Laserfiche WebLink
21 2/17/64 <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