|
<br /> -----..-
<br /> Vlllag8 Ccuncll Minutes -2- Oct. .30, 1972
<br /> ,
<br /> , ,
<br /> Councll~~n Henderson s~ld he thought the val~atlons sho~ld be Increased
<br /> by $10,000 each.
<br /> Mr. Druck stetsdthat Dreyfus used sstlmetes of valuation from Metro
<br /> Council records, but felt the valuation list to be Irrelavant to the
<br /> subject.
<br /> Councilman Hetrick e~pressed concern regarding the two parcels of land
<br /> ~Ithin the tract not Included I~ the development plans. He questlooed
<br /> how end wh~n e P.U.O. project fits together" He stated that eventual
<br /> dellelopment of the hID "rails could slgl'll f1cllntly chenge tho overall
<br /> plen. Mr. Nordby said the original plan epp! Icatlon Included the anti re
<br /> parc11I1, but ~18S rflclucod to the tC\'Il'IhOllSe eree only ct the request of
<br /> the Pla~nlng Cammi_sion.
<br /> . CounClliilan Hollonhorst exp !alned that the ill>.ove statement W85 ettrlbuted
<br /> to Planning CommlsslonChlllc-men L. McGough 'i. but Mr. McGough said he hOlo
<br /> be-€- Y\ ml.Sllnderstood andh~d.not ma e such stefome,nt.
<br /> litre. Ala::>! Chvestulk. V.li ISge !"0Sldllnt, IlIskej:\f9r ~oe:kground Information
<br /> 0l1fheOrsyfu3 proposaL Mayor CrGp01'1U I IstGdth.e pest two pub lie: hear-
<br /> ! 09 dates on thiS I!i~tt$r, uti I ch Mr. Chv<<lstU,II,sl!i,rd;; he had not ettended.
<br /> Afty..CQurtney brr~fIVQ)(plalned where the';.llriOp6~.d project Is located
<br /> 111'ldwhat Is InvolvQd. .'3.;
<br /> ..".
<br /> "'""'1. Druck $Sid the'\" Hp!;:;ns for th~ rest o.f th$ site will be of bene-
<br /> fit to:;. tlla Vi Iloge In It$ study of tho proJoct,DreyfUs will submit th8m.
<br /> ,::"
<br /> CO'~.!1!:llliillln Holl9ni'\p'-st5''hlted that he is oPPolledto the project et tills
<br /> tlii1I!l:.r!e uld tiild'rh!!> dovelopment \1ouldset II .trend for future devel-
<br /> op~~!'lnts) that it WI;iS n4'~~ <1l.1aluty pj'oject:~&nd lIould be unflllrto the
<br /> neighbors In that 9.1"0:1 T9 p<llrmlt 11'. He a4'dad th.et oe feels It Is not
<br /> fe!.-tothe adjoining "'1"01:1 of thll VI 0 lags Ii"t to require a project of 1::,
<br /> bettaf'(j8velopmal'lt. He <.dded that ths p,-oiio!:ed project would need to ,:'<
<br /> "dl"
<br /> be'l:julti3 drastlcel!v ch{iilged to bring It up to an acceptable stenderd ,(,
<br /> of. qlle{ lty for "thai' gen.era I area. II
<br /> '.j
<br /> CO(~II,Gihilll!l Henderson !d'lltec! ho tlollnd hav/,) f.o.vote against the project
<br /> If II decl$lon were; mall" et 't-hls tlrn~, becalis8 he:does not feel the
<br /> proJact.satlsf!od "'ha S'cq 13 I ramE/nts dehlled..b,y tho YII lege Planning,;
<br /> Commissum. liowa'lel" , be added he \1ould be..~H ling to listen fIIrthe,. I',
<br /> tqany z:>ddltloflal ~l1'OiU.,t1tllt!OI1$ end tills mi'ghtnpt be his final decision..
<br /> Atty. Oruck sh'fed, he f~le~s the to\'inh<oYses'd!,!'I616.IHl1snt is appropriate
<br /> "1'01'" "l'hl$ particular IIreo. Councilman Ho8lGr.horst stated that ho doesn't
<br /> fUGl tho !"Iannlng COlllmu$$loll has aver takon the position thilt the area
<br /> is not seth fac'h',i"'1forfoloillllouses.
<br /> AUy. Druc" mentioned qUllHt'l 0'1 construction of .the project, and
<br /> Stil7Qd ti1!!l'( the Dreyfus projects located I n Bloomington and Woodbury
<br /> gellarally equate ~dththe qUl'll ity of constrllctlon for the propolled
<br /> ArdiO;n Hills project.
<br /> CoullcllmaD'l Hol ienlwl"st s";'uhd thflt he and O"rllGr person visited
<br /> tho Bloomington project" and thet 'ihey \'tare not impressed with the
<br /> qUl!lltyof consti"lll:t lon, although Mr, HOllonhond stated he does not
<br /> . feel th"t he Is 8 bill R(lIng GltpGE"t.
<br /> Mayo,' Crepeau unfo,'f,lad th<!l Coullel' that CO(Jnci I action can be delayed
<br /> I f more "rime is needed to study the rnllterl&l. flrr. Nordby again requested
<br /> thO!l Coune I I to taka action tonight I f at all possibla.
<br /> . Motion l<Hl3 mado by HoHellhon.t, saco.ldod by Olman, that the Special Use
<br /> Per'mit in the Dnlyfl!S Project, be denied, beclluse of the reasons ststed
<br /> In the Village Planning CommissIon mtnutes, dated Jllne 20, 1972, end
<br /> Octoba I" :3, 1972, and, bec8use the Council does not fael that setting
<br /> II ~rBC3dcnt by approving thi~ ,rOJect ~s I n the best ! nte rests of the
<br /> VI,i~ge; motion carrlcd unanimously.
<br /> Case No. 70-30, Bussa~cl Addition
<br /> ..--...--. ....-. ... ~........._... .. .-
<br /> Atty. Courtney pre$O~ted and r$Vi0~~d 8 wr!tton report, dated Oct. 30,
<br /> 1972, regarding a request from Mr. Joe Suszard that the final plat for
<br /> - - ~
<br /> ~
<br />
|