<br />of the Village Engineer, as recorded in the Minutes of Febr.17th relative to the