pm_600601 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

~' .. h - !"'r. 'f3ell corrected the record by correctly stating the ovant.,f.~ leadir.g up t.o tho action of the plannillf{ commission on ~'1a.roh 2, 1960. 'lYhe proposed Bp8cia.l use permi.t 'MOUld be applicable village-wide. ~~. T)ahlf(r8n stated his roasons for proposing this Special use -permit priOl" to the time that Mr. Thorsen formally requils1.ied twtion.. Jioreover, the zoning ordinanoe states that a revision of the ZOl'1:l.nr~ ordimmca lnay be initiated by any property owner and !.fr.. SlA1dk VElS within hts ri~hi~s so to do. Dahlgran pointed out that this is a new device ano. not available last year "Then we co.mpleted our ordinance but in zoning ordinances that!rl.s firm is currently working 01\ and on ordinar1ces fuat he has written for St. Louis Park, Minneapolis, &ndota Heights 2.nd Falcon HetghtfJ (-\ this special use has been provided. John Rausch, 1414 Shryet", spoke for atoning ordinance that rell1ro.ned fixed and static. Hrs. Russell Sharp, address not p,1ven 'lpon request, stated tha,t "'Lhe entire loague of women voters were againat it". "She knoua, she 1s a memhar.u Lee , 2001 N. Asbury "He're wt iJm.}resaed by a f01~r.m the leader arg11ll!emt. v~ was it necessar,y in other communitica?rt Dahlgre~ point~d out ths reasono. IJ(embrez asked whether to handle a situat'lon like this they would pt'efel' a rezoning or e. special use pennit. Steneroden prefe.r1"er', rezo'1ing; Jil' '!hompson, 2000 Asbury preferred the special use pennit.. M1.1an Olson, 2000 Asbury, challenged tl/3.t Dah1gren was in Sle.wik' B back pocket. Let's torget about this until we need it. . lToward Johnson, 19S6 A1'Ona, hoped that. the Planning Cor/!ll1issh'n would not be exasperated With the ~ople and ind1cate4 that he could seae where a apeci..l use narmit. could bo used. \41th re<<ard to the at't0rne7' s letter he said, if' we follow the attorney's opinion good; it not let's get a new attorney. Gordon E1IIqu1st, 1986 A s'bury said tbt! speclal use parmi t was Mare applicable to older 01\1_ and that he would be for the upec1al U8e permit if it appli\d to existing at.ructuros onl7. i1ab1greo aued, it it is good for old buildings, wIv 18l1f t :', t. good for new? No anav.., but Rauch began talk1ng abont KralftUI'S park1.ng problem. !)L,'11gren cited the need tar a park in this area and that the park could be incorporated in"li(, a permit. J. TboIap8OD a:rped against placement ot a park in this area.. RIlph H1nb8ch, 1371 Ryan asked, "Why not table this for a yem."n. O:I.lle8 moved. SillJenl1Sl1 seconded that t.he letter trom the v1llo.f~a attornl'" was read and that the position of the planning corr,m1ssion remaino unchanged. Apparemly the village att.ora.el7 does not draw the same d1sti:nct1on on this type or Rc'~ion which ~ 3, in effect, that the special use perJD1t tor parldng in R..1 zone is a type I)f' razorlinB:g It chsny,es the cbaractC' of the neighborhoodJ theretore, it shou1d 00 l".ardlod li1r.e a rt.\:oning. Motion can-ied unan1mously. 10. PARK PIA ~ Ot1les reported that a letter had been vritten to the HeCl"'el.tS>l1 Bc>a1"d and that '~he 'Soard requested a meeti.ngwitb the Planning Col'I'iillismn at 6:30 p.)m. on J\1l1lI 1119~Oo The meeting 1fas announced. 11. mE STATION Gin.s reported that letters had been excbanF.ed vi th the Mim'lewte. state Hig~' DEpartment.. 4pParently' at this time it is not planned to terminate FLrl,rviml Ave. at Highway ;6. In view of 'Put recOWlllendation8~ Membrez 11'JOVec1 and Graul seconded that tho P'lanrrl.r.~ Collll1ss1on recolll'l'lGnd that about ten acres of land be acquired .'..'or a fire Stati01'1 an.'. associated public buildings at FId.rv1ew Ave. and County Road I/B". !1otion carried UlW\i1'llous1yo