CC_Minutes_1949_0118 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

~~^) .. ~. . . 45 VILLAGE COUNCIL OF ROSEVILLE Meeting,Tuesd~,Januar,y l8th,1949 at 2 P.M. ------------------------------------------------- The Village Council met on the above date in regular session with the following members present:Mueller,Membrez,Pothen,Hammersten,Carlson. Ira Karon,attorney and Frank Leinen,treasurer were also present. Mueller presided. The Clerk read the minutes of the previous meetings and on motion by Hammersten, seconded by Mueller,they were approved as read.Roll Call:Ayes-('),Nays-(O). The Den E.Lane rezoning matter for which a public hearing was held on January 4th and extended to this meeting came up for discussion. Mr.Den E.Lane,realtor and 1Ir.C1aude Allen his attorney, stressed the fact that in most communities, business developements take place in the outskirts of Cities mostly due to the serious parking problems.IIr.Lane stated that he planned to have a nice center which will be a credit to the Village.He said he was hoping to start as soon as possible. Membrez moved,seconded by Mueller to zone the property described in minutes of meeting of January 4th from Farm-residence District to Business District. Roll call:Ayes-('),N~B-(O). The application of Mr.Gottfried for the rezoning the following described property from a farm-residence district to a business district was read by the clerk: "All that part of the South 449., feet of the SW! of the swi 'Iof sect.15,TOwn 29N,Range 23.,lying westerly of the property . "owned by Ramsey County for drainage purpOBes excepting therefrom "the Right-Of-Way of Larpenteur Ave and Hamline Ave and also "excepting therefrom the area presently zoned as business. {Mr.Joe D~,17l7 No.Hamline spokesman for the group opposing ,-tl}~ ...rezoning submitted a petition of 126 peoples indicating that they are opposed tðrt.Žióning requested ~ by Mr.Gottfried. He also submitted a copy of a letter mailed to the Town of Rose .I by the Ramsey County Planning Commission recommending not to rezone this property / when it was first applied for, in 1947 by Mr.Gottfried. Fred.A.Kueppers,attorney for Mr. Gottfried stated that the corner 1,0 X 150 feet now zoned BusineBs waB not large enough to develop for businesB.He felt that this corner having been zoned originally was adaptable for that purpose and that this application Bhould not be considered as a new request but just addi tional space BO that a nice buBiness developement could be started. He did not think that a nice building for business would depreciate the residential properties. Dr- T.H.Hoivik stressed the traffic hazards,gave statistics on accidents in Ramsey County. He 'Was of the opinion that if the property is zoned business it wiU add to the traffic hazards. Mr. Joe ~ speaking for the group strongly opposed the rez6ning,he cited depreciation of homes on Hamline,accidents,etc.if the property is zoned. Mr.Rustad,1727 No.Hamline stated that A.D.Rehnberg,realtor,contractor Gilbert H~~at this property is not adaptable for business. To~ Schmidt also strongly opposed the rezoning.He stated that Hamline Ave èuld be kept as a residential avenue from Como Park all the 'Wq north to the lake. Ed Willmus favoring the rezoning said that the mail boxes on Hamline A.ve should be moved back so that the street could be widened.In doing so, the accidents if a1V could be reduced. Joseph Jlaun,attorney for the opposition also spoke pointing out many disadvantages if property is rezoned. .._.._ ..____~.__~~____.w__..._~_. . ._.~_..__.~-_._.._.__.._.. . c,~