Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE REGULARMEETING OF THE <br />EDINA VILLAGE COUNCIL HELD AT VILLAGE HALL ON <br />. . MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, s.1969 . - <br />Members answering rollcall were Councilmen Courtney, Johnson, Shaw and VanValk- <br />enburg who served as Mayor Pro Tem in the absence of Mayor Bredesen. <br />MINUTES of November 3, 1969, were approved as submitted by motion of Council- <br />man Johnson, seconded by Councilman Courtney and carried. <br />R. E. WMER AND L. G. CHERNE ZONING CHANGE REQUESTS CONTINUED TO JANUARY 19, <br />1969. Mr. Hoisington noted that the zoning request of R. E. Kremer and L, G. <br />Cherne for Planned Industri'al District zoning along County Road 18 which had <br />been continued from October 20, 1969, should again be continued. Councilman <br />Courtney's motion contingingxthezhearing until January 19, 1920, was seconded <br />by Councilman Shaw and carried. <br />REGIONAL MEDICAL AND OFFICE BUILLDING DISTRICTS SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TABLED. <br />Mr. Hoisington advised Council that Fairview Southdale Itospital is not pursuing <br />the adoption of the Sign Ordinance amendment, hearing for which had been contin- <br />ued from the meeting of November 17, 1969. <br />that he had been contacted by Naegele Advertising Company and that they still <br />would urge the adoption of the ordinance. <br />ordinance be tabled was seconded by Councilman Johnson and carried. <br />Mayor Pro Tem VanValkenburg said <br />Councilman Shaw's motion that..the <br />ORDINANCE NO. 261-192 ADOPTED AT SECOND READING. Mr. Hoisington reported that <br />all information has been supplied, all agreements have been reached and a <br />letter received from the Highway Department approving plans as requested by <br />Counci'l before approval of the zoning change for Edina Building, Inc. <br />Councilman Johnson thereupon offered Ordinance No. 261-192 for Second Reading <br />and moved its adoption as follows: <br />ORDINANCE NO. 261-192 <br />AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE <br />OF THE VILLAGE OF EDINA BY ESTABLISHING <br />AN ADDITIONAL C-2 COMMERCIAL DISTRICT <br />THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: <br />Section 1. Paragraph 3, Boundaries of the Commercial District of Section 9, <br />(Commercial District) of Ordinance No. 261 of revised ordinances of the Village <br />of Edina, as amended, is hereby further amended by adding the following sub- <br />paragraph : <br />District C-2: <br />"(25) Lots 1 and 2, including adjacent 1/2 of vacated Hopkins Road, <br />Block 1, Grand View Heights and Lot 9 and that part of Lot 10 <br />lying south of the westerly extension of the south line of Lot 8 <br />including adjacent 1/2 of vacated Hopkins Road, Block 7, Tingdale <br />Bros . Brookside. '' <br />Section 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its <br />passage and publication according to law. <br />Motion for adoption of the resolution <br />rollcall there were four ayes and no <br />DAVID THOMAS R-4 ZONING REQUEST FOR PROPERTY ON 5QTH AND FRANCE AVENUE CONTINUED. <br />gffidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered <br />placed on file. Mr. Hoisington presented the request of Mr. David Thomas for <br />rezoning of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Elmwood Terrace, and Lot 1, Block 1, Elm- <br />Wood Terrace Second Addition, from R-1 Residential District to R-4 Multiple <br />Residence District. <br />existing eleven unit apartment owned by Mr. Thomas at 5412 France Avenue and <br />if rezoned, the site would accommodate thirteen units with underground parking. <br />Elr. Hoisington noted that surrounding zoning consists of R-4 on the north and <br />R-1 on the other three sides. At the request of Mayor Pro Tem VanValkenburg, <br />Mr. Hoisington reviewed building heights permitted in various zoning districts <br />and said that apartments and boarding care homes are permitted uses in the R-4 <br />Nultiple Residence District. <br />presently occupied by an older home which is in a state of disrepair and that <br />the Planning Conrmission and staff have recommended approval, feeling that this <br />would be a logical and reasonable extension of existing R-4 zoning. Mr. Hyde <br />called attention to a petition by owners of twenty-eight properties in the <br />area expressing opposition to the proposed rezoning and also a letter from Mr. <br />The property in question is immediately south of an <br />Mr. Hoisington added further that the site is