Loading...
1966 Planning Minutes of Planning C~mmission Meeting~ Jan. 4 1966 Members present: Plufka, Krueger~ Sueker~ Truoker~ Wahl~ Click Members absent: Klosterman~ Adams~ Buk~ila The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chaimman Plufka at 8:00 P~M~ A public hearing~ case number 68-~ was opened on the proposed rezoning from general industry to multiple family residence~ The property in question is in the vicinity of 4Oth Ave° No~ and ~innetka Ave° NCo ~r~ John Bergly, Nmo Norman Rooney and N~. L~mry Anderson were p~esent to discuss the request for the rezoning with the Planniz~ Commission~ They stated it would make a good buffemo The proposed ~ezoning was turned down three times before, in Dec~ 1960~ in Jan~ 1961= and in June 1968. A petition was presented in favor of the rezoningo The petitioners are: and ~rs~ Hobert Carlson V618 49th Ave° NCo and Mrs. William D~ McKeen and Mrs~ Leo ~o Eiden and Mrs~ Roy E~enson and ~h~So R~ H~ D~k and Mr~ M~ L~ Gerdan and Nr~o Paul Johnson John Co Klobnak Ke7-5836 7659 49th Ave° No. Ke7-5959 7711 49th Ave~ No, Ke7-6880 7727 49th Ave° No. Ke7-8839 7829 49th Ave~ No. Ke7~5538 corner lot on south side of Winnetka 7~05 49th Ave No~ Ke~~7877 76~1 49th Ave~ Nco Ke7-5576 Mmo McPartland and Mro Mrosak~ from the Soo Line Railroad, appeared for Tri State Land Company, opposing the rezoningo Mr~ McPartland asked two questions: Was the property zoned industrial 4& years a~o? The answer yes, and how much property do they have? The answer 8~3 acres~ They feel multiple units would decrease the value of their adjacent property of 40 acres and it would be difficult to interest lndustry~ When they bought the property they relied on the zoning staying iudustrial. Mr~ McPartlsnd said the multiple units would affect a balanced tax~ and congest the public streets. M~ Mrosak submitted a report dated January 23, 1961~ from Midwest Planning and Research~ Inco indicating the status and development plan fo~ their adjacent property~ Mr° Eiden and Mro Go~dan~ who signed the petition~ wer~ present, and stated theY were in favor of the rezoning. Motion by Click~ seconded by Krueger~ to recommend to the Village Council. to deny the application for rezoningo Motion ca~ried~. Chairman Plu~ka opposed~ A public hearing, case number 65-3~ was opened at 8:45 on the proposed rezoning from single residential to multiple fa~ily residential° The~property in question is in the vicinity of ~2nd Ave~ Nco and Boone Ave. No. The petitioner requested to delete from the request lots 8~ 9~ 10~ and 1! of noyal Oak Hil~ 6th Addition~ The area discussed is south of 32nd Ave~ NCo ~ Ji~a ~arker~ of ~gle Investment~ was present to discuss rezoning~ Mr~ Parke~ doesn't own the property in ouestion, Parker stated he is havi~,g trouble obtaining FHA financing beoause there is only half a street abutting Royal Oak Rill ~th Addition, and the south side of t~e street is in Crystal Vil!age~ Crystal is reluctant to complete the streat~ Mr~ Parker has tried to purchase t~e land in Crystal from National ~unds. This woul~ enable hi~ to request the completion of t~e street~ ?~r~ Parker state~ the lots in question have a soil proble~ The Planning Commission received a letter fro~ Bonestroo, Rosene~ Anderlik aud Associates, Inc~ pertaining to the soil problem ~r~ David Gilman, spokemau for the group present~ presented a petition in opposition to the ~ezoningo They said when they purchased their homes that it wa~ single family residence and to their knowledge they thought it would stay as such. A~so~ multiple units increase the traffic hazard° ~r~ F~ Han~ou ~309 ~ukon Ave~ No~ was told that single family homes would be built in back of his~ ~otion by Krueger~ seconde8 by ~ahl, to recommend to the Village Council~ to reject the proposed rezoning~ Motion carried. The Invoice~ number 846, was receive8 from Midwest Planning and Eesearch~ inc. Motion by Sueker, seconded by Click, to recommend to the Village Council to pay the $280 retainer~ Motion carried° The Planning Commission minutes of December 21~ 196~ were read~ _Wlue addition is: item 2~ para~aph c- concerning the memo from the Village Planner pertaining to the parking requirements. Section EV D and section IV HP-(d) are not consistent and the Planning Commission recommends that they be cross referenced. Motion by Wahl, seconded by Sucker, to approve the minutes as amended° Motion ca~riedo To formalize the hiring of Vickie Johnson, the New Hope Planning Commission recommends to the Village Council that Vickie Johnson be t~l~ ~ecording secretary for the calendar year 1966, at $260 a Motion by Plufka, seconded by Wahl, to recommend to the Village Council to reappoint Nrc Albert Click, and Mr~ Ivan Kruegero Motion carried~ Discussion was held on obSaining two more members to fill the vacant seats on the Planning Co~missiono Nrc Plufka appointed Mr. Click head of a committee that is to review the previsions of the ordinance that regulates the Planning Commission Motion by K~ueger, seconded by Click~ to adjourn at 10:45~ Motion carried° Sec~ Ivan Ro K~ueger ':VZLF.,*~GE ©F NE~'~' !i'OF~:~, , ~inutes of fflanning Com~ission ~eeting~ Jan° 1~$~ 1965 ~,embers Present: Krueger~ Ciick~ Fiufka~ Wahl~ Sueker~ Trucker ~embers Absent: Klosterman~ Adams~ Bukkila Village Plannem also present The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairman Plufka at 8:00 The Planning Commission minutes of January 4~ 1960 were resd~ The addition is: item ~ line 5- the word ~not'~ should Oe stricken f~,om the minutes,,~ Motion by Click~ seconded by Wahl~ to approve the minutes as amen5ed. ~otion carried° Discussion was held pertaining to the reading of the Planners Reports at public hearings. % Dale PollocW presented three housing code books for reference~ ~r~ Plufka appointed a committee to investigate the feasibility of a housing code° ~r~ Sueker, Chairman~ Mr~ Click, Mr~ Krueger~ and Nrc P!ufka ame the members, Motion by Plufka, seconded by Wahl, to recommend to the Village Council to purchase four copies of "Uniform Housing Code~ 1964 edition~ and "A Proposed Housing Ordinance" published by the American Public F~:~alth Association~ Inc. Motion carried~ Dale Pollock distributed the 1966 Planning Commission schedule° Discussion wa~ held on the ~ies and Procedure~ in the Planning Commis~iono Motion by Sucker, seconded by if_~ueger~ to amend the Hules and Procedure° Section l~ line l~ shall read: "At the first meeting of the calendar year after the first Village Council meeting, the Planning Commission shall elect from its membe~ ship a Chairman~ Vice Chair~an~ and a Secretary." ~otion carried~ Click presented a burning ordinance for discussion~ Motion b~.~ Click, seconde5 by Plufka~ to recommend to the Village Council to adopt the recommende~ burning laws. Discussion was hel5 and the ~uestion wes raised about the use of fire places~ leaf burning and barbecues° it also was stste5 that the burning ordinance wo~ld deprive the citizens the Use of their property~ Motion failed~ Plufka and Click for~ Krueger~ Trucker~ Wahl~ Sucker opposed~ ' ~ Jarzu~r~- !0~ 1966~ ~ ~otion by ~ueger, seconded 0y ',¥ahl, to ~ccept the ~esign~tion of Mr. Klosterman with regrets~ Notion carried. ~ letter of th~nks is to fol!0w~ ~ letter o? resign~tion w~s received fro~ ~r. Ad~s, 8~.~ted January 18, 1966~ Wot!on by ?;ah!~ seconded by Click, to acceot the resignation of ~'~r~ Ad~s~ with regrets. Motion carried. A letter of thanks is to fo!low~. The ?!annlng Com'~-!ssion received letters cf m,]allflc.~.tio"s and desire to serve on the Planning Commission from ~.~r~ }<chert ~onner and Verno~ Faaberg~. ~hich were read and placed on ~ile~ Motion b~ Sueker, seconded by Olick, to recom'~end to the Village oourcil~ to approve the application of nobert Bonnet to the Planning Commission~ Hotion carried~ ?~otlon by Plufka~ seconded b~ Wahl, that the letter from Nrc Faaberg be held over until the ~%bruar~~ 1 meeting, at which time hs will appear before the Planning Oommission~ ~otion carried~ 10o The Council minutes of December ~8~ 1965, were reviewed. I1o The Council agenda of January 11, !966~ was . reviewed. 12. The New Hope Park Board Agenda was reviewed° 13. Discussion was held on the School Board building a bus g-rage at Winnetka end Rockford ~oad~ Dale Pollock pointed out the Planning Commission has the right to : review plats of the bus g.~rgge proposed by the School Board due to State Legislation° A pha~plet entitled "~dina Grows 1980-lPd~ was viewed by the Planning Co~ission,~ 15o Motion by Plufka~ seconded by Wahl, ~0 recommend to the Village Council to authorize the Planning Commission to acouire ~odification of State Laws Pertaining to Go~munity Planning Commissions.'' Motion carried° Motion by Sueker~ seconded bv ~ahl, to adjourn at 10:00. carried° ~otion Sec~ Ivan Ro M~ueger VILLAGE OF ~'~¥ ii0±~i~ Hinutes of Ftanning Commission Meeting, Feb~ I, 1966 ~embers present: Flufka, Krueger~ Bonnet, Wah!~ Trucker, Sueker, Click Bukkila The Planning Commission meeting was caile~ to order by Chairman Plufka at 8:00 P~N, A public hearing~ case nu-~ber 66-1~ was opene~ at 8:00, on the proposed rezoning from limited business to retail business~ property in question is on the northwest corner of Wi~netka Ave~ and Bass Lake Road~ ~r~ Ronald Krank and Nr~ Warren were present to Discuss the rezoning. TDey had three re~uests to make° To rezone from limited business to retail business~ %'0 request a v~riance from ~ acre minimum lot ar~a to I acre~ ~o To request a variance fro~ 90,000 sq~ ft. minimum bui!~ing to approximately 9~000 sq~ ftc and request a variance of the side yard setback to 0 The petitioners presented a letter from Mrs. Florence Jewett stating abe has no objection to the rezoning~ Mr~ Warren stated he called ~r0 Bowden, the secretary of the bourd of St~ Tbersa~s Rest and ~ro ~owden had no objection to the rezoning~ Mro Jewett was present to represent his sister. Nr~ Jewett stated he nor his sister had any o~jections to the rezoning but they objected to a 0 ft~ side yard setback. The Planning Commission discussed the site plan with Mr= Krank and Mro Warren~ Points discussed were: the side yard setback bo ample parking co curb cuts on Bass Lake Road building entrances and exits location and size of the building Motion by Sueker~ seconded by Bonnet, to reco~T~end to the Village Council to approve the proposed rezonlng from ii~ited business to retail business~ Motion carried? Ka~ueger opposed° ~otion by Bonner~ seconded by Wahl, to recommend to the Village Council to table the me~uest for the variance and the prel~m~hary site plan until the Februa~z !~ meeting, pending the return of a revised site plan. Motion ca~miedo A public hearing~ case number 66-2~ was opened on the proposed rezoning f~om single family residential to retail buslness~ The property in question is on the northeast corner of Boone Avenue and Bass Lake Road° Mr~ Urbanski and Mr~ Fdward Ell were present~ representing Qik Ezy Ineo~ to discuss the rezoningo They stated ~lcoholic beverage~ would not be sold because the propert2 in question is less than 500 ft~ from church property. ~l~e Planning Commission ~ceived a letter from Ma~ Ferguson objecting to the rezoning~ which was placed on file~ The Planning Oo]n~,-]ission di..~cusse~ with the petitionez~:~ off stmest parking bo side yard setback spot zoning area re~uireme, nts Motion by Krueger? seconded b~? Wahl~ to recommend to the Village Council to reject the proposed rezoning from single family residsntia! to retail business~ Notion carried~ The Planning Commission reviewed the site plan for Village· ~re~n ~ ~ Apartments~ which was referred to the Planning Com~ission by the Village Council° it can be re£e~red back to case number 65~1~ ~.~ Har~rington stated ~he plan met with all the village requirem~nts~ He also stated the ga~.ges would b~ split into four units inste~d of two~ The Planning Co~mission discussed the parking area~ out side burning~ and supervision of the swi~ing pool. The pool will close at 10~00 P~M~ Also it was discussed that the site plan did not show the location of side walks which are required~ Notion by Wahl~ seconded by Bukkita, to recommend to the Village Council to approve the site plan: provided it complies with ali the ordinances. Notion carried~ The Planning Commission received a letter dnted January 26, 1966 from the Administrative Assistant, concerning the construction of U~So Steel Ho~es in the Vill~ge of New Hope. Discussion was held on the construction, and whether or not they met with the codes and ordinances. Notion by Ciick~ seconded by Sueker~ to recommend to the Village Council, that if~ in fact~ these homes meet the Village Building Code then there is no object!on to U.S. Steel Homes being built in the villa~eo Motion by Bonner~ seconded by P!ufka, to amend the original motion~ If the Buil$ing Inspector and or the Village Engineer find ~S~ Steel Homes'do not meet Building Codes, the Plannir~ Com~ission wishes to have a copy o£ their reports suDmitted to the Planning Commission for study° Motion carried~ Click opposed~ Original motion carried~ Click opposed~ · 59 Notion by Click~ seconded by Wahl, to recommend to the Village Council to appoint Mr~ Vernon Fa~berg to replace Mr° Adams on the Planning Com~issiono Notion carried° The chairman requested thst Planning Commission secretary, to obtain impo~tant data, such as address, phone etc~ A new ~oster is to be prepsred as soon as this information is collected° The Planning Co~mission minutes of Janus.my 18 were resdo The a~endment is~ ite~ 9 line 8- afte~ the wo~d will ~be asked to~ should be inserte~ / 11o 12 o Notion by Click, seconded by Bonnet, to ~.pprove the minute~ as amended~ Hotion c~.rried~ A new copy of the Rules of Procedure is to be made consistent with the change in the January 18, 1966 minutes. Chsirman 2lurks appointed Mr~ Bonnet as parli~mentsrien through Decer~ber ~1~ 1966~ ^ memo was received fro~ the Administrative Assistant pertsining to "A Proposed Housing 0rdinanc~" and "Unifor~ Housing Code~~' Six copies have been ordered of each. The Invoice~ number °OJ, was received from ~gidwest Planners ~nd Resenrch In¢~ Motion by Flufka~ seconded by Erueger~ to recommend to the Village Council to pay the ~'2~0 retainer. Notion carried. The Village Council minutes of January ~S~ 1966 were reviewed. Motion by ~!ufka, seconded by Wah!~ to recow~mend to the Village Council to advertize for public hearing the following property 2~r rezoning~ ~e property on which Standard 0il is situated on the northwest corner of~the intersection of Winnetka Ave, ~nd B~ss Lake Road to change the rezoning from limited business to general business~ The property on which a home occupied by Mr~ ~rix is situated shall be ~ezoned from residential to limited industry to conform to the surrounding property~ Motion carried~ Discussion was held concerning the zoning mmp being the officim! zoning o~dinanceo The Planning Co~ission recommends that the Village Council thoroughly review the feasibility of zoning maps rather than describing zones by iega~ description° St. Louis Park is an example o~ ~ suburb th.at uses a zoning Sec, Ivan H~ Krueger Minutes of Planning Commission Neeting~ Feb. 18:1960 ,~embers present: K~ueger, Trucker, Wahl, Click, 21ufka, Faaberg~ Sucker arriving at 8:~0 ~embers absent: Bonnet, Bukkila Village Flanne~ also present The Planning Commission meeting was called to orde~ by Chairman Plufka at 8:00 Io The Planning Commissi,~n minutes of February I, !966 were ~-esd. Motion by Click, seconded by ~ahi~ to approve the minutes as read. A public hearing, case number 66-i, w~s reopened on the proposed rezoning · ~.m limited business to retail business. The property in ~uestion is on the northwest comnem of Winnetka Avenue and Bass Lake Road. N~ Warren and ~Pm. Willingham were pmesent to discuss the rezoning. The red. sons the case was reopened weme: a variance fro~ 20~000 sec ft. to 7,000 sQ~ ft. a 0 foot setback. Co presentation of a plat. Wmo ~arren stated they now have a 10 foot setback~ The Planning Commission discussed curb cut~ and parking ares with ~arren and Mm~ Willingham. It was also stated that a fence is re,uired along the north boundary line. Motion by Suekem to mecom~end to the Village Council lhat if the plat meets the acceptance of a pr~iminaz~y plat, incorporating features of the site plan submitted to the ~lannir~ Commission on FebruaE~ !5, 1966, then the Planning Commission recommends ap~moval, subject to the reviewal of the prelimina~ plat by the planner and written comments~ Motion failed, for lack of a second. Discussion was held on requirements for a prelimlnax~y plat plan. They should have a legal survey, a plat name, lots and blocks numbers and important engineering data. Notion b.v C!ick~ seconded by K~ueger, to recommend to the Village Council to appmove the sketch as presented. Motion carried. It was recommended to Mr, Willingham and Er. Warren that they present a Plat Plan to the Village Council that would meet the ~e~uirements of the Platting Ordinance° Dale Pollock pmesented the Planning Comm~ission with six copies of "A Proposed Housing Ordinance." Dale Poi. lock distPibuted "Municipal Planning Act", effective January 1, 1966 to the Planning Commission. It is the state laws which govern the Planning Commission activities. The Planning Commission members are recuested to study the "~untctpal Planning Act" before the March 18 meeting~ at which 5.-~Di2cussion was held on zoning ordinances showing the develope~ent of shopping centers. Points discussed were: a. the size of the shopping center site. locations of potential shopping center sites. c. elimination of unsuitable sites. Wotiou by ?lufka, seconded by Wahl, to recommend to the Village Council to refer to the zoning ordinance section III O 6 (a)- zoning msp should be changed to developement plan, Motion c~rried, 6. ~r. Sw,'~nson and Mr. Ostland appeared before the Planning Commission in regard to the opening on the Planning Commission, They also submitted letters of qualifications and expressed the desire to serve on the Planning Commission~ ~ All letters of application should be submitted to the Fl~nnzng Commission GO~m~sion on or beffore March !5~ .... AppI~cants sbonld appear at a Flanniz~g meeting to express their desire to serve on the Planning Commission before Ma~ch 18, ~ The Planning Commission discussed how many ti~es a person may appe~ before the Planning Cor~nission with ~ specific presentation of a pmeliminary plat plan, The Planning Commission cqncluded that person or person applied for a public hearing to be heard at the~! Planning Commission meeting they could apply' am many times as.th~y'wish as long as they own or have Ol~i~n on a lm~ticmlar site° The Village Council ~inutes of Februar~y 8~ 1966 were revlewed~ ~otion by Krueger~ seconded by Click to adjourn at 10:20. ~otion carried~ Ivan h. KrUege~.l ~'inute~ of Planning Commission .~eeting, !.~arch l~ i966 ~{embers present: Plufka, ~{rueger~ Trucker~ Bonnet, Click~ Sucker '~embers absent: Bukkiia~ Wahl~ Faaberg Swanson was present as an intel, eared observer, Th..e Planning Commission ~e-oting was called to order 'by Chairman Plufka at ~:CO Po~ ' A public '~ne~rin?,, case numba~ 6"-T-4~ was opened on the proposed, rezoning fro~ single family resldenti;~.l to retail business~ Tb.,e property in ~uestion is in the vicinity of the N','V corner of ~6th ~\venue North and Winnetka Avenue and ~r~ Jorgenson were present to discuss the rezon!ng~ plans to construct a superette on the site.~ The Planning Commission discussed with the gentlemen: the rezoning would be spot zoning b a variance f~o~ 3 acc. es to ~ ~ ~ acre site c~ probable in,~daquate parking~ ~rs~ Thorn, 6802 36th Ave North, w~.~s present to ask the Planning Commission a few Questions~ She wes wondering how much more of the watersh;~d w~s going to be filled in~ She was informed none° The Planning Commission received a letter from Fagle Investment Inco~ pertaining to the ~ezoning, It was reed and placed on fileo They stated they had no objections to the ~ezon!ng, provided the zonin~ didn't extend ~ny farther west than the easter]7 line ot Hoyal Oak Hills 7th Addition~ ' · ?lotion by Krueger, seconded by Sueker, to recommend to the Vil/age Council to reject the proposal to rezone the 195 feet by 90o feet lot~ adjacent to the ?u~e Oil statlon~ to retail business. Notion carriedo ^ public bearing, case number 86-4, was opened on the p~oposed rezoning from sinale family residential to multiple family residential~ The property in Guestion is in the vicinity of the ~,%' co~ner of 36th ave No~th and Winnetka Avenue North~ ~r~ Jor~enson and ~'~r~ Hogers were present to discuss the ~ezoningo The .Planning Commission discussed the gentlemens agreement to rezoning ~r~ Tedesco~$ property along 36th Ave~ North to multiple family use up to a point where the storm sewer crosses in the holding pond~ 5his is the point where Hoyal Oak Hills ~ultiple dwelling rezon~ extends/ ~otion by Sucker, to recommend to the Village Council, that the 680 feet Front foot west of the westerly general business area, at a depth of f).~ feet, be rezoned to multiple family residential, provided a seven foot easement for right of way along 36th Ave. is given° the cc~nter ;Line of the stozv~ se =r~ .~80' .... more or less Urn. Jorgenson was sdviced th,~t no more ~gree~gent could be ~r, ade ~n add!tian to the zo~.,~ng without npproval or disgpproval by the £1anning Comml ssion ~ ' Uot]~on b~; ~-~' seconded b~.~ Crue~e~~ to recommend to the Village Council that the portion west of the center line of the storm sewer be rsjeoted~ ~.{otton carried~ ~:e Vill~:~ge ?lanner recommended thct case 66-6 be taken first~ {~, oub!ic ...... ~..ag ,.~as opened~ case mtmber 66-6,~ on the proposed rezoning -~r~,].~ famiiw residential to limited buslness~ The propert~f in question is a,t 9334 Bass Lake Hoad~ ~fr~ Jessen and b~r~ Nage! were p~esont to discuss ~ rezoning~ The Flanning Cow~0isslou discussed~ the rezo~ing~would affect the s~ie of limited business includes clubs~ churches, offices~ ~r Leonard- 5°Y8 I ,~ . ndepenmen~e Avenue North ','r~ Ha~m~n 0905 Independence Avenue ~orth ~ I,e Barge ~01 Indepemdenoe Avenue ~r. Gantner 5~Yl Independence Avenue North All the above na~es are objected to the proposed preliminary plst of Highland Hills~ A few of the reasons given: presents a traffic problem, the street pattern, and the apartment ~,~otion by Click, seconded by Kruegsr~ to vote on the itez at hand~ ~'~ot I on failed, B~rther 5iscussion was held to clarify the issue, ?otion ~y Sueker~ seconded by Bonner~ to recommend to the Village Council, to approve the rezoning. Motion csrriedo A public hearing, case number 66-5, was o..ened on the proposed preliminary plat of Highland Hills~ The property in question is in the vicinity of 58th Avenue North and Independence Avenue North~ !~otion by Plufka, seconded by Sueker, to recommend to the Village Council~ to accept the preliminary pl~t of Highland Hills~ Notion faile~ Members voting for: Trucker, ?lufka~ Click ,%~embers voting against: Sueker~ Krueger~ Bonnet Hotion bv Sueker~ seconded by Bonnet, to table the request until the neat meetiug~ Before this time t~e petitioners would make a study of the suggested plat~ in line with the planners recommendations- better access to park, the cu!desac~ and long narrow lotso ~otion failed. ~embers voting for: 'Krueger~ Bonner~ Sueke~ ~embe~s voting ~gainst: Click Trucker~ Ptufka 1]. Councli~ %o '- . uc~,.:~t, the .oreiiminary. plat of Higb. la~1d Hil] l~'b !, block 1~ which wi!1 Oe held ....... been worke~ out east of the property in question~ ~%'tion The site plan was not acted on because it was not part of the re,~uest~ ~ . b~ar~ng, c~ number 66-? was opened on -th~ proposed rezoning from sing!~ fami].~ residential to limited business,~ The propert~ is in the vicinity of .~, &venue and '~r~ Robert, Krause~ from Suburban Industrial Par',~ was present to discuss the rezon~ug with the Pianni~g Commiss!cn._~ ~'otion by 3on' .... -,'~r, seconded by. Click, to rsco~mend to the Vl!l~ge Council, to rezone the t~vo !nfs in ~'~u~-stlon ~rom s~ ,gle fam~.ty residentla}, 'to limited business. ~Motion oarrle~o & public he~ing, case number 66-8~ was openad on the proposed rezenlnf, from limited bu. siness to general business~ The propcrt~f is ~n the vicinity of the N,¥ corner oF ',~'innetka ~nd Bass Lake Road~ ~fotion by C!ick~ seconded by E~ueger~ to recommend to the Village Council to accept the rezoni~-g~. ~.~otion ca~.ried~ ,.~r, Adams and ~ro Kern appeared before the Planning Commission to discuss their site plan in the Science Industry Center~ Their bulldi~ ~ would be a semi-manufacturing and a warehouse~ ~ V. otion by Flufka~ seconded by Krueger, to grant the w~riances~ .a stdeyard set back from 38 feet to 2~ feet, the front y~rd set back from ~0 feet to 4~ feet, and a three acre slte... ~ney would take the proposed site plan to the administrative office ':~nd to the Village ?lanner to have the necess,~ry informatio~: before the VillaEe Council meeting. Motion carried° The Invo!ce, number 9.~4, w'~s received from .~.~idwest Planners and Hesearcb inco ~'~otion b.v ~ueger~ seconded by Cl!ck~ to recommend to the Vtl!sge Council. to p~y the The Planning Commission minutes of February 15, 1966, were read. addition is~ item 6, paragraph ~ line 3- "on or before" should be added° Motion by Sueker, seconded by Bonner~ to approve the minutes aB amended° "lotion carried~ The Planning Commission ~evie~ed the Village Council minutes of ~eb~ 22~ At the next Planning Co~mission meetlng, discussion will be held on item ~, section A of the December Ri~ 196~ Planning Commission minutes° The Planning Commission reviewed the Park Board minutes of January and Februal~y 16~ for the purpose of gromoting better eommunic,,tioD betwe~n Co.miss,ion and the ~ark Bo~fd~ ~e o p ~ ,~ a presentstion of the ~'ark Board tentative plans for l,,~ew ~otion b'~ Krueger, seconded by' Bonner~ to adjourn at ~otlon c~,rried ~ Plufka:, Click~ Krueger~ Bonner~ Paaberg~ Trucker Wahl ' ~--~'~, ~"~ ~,ommias~on meeting waa called to order bv unairman ~,rzufka at 8~00 P~.~ . ~..~x. es,co was pz'esont to discuss ~-,.~n the Planning Commission the ~-~-ng Gommi~szon on his rezoning !f>~i6 The Property is on the ~""' .... ~ ' Avenue ~' - ' Av~ ....... ~ ~.~..::mesco claimed the property is a prooiem and marginal land, ~,~ ...... a Qairy store would be a ~e~t oonvience to the people in the arem.~ ~'~ Tedesco s'b~ ted the d~iry store would have had The 22ann'ing Commission statea the reasons they had turned down %'&~:~ T~desco~s request was because they didn,t want spot zoning~ z~hich thi~,~ would be The ~ , ~annzng Commie, s!on also stated the b~op~F didn't meet the requirements of a th~ee acre site~ ~'~ Vern Do~na~ a~d ~r~ -' ' ......... Y Robert ~u~rer .... " ~ me before the Planni~ c;omm:~ss!on to present a preview of the April 5 ~eet:lng, fm~e before th~ Planning 0cronies!on once before to get approval ~-~ the ~!te plan, The site wou~ have fou~ buildings with ~ner~ would be get-ages ~'~,d open parking spaces for ewary unit~ ~e bu~lding would be 100 per cent !e~e,,~4 the Vilta~e Council agenda of ........ ~., plao~d on fi!~ .............. ~xa,~,.g, aubject to one change" - ~ page should b~ 125 f~t by 19~ e , z~et, t~oti?n :?'~'1'~'~17 f'Z~Om the ;,,linnesota Planning I .... ,~ ~ ..... ~ ~$~o,..~.ation was ~e~,iv~d and ..... ~',~,~,~ by ~o:c,:~e~ seconded by Wahl. to ad.jeu~n at I0:~0. Wan-H~ K~-uege~ /?t~nning Commission gdopted )~arch ~-~.~ 1900 Article £-Of~Icers and Their Duties Section !.~. dt the f'~.~'~t most!nc of the calend.~.P ye. ar~. afte?r the (:~Ps~ ,~zlia~;e ~ou;ac~.l,~.~%~.-~ the Pi~nning domm~ssJrn Section '"co~'.~-~%T:~tt~es~, and perform such other duties the Section 4~ The Vice Chairman shall act in the c~pacity of bhe ~,hai~man Tn the absence of the Chai~,man~ in the event the ~ '~'~'~ of the Chairman becomes vaca~t, the Vice Chair~n ~,~ suc~ ~ to this office for the unexpired term and the Commission shall elect a sucoeesoP to the orifice of Vice Chairman for the ,'~:.,~':-,~,~ terms. The Secretary will likewise succeed to the office of Vice Chairman fop the unexpired term and the Commission shall el~-~:~'t successor to the office of SecretaP]; FoP the unexpired tePm~ 6ection 5~ The Secre~,.,.y shall keep the minutes of .... ,=ach.'" meeting and shall perform such ' r ~ ~ , otne~ au~,le~ as the Commission shall ~irticle li-E!ectlon of Of .... cePs Section 1 Nomination of of~icers shall be made from the f'ioo:~P at the ~eetzng p~eceding the annual orgsnization meeting~ section ~.~ A candidate receiving the most votes shs!] be declared elected~. Absentee votes will be accepted if -~,~ney~ are ~c~on 3~ Vacancies in offices shall be fille8 bT; regular electS, on pmoced'u~e8 for the unexpimed term, article Iii-Meetings Section !~ The Commission sluat! bold regut~r meetings on the fir~t a ~ ,.hz~Tuesday's~ of eaah month ~t 8:00p,:m~,~ provided~ ..... ,~ that when the c~v fixed for an~ regular meeting of the fazls upon a day d.,sign~tea by zs~ as a legal holiday~ such ~haii be held at the same hour on the next succeeding d~y hollday~ All re.g,.,lar,' meetings of the Cotm~i~alon' ' shall be held ~n~ V~!age ~al'~ unless otf~e~lse publisBe5~ Section P~, Special meetings of the Com-uission ~ay be e~lled by the Chsirman upon two d-'¥s notice, and shall be c~!led b.v the Chairvmn or the Secretary upon two days written notice not more th~n two d~ys after receipt by the Chairman of a written re,~uest for a speoiai ~eetin~ of the 2iannin~ Com~isslcn si~ned by three of ~ore ~eufoers of the F!anning Commission~ Secti<,n '~ A ouo,~,um sba!l consist of ?iv'e me:rFoers~ The sff.trmat vote of the ~ajority of those present sb~l! be required for the off officers ~ Section o= :n ail points not covered 'by these rules~ ~h~ ss: ~h.~i b~ governed on its pPoGodRPo by hobert~s Nulea of Orders. Section 6~ , ~1 rog:ilar and special shall be eicon to the public~ Article lV~OrdeP of Business Section !~ The oPde~ of business shall be as follows~ hell Call Public Hearings Old Unfinished Business New Business Miscel!~neoum Approval oF l~inutes Adjournment SeCtion Po Unless ob~ection is made by motion of the ~, ~ommz~?ss4~on~ the ~-~4~lS~ing Officer '~ay modify the foregoing order of bus!ness in order to accommodat~ citizens present or to expedite th~ business of the Co~ission~ Section 3~ Unless a reading of the Commission meetiug minutes is requested by a memDer of the Commissl;n~ such minutes may be approved without reading if the Secz, et~ry has previously furnished each ~e~ber with a copy thereof~ Section 4~ akny person desiring to address the Commi;,~8ion shall fIP~t secure the pe~missi,~,n of the P~esidi~g O~ce~P"" so to do~ Section ~, Eoch person addressing %he Commission shall~ if by the 2residin~ Officer., ~tep up in front~ sh~l~ ?ire his n~me and ~ddress in an audible to'ac for the records~ and unless luther is gran%ed b'y the Presiding Officer~ ~ha!i limit his rem~:~.rks five i ' ...... ~ ' ' nu~es~ Ali remarks s~uzm be addressed to the Oommis~zon as a body ~nd not to any member thereof~ No person other than th~ Com~nls~io~' and the person hav~ng the floor, shall be per, mitred to enter into an'y discussion~ ei~he~~ directly or through a member of t}~ Commiaaion~, without the per~issio'n &~ the ?residing ¢~o :~uestion shall be asked a Co~nission member ~xoept th~?ougb the Yresid~ng Artzcze ¥-Gommittezs Section 1~ The Chairman of the Commission may. st his dis~,~e~.,~-n ao~oint special committee to e×p~dite ~ ~o '~ O .... ~ ~ Section ~,~ It shall be the duty of each Com~.~ittee to investigste and study every subject referred to It~ and to report to the Commission all ' ~ znfor~=~a~ion contained therein~ and it~ re~c,m.~end~ .... on~ thereon in writing~ ~t its next regular meeting~ or ~t such time as the Chairman may di~ect~ Section 3 The Chairman of the Com~.lssion '~ ~'~ member of all Commi~tess, Section' 4~ T~le pi'~ce and time of Committee me,tings ~hail be decided 'b.v the members Off each Section 5, It shall be the duty off the Secretary to notif~ the ~$e~ of the .Standing Committ~e~ of the ti~e end pi~ce for respective meetings ~v,~ w~,.~n rssuested to do so by the Committee Articl~ ~!~Hearin~s Section 1, In addition to those required by law~. the Commission may at ~ discretion hold public hearings when it deci~:~ ~ hearing will 'b~ in th~ public, interest~ Section 2~ in the event of a public hearing~ as described ~on~o£ this Amtic!e~ no~ce of such hearing shall be published in the oFFicial newspape~ of the municipality not lesa than ten days ~efore the ti'~e of the hearing~ ~t~c~l.~II~Niscellaneous Section 1o The Commission may postpone any.. item or cun~-nue~ ~ ' a~ .... ~'~em~u~ther study and Infommation ~ntil the next mew~l~r meeting om until ~ special meeting designated Com this pumpose, upou an aIfm~m-~.tlv~, vote of a m~','ori of ~. enid. re ~;"b~"~b~' Section 3~ These rules may b~ amended at anF' regular or meeting by an affirmative vote of a ~aJor~t~f of the entire m~smbem,~ s~Ip after notice ~n writing~ cont~.~in!ng the form of the as ~.t will appear ~f amended as proposed, shal! have '~een at least t~r~ days p~icr to the m~etlng a~; whic~ such '~'~te :~ar,~:~ng Oom":tasion meetie, g was c:~zed to order b?/ c,~ *' ......... h- .... -; ....... ,ifs ,cesid.~"~','-~al co ,--,~.r-~,~'}e i ...... l? :!>,:ds ii;,': ~:P L}le : ........ . ¢ ~ e,~: ..... ;~-, surrounding t pPooe~ty He a~so st'-~ o'po,-:~-'sed that National Panda, Ino would not build ~,-': ~ the .er~}~ ~,ational }t~nds !nc. will build~ow~:~ and r~an~:ga the - ,.. ~,~ ur,'~';s, A petition w~s presented in f'~vor of the rezoning Those signed were: '-: ~' >'r~ and ?rs~ L-~:¢r,ence h~ Barette }ar,. and P,~Ps~ Laurence Hol!erman ~r~, and }.~rs~ Joseph Stadnick ?*re and ~.~rs~ Gilmore Hehw~Idt }!:.r,~ ard f{~8,~, Vernon ~aabe~.g H:-~, and Mra~ Robert ;¢uPdook ~?~' and ~rs~, '~oma8 Ohristaferson '?r~ and Xrs¢ Donald. Swanson buffer agreement was aisc p~eaented., and ;/ira. Joseph Stadnick' and Mtso Donald bw**nson and ~,~Ps~ Gilmore ~ehwaldt and-'lr~o n~ F~ i':o~man and ~4ra<, Vernon Faaberg and ~:~rs,~ ~obe?t ~urdock and ~4r8~. Laurence Holle~man and ~gra~ k%~omas Oh~Istoferson 90?5 x --urn Avenue Nor'th 9017 ,~Oth Avenue ?:orth -3°01 ~Ot'h Avenue YoPth 8(~01 ~Oth Avenue North 8~al YOth Avenue North 8~3 50th Avenue North 8¢OQ YOth Avenue North 8809 $Oth Avem.{e NoPth --nose who S!¢:~ed were; 902,5 30th Avenue North 8901 30th ~,venue :forth 8809 30th ~venue i;orth 8801 50th Avenue ~,~orth 8V49 30th Avenue No~tb 8'741 30th &venue ~orth 87~ 30th Avenue ~orth 9017 ~O~h Avenue ~;omth 8909 ~O%h .%venue North ::iF Lyte ~¢,,uPray p.,~ e~ented a small pamphlet on Sun Ray A.part¥~en'ts and a copy from 'the ~,~inneapoi&8 Tribune¢ ,fa .... h 30¢ "~ ~" 1966 issue: :::c<, ~,(llrPay also presented anony~ous letter which was ~iled to a ?:w of the neighbora~ -' ~':, ~., Barette.~ 9095 30th Avenue No~th, was Present ~o .~epresent the nell,,, ~oz ~. ~no are in f~'voP cf the Pezoningo He state8 the reason t}:~y had not been in favor of the ~ezoning before was because 'they were not infor~ed on the s~,,~t~,~ :.~o Barette s~id he and n-e::ghbors had 88vera~ r~eetings to discuss o .......... th~.~,ks the best use for the property la si~le, family, residence, ?'~r~ Nu.r~ay. , stated_, the _properties. would ~,~ .. ....... ,,un :,venue Nor~h; .sres'~;nted ~,.- .oetition o ,osir:a· the It~ose signing wet. e: r,ezoning~ '' ano :irs.~ To~ otto! and ~'frs~, No~ler ifuhn otan Torgerson ~'~d '".,rs' ~ ~,~r~~',,~, .:Leke~ .a~d: t,{rs~ Gil i~ehwaldt and Mrs,. Le~nder Erhard and ~,~rs~ Kaml !~vin ~001 eavell avenue '4orth 8808 SOth .avenue korth 3000 Cave!! ~venue North 8~ 09 SOth A~enue North 8818:5Otb Avenue North 8"08 50th Avenue No?th 500t Scone ~w'enue 293i tSoorte Avenue 8V09 both ,ivet~ue North 8VlV [!0th Avenue 8795 302h Avenue 8801 t4Oth Avenue No:rrb 8809 30th Avenue North 3016 Gave!! ~wenue No~th SO" = En~si ~ gn ~wenue North and ,"{rs~ Ken Davidson 3000 I~sign Avenue NoPth and ~'rs~. James Christi~nsen ~009 ~usign Avenue )iorth ,~nd ~.~rs~ Henry ~mgerstro~ 700.~] !'~,sign Avenue North Mr~ ~nd ~rs,, F,~ G~ Gould ~r~ and ~rs~ Berncs Haakang vr~. a'nd Nrs~. Kenneth We jack · ~r,~ and Hrs~ CaPl Gorlinsky Mr~ David Harrold ~,~r~. Charles Rice Hr~ John }{r~ and Mrs~ Glenn Jerpseth ~,{~ and Mtso Conrad ~oerr ~'~{ro and Nrs~ C~rl Sheppard ;~r~ ~.nd ~.{rso Robert Schilling :~{r~ end ~rm~ G~. Ka~in Mrs, and Hrs~ Gene Lehner t,,~r,,~ and Mrs~ Louis boerr SOP? Ensign 4venue North SO[~3 Ensign Avenue North ~OP~ F~sign A~enue North ~040 &nsign ~venue ~oP,oh~ ~ ~ 3017 "' - . ~a. vei ~. Avenue ~,,"'ort~n ~025 Caveil Avenue North 30Y4 Cavei! Avenue iqorth 30~i ~nsign avenue l:~orth 3100 Ensign Avenue North 3116 ~sign ~venue North SrO! 31st Avenue 2orth 8~00 31st Avenue North 3t0t Knsign Avenue North 3046 Oavell aven~le North 3016 ~oone avenue North 303i Scone Avenue North .:OTE~..,,"~_ and Xrs., Oilmore~ Hr. and ~.,,".rs ~ ghriatnferson" ' and '";~r and F~rs~ Scanlon signed all three petitions. t~r David Harrold~ 30 o ~, Cavell Avenue North~ was present to express his views.~ A few of the reasons are: popu!~tion density will be Increased. this is supposed to be a family style 'vi!iago: creates a traffic problem~ increases taxes. Harrc!~ is opposed to the rezonln~. '~ofion by Bonner~, seconded by o "a,. ~ ,~ oue~,.~,, to recommend to the F~l!age Go~ ...... ii to deny the request for resorting for v~-~ . },%tlon carried,. ,~a,~e.,g nbstalned i~,~ puOiio hea:~'ing~ c:?,se number 56--i'!.j was opened on the proposed rezor, i:g from limited industry to multiple fami!;¢ residential~ The property in ~ueztion is in the vicinity of 7300 36th Avenue [.lort~. Robert Bur'~er was present to represent ~,~r,, Dounsy.~ He stated rezouing to Tu!tipie fa~i]~v residential would be a ~ood use for the ]~nd~ '~r~, ~ur~er also stated: it would[ make a goo~ buffer and be 'very attractive~ the pr~,perty is easily acces's~0!e~ they ,/ou!~ dedicate b~If a street for street pur?oses. '~rs,~ '~sh wqs present to oppose tb, e rezoning. She presented a writt,-n statement of her f' ellngs toward the rezoning. She states: '~r~.~ Vern Donnay was well ~ware of the co~ple×ity of the ~arlnko property when he purchased his propert'y~ f/. ?fr~ Vern Donnay h~s built a structure on his property that is uncor:f'orming with ~is re~'~uest~ ~ 5~e Martnko property owners wish ~r.~ern Donnay would discontinue to req:_~est for rezoning.~ t~,s~ ',¥cish also stated she is preparing to sell her property and this rezoning would hurt her property, She states that the rezoning ..~ould be of no benefit to her or the %illage of New Hope and it is ,not putting the land to proper use~ Hotion by Krueger~ seconded by Bonner~ to recommend to the Village Council to reject the rezoning because it doesn't meet the compre- hensive land use plan~ ~otion carried, Wr~ Plufka opposed~ A public hearing~ case number 66~12~ was opened on the proposed rezoning from single family residential to multiple family residential° ~e property in &uestion is in the vicinity of Nevada Avenue North between 4~nd and 48th Avenues North~ ?~ro Gene Burg~ who lives in Robbinsdale~ Mr, end Mrs~ Huro~ 4208 Nevada~ and ~rs~ ~allace Brown~ 421~ Nevada~ who all own parts of the property in Question~ were present to give their views on the subJect~ ~ey are all in favor of the rezoning, Notion by Krueger, seconded by Faaberg~ to recommend to the Village Council that lots 18 through ~0 of Auditor's Subdivision No~39~ lying %~est of the East 130 feet thereof~ be rezoned to multiple family residential, pending the dedication of a 60 foot streeto ~otion carried° A ~ublic hearing~ case number 66~1~ was opened on the proposed p~eliminary plat of~ ~aul Schwartz Addi~iono The property in question is in the vicinity of 49th avenue and Boone avenue North~ Johnson ~as present to discuss the rezoning~ ~oticn by Bonner~ seconded by Wah!~ to recommend to the Village Council to approve the plat~ allowing a variance on lots ? and 8 of block i and lots 1 and 9 cf block 2 of a Sideyard set back of ~ ftc and su~ject to any further dedic~tion for ~eland Avenue North¢ ~otion carried° A public hesring~ case number 65~14 ~nd 15, w~s opened on the proposed The property in cuestlon is on tuebec ~¥en~.e from J6th to 55th ;",venue ?~ortho ~,~r~ ~ Kauffmann and ?~r. Dick Kauffmann were present to discuss the pro~oerty~ They az~e representing ~.K. ~eait.y~ The building would be constructed of brick and stucco and would meet all village requiremonts~ The property wo'~l~ cont~in s play area and tho buildings will be ~:k stories ?~igh~ Hr~ Kauf~aann st~:.~ted the short, lng center and tr~nspo~t~,tion are two assets of t~e site. They are ~ia~ing to screen the property with trees, or fencing iF it is re~uired~ ~ ~.tion by Plufka~ seconded bN Bukki!a~ to recommend to the ViilaFe Council to approve the rezoning to multiple residential, subject to t?:e street easement of '%uebec A'venue North fro~ l{ass Lake Road to 58+h Avenue ~.~orth~ ?.~otion by ~,%~ahl~ seconded by Bonner~ to reco~end to the ¥illnge Council to approve the preliminary p!~t of Chalet Terrace as shown~ ~Fne Planning Comv~lssion wishes to review the final site plan before a building permit is issued~ ~,otion ~arried~ The Planning Commission received a letter~ file nu.~ber 64S4~ from Sonestroo~ nosene~ Anderlik and ~smociates.~ Inc~ pertaining to the public hearings of April ~5~ 1~66, it w~ read and placed on file~ The invoice, number t009~ was received fram ~{idwest Planning and nes e;.~rch~ Inc~ ~otion by Sueker~ seconded oy Bonner~ to recommend to the Village Council to pay the ~S80 retainer~ ~ot ion carried ~ Hotion by Sucker, seconded by $onner~ to approve the minutes of ~arch 16, 1~86~ without reading~ subject to one change: the dste should be changed from February 1~, 1~68 to ~arch 18~ 1966~ ~otion csrrie~ The Chairm~n table8 the reviewal of the Rules of Procedur~ until the April le~ 1966 Planning Commission meeting~ }~otion b-' Krueger~ secondeU b.y Sucker, to adjourn at 1~:10~ Notion c arried.~ Ivan M~ Krueger~ Seco Arti¢ie: l*~Office~-0s and Their Duties ,**~,,_., theiz .~uccesaozs ax*e elected and assume office. S~c'{;iou~:__~,~_,,.~.. . ~ 3~ The Chairman shall preside at a!] m~et!,~gs,= ~ ~ apso~nt' co~m~ttees., and perform such othe~ duties s;s may be etd~,*-~d ~ the Commissior~.~ Section 4 ~ (~" ~ o ~..~e Vice. ~n.!rman st~a!l act ~n the ~ ..... ~ ......... *' ,.~os'noe of the Chairman. In the event the~z-~fz~,e'- of the Chaix~man becomes vacant, the Vice Chair~n shall succeed 'to this office for the unexpired term and the Commission shall elect a successor to the office of Vice Chairman for the unexpired terms, The $ecretary will likewise succeed to the office of Vice Chairman for the unexpired term and the 0ommission shall elect a successo~~ to the office of Sec~etamy fo~ the unexpi~ed ~e~m~, Section -.5, The ,$ecret~:~ry shall keep the minutes of each meeting and shall.~erform ?u_~.~.~,,,.. other dutias as the Commission. shall a.~re,a't~,*' '' ,:krt'lcle II-Election of 0fCicers Section 1~, i'~omination of officers s~ali be ,,,,*ds from ~"' ' ~;** the meeting p~eced!ng the annual orgsnlzatlon ~eeting~ Section ~, A candidate receiving the most ~-otes shall be declared ~~'Ab~ ent ee v ..... ~ - ,,~,~,~$ will be accepted if they a~e in wr!'bi~g% Section 3, Vacancies In offices shall be fil.,.e~"'* a btf. regular $1eotion p~ocedures for the unexp!~,ed term~ ' Article ii£-Neeting~ Section io The Comm, ission shall hold regular meetings on the first and thzr--8--Tuesuays of each month at 8:00p~m~ provided~ however~ that when the d~y fixed for any regular meeting of the Co~ission ~a~ls upon a day des~ ~gn~ted by law as a legal holiday~? suc?~ '~eetLug shall be held at the ss~e hour on the next succeeding d~y not a hoildayo All regular raeetings of the Commission' "~ ~ shall be' held en~ Village ~a~i unless othe~wlse pub!i~k~ed '- Section ?~ Special meetings of the, Com'~.ission may be c".lled by the Chsirman upon two d-ys notice~ and shall be ¢,~iled b~; the Chairman or the Seoretsry upon two ~ays writ?eh notice not more th~n two dsys after reoei, pt by the Chair~nan of a written re,~uost Yet a speolai meeting of the Planning Com~aissicn sL~zned by three o'? ~ore members of the F!anning Commission. Seco'ion .~ A Quorum stall consist o~ eive mercers The vote of the majority of those present sb~l! be re:~ui~ed f'or the Section o In all ooints ~ '~ - -.. ~o~ covered by these rules~ th~ C-~,.~:~o,., ...... sion shall be governed on its procedure by hobert~s i~.ules of Order~ Section 6¢ Ail ~eg~lar and ~,.~,.~ meeting, ~reco~.ds, shall be oi~e~ to the public. Section af~ticle .~V--Order of ~uslnes.~ The order cZ business sna!l be as ~ollow~';~ holi Call Public Hea~ings Old Unfinished Business New Busiuess Miscellaneous Approval o¢ "/inures Ad J ournment SeCtion 2 Unless ob'Jectlon is ,~de by motion of the '* ~ the Fr, es~ing Officer '~ay ~odify the ffo~*egoing orde~ of busi:aeaa in order to accommodate citizens pz, esent or to expe,S'~.¢-.~,,,~, the business of the Co~ission¢ Section 3, Unless a reading of the .,o.mmzssion meeti,ug minutes is ~e,,~ue~ed by a member of the Oo~f~lssi,-~¢ s~oh minutes ma? be approved without reading if the Se~re~..~ry has previousl7 D~rn~s.,ert each ~'~=~oer with a copy thereof~ Section 4~ &ny person desiring to address the Commi¢*~sion shall first secure the pe~'mission of the F.vesiding Officer so to do~ ,~u. ~,ss '~.r~ an audible ~--~-~-~ for ' -'~d ~l.r~ies~'~-'~u~.~ne i:ime as the ¢hai~man tualy di:,ueot~ in the official newspapeP of the ~uni{i:~ya. l~-,~ not t.::$~ '~:na~ ten days before the At~ticte ¥'ll~Mi soellaneou.$ '{~~~ther atudy and in~,o~.mation ~" ~'~ .... ~ · oP ~nti! a special meeting ,,~ - ~ ~ ~eo~gna,.e~ fo~ this pu~pese,~ April 19~ ~..~=~ ~.~a~mi~ Cor~ission meet-m~ was caim~a to oi~er by Chair~mn Plui%m at 8:00 P.M~ Jyi:'~ B<~o Burger) r:q~resanting Mr~ Vern Dczmay~ :as present, to discuss with the Don:say and Marinko property b~ referre~ to t~'~e Vil!age Pin:mcr to reco~e~_ a zoning for these pro~rtic~s a~ a justification for such ........ on the _~a~e~a%ure distributed by Dale ~a ~ St-, uemenu on ,~,x~ss_ Way'. D~s:Dn ~ Cities Amapteo.' ' "~ from the Co:m~issio~rs .......... ~ s~' Depertaent of Cit, y Ylanrmng~ Voim.~e August (b) ~Cha~ing [:~.ly' Y~.na~e~ based oua seven city survey by the U~,S~ ~Sureau of Labor Statisties~ Published in i9~2: Motion by Plufks~ secor~iad by Wahl~ to ask the Village Council 'to give an indication of the.ir opposition to 'the colored land use p'lan, Motion carried ~. Discussion was held or~ the Munici?~! Planning Act~ Motion by Waht~ seconded by Bonner.~, to refer the Municipal ~a~ning Act to the V~lage.. Attornsy for re~e~ml. S~cifical!y~ section ~70.6~I. saoti~m divisior~ 2 ~ ~age 8. Mot i on The invoice.~ number lu6~,~ w~s recei'~d from M~idwest Pi~.~mg a~ i~sea, rch~ Ir~, Mot! on by ~ ~, I,- ~,,n ........ C oumc:l ....... ~ seaond, e~ by Bo~ner~ to reco~me~ to ~'~ :r~:aag~ ~' to _ , the $200 ~tainer~ i~'~;][~[~'~ ~[n the absence of the Chairman, In 'the e~'.:,.~8 ~ne C~,.aizma,., becomes vacant bhe V'~ ~ CSai',*~m--, .' to th. ia office for the u~expired term anl the elect a sucgessoP to the off'ice of ¥ice Chaiz, man for, tei*.m~ The Secretary will like?¢~.se succeed 'to the of.ilea Chaii~man fop the unexpi~e'i tei*m and the {;ommiaa:Loi: ~u, ocesso~ to the office of Secrets:c?- fo~, the unexp[~:q':d a;od 8hall pe~fopm suoh otb. st duties ~ 't?lS Conimissioi: s~ :'~ -::::~r,~ pPocedu~es fo~ the 9nezpIPe¢ Section 1~ The Commission shall hold ~egu!a:~ meetiio, gm al;al! be held at the ssme hour on the next suooeedimg ~.a% ~<.,C a Section P, Special meei:.:ingg of the Oom~;~ission may be cq!!ed by the Ohslrman upon ~,wo d-'ys notice~ and shall be called by the ChaiF~an oF 'the Secretary- upon two days writ'~-'en notioe not more th~n ,:?:,~ of the Planning Commiasion, shall be o~e:' to the pubiio, i~, ilnfini shed ~ eccion ~ Unless oboe<~. .... , ..... , ...... , in o~d. er ~o. aceommodat:~ cii;izens present oP to :.xped.t:;e~ ~" ' ':-' tl:~ _ne~a of the ~` ~ wi~hou'b ' a "~- - .... ~.n~lte~ ma;, be fi:eat seethe the re-tulsa!on of the Presiding Off!eof ~- ..... o, - . ~o~rnisslon shal]~ ..... ..... ~tec] ,,~. ....... , step up in f~en't, ~ddress 'in an audible to~e For the records~ an~ unless futheP time ~:- ?Nutted b":/ the ~ ~ ~-r~.sidin? nl..in~ ~:,'k~'li ii'~i'h his rem'~p]cs ?i've 'inutas~ A!] remaPks should be addPessed to the CoramissJ. on as a body. and. not to any. member ~='~oeo,,,,~,...~ No person el;her than the (;'ommissio~ and the,.nerson having the f'leoP~ ..~,a~_]~ be permitted to e'ntez~ into any discusslon~ eib:her directly or 'through a member of 2'he Com~iasion.:. without the permission 6~ "cbc ?residin i.,o ,ueation shall be asked a Co:'amission member except /re ~idingu.,~'c:iceP~, i'iection 1~ The 6nai_man of the Commission may st als diacre'tlo~n appoint soec~al. _ committee to expedite business of the Oomm.~:~si. on..' "= Section P,= It shall be the duty of each Gom-,~ittee to investigate and study every subject referred to it~ end to repoP~ to the r~ ~ ~.~,e.c~ ~ "~'" it com~end~ticns ~,omnzasion a!! information containe~ '~ ......... · 'thereon in .vriti.r~g: 'it its next re~jular meeting, or at such time ~s the Chairman may diPect~ Section 3 The Chair,,an of the Commission -"~'~ be o S~IR ~ aTi membe~ of all CommiStess~ ~ectlon 4 The pl~oe and time of Committee meetings ~hali be dec~ -~-~ by the members of each co~itteo~ Section 5~ Ii; shall be the duty of' the Secretary to noti:£c the members of the Standing Committees of the tif~e ...... ~,~'~ ~iaae ~oz, their respective e ~ - m_.e~,ir, gs when re:::uested *~,- do so by the Committee C'hair~an Article ¥2~ Hear i~,3g.s Section 1 in addition to those recruited by law:. the Oommlsa~o.a ~naF at its di~cretlon hold public heaPings when it declarss such hearing will be ~ ~.,n the .public inter, est,. Section 2~ in the event of a puoiic hearing~, as described in Sect-~on---n-Tof Bhis Amtic!e~ no,,Ice, ~"' ' of such hearing shall be pubii~hed in the official newspapeP of the municipality not less than ten days before the ti ze of the hearing~ ~Pticie VII~Xi scetianeous Section 1~ The Commission may postpone any item or continue ~ny item for further study and information Until the next or until a special meeting designated for this purpose~ at least ben A oubi4~ b. er~,'ring, ca~ n~mber 61.-iE.? was o2ened at 8;0c P~}{~, on the :~.:~sldence and ¢~¢.,~ '~*"itip!e family re,'~.idcnce to '%qe 'property in question is in the vicinity of 1~ .... ', .... .-, ~anueo}(u~... and }.Er.... JoPgenson were i:Pesent, to ¢kscuss the re.zoning, ~r~, LandeckeP orated the topog},aphy of the l~nd ~s v'erF iz?egu!ar and a Io% of fill would be nee~ed~ ~[e stat<~ 'she m~r~n~-~-~ would have no g:¢e:-~t drainage probiem~, The r'!annlnc: Commission stat~: they think the ~-ezonirg would !n-,olve spoh zoning and there is no hardship of the tand~ Mr,, Ji~ Pa.rke:r~. :¢epre:~enting F~.gie investment, wr:~s [resent to oppose the rezonlng~ He doesn't see any reason for rezoni~:g and he thinks ~]"~e p'r-~o'~e'~~-, osn be de~eloped singze family mesider.se~ He :,~:a,,es the :'ezoni:a6 would damage the sale of his E~r.~ Wa~en l";~eks was present to represent the neif, hbors who are opposed 'bo the rezoning~ They don~t thiuk It wouli add azuthing to the neighborhoods, },~r~, h'eeks p~esente~ a petition Fhose signing wePe;~ _ - . ,.,~...~.,e~ and ~nd Mrs:~ Don elllles a'~d M~s ~ ~anuei Her~andz and ~s~. D~ ~iadtke Oeo?ge Jenks and ~;~Ps ~ David Nodda and ;~:?ra~ Lyie Olson James b:~own b~anklin Fay and Nrs~ Robert Congdon and ~Pso D~ther Chastain and NPs~ Lloyd Johnson and ~rs~ R~ E~ Hanson and ~ms~ John Kroska and M~,S~ Peter Gau~tad J525 Yukon A'~'enue North 3519 Yukon /venue North 3513 Yukon ~.t~enue Nor:th J60TM Yukon ,~renue North 3501 Yukon A~'enue ~orth J46v Yukon ~venue S4.+~0 Yukon .%ve~,ue MoP%h J44S Yukon R. renue North 34.31 Yukon .'~';;~enue North 3830 Yukon .. wenue North ~.-, Yukon ~v~nue 3518 Yukon ~.venue North 3500 Yukon ~;.venue North 3498 Yukon ~venue North G490 ~ukon /-.~enue North 34V8 Yukon ~enue North L5468 Yukon ~'~enue North ~448 Yukon [~venue North 5442 Yukon Avenue NoPtb ~500 Xyion Avenue Nomth ~ylon Avenue YP.~ and Mra~ ~ob~rt Lund~ulst [,~r~ and Mrs~ nlch~rd Johnson Mr~ ~nd ~.[rs~ Melvin B~okm~n ~*~r~ and }.;re, ¢~alfred Johnson [nez Johnson Lil~ Johnson Wr~ and f{rs~ George HerNan ~r~ and ~rs~ Harold }~aine Nr~ and N[rs~ Wayne ~aker wr~ and ~,~rs_~ Louis Benko 8801 Northwood 3550 }~ealand Avenue North 3054 Zealand Avenue Nort~ 3554 Zealand Avenue, North YL48 Zealand .'~venue Nor%~ SO49 Zealand Avenue North YYY6 Lealand Avenue North ;~518 '.<;e~land '.~,.venue '~oPth :'~5t© Zealand Avenue North Ya, 0G Zeals. nd ivenue North ;'~50'7 ;iceland Avemae North Council to deny the request for reZoning from multiple family residence 'to re,:all business and allowance of a variance ad.Joini~g the service st~tion on the basis that it is not a hardship on the locotion o~~ the owner~ ,,.rotion carried.,. ~otion by SuekeP~, seconded by Bonnet: to reco~ruend to the Village Gounci! thato~.~ ....... ~eque~ for rezoning from single famil;v re~ide~ce to multiple family res~a~z~Oe be denied~ Notion carried~ A publi.¢ hearing¢~' case number 66~17¢ was o:ened at 9~0 ..... ~ ""..~ or_ the proposed Pezon~ng, from single family residence to :~ul~..p~e''' family residences, Tn,, Property is 42~8 ~xnnetka~ owned by M-~, Y~ Bongo * = subject to Prazer and Mr~., Bernu.~, who have option on were present to discuss the Pezoniug¢ Elmer Lamphere ,~tated he thought u.,.;~.s wa~ an ideal !ocat;ion fo. m~,l~ip~e dwellings ~ ~ro ~e5 VanBeusekon, 4Z?O Winnetka Avenue and Mr~ Jerome Helsi6k, "800 4/th Avenue were present to oppose the rezoning~ ~.ey feel there ~ro enough apartments ~nd it souid stay residendiaio They stated it would also increase the traffic~ ~otion by Plufka~ seconded by ~¥ahl~ to recommend to the ~-'~¥~ga~= Oouncil to table the reauest for rezoning until th.e May i7~ 196,; Planning Co, lesion meeting and request that the applicants go to the ~illage Hall and ammend the request for rezoning, and the site plan~, which, at that time, should be submit+ed to the Planner Cot review~ }~otion carried~ A public hearing~ case number 66~18~ was opened at I0:00 the pz~oposed rezoning from single family residence to ~etaEl and from single family residence to multiple family r, esidence~ for a special use per~it for a ~ervice station,~ ~'~e... vicinity of the SE corner of Rockford Road and Highway d~v,o,"~r;~ PepPesa~ting-t~t,~e ~.~t.~e Pinnet~a~n Oo ~ was DPese?,lt to the Pezoning. with the. Planning Commission° Earl Strande are abutting property o~ner.~:~ They are in f~vor of the re:oning an,~ 'the serwice stat:i.o:~. The site consept ^ ~ ,~:. good planning~ ~otion b_v Flufka~ ~econded bF '~'~'' :~anl~, to recourse:ad to the lf~~~ Council to rezone from single family residence to retail business ~.nd fro::..a~-~_.~o~..~ :a"~h-i~ ~s~den~e to ~ultip'~e 'e~mliy :,'~<,~-~, as ze:luested in tho :oubtlc hearing no'tices~ h~otion oarricd~ ~otion by Flufka~ seconded by bonner~ to reoom~end to the Village. Council to g~:nt a special use perm~.t for s. servLoe statio~: on the legally des:~ribed p:m:~.perty in the p::~biio he,ring 'aotie, April { i} setback fOP st:neet {{~) off s'tPeet parking (~} oonfor~: to all Village re~uirement:~ ~¢ot !on oarr!ed~ gP,~ Sa~i O~Banno:: w<:s present to discuss the pret::~:in~rF- Fiat of his property o Council to table the preli,~inar7 plat because the Village Planner hadn't viewed the plat~ Howeverr, if the ¥il!age Council wi~hes to recommend approval of the plat upon seeing the resommend~.~tions of the Village Pian~..er:~ the Village Council should s:~e fit to do soo Motion car'rled~ letter of ~'esisn[:tion was received from ~otion by' ftufka~ sesonded by Wahl~ to accept the resignation of Vernon ~otion carried~ [,totion by Bonner~ seconded by SuekeP~ to approve N'le minutes of April 1~ 1966 ,~lthou¢ re~ding¢, },~ot ion carPied~ Sec. Ivan Ho ~u~sger ~inute~ of Planning Commission M ~ . l,ee~ing~ May l?~ !',~embers present: Flufka~ Sueker~ tirueger~ Wahl~ Swanson~, Trucker Hombers a0sent; ~onner~ Click~ Bukkila %~l.~lage Planner also present ,~r. ~ernu requested, that the public bearing on the Benz p:-operty be delayed until his partner arrived. The ~elay was gr~nte~ The chairman red, nested the Viilage Planner to pass out the memorandu~.~ pertaining to the ~eveioow~ent of the 6~ a~~, ~ Donuav oroperty and 11'~' acres of the ~.~arRnko property. Tlae Planning Co;~is~ion read the memorandum~ short discussion was held on the colored land use map~ public hearing~ case nu~oer 6~-!~ was opened at 8~i5 by the cbairmano }~ro Bernu pointed out the following points pert~ining to the change in the zoning of the Benz property: The abutting homes will not lose their value~ provided. desir~ble~ well planned multiples are erected~ (b) The property must be .developed to its best use~ (c) The traffic problems will }~e minimized with the ' · ~ ~ par~ ~ng area developed with two drive ways° (d) A buffer, along the north Ooundary will be provided with a terraced effect and with planting,~ (e) The rent wi~ garages will be ;~155 and ~178~ W.r~ Donald Nelson and I~r~ Van Beusekon objected to the drivewa_v at the no~th oo~ndary~ The Planning Commission requests thgt the names of these people be notified of a site plan r~.view. Mro and ~rs~ James ~arks ~r~ and Mrs~ Donald Nelson ~r~ and Nr~ Jerome Iieisick ~r~ and Mrs,, Stanley Karlstad ~r~ and Nrso Ralph Pollack Nr~ and Nrs~ Ceburne Squire Mr~ and Mrs~ Fred Van Beusekon ~8i0 44th Avenue North v801 44th Avenue North ~800 44th Avenue North VS~l 44th Avenue North 7820 44th Avenue North VS~0 44th Avenue North 4320 Winnetka avenue North ~,~otion by Flufka~ seconded by ~ahl~ to recommend to the Village Council to approve the rszoning from Oingle ~amily hesid, ence to Nu!tiple Family hesidence~ ' ~ot i on carried~ A memo w~s received from ~id,~est Plarming and hesearch~ in¢~ A le~ gth7~ discussion was held on the future development of land surrounded by 36th avenue on the south, the ~.{inneapolis-'~orthfield and Southern Haiiroad on th~ west, ~Sth Avenue on the north and Maryland ~.venue on the east° A land use plan or lay out. of single family residence was vie?,~ed ~nd discussed by the f!anning Commission~ The plan w~s prepared by f~id~'~est F!anning and ~esearch~ ~otion b?..~ Plufka~ seconded by ;fahl, to recommend to th~ Vitlag~ Council 'that the Donnay and ?~arinko property be plaoed on file for a public hearin~ to change the rezonin~ fro~ limited business to multiple fs~i!y res~dence~ ~ot i on failed, '/ahl~ ?lufka- for Krueger~ ~u~ker- against Swat sot T~ucker- abstain ?orion by Flufka~ seconded by ~ah~.~ ~o re!er the ~emo from ~fidwest ?fanning and Research~ inc~, to the ¥illage Council in view of the proceeding motion~ Se~,ious consideration should be given to the use of this land~ ~e ~uestion still r~mains~ should the zoning be changed or ~saffirmed? ~'~otlon carrie~ ~ Preliminary Flat of Sam O~Bannon was taken up at the ~ii]age Council meeting~ and the Planning Commission was made aware of the P!anner~s Report-and the Village Council action on the Flat~ k ietter~ dated Nay 9~ 1966, wes mailed to Vernon Faaberg thanking him for his voluntary service on the Planning Commission~ The review of the Nunicipa! Planning Act~ s~ction 8VO~6-1 section 6 subdivision ~, page 8~ was held in abeyance pending a report fro~ the Village Attorney. The Park Board is invited to attend the June P.l~ 1966 21ann!ag Co~mission meeting° 10o On January i8~ 19~ Nr~ Plufka appointed a comnittee to investigste the feasibility of a housing code~ ~r~ Click was appointed to replace Mro Sueker ~s chair~an~ Each Ftanning Commission member is asked to review the community po]icy and gogls, distributed by the Village Planner~ b~fore the next Planning Commission meeting~ Special couslderatiou sbou!d be given to answering all ~uestlons: The Park Board minutes of ~a,rch 95~ 1.n6{~ and April ?0~ lO6<~ were The Village Council minutes of April 96, 1966 and ~{ay~o~.~ 1966 were r evi ewed o The F!anning Commission minutes of May 3~ i96.~ were read~ The ammendmen~s are: item 2- paragraph 5 should have, the location of a sign~ which would be applicable to the general business category~ ite~ O,- '~ith regrets" s~ou!d be ~dded~ it~~ ~- should b~ "as printed" inst%~d of wit?~out reading~ ~otion by P!u~a, seoonded oy ~,'~'ahl~ to a~prove the minutes as :'~'ot i on carried. i'~otion by ~'Tahi~ seoonded b>~ ~'~ ~ ~ ?orion oar:~.ied ~ Sec~ Ivan H~ Krueger ¥ILLAOE OP N~..~,~ UO?E 1966 ~embers prese~...t~ Sucker, ~ani, iLvueger~ Truoke~, Bonner~ Plufka, Sv~.~!Eon Me.~£oers aosent. Cliok~ Bukki!a The Planning Commimsion meeting was opened with. an item referred back to the ?lanning Oo~amission f~om the Village Council, the Narin~o and Donnay p~operty~ ~s~ ~elsh, representing the Narinko pmoperty~ objected to the ~ezoningo Her ~easons are: down grading the zoning~ dlscrimination~ limited industry use is now establlshed~ the pmoperty is being held for limited industry use and will be developed in accordance with the zoning~ ~{~o Donnayhad no other comments other than what he had stated at the publio hearing° ~otion by Piufka~ seconded by Sueker~ to mecommend to the Vill~ge Council that the Naminko and Donn~y p~opert~es be placed for a public hearing For ~ezoning f~om limited industry to multipl~ family re~iden~e~ Wotion cmrried~ Sucker, ~ahl~ SWanson~ Plu~¢a~ voting Bonner~ ¥[~usger~ vo~ing True,er abst~iniug~ A public hearing~ case number 66-~1, was opened at 8:45, on the proposed plat on the following legally described property: : Part of $~ of the ~ of Section 18, Twp~ 118, Hg~ 21. Hennepin County~ ~innesota~ ~ ~i~r~ representing Hipp Con~t~ction Compa~ was p~es~n~o discuss th~ plattlng~ ~ ~ ~ew Avenue Nomth and Mr. mud Nr~ Pokillm~ ~, and ~ Hath, 790~ ~ 8010 ~8~ Avenue Nomth~ objected to the platting because they Feel' the p~op~ty ~hould memain ~s it is. It would eliminmte a play ame~ for the children and spoil the view~ Interest in the d~ainage was discusmed at length. N~ Reimer ~tated that the drainage would conform to the village reGuirement~ Motion by Bonner~ seconded by Wahl~ to mecommend to the Village Council that the proposed plat~ submitted by E.H. Reimer~ "the A1Tsdemco pmoperty" be approved with (!) a seven Foot easement Fo~ street pumposes along ~innetka~ (9) a variance given in regamds to the length of culdesae (3) 10 foot drainage easement b~een lots 9 and 3 and ~ and S and ~on2o~m to the memalning vil%age omdinances. Avenue [~orth~ Several people from the area were present to discuss the rezoning from single residence to multiple family residence, but no one objected, ' Discussion was held on the extension of a street ~-~.b.~ttzng the cheez property on Wisconsin Avenue North, ~e problem being the Dtgatano ho~e on the p~opos~d street easement~ ' ~.fotion by ~ · ~ bue~ce~, seconded by W~h~ -~..~ to recommend to the ¥illage Council to approve the request of e ' r~sidence ~o multlpl~ f~mily r~sidenc6~ ~o,~ sin~ f~il Notion carried. A 9ubtic hearlng~ case n~.~r 66~ was opened at i0~30~ The reques-h b~ing rezoning fro~ si~l~ Family r~sidenc~ to multlo~ f~i~· ~ ~esi~en~e~ ~ property being the portion of t~ ~g~ th~ ~ ~ectlon 6 ~ ~ 118 ~ 21 ' ~ ~v ~'~,~ ~ ~ P , g~ . ~ zyl~g .~est o~ z~aiand ~x~endin~ north. excluding the streot~ '~ ' - ~everand Elmer T~ ~enry, N.P~ Halph Sather, ~r~ Eugene nama!av~ ~o Robert ~eise~ from the Church of the ~piphany~ were pres~t to discuss the p~oposal. £tems discussed were: the errection of mo~e buildings on the remainin~ church site~ location of parking on the requested $lte~ location of multiple buildings~ Notion by Krueger~ seconded by Bonnet, to recommend to the Vtllsge Council to approve the request of rezoning from single family residence to multiple family residence. ~otion carried~ Note to Village Council: is.in question~ tb.e actual limits of the zoning A public heari~g~ case number 6~:-24, was opened at 10:45, on the proposed rezoning from single Family residence to multiple family residence Lot 1, Block 1~ Morks Camp_on Manor~ Mr. Bob Nelson~ ~epresenttng Northern Land and Healty Company~ was p~esent to discuss the proposal, Points discussed were: !o the ~0 foot set back reGuirement. spot zoning° 3o area requirements. 4o seven foot street easement~ garage of garages one on each end~ 6o size of the struotu~e~ Motion by Sueker~ seconded by Wahl, to ~eco~end to the Village Council to grant the request° Notion by Plufka~ to ammend the motion~ to recommend to the Village CounciTM to grant the rezoning and the variance on this particula~ rezoning based on the merits and circumstance of this request~ Seconded by Bonnet. carried. l,~otion by Plufka, seconded by I$'ahl~ to reco~m~end to the Village Council that consideration be given to double bungalows as a special use pe~.~it. Discussion followed Flnfka wished to withdraw his motion. Wahl withdrew his second. }~otion by Pluf~a~ seconded by ~¥ah!, to reco~end to the Village Co'~.~ncil that the matter of whether to ~llow double bungalows in si~gle family area by rezoning to multiple family residence or g~anting a special use in the existing zoning o~dina~ce be referred to the Village ~oti on carried ~otion by SueWer, seconded by Plufka~ to reoom-~end to the Village Council that Section III B Subdivision 8 under single f~mily ~esidence in the zoning o~din~nce requireme~t~ be changed from 080 Sqo ft~ to 1000 sqo ft~ Motion by Bonnet, seconded by Krueger, to table the ~otion~ I~rueger~ Bonnet, ~ahl, ~w2nson~ Trucker voting yes. Sucker, Plu~a voting no. l~otion carried~ Motion by Bonnet, seconded by Swanson, to devote the next Planning Commission meeting entirely on the zoning ordinance~ and bringing up to date the land use map. The secretary should notify the Village Planner~ to bring all the maps~ lo land use ~ap~ comprehensive land use plan. zoning map~ Notion car~iedo The chairman ~ppointed Nr~ Bonne~ to hesd the co~mitte~ to bandte the business at the next meeting. The Pl~nning Co~mission recuests the Administrative Assistant to ~ail to each Ptaoning Co~mission membe~ a copy of the zoning and platting ordinance with their mdmen~ments~ Notion by Sueker~ seconded by ~%~ahl, to recommend to the Village Council that the invoice from Midwest P!armlng and Eeseareh, Inc.~ number 1146, be paid~ Motion carried° 'l~e notice of a public hearing was read° ~2roposed ~ministrative Rules and Reguiations~' will be held at 10:00 A~ June I~ at the 0spiral Approach, St~ Paul, Ninnesota~ The notice sent by Ray Lappegaardo 14. 16, ~%e Village Council ~inutes of I,{ay 24, 1~-66 were read~ discussed~ and plac~d on fil~, The minutes oF the Planning Com.~ission meeting of ~ay i7~ ].986 ,~,~ere accepted by the chairman as printed, Discussion was held on Community Goals and Direction, decision was re~che¢~. No Concrete ~anobePg~ ~epresenting the New Hope Jaycees: was p~esent to give a sneak ~,~l. OO~ to New }lope, the P~raily Styled Village," signed by the New Hope Jaycees, }.~'otion b.v Bonnet, secon¢ied b,v Swanson to adjourn ~t Sec, ivan :'~, gene:',al disaussion on the use ~of zoning '~a~}$ was b, eld Village i?lan?~er~ It is to be continued ez-~ ~{u'ly io,~ No{:lon by '$~}hi~ see~onded by Swa;ason~. i-:-o ac~.jox~rn at portion of t"~e pPepe:P, vy Ne will oI ange %ha %c>e:~x'ap';:,y oP b'hs i~c~d t.o the Village CouR.,'~li :for z~ezor.~ng if sh~ would sue ~nutoo 'of the Planning Cca~ission Meeting ~ ~9, ~966 Her ~t~ ~d ~so a ~asibie e~ee of ~ !~g a ~i~ of p~y ~ J~s~ s~tes that ~ c~t of d~op~ the p~ ~u~ ~ p~hibitive~ ~at~ ~ ~s lett~ %~t the costs p~ lot is ~,~ ~ch the ~~ C~i~ ~ ~ ~e~t ~th the cost. ~ C~ss~ C~ s~%~ %~ ~ Jess~ t~t ~e cost of d~el~ ~ ~ttle ~g ~ ~oept~g o~ ~J~ a p~t ~ ~d%h of the w~ ~, to t~ ~ ~g the ~a ~i~$~ for P~k if i~ d~t d~op a ~k~ ~e ~k ~a ~st ~ pi~ ~her ~ get ~ ~a~e al~g ~ ~st by the ~k ~ ~ ob~ the ~a for ~c~s ~ the ~ ~h ~s~osi~8 Yi~e C~c~ ~ a~e t~ ~ as p~sm~ subJec~ ~ b~g the ~~ ~ the V~ C~ t~t N~ ~ ~ not ~co~ ~ the Vi~ Co~c~ that the ~J~ ~_~o~ ~a ~~t~ for ~ s~e f~Y ~id~ce ~ the z~g o~:~oe ( 8~ti~ II ) Sub he~g ~r ~a be c~ to el~ate the g~e, ~hes~ b~nts, ~d ce~ ~as as p~ of the ~ea Moti~ c~i~o ~~i~ ~ he~ ~ ~he ~er ~t o~ ~rk~g m~as O~ce 5~ Dis~ussi~ ~ h~d ~ the ~~ plat ohe~k ~st. ~ti~ by that eepies of the cheek be giv~ to e~h ~s~ that -~shes t~ ~le f~ a ~ h~ ~ a P~~ plat. ~i~m ~1~~ No~e %o C~c~. ~ the fo~s ~er 6~26 y~ ~ ~scussi~ ~ he~ ~ the ~fici~ Z~g ~st~ct ~ ~is ~p ~ be held ~ ~%~ they ~ ~=ussim ~ h~d ~ the ~ Use ~p~ ~e ~m~g the ~p up to O~ssi~ ~ute8 of ~ ~ 1966. ~ti~ Public hear~?, ~: ~ a~;:~.~ber 66~27 for proposed rezoning was openad ~ion by (~gir~ ~:lsfka~ second~ by }!e~ber Swanson~ to r~cou~d to the Village Co~nci~ t~,~ Lhe property concerned be rezone~ from Single Family Residence ~ ~enera~ Business amd that a Special Use Permi~ be granted Minutes of Planning Commission -2- August 2~ 1966 Yes: Plufka, Swanson, Krueger~ Wahl No: Click Motion carried~ Mien. utes of the Village ~un¢il meeting of July 26~ 1966~ were read and discu~sed~ Mr~ Glen jerpseth of 3021 Ensign B3qenue North was introduced ~o the C~mmission members and stated his interest in serving on the Planning Co~ission~ Commission ~aemfmers requested he return to ~he next scheduled ~etlng and submit a rssn~e - giving his reasons for wanting to serve on the Co~mission~ Imt~er of July 26~ i966~ from the New ~ope Jaycees read. by Ghairman Plufka ~o the ~om~ission members~ Invoice ~ 1240, da~ed July 1~ 1966~ received from I~idwest Planning amd Chair~mn P!ufka requested that it be noted that another ~'~ryou~" for the ~aking of the minu~es would be held at ~he Planning C~mmission meeting of August 16~ 1966~ Payment of $10~00 is to be made ~o Mrs,~ ~ Gary Ebert~ 5600 Zealand Avenue North, New Hope, for recording the minutes of subject meeting° There being no 'further business before the Planning Cemmission~ the mee~%ing w~s adjourned ag 10.03 p-m~ Chairm~n Plufk~~' reques%ed %haZ it be no%ed that am~other ~%r~ou%" fo~~ the %skiP~ of the m~z~utes would be held ~t the Pl~nin~ Com~ission meeti~g of ~0 is 'to be m~de %o S~anae }~ Jones~ ~pt-,~ ~ 6.~ .~¥06,~ ...... P~ymer~t oi~ ?!0~.. meeting l~inutes of %he Village CouncJ. i mee%in~r of ~,u{}us% 9~ 1966~ were read snd pla~ed o~ file, Tber being no further business before ~zhe Plan:'~ing Commissione ~ mo%ion w~s made by ~ember ~ ~ '~ "~ '~ ' ' ~ ~e~e~ secoF, ded by ~m{~er i?ahl to adjour~ ~ne mee~in~ ~o'tion was carried~ V%LI~OE OF NEI'~ I{OPE Minutes of Planning Commis.~ton Heating, September 6~ !966o The Pla~n!n~ Cc~missfou meeting was called to order b~ Chairman Plufka at 8~00 Proposals worm presented to the Commission in behalf of l~arvfn H~ Anderson involving ~he Hot,beast come~ o£ County Road i8 aged 36th Avenue Not,ho ~he propo~ala.~ere a~ foll~s: ~ne presentation of the preliminary plat on North~ood Terrace~ 6th Add it io~ ° B. Rezonlng of a parcel of the stated area from limited business to general b%~s iness o C. Reaoni~g o£ a parcel of the stated area from ~ingle family residential to retail busi~!~SSo Discussion was held, bringing to point such factors as the exact co,sty road pla~ which are questionable at this time and ~he possible desire A motion ~as made by Plufka~ seconded by Sueker, to deny the proposals ~n the basis of the aforementioned circumstances° !~t ion carried~ Discussion was opened on t,~o applicants, Merle Johrmon and Glenm Jerpseth~ seeking appointment to the Ptanni~ Commission to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Vernon Faaberg~ A me, ion was made by Bonner~ seconded by Sueker, to recommend to the Village Council that }fer!e Johnson be appointed an~ to place the application of }~. Jerpsath on file for consideration at such tim~e a~!other position ~ight be opene~o Motion carried. The minutes of the Planning C¢~iission nleeti~g of A,ag~t t6, 1966, were read and di~cussed.~ l~otion by Wahl seconded by Click to accept the minntes as read° Merle?. carrie~ o o ~nvoice #t360, dated August 1~ 1966, in the ~moun~ o~ $250000 £rom Midwest Planning and Research Commission for services rendered in July was presented° ~otton by Bonner~ seconded by Wahl, ~o approve payment° Motion carried. The minutes of the Village Council meeting of August 23, 1966, were viewed and discussed at length° Hot!on by Sucker, seconded by Wahl, to request that the Village Council inform the Planning Commission of major proposed road changes, such as the one planned between County Road 18 and 36th Avenue North, prior to council action. This will allow the Commission an opportunity to make recommendations and aid indecisions concernimg adjoin~ng property when applicable. A discussion was held on recent Post articles referrinS to the Planniv~ Commission,s involvement in the proposed bond issue on ~he New Hope Civic Centers I~ was the concensus of the Planning Commission that no commlttment be made at this tiz~e~ A motion was made by Bonner~ seconded by Wahl, to approve the payment of $10,00 to RWberta Johnson for recording the minutes of the meeting on a trial basis, Motion carried~ In the absence of any further Commission business~ a motion was made by Krueger and was seconded by Bonnet to adjourn the meetin~ at 10:15 Motion carried, HODS] NG SHEET Where does the Tvvln Citie..~ Mef-~-'c:: o~he, n Area fat~ i,~ rei~t~on i'o o?he~-- ~tropoii'~(~ ,~e~s ~ the num[~r of ~w how;~s; si~c~¢s? Figures ius'i' relecsed by ?he U~ So Euredu of the Census for t]~e month of Ap-:] ~rdJc ~te t-h~' our ~-e6 renked ]:6th MShest emo~g NEW HOUSING UNITS AUTHOPlZED iN S?ANDA~i-:, b/~E~RO20~-!~A N S?A~}~,ICAL AREAS FOB APRIL~ J9~ TOTAL TOTAL UN., RANK SMSA HOUSING 'j WasMngiron¢ D,, Co 5.¢~ $ 60~,876 ' '.' ' 5~426 72 ~3~ 2 New '¢ork~,. New 5 Anaheim., C~ifo 2~ 289 ~987 7 Ph~e~ph~ P~ 2~ 198 22~ ~59 8 Aflfni'a¢ Ga,, 2¢033 20¢~i 9 S~ Francisco~, Cr~[~f~, l~784 lO Honoluiu¢ Hao i~¢~ 2l~,~5 J l Balti~ore, M~,[r~¢ J ¢563 i8~, ~0 12 Housto~¢ Tex~ 13 SeC'fief W~hi~fon I ¢426 14 Ctevel~d¢ Ohio i¢367 18~,895 15 Fro Mtuderdele, FlorM6 l;,275 16~..0~ 16 MINNEAPOMS-~ ST~ PAUL¢ MINN~ J¢~0 16¢~8 Our area leads otker" ' League" ,metropolitan ~eas such as Boston¢ Cincinnati,, Mraor Dallas, Kansas Cl¢~¢ Pitfs~rg and Sto Louis in the numar of new housing stfs for L~king at MJnnesota¢ acius ae,':~ ~jc~e ih¢ 7~ of all the ~w housing st~ts in the stye were w~thm the Twin C~,~es Melropo~~hile ~0 percent o~ all housi~ st~ts in the metro 6ma occurred ir,, suburben communitieso An analysis of buitdlng permits issued in this ~aa l¢ic~es that slightly more than half of all permits were l~ued ~r structures ~,~tn 5 or more units¢ leo ~¢tmen¢'so However., a breadth of valu¢ion Rgures l¢lcate thC single famli~ homes still accounted for iw~thirds of the total valu~io, for all units st~ed in this ~reao On the n~ional level~, housing starts Ce down 7 percent ~om ~rll¢ 19¢; but in the Twin Ci~ area¢ buiJding pe~;~s i~ued for the ~~w housi~ units ~e~~- cent over l~t ye~ -1- Neml~rs Present': ~mnsen, Plufka, Eraeger, Wahl, Bcamer, $ueke~, Johasen, C~ick and Trucker. ~ew ~ ~ C~aisatea 2udder for 1967. ProfeSsion Planne~ MiScellaneous Total 100.00 / . 3,820.00 $30.00 t~ be paid t~ the Planning. Cce~is~ion Sec~tary semi 3. $10,00 every t,~ ~ ~o f, he Recording Secret~7. D~ion ~as held on the interc~U at 36th Avenue North and 2~th A ~vem~.~ ..~a~h and Oounty Road 18. The plans diseus~ed bY the Plmni~g ~~n were dated Augas~ t 9' 1%6, under ~ F a~ .appr~ed by the .New H..c. si~ Umits Authorimed in St~adard Ee~repeli~a S~stis~ieal A~,' ranked sixteemt~ in t~tal hemsi~g mni~ .and that ?&3% of all ne~ ~ ~s ~ the state ~ within t~e ~ Cities ~etrop~litan ~e~. On ~he ~a$i~al level, h~uSing star~s are do~n 7%~ April, ~eticn By E~.uege~ seconded By ~ t~ re~ to the Vil~e Council that ~h~. Gaw~ Eber~, 2832 ~e~ka Avenue ~ Be the new recc~ I~ Bas ee~e ~ the at~oa of the ~ Ceeed~i~a thr~gh ~o ~ 'that the two ap~rtaents ~e~mea ~6t,~ Aveaue ~-hh and ~ Lake with I/tue~.ins~ of bx"ie..k. ~ ~ It ha~: e~as to the atten~ien, of the Pla~ing-Cm~usaio~ ~.tbro~h ~tr.. ~ t~at ~ ~il~ ~Ch ~ ~d ~ ~ the f~i~ ~ t~ ~ ~ ~e~. R~ ~o ~ ~ ~t~ of ~ 10, 1~, i~ l~mt. ion by' Suekex,, aeooaded by lz, uege~ 'to adjmu,~ aY, 10,*00 o'clock p,m. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 4~ 1966 Meeting called to order by Chairman Plafka at 8:30 pomo Members Presents Pi~fka, Krueger~ Bonner~ wahl~ Sueker~ Johnson~ and Truckero Members Absents Bmk/~lla~ Swanson The planning Commission minutes of September 20~ 1966~ were read and discv~sedo Motion by Member Krueger~ seconded by Member Bonner~ to approve the minutes as read. Motion carriedo Discussion was held on %tom #7 of the minutes of September ZO~ 1966~ pertaining to the finishing of the two apartment build= trigs between 56th Avenue North and Bass Lake ~Oado Member P!ufka read a copy of a letter to Mro Stanley Sopczyk requesting that the construction work on the buildings in question comply with the Council's stipulations stated in %he Co,nell minutes of February 8~ 1966o it was brought to the attention of the Commission by Member ~ahl that upon personal inspection he could report that the finishing construction was not as the plans called for and as the Comncit called for° The Commission recommended that a copy of the letter to Mr~ Sopczy~ be sent %o the Building Inspector Discussion was held on Item#8 of the September ZOth mina%es in reference to the building moved in on the ~?00 block on Winnetka AVen~eo Council minutes of May 10s 1966~ and April Z6~ 1966~ were reviewed and each stated that the Council reqmired that the front of the building to be ~ithe~ 'brick or stoneo ~!ember Swanson D~d reported that the b~ilding had brick for a height of approximately 3 feet onlyo The Commission recommends that the matter be referred to the B~ilding Inspector to lnsur~ the owner comply to the regulations° PLANNING COMMISSION //INUTES ~Z~ October 4~ 1966 Member Trucker requested that the p2annin~ Oommtsslon be advised of the action talcen by the Building Inspector to resolve the problems (~e~ items ~ and ~3)~ The Council Minutes of September Z7, 1966, were read and d i~cussedo 5o Discussion of the Burning Laws° There being no f,~rther business before the Commtseion~ the meeting was adjourned at 9345 pom~ PLANNING CO~tISSION MINUTES October 18~ 1966 New Hope Planning Commission Minutes of meeting held October 184 1966~ Members Present~ Members Absent~ Bonnet4 Click4 Plvm-t~a. Suelier. and a'ahlo Bullklla4 Johnson. Krueger, Swanson. and Trucker° Village zoning maps were distributed by the Village Planner~ Mro Dale Polloc~ and discussion was held by the Planning Commission members~ Chairman Plufka moved that the Commission recommend that consideration be given to rezone the parcel on the southeast corner of 6Z~nd Avenue North and County Road 18 from Retail Business to Single Family Residence because of dramatic changes in the accessibility to property by ma~or transportation° ~lotion seconded by Member ;;ahlo Discussion .~f motion° Members for; Bonner~ Plmfka~ Sueker~ and ~ahlo Members agalnst~ ClicX Motion carried° Invoice #1270 from Midwest Planning and Research~ Inco received for services rendered during the month of August° Motion by Member Sucker, seconded by Member Bonner~ to pay the billo Motion carried° The Planning Commission minutes of October 44 1966~ were read and discussed~ ~lotion made and seconded to approve the minutes as read~ Motion carried° 4.> Council minutes of October 11~ 1966~ were reviewed and discussed° The County Highway D~partment plans for County Road 18 were reviewed and discussed~ PLANNING COM~ISSiON MINUTES Ootober 15, 1966 //aterial on air poilu%ion was distriba~ed by M~o Dale Poliock and discussed by %he Commission mombers~ There being no further business before the Commiseion~ a motion wt~s made by Member Sueker~ seconded by Member Bonner~ %o adjourn° Motion carrie~ NEW HOPE PLANNING OO~ISSION New Hope Planning Commission Minutes November l~ 1966 Meeting of the New Hope Planning Gommission was called to order by Chairman Plufka at 8 p,m. Met~bera 'Present Members Absenta Bonnet, Cliok~Plufka~ ewanson~ Johnson~ Truoker~ and Wahlo Bukilla~ Krueger0 and Sueker° Mr. Richard Htpp of Hlpp Construction Company requested rezonin~ of iota 16~17~18~19~ bloc~ 1 in the Hopewood Hill addition from Single Fatally Residence to Uultiple Family Residence for the purpose of oormtruoting double bmlgalowe on lots 16~ 170 18~ and building a dentist's office on lot 19o Mr. Fred go Hayea~ Jr° of 3996 Wisconsin Avenue North0 &ottng as spokesman~ and }ir. Richard Little cg 3981 giaconsin Avenue North~ presented ~ p~tition, with approximately 2~5 eignatures~ opposing the rezoning for the following reasone~ ~o 4. 5o 6~ Increased traffic. Residential property values will decrease. Homes were parchaaed contingent on area being kept as single family residence. Rental property is not as well tended aa single family residence due to lack of interest. Possibility of more children, overcrowded schools without the interest in Village taxes and lmprovem~atSo If building conform to minimum building codes they will not be comparable to existing single family resldenoeso Proper Village planning ehoald consider faulty spot re-zoning~ There being no one present to represent Hlpp Construction Company, comments were called for from those present by the ~ommlesion° MI'o John Hanson, 8001- 40th Avenue North, and Mr. Donald Newall~ 3948 Utah Avenue North, presented their ob~ections to the rezoning proposal which were related to the 8 points brought forth in the petition. A question was .raised -2- November I~ 1966 as to whether there would be any restriction on the type of home built if the rezoning was granted. The Commission replied in the negative° Member Kraeger arrtved at $:20 pomo Mro Richard Htpp, now present, presented his case for his request for reznningo Member Bonnet asked Mr. HIpp if it wo~ld not be advantageous tO Mro Hlpp tO wait a couple of years before t~king final steps to .dispose of the property in question° Mr. Frank Hayes also asked if any steps had been taken by Hipp Construction to mal~e the property more .saleable than as at present. After ~iscussion, the Chair called for a motion on the question° Member Bonnet moved that the Planning Co.mission recommend to the Village Council that the request for rezoning from Single Family Residence to Multiple Family Residence be denied due to the fact that it would conatitttte spot zoning° Motion seconded by Member Johnson° There beingno discmssion on the motion, a vote was called for° Motion carried° Mr~..'RiChard Hlpp requested rezoning of lot 1, block lot ~0, block ~; let 1~ bloc~ ~ of Hlpp Hopewo~ Hills. 2nd Addition located at A~ Street ~d ~si~ Avenue Mor~h~ from St~e F~ly Residence to M~t~ple F~ily Residence for oo~t~uotion of double b~ows. It:"was again pointed oat by the Co~18sion t~t ~8 wo~d coat,tats spot zoning. Co~nts of the Village profesa~:o~l pl~r were read by ~air~ Th~ere"b.einS no further discussion, the C~lr ~lled for a motion r~"~dLng the request for rezoni~o Me,bed"Er'asSet ~ved that ~he Pla~ing Co~lssion reco~e~. .. to the. VLllage Co,oX1 t~t the req~st for rezon~ fro~ singles .Family Residen~ to M~tiple Fa~ly Residence, as requested by ~. Hlpp~ be denied dee to the fast t~t constltate spot zonl~ Motion seconded by Member #66-30 Mr° ~arvin Ho Anderson requested rezoning part of Outlot 1~ Northwood Terrace - ~rd Addition, located at 36th Avenue between' November l~ 1966 Planuing Commission Minutes Highway 18 and Jordan Avenue North from Limited Business and Single Family Residence to General Business° Mr. Hedland, engineer, and Mr. Mason, planner, of Marvin H. Anderson Construction were alee present. Mr. Anderson stated that the property in question was originally set aside for future co~merolal use (shopping oenter)~ and since conditions have changed plane are being made for a neighborhood convenience center° Discussion by Mr. Anderson and the Planning Commission° Chairman Plufka moved that the Planning Commisslo~re_~t~m~nd~ to the Village Council that the preliminary platt~f Northwood Terrace - 6th Addition be approved and tho property requested be rezoned from Limited Business to RStatl Business and that a special permit be granted for a service station sub,eot to the Planning Commission and Village Council revtewinga detailed site and elevation plan prior to the granting of a building permtto Motion seconded by Member Bonnero Opposed; For: Krusger Bonuer~ Click0 Pl~tfka, Swanson0 Johnson~ Truoker~ and ~aht o Motion carried° ° ' Application by Mi~meapolie Federal Savings and Loan Association for rezoning of: Ao Lots 1 thru 10~ block 6~ Howland~s It~lghts~ located at ~gth to 30th Avenue Nor. th~ Itill.aboro Avenue to Highway 18 · Lots 1 thru 17~ block 1~ West Winnetka Park - 3rd Addltio~ located a't Independence Avenue North 30%h to 32nd Avenue item Single Family Residence to Multiple Family Residence. Mro Eo Oo Eltaeon of Minneapolis Federal Savings and Loan presented plans for the proposed construction of multiple dwellings on the property in question. After discussion by representatives of Minneapolis Federal a~d members of the Commission ~ Chairman Pluf~a called for a motion on the rezoning requested before the Commission° Chairman Plufka moved that the Commission recommend to %he Village Co.ali that It gr~% the rezoni~ from Single F~mlly Residence to ~ultiple Family Residence for ParCel A b~t nos fo~ Parcel B~ sub~ec~ %o complete site plans being p~sented before a building permit is gran%edo ~otion seconded by Member Wahl ~ For~ Abmtaln~ Bonner~ Joh~son~ Plufka~ Swanson~ Tr~lcker Due to the necessity of ~smbsr Cllo~ hawing %o tsars befo~ the vote was called fo~ it was requested that 'the records show that he was opposed to the rezoning of the property in question ~ both Parcel A and Parcel Bo The Commission minates of October 18 were read and dimoussed~, ~otion by member Krueger~ seconded by ~ember Wahl~ to approve the minutes as reado ~otion carried~ Letter of Agreement from the Ntdwe$% Planning and Research~ read by Chairman ?lufka~ ~otion by Nember ~ahl %o reoomm~ acceptance of %he agreemen~ subject %o adding a cla~e ~ega~ding termination of contract in 30 days~ ~otion se~onded and carrted~ invoice #i461 received from Midwest Planning and Resea~ch~ inco for ssrvides rendered dmring the month of September~ Notion ~ade and seconded to pay invoice. ~ot!on carried° ~amo from Betty Peddler submitting the name of Nr~ Ray Rauch for Planning Commission membe~ship was received° Since the Commission has l0 members at presen%~ the ~emo will by put on file and re?tewed if any opening on the Commission should occ~tro The Park Board minutes were read The Vitlaie Co<ell minutes of October llo 1966~ and October ~5,.~ 1966~ were read and diec~sed~ There being no further b~$1ness~ a motion was made and seconded adjo~n~ ~otion carried° Meeting adjourned a% 11~55 pome l~an Kr~egsr~ ~ecratary NEW HOPE PLANNING COMMISSION New Hope Planning Commission November 15~ 1966 Meeting of the New Hope Planning Commission was called %o order by Chairman Plufka at 8 p~mo Members Present Members Absent Bonner~ Krueger~ Plufka~ Swansom~ Trucker~ and Wahlo Bukklla~ Click~ Johnson, and Sueker~ The Planning Commission minutes for November 1~ 1966~ were read' and dlscussed~ Motion by Member Pl ufka~ seconded by Member ~ahl~ to approve the minutes as read° Motion carried° The budget was discussed by the members of the Commlssion~ It was mowed and seconded that the salary of the elected Secretary of the Commission be terminated beginning January 1~ 1B67~ ~otion carried~ It was requested that the name and address of the recording secretary be added to the mailing list in order to receive a copy of the printed minutes of the Planning Commlssion~ NAME; Ho Gary Ebsrt Winnetka Avenme North Discussion by members of the Commission and the Village Planner on the building and placement of multiple dwellings~ Discussion by members of the Commission and the Village Planner of his converse%Ion with Mrs° Helen ~elch regarding %he possible commercial development of the front portion of the Ed Erickson property located east of the Northwest Baptist Church located at 8615 Bass Lake Road~ Chairman-Plufka made the following motlon~ which was seconded by member Bonne~ ~HEREAS:~, Section 462o356~ Subdivision 2~, Chapter 670~ Laws of 1965~ State Planning Law requires that all public capital improvements be reviewed by the local planning commission and~ ~'HEREAS~ the Robinsdale #Be! School District has a continuing need for substantial capital improvements~ and Planning Commission Minutes ~Z~ November 15~ 1965 WHEBEAS~ the construction of schools represents an important segment of the community's overall development plan~ and THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT~ the New Hope Planning Commission does hereby notify the Robbinsdale #201 School District that all future plans for public capital improvements within the boundaries of the Village of New Hope should be submitted for Planning Commission review, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT~ the aforementioned review will be made promptly at a regular meeting so that no undue delay shall accrue to the School District~ and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT~ in the review the following criteria shall be considered for each new proposed school facility: 1o Effect on the Vlllage~s Master Development Plan Effect of facility on existing and future development in the specific area Site access to public utilities 4o Vehicular access to the site Pedestrian access to the site Potential area requirements of the proposed facility 70 Park and Recreation needs of the neighborhood area Building location on the site° After discussion the motion was carried, It was requested that a copy of the motion be sent to the Village Council and to the School Board~ * ~ see page 4 for point #7° 8~ Letter of November 10~ 1986~ from the New Hope Village Attorne~ Mro ~o Jo Corrlck~ to Mro and Mrs° Richard Do Wachtler~ Mro and Mrs° Stephen Fo ~achtler~ and Mro and Mrs° Donald BabinsXi~ re~ garding dlvlsion of property on county and Village records for tax purposes was read to the Commission by Chairman Plufkao 0halrman PlufXa requested that it be pointed out that an apartment building constructed in the vicinity of Bass Lake Road & 56th was of stucco and not brick as required by the building ordinance° It had been brought to the attention ':~f the Village Council~ and it was the Commission~s recommendation that the matter be turned over to the Building Inspector and that his findings be reported to the Commission (Planning Commission minutes of 9-~O-$6)o As of this date no report has been received from the Building Inspe ctoro Plar~lng Commission Minutes ~5~ November 15~ 1966 i0o 11o A similar situation exists regarding a double bungalow which was moved to 57th & winnetka Avenue North for which the Commission required that the front be either of bricX or s~oneo Since the requirement had not been complied with~ the Commission again reoommen~e~ to ~e VXllage Co~tl ~ ~he ma~er be ~arned o~er to the Building Inspeo~ur and ~ha~ he report his findings ~o the Oommissiono To d~e, no report has been ceoeived~ Member Swanson reported ~ha~ ~he owner of ~he doable b~galo~ has used siding ~d not brioA or stone~ ~/ember Johnson pointed ou~ a ?lolatlon of the zoning ordananoe a% 46th & Winnetka Avenue North~ reporting that ~he'owner of ~he house located on %he northeast corner was opera%lng at...business out of his garageo Member Johnson also pointed o~% the existence of a gas p~p m~ the same loca~ion~ adding tha~ he was not sure if the p~p wac being operatedo ~scussion by members of the Commi~slon of the posslbtl~ty of a v~iance of the building ordanance regarding requirement of brick There being no farther business before the Commissionv a motion by Member Xr~eger~ seconded by Member Bonner~ that the meeting be ad~o~nedo Mo~i~ carr~.do Meeting adjourned at 11~30 Respectally submitted~ ivan Kraeger~ Secretary Jo Ac Ebert~ Recording Secretary Planning Com~sion MfLn~tes November 15~ 1966 Johnson arrived at 8:50 pomo ~ Harvey Feldman and members of the Park Board appeared before the Commission and presented the proposed comprehensive park plan~ along with a ~ showing the location of property purchased by the Vii~age %o be developed as park areas~ and locatio~ of property so developedo At present the Village has abo~t 110 acres of la~ plus 110 acres of school la~ //to Feldman gave a breakdown of the development of a few major area8 o The problem of maintenance of the parks~ both at present and after future development~ was discussed along with possible means to obtain the f~nds necessary for further development° The Commission recommended that the Park Board present their plans ~o the Village Council. and also let the people of the Village know of their plans° NEW HOPE PLANNING COMMISSION New Hope Planning Commission Minutes December 6~ 1966 Meeting o£ the New Hope Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman PlufRa at 8 p~m~, ~embers Present~ ~em~ers Absent~ Bonner~ Ci!ck~ johnson~ PlufEa~ $ueker~ Swanson~ and ~ahl~ Case # 68~4 Mr~ Hartzel E~ Richards appeared before the.Commission with his request for the rezoning of the following property from Retail Business to General Business~ That part of Lot ~S~ Audito~s Subdivision No.~ ~$6~, corresponding with the Wes% 16O feet (10 rods) of the East 181~ feet (l! rods) of the North quarter of the Southeast quarter of ~he Southwest quarter of Section 8~ Township 118 North~ Range 21 ~Tea~o except the Southerly 151o9~ feet %here.of~ all in Hennepin County~ ~Innesota~ (V~cinity SW corner of Bass Lake Road and Louisiana A~enue) The purpose of rezoning is for the construction of a gas station~ Chairman Ptufka pointed out that a service s~tion could be established under a special mss permit~ The issue of the dedication of property fo~ road construction was discussed~ ~r~ Richards ~tated that he would be ~llling dedicate E7 feet on the east edge of the property in qusstion~ The Commission pointed out that e?en if E? feet were given~ the present site plan would not meet the setback Mro and Mtso Le~gh E~ Broberg of 7009 Bass Lake Road~ property owners residing on the east side of the property in que~ticn~ were present~ ~r,~ Broberg stated %hat they wer~ present only to discuss how the rezoning might directly effect them° ~otion by Chairman Ptufka~ seconded by ~ember Bonner~ that the Commission recommend to the Village Council that rezoning of the property in question be granted subject to the dedication of the December 6~ 1966 easterly 27 feet of said property~ and subject to %he reviewing by the Commission of a complete site plan prior %o the g~anting of a building permit~ The Commission does not~ at this timer approve of any variances of the Village ordinances~ Motion ~arr 1 ed ~ Discussion and review with a representative of Minneapolis Savings and Loan and Mrs., Johnson of Harry So Johnson Construction Company of the proposed Winnetka Cha%ea~ to be constructed at County Road 18 and ~gth Avenue North° o The Park Board minutes of November 264 1968~ were read and discassed~ Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of November 15~ !966~ were read and discuseedo ~otion made and seconded to approve the minutes as read~ Motion carried~ Village Co~ncii minutes of November 22~ 1966~ were read and discussed~ It ~as requested that a letter from the Commission be sent to the Council to request that the matter of completion of the double bungalow located in t~e 5700 block on %%~innetka Avenue North be placed on the agenda for the Council meeting of December 15~ Invoice #1522 from Midwest Planning and Research~ Inc~ in the amount of $250 for services rendered for the month of October~ 1986~ Feceivedo Motion carried to approve payment of invoice~ Invoice date~ December 1~ 1966~ from Midwest Planning and Research~ Inc~ for the amount of $5~7~10 received~ There being no description for charges~ other than ~balance~ the Commission assumes the fee includes services for Octobero The Commission approves payment of the invoice° 8.. Discussion of the expenditures through October~ 1966~ It was pointed out by Member ~iahl that Robbinsdale Independent School District #281 is contemplating ~he construction of a two~ sto~y elementary school building at OSth and ~.~'innetka~, The Commission requested %hat a letter be sen~ to the school district to call ~heir attention to ~e resolution passed by the Commission which required a review of any plans for p~blio ~pital improvement~ ~lthin the boundaries of the Village of New Hope~ There being no further business before the Commission~ motion by Member Swanson~ seconded by Member Click, to adjourn the meeting. Eotion carrled~ MesSing adjomrned at 9:45 pom~ Respa ctally submitted~ ivan Kr~eg~r~ Secretary J~, A,~ Eber~ Recording PLANNING CO~MIS~ION ~INUTES December SO. 1965 The Planning Commission meeting of December 20~ 1966~ was called to order at 8 pom~. by Chairman PlafXao Members Present: Bonne~ Johnson~ Krueger~ P!ufka~ Sueker~ Swanson, Wahl~ and Trucker~ ~/embers Absent: Bukki!a and Click° Dro Hood, Superintendent of Robbinsdale Independent School District, #ESl~ and the architect~ presented building and site plains for the proposed two-story elementary school building to be built at 55th and Winnetka Avenue North° Dfc Hood pointed ()ut that there were only three building projects remaining for fmtm.'e construction in New Hope~ After discussion and review~ the Commission had no major ob~ections to the proposed plans~. I~ was concluded that the construction of the two-story elementar~ building would not hinder the commer~c£al d~vetopment of the property located north of the building site° Discussion of the sample ~,all presented to the Village Council at the meeting of December' 1~ 19~ relati'~e to the construction of a proposed 120-unit apartment at ~6th and ~lnnetka Avenue No~tho Motion by Member ;~ueker, seconded by Member Krueger~ to ~ecommend to the Village Council that it not approve the use of the substitute wall fo~' brick as presented to the Council° Motion carried° Discmssion as to what possible procedures can be taken in respect to the Commission receivin~ reports f~om the Village Building Inspector' on whether or not construction is meeting the new building ordinanceso ° Discussion with Mrs° Helen Welch on possible development of property and request for varlan~s for proposed development° The Commission suggested that a preli.~£nary site plan be made and guest be submitted and brought before the Oommlssion~ th~s %o be done before any declsl~,~ or recommendations will be madd by the Commission° · Planning Commission Minutes ~- December Z0~ 1966 Discussion by Commission and Air~ Dale Po!lock, Village Planner~ of building trends° The Planning Commission minutes of December 6~ 1966, were read and discussed° Motion by Member Johnson~ seconded by Member Swanson~ to approve the minutes as read~ Motion carried. The Village Council minutes of December 13~ 1966, were read and discussed~ I% ~as pointed out to the members of the Commission %ha% %he terms of S members were due %o expire° The followln~ are %o be considered to fill the expiring terms~ a~ Mr, R, Pl ufka b o ~/r o ~ahl Co. Air o Mo Ohman d~ Mr, Reush e o Air o D o Ostland f, Atr~ Go Jerpseth The first order of business at the Commission meeting of January 1967~ will be the selection by nomination and election of %he ~ individuals to fill the expirin~ %erms~ The second order of business will be the nomination and election of officers of ~he Commission° There being no further business before the Commission, motion by Member Krue~er~ seconded by Member Johnson~ that the meeting be adjourned, Aiotion carried, Aieeting adjourned at 9~45 pomo Hespectf ul ly submi tted ~ Ivan Krueger~ Secretary J~ Ebert~ Recording Secretary