Laserfiche WebLink
-~? 1 <br />Attorney come up with an astounding figure. He then introduced Mr. Ray <br />Wallace yfi. Faricy, of St Paul, as their appraisal expert, with a summary <br />(cont'd) of his qualifications. <br />Ray W. Faricy, Mr. Faricy said we should think of the proposed rezoning from <br />Appraiser an appraisal standpoint - that it might be considered a nuisance, <br />a change in rights you have as an ~ana~i~idual. He said when <br />you buy a piece of property you buy rights. If the petition is <br />successful, he said, the result would be to increase traffic in <br />the area with a bad effect on homes. He thought it would <br />take traffic off commercial streets and transfer it to a <br />residential area. Mr. Faricy said that as an appraiser he <br />thinks resulting damage to be suffered in the residential <br />area would be 15 per cent. <br />Shavor questions In answer to Trustee Shavor's question if Mr. Faricy was <br />Faricy opposed to rezoning of Tract 1 or 2, 1Vh'. Faricy said he was <br />opposed to both. Asked if he would recommend developing the <br />area for something or leaving it as iS, or if he felt any portion <br />of it is suitable for homes; t~Ir, Faricy said he did not. think <br />the area was suitable for single family residences. <br />Attorney said the issue is not what can be done with the area, but what <br />Wallace is going to happen to homes if the rezoning change is made,; and <br /> that he would like to have the council hear some people who <br /> received promises when they bought their homes. He then called <br /> on Mr. E. C. Day. <br />Mr. E. C. Day, Mr. Day said he purchased his home in 1948 and was promised at <br />.1506 W. California that time there would be no commercial addition in the area, <br /> but that subsequently there were several attempts to rezone <br /> the property under discussion. Said the Polder Company booster <br /> station was put in and the area rezoned for it without residents <br /> in the area being informed in advance about it. Mr. Day thot <br /> the proposed rezoning would result in-additional traffic to the <br /> detriment of surrounding homes. <br />Glen Wallace, Glen V4'allaee, member of the Minneapolis council for 20 years <br />Mpls. Councilman and of that City's Planning Board, was introduced. Mr. Wallace <br /> said he was in sympathy with the problem being considered and <br /> that he had been on the public side of these matters for many <br /> years as a planning commission representative; that out of his <br /> experience he hoped he could throw some light on the problem. <br /> The problem, he said, was the e~Et,ending of a commercial area <br /> as it relates to the rights of people and their homes. Said <br /> that in his section of S.E. `~inneapolis they have almost <br /> identical problems. The problem of zoning and planning, Mr. <br /> Jdallace said, is to do the best job possible to see that any <br /> change conforms as nearly as possible with the ri~?hts of the <br /> people. He said that problems as serious as this in S.E. <br /> Minneapolis have been worked out satisfactorily, and he felt <br /> it could be done here. Said he did not know what the answer <br /> or solution is, but v~rhere a petitioner is asking for a rezoning, <br /> the burden of proof is on the proponent. That it takes a 1t to <br /> 1 vote of the council to rezone indicates how serious the matter <br /> is, he said. To plan the whole area as a unit was desirablein <br /> his opinion, he said, but that it was up to the petitioner to <br /> prove that his plan was not only good zoning, but good planning <br /> and that it can be done in all good conscience with the neighbors' <br />