Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE REGULARMEETING OF THE: <br />EDINA VILLAGE CQrrrJCIL HELD AT VII;LAGE HALL ON <br />MONDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 1969 <br />Members answering Rollcall were Councilmen Courtney, Johnson, VanValkenburg <br />and Mayor Bredesen. <br />MINUTES of October 20, 1964, were approved as submitted by motion of Council- <br />man VanValkenburg, seconded by Councilman Courtney and carried. <br />VILLI& OLSEN PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT HEARING DATE SET FOR NOVEMBER 17, - 1969. Affidavits of Mailing on October 24 and of Publication on October 23 and <br />of corrected Affidavits of Mailing on October 28 and of Publication on October <br />30, 1969, were presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on <br />file. Mr. Hoisington presented the request of Mr. 'EJilliam Olsen for zoning - <br />change from R-1 Residential District to Planned Residential District for <br />property located generally South of TJ. 62nd Street, West of Countryside Park <br />and North of the Crosstown Highway. He reviewed the history of the property, <br />and noted that Mr. Olsen and the Village of Edina have now entered into an <br />agreement, contingent upon Council approval of the proposed rezoning, whereby <br />Mr. Olsen would be permitted to develop 16 of his 24 acres of property with <br />town houses and give the remaining eight acres to the Village for park use in <br />accord with Planned Residential District regulations. <br />indicated that, contingent upon granting of necessary variances, the agreement <br />would allow five dwelling units per acre (instead of 4) and that it limited <br />development to single family, two family and town house structures only. <br />Hoisington recalled-that in 1960 the entire area now under consideration was <br />intended to be used for a.park. <br />zoning of this same property in anticipation of construction of three twenty- <br />story Cowers, but because of the moratorium on apartment rezonings, Council <br />has never before considered the rezoning of this property. <br />noted further that Planning Commission had recommended denial of.Mr. Olsen's <br />request for R-5 zoning and three 26-story towers earlier in 1969 on the grounds <br />that this zoning was totally out of character with the neighborhood as well <br />as with the.Blud Lake area plans. Because it believed that the proposed use <br />would be compatible with the park, Planning Commission has now recommended <br />approval of the Planned Residential District zoning for sixteen acres of Mr. <br />Olsen's property as part of an agreement under which Mr. Olsen will donate <br />eight acres of his land for Village park use. <br />that no more than five dwelling units per gross acre are to be constructed <br />and if the agreement canbe put into effect by the granting of the requested <br />rezoning and necessary variances, the condemnation proceedings already com- <br />menced will be dropped. <br />lznger binding. Approval of the zoning is recommended in view of the facts <br />that (1) town house development respects the fact that this is a low density <br />area; (2) it will allow reasonable use of the property, whereas R-1 develop- <br />ment would be impractical because of the serious soil conditions; (3) it <br />will not be detrimental to surrounding properties because of the substantial <br />distance between this property and single family dwellings in the area. Mr. <br />Donald Bunker, 5841 Jeff Place, protested the proposed zoning change on the <br />grounds that adjacent property values would be reduced. He said that he had <br />been advised during a telephone call to the Village Hall some time ago that <br />this land would become part of the park system, but he could not identify <br />the person who gave him this information. <br />was loosely changing the character of his neighborhood and that town houses <br />would be spot zoning. <br />of Mr. Bunker that the Village is guaranteeing the profit of the person who <br />owns this land. He pointed out that it was not likely that good homes would <br />be built in an area adjoining a super highway. <br />that the cost of property for the Mud Lake area park is running considerably <br />higher than anticipated and that before authorizing expenditure of any more <br />funds than are absolutely necessary for a %eighborhood park" he would vote <br />against the Mud Lake project and let it go to full development. <br />pointed out that the Mud Lake Plan is a "plan1' only and that since its inception <br />land prices increased well over the amount budgeted for the park. He added <br />that if the entire Olsen tract should be used for park purposes, the Village <br />m5llrrate would be increased by approximately five mills. Mr. Hyde.pointed <br />out that a professor of architecture at the University of Illinois has said <br />that one of the reasons for tax increases is the way housing is scattered in <br />suburbia and that if Edina is ever going to have town houses, this is the best <br />location for them. He added that this plan would give more common open area <br />which the Village feels is desirable. Messrs. Thomas Pierce, 5816 Jeff Place, <br />L. I?. Venable, 5828 Jeff Place, John Moberry, 5820 W. 61st Street, Daniel Bros, <br />Mr. Hoisington <br />Mr. <br />In 1967 a zoning request was made for R-5 <br />Mr. Hoisington <br />Terms of the agreement stipulate <br />If these conditions do not occur, the agreement is no <br />Mr. Bunker charged that the Village <br />Mayor Bredesen said that he resented the allegation <br />Mayor Bredesen further stated <br />Mr. Hyde