Laserfiche WebLink
10/26/64 <br />MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE EDINA <br />VILLAGE COUNCIL, HELD MONDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1964, <br />1 <br />AT 7:OO P.M., EDINA VILLAGE HALL. <br />Members answering Rollc,qll were MacArlillan, Rixe, Tgpa, VanValkenburg and Bredesen. <br />MINUTES. for the scheduled Meeting of October 19, 1964, which was postponed until tonight <br />seconded by Tupa and carried. <br />.because of the death of Mrs. Alden, were.approved as read, by motion VanValkenburg, <br />COUNCIL CONTINUES HEARINE R. H. Peterson's <br />Petition for Rezoning from R-4 Multiple Residence to R-5 Multiple Residence District: <br />and for yard and density variances; for construction of 12-story apartment building <br />on Lots 3 and 4, Cassin's Replat (6308-6340 York Avenue South) was continued to <br />November 2, 1964.. <br />COUNC 1-S - S IF IE S PROPERTIES FRO, <br />LAL DISWERCIALL <br />C-2, COMMERCIAL DISTRICG <br />Affidavits of Publication in the Edina-Morningside Courier <br />October 8 and October 15, 1264, which Affidavits were approved as to form and ordered <br />placed on file. Mre Hite reported that on July 6, 1964, the Council adopted <br />Ordinance 261-88, intended to regulate all retail and commercial areas. The adoption <br />of this requires a reclassification of all existing retail and commercial areas, . . <br />assigning each area to one of the four districts included in Ordinance 261-88. Areas <br />previously zoned as Community Store, Regional Shopping and Commercial should be zoned <br />as C-1, C-2, C-3, C-4, Planned Commercial, Office, or Light Industrial. Ilk. Hite <br />explained that the reclassification of property would not change the permissive uses <br />under the present zoning. <br />in the status of parties or subsequent parties because of the reclassification, <br />explained that further Council action on a rezoning hearing would be necessary to <br />change such status. Mayor Bredesen reported that under the new classification, the <br />parties would have the same right to convey title and the restrictions would be the <br />same on the transfer. <br />the same as "Light Industrial" in the new classification. <br />the "Grandview" area, properties currently zoned as "Commercial" which should be <br />reclassified as "Light Industrial" were described.. Other properties in the area were <br />shown as being reclassified from "Community Store" to C-4 and C-2, <br />The 70th and Cahill area was then described, where the Bell Telephone Garage and <br />the Northern States Power Company property are currently zoned as "Commercial," and <br />should be reclassified to "Light Industrial.'! <br />The 50th Street and France Avenue area was next considered, where changes are <br />necessary from '%ommunity Store" to C-2 and C-4, <br />A similar presentation was made by Air, Hite concerning all other locations <br />specifically described in the following Ordinance No. 261.99. <br />Nr. and Mrs. Neal Swant, oyners of property at Valley View and IVooddale, and <br />Ah. Emma Tedman, objected to re-classification of their property to C-1. It was <br />explained to them that in order for a gasoline filling station to be allowed on their <br />property, further action by the Council would be necessary even if no re-classification were undertaken, <br />business of automobile repair as a non-conforming usage. <br />Company had requested a clarification with reference to the reclassification as <br />applied to their property and that the Village Attorney had written a clarification. <br />Mro Victor Johnson, representing Employers Mutual Insurance Company, which ovms <br />properky near 66th and France, requested a clarification as to the re-classification <br />proposed on that property, <br />in that vicinity, except the vacant parcel fronting on France, Valley View Road, and <br />West 66th Street, has been developed and used for office building, that the <br />classification was to be changed from "Regional Shopping" to "Off ice Building," <br />at West 66th Street and Xerxes Avenue. <br />of which his clients own, was not shown. <br />order was controlling on this particular parcel and that its provisions did not <br />coincide with any of the districts in the zoning ordinance. <br />&Ire Daubney questioned the application of the setback requirements of the C-3 <br />classification to the property north of West 66th Street, pointing out that the <br />existing "Community Store" district requires no setbacks, and that the District Court ' <br />ruling provided for "Community Store" zoning €or this property. <br /> contrary to the order of the court and that while we understand that this is <br />a zoning classification and isn't directed toward this particular piece of property, <br />nonetheless, particularly in light of the location of the property and the problems <br />that exist relative to access and egress, an extremely adverse affect is created. wish to go on record as opposing the change from "Community Store" to C-3, primarily <br />REGIONAL SHOPPING <br />Jvlr, VanValkenburg questioned whether there would be a change <br />Mr- Hite <br />8- <br />Mr, Hite explained that under the old classific&tion, "Commercial" zoning was <br />With the aid of a map of <br />I <br />. Mr. Hite advised that hir, Sviant could continue his present garage <br />in discussing the Southdale area, Ab. Hite pointed out that the Dayton Development <br />Ak, Hite explained that inasmuch as all of the property <br />Mro John Daubney appeared as attorney for the Misses Pearce, who own property <br />Mr, Hite explained that the District Court I He pointed out that the triangle, a portion <br />. <br />He stated, We feel <br />We