HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCMin_61Dec7_Special1675
SPECIAL HEADING 12/7/61
The Special Hearing on the comprehensive zoning elan proposed as ~ amendment to
Ordinance No. 8 was called to order at 8:10 P. ~~4., the following Council Members
being presents Harold C. Nilsen, Mayor; George J. Shavor, Trustee; ~dillis ~far-
kentien, Trustee; Charles P. Stone, Trustee; V't. A~ Mortenson, Clerk. Also present
were David P. Cartwright; Chairman Planning Commission, Howard Dahlgren, Planning
Consultant; Bradford Lemberg, Engineer; `~. J. Galvin, Village Attorney and Ethel
E. Vrhite, Deputy Clerk and Deputy Treasurer. Also 28 residents.
1~4ayor Nilsen opened the meeting by saying all five members of the Council were
present for the meeting tonight. Clerk Mortenson read notices as posted and
published.
Mayor Nilsen read excerpt from Zoning Ordinance as follows: "'~hereas Chapter
X62.01 empowers the Village to enact a zoning ordinance and to provide for its
administration, enforcement and. amendment, and whereas the Village Council deems it
necessary for the purpose of promoting health, safety, order, convenience, prosperity
and general welfare of the Village to enact such an ordinance and whereas the Village
Council has prepared a comprehensive plan for the future development and improvement
of the Village and deems it necessary to make different regulations for different
districts to carry out the purpose of the aforesaid statutes, now therefore be it
enacted by the Village of Falcon Heights and. so forth. He then read the intent and
purpose of the ordinance, and stated the meeting tonight is for the purpose of
discussing the proposed ordinance. He also informed those present that the Planning
Commission had v~rorked on the ordinance for about two years and introduced David
Cartwright, Chairman of the planning Commission.
r~ir. Cartwright said. that they had worked on the Planning Recommendations for about
two years; that at first they strove to come up with something that would make
everybody harpy, but in the end they compromised and came up with a proposal which
they feel is in the best interests of the Village and which they feel will not ser-
iously injure any of the citizens or business people. He named the members of the
Planning Commission a.nd rave their addresses so those present would know the
different districts were well represented.
He advised they had. held an informal meeting about 6 weeks ago and handed out
a synopsis of the ordinance and the proposed. zoning map, and had handed them out
again tonight, saying "There is one change on the map you may want to make right
now - it's the R-3 District on the N. Vif. corner of Fairview and Larpenteur, between
Tatum and Fairview, North of La.rpenteur, the northern boundary of that zone was set
so it bisects the second lot North of the boundary on the map and it goes right
through the greenhouse which is on there. It stops in the middle of the North-South
lot that isn't on any street. You can see that it goes down to the middle of that
and then down to the original boundary. I might back up and say that for a good many
years the Village was worried. about spot zoning. t~uite a lot of the property in
the Village was not zoned at all and. the ov~~ner or the prospective buyer would come
in and request that the Council zone it for a specific use. Following that pattern,
you develop a hodge-Hodge of various uses and the Village felt that some systematic
approach to zoning should be undertaken. The Council requested that the Planning
Commission look into tie matter, and the Planning Commission retained the services
of a Professional Planning Consultant, P~?r. Hovrard Dahlgren. His work v~*as first a
research of the existing zoning, a survey of the Viila~e to determine what would
be the most approrriate zoning, the most ap-~roz~ri.ate land use not only for the
citizens of the Vi.?_lage, but also in the development of a_ reasonable tax base.
Part of our deliberations were on the basis that vre vranted to recognize the sole
source of taxes for the Village, the School District and the State should not be
single family residences. They carry a heavy burden of taxes anyway. In developing
1676
that, I~Rr. Dahlgren came out first with a planning survey. Following the survey,
he developed a land use proposal and an initial draft of the zoning ordinance.
Those land use proposals were eventually refined into the zoning plan. The land
use and rezoning proposal tiwas rev~.sed two or three times and here is the final
draft of that. There have been a few changes since our meting sx weeks ago.
He gave Iia.yor Nilsen am Official cony of the Ordinance and. map.
Howard Dahlgren: Fa_con Heights is not a typical community. You have the
unique situation where 2~3 of the Vi.lage is owned by the Fair Grounds and
the University of I~4inn~sota. It is primarily a single family, residential
community of ve*y excellent quality. ?because it is primarily a single family
community, vrith relatively 1 ±tle business, we have the typical problem here
of commercial business in close proximity to high class residential districts.
One of the prime concerns of the proposed rezoning is to offer protection to
the existing high quality residential developments. lay the same token vre vrant
to encourage commercial developments in those areas where it is appropriate.
The over-all objective is to promote high duality commercial development and
yet protect and encourage the development of good. single family residential areas
toward which you are well on the vray. A good deal of our study was concerned
with the tax base of the community. 'Most homes, unless you have an average val-
uation of X30,000.00 and upwards, do not pay for services rendered for those
homes plus the school costs. What is needed is a. non-residential tax source
such as commercial or industrial. Theme is relatively little raw land left in
Falcon Heights for any vast commercial or industrial development. It is important
±hat we encourage a cor!rnercial development of high quality so we don't tend to
waste the land available. V`Je are fearful of encroaching upon the very fine
residential areas zve have.
The ultimate design and construction of the grade separation at the corner of
Snelling and Larpenteur Avenues is unknown. If a grade separation is constructed
at this point, we have s ome severe problems of providing access to the existing
commercial facilities ~rre have on that corner . ~! very substantial portion of
your non residence taxes are loc^+ed on that corr:er.
The University Proper+tT can be considered to be an asset to the Village in
several ways. Number 1, it a+,tracts people who are connected with the University
and who a°,ant to live in Falcon heights. Number two, the cultural relationship
between the campus and the people of the Village is a good thing. Number 3, the
vast areas of open space, a~;sthetically, is an a~:vantage to the Villa~-e. V~ithout
that, you would be surrounded vrith high-density urban development. The question
is where does the University go from here in regard to the acquiring of more
land. It is very difficult for them to determine how much land they are eventually
going to need or whether there might be a.n eventual shift of some of their campus
to another area. This is something we are going to ha~.e to live iaiith, but we
have t: iven some thought as to -.°;hat mi~--ht ha---pen i_f they moved some of +.,he'_r
farming activities to another location. He--, then went to the mans and pointed
out what zoning they singes+,ed for the University ovn ed land if any of it should
be sold for commercial use. He also re^!arked that vre would appreciate the
University's cooperation if any large narking areas, or large construction such
as a stadium were planned vrithin 300', or any narking within 300' of residential
area, that then some coordination vrould be desirable betereen the Village and the
University so we don't hurt each other in any way. irde do feel that vahere we
might have vrhat is considered a conflict of interest that here some coordination
would be desirable. Tha+,'s basically what the ordinance says in regard to the
University and Fair ('bounds people.
~:Iayor Nilsen called. for q~~estions from the floor from people living East of
Snelling ~a.venue. There being none, Dahlgren vvas asked to describe what had been
done East of Snelling.
1b77
Dahlgren: The Eastern portion of the Villas-e has been well developed
as you a.ll knovr. The property from Arona to Pascal ha.s been rezoned from commer-
cial to multiple as it has primarily been developed. There has ben a tremendous
dema~for apartments in the last few years. Frequently land used for apartments
is worth more than commercial. This is not alvrays true but it is sometimes true.
We expect that market to ~rAW. young people and elderly people are moving into
apartments. Vre expect that in time some of the duplexes that have been built in
this section will be replaced with apartments. The property at Hamline and
Larpenteur has been zoned B-l, used as a Duffer between single family developments
and commercial. The pas station across the corner has been zoned B-2. The land
in the t~LE~ South and East of the shopping center was not zoned commercial because
it is felt that, should it be necessary to expand the parking area, this should be
handled as a "Conditional" use permit in single family areas. This enables the
Villa<^e to attach whatever conditions they want to that Hermit which gives a higher
degree of control. You can specify fencing, type, landscaping, surfacing, etc.
1+Qayor Nilsen; Is there anyone who has a question?
?,tr. Tschirley, 1505 I own a lot at Pascal and Larpenteur and I think it is
Highland Pkway. 50 x 130. Th'hat could I build on that corner?
Dahlgren: An Apartment.
Tschirley: Could it face either Pascal or La »penteur?
Dahlgren: It could face either direction but it has to be set back
30' from the street. Where we have existing platted lots and these lots are perhaps
not as large as we vrould like them to '~e, the ?'lapping Commission and Council has
the authority to issue a variance. Come in with a preliminary sketch showing what
you propose as to building, location, etc., and the Planning Commission and Council
will review it and may make some suggestions regarding narking, set-backs, etc.
n~2ayor Nilsen: I was asked what the plans were for the property North of
Ruggles, Vtest of Hamline. Tha±, property is within single family residential zoning
as is all property outside of the heavily lined areas.
Cartwright: I vrant to point out that there is a rezoning North of the
Shell Station on Albert. ti"te changed it from single family to two family. It
swings ?round and covers the corner of Holton and Albert too and North on Holton.
i~dayor Nilsen called for questions from people interested in property 'Test of
Snelling.
Labalestra asked why the line was not, the same depth all the way through.
P.Rayor Nilsen: Tate have the very nice residdntial district immediately back
of the restaurant there and I think we must recognize some of the limitations we
do have in Falcon Heights as pointed out by ?rir. Cartwright and bar. Dahlgren. Hovrard,
may I have your comments? In other words, Labalestra would propose the enlargement
of the ff-2 zone to straighten out vrith the X3-1 going back to the R-3.
Dahlgren: If the use of the property was only for parking, it wouldn't
require rezoning. You would hate to acquire the property and then ask for a con-
ditional use permit. The conditions might be pretty rough inasmuch as the Council
would be concerned about protecting these homes. I think it would be wrong to
rezone them now because it would put a cloud on the value of those properties for
16 78
for single Family purposes. I don't th'nk ~^~e should play loosely v.i th thE~se
zoning lines because it does affect property ~.ralues tremendously. If you want
to expand the parking, the steps to take are: #l, acquire the property or an
option and then apply to the Planning Commission and Council for a conditional
use permit for the expansion of the narking, you showing how you propose to
expand that narking. Any citizen in the Village has a right to apply for the
rezoning of this property at any time. The Planning Commission and the Council
could make a decision after holding a hearing according to the due process of law.
Nilsens The proposed zoning ordinance, under "Administration'", ex-
plains the process and states that any rezoning calls for mandatory submission
to the Planning Commission. 'chat "safe-guard'" is built into the ordinance.
Ewald Hermes advised he was representing the Larpenteur Avenue group, including
t~Ir. Hawkins, a.nd -presented the following; petition: "Yye the undersigned hereby
petition to change the "Proposed Zoning Plan" (Revised 9/30/61) as follows:
All R-3 classifications change to '3-2 classifications, and extend the distance
North of Larpenteur the same as the University property, vrhich is now classified
as B-2. Petition vras signed by ~wald Hermes, Victor J. Hermes, Alfred L. Hermes,
Edward J. Carroll, Arthur A. Lindig, Nick Labalestra, Ewald Hermes, y'ralter Sipe,
Giorge Gasnarro, Robert J. Hermes, Charles J. Hawkins, David A. r,icDonald, Paul
A. Colbert, '^?argaret Youngner, Truman Nodland, hSrs. R. L. Sanford, Lillian Lindig,
Christina R. Ke~_ler, Victor E. Peterson, Ronald V. Peterson, P~:4rs. Julian V. Lee,
-L s . Anna P..4. Keller.
Hermes; ~~e got the signatures on Larpenteur 500 feet down but
didn't get up Fairview and Tatum as intended because of lack of time.
Cartwright: The notifications that we_~e sent out referred to the pro-
posed zoning shovm on this map. Lay moving that line or changing the boundaries,
we would h we to re-notify all the affected people. That's one reason we couldn't
do anything on it tonight. Secondly, the people who would be affected by changing
that to B-2 have not been notified of that. I'm sure you would encounter consid-
erable opposition from the single family residents, the ovners on Tatum and
Fairview. As a matter of fact, we had opposition rezoning it R-3 - they thought
it should be zoned single family on Larpenteur. If you go down the scale from
multiple dwelling to retail districts, the opposition v~rould increase the further
you go dovrn the scale. I Mould recommend that this petition be with-held until
after the new zoning ordinance has been adopted and then consider this request
under the new ordinance.
r4ayor Nilsen asked for Attorney Calvin's comments.
Attorney fTalvins Before this petition could be considered, it vlould be
necessary to determine that all the narti:;s concerned within 500 feet had signed
it. Secondly, a date must be set for a Public He?ring on it. In other v,ords,
nothing could be done this evening in respect to this p?rticular petition. As
t~,1r. Cartwright said, we couldn't amend this ordinance this evening because there
are a good many people who are operating under the assumption, and the notice, of
course, said th?t this property would be rezoned as R-3. People who would have
an objection or an interest in it being rezoned as B-2 could not be h and tonight
because they didn't know the matter was going to he discussed. It would ~>e im-
possible under our existing ordinance, ordinance D1o. 8, paragraph 12-E, to con-
sider the petition this evening, but perhaps it should be referred to the
Planning commission for subsequent action.
1679
Nilsen: That, without doubt, is the prover procedure. 'd4r. Andrew
Hustrulid on Fairview called me tonight and told me he would like to see all this
property retained as single family residential nronerty. I r,~ant to point out
that there would be a lot more pros and cans on this particular matter. ~'~e will
carry on then vrith the districts as we have them delineated on this map. Take steps
to iniate your petition in the regular manner.
Vde will move on to the R-3 zoning from Fairview to Tatum, and, as I~~r. Cartwright
pointed out, there vrs a slight change on t e zoning map which I can perhaps show
on the map on the wall. It carries the R-3 from the d"lest side of Tatum Street to
the East side at the same distance North of Larpenteur, carries it through the
greenhouse and then goes back South of the Somers' property.
Dirs. Labalestra: How deep, how far North from ~,arpenteur, is the line?
Lemberg: 280' from the nronerty line on Larnenteur Avenue.
far. Sipe suggested additional R-3, but ?~ayor Nilsen said they were considering
just the plan before them. Any changes would reouire petitions and it would be
necessary to send out notices to affected nronerty owners.
Emil .t~nderson, 1707 .This new change in the line .moves extremely close to our
No. Fairview: property. A.s a matter of fact, the way I look at it, it
comes right to the corner of our nronerty. L:~ss than 2 ;rears ago, when we were
planning our home, there seemed to be room enough for another lot directly South
of the Sommers' property - room for one more home between Larpenteur and the home
there a±. the present time inferring that this was going to be one family residential
area. and this was certainly the impression we had at the time we built that home.
If we extend this back further North, I think it certainly jeopardizes our position.
I would also like to comment on the zoning to ~-1 of the University property along
Larpenteur. I don't see any real need for zoning that University property at, the
present time. I think a good many things could happen before that property is
developed which could change our thinking tremendously insofar as zoning that area
is concerned, and to have a B-1 zone directly across from vrhere we are now is cer-
tainly likely to affect our property values for anyone who is going to buy in that
area, and if it is not necessary to have th,~+„ H-1 there, I don't see vrhy it is
there.
Dahlgren: V~ith respect to the first question, the original line was
drawn further South because tf' Sommers' home. Some of the land avrners are asking
that this area be zoned. H-2. Frankly, from our t.andpoint, vre feel there are
many reasons why it should not be B-2. I don't think them is a tremendous retail
potential dawn in this area. This is a good. ruestion you have raised regarding the
North-South line with respect to your property. The zoning of the University
property may be unnecessary or ineffective. The University may occu~ay th?t property
as open space for the next 100 years - I don't know. The intent of this map is
th~+ if the University were to -release some property, then this might be the place
where it should be done. Vou raised a good-point as to the effect o~' the zoning on
the property directly across the street. '.'erhaps the ~]ean can enlighten us as to
the University's plans for this area..
Dean. Theo. H. Fenske: Dean Fenske read. letter -^om the A±,torney for the University
(Associate Wean, In- of "~4innesota to Briggs and ~",organ, Village Attorneys, which
stitut.e of A.~ricul- reed, in part: "At present we see no problems as the
tune, U. of ":Z.) University properties now conform or as a pre-existing, non-
conforming use. Should the occasion ever arise when the Univ~:rsity's programming
1680
is inconsistent with the Village Manning, we will continue to impart and
hone to receive cooperation with and from the Villas-e of Falcon Heights. aye do
not feel that the University is amenable to zoning ordinances as such, nor to
have anything interpreted as a waiver of the University's right to regulate it's
own property."
Generally sneaking, the University a.nd Fair Grounds property is zoned a.s P-1 or
Public Institution use. There are some zon~ad otharv~rise. ~~ie mould. take the posi-
-'-:ion that. all of these tracts should. be zoned P-1. The ordinance states that
the conditional uses require approval by the Planning Commission and the Council.
~',Te vrould be glad at any time to let the Planning Commission a.nd the Council look
at our plans but we do not admit the right of the '.Tanning Commission or the
Council to vetoe any plans of the University. 1:e operate under a territorial
charter vrhich gives the regents the sole control of the finances and the nronerty
of the University. It is a pre-existing use and vre do not think the zoning ordin-
ance is applicable.
dir. Bilski, ovrner of the property commonly knovrn as Rosetown Greenhouse, asked
,;chat zoning was contemplated for his property -- that it hadn't been zoned at all
as per the present map. I have about an acre and a half of land I ti°lant to
develop and vrould like to know what to do. Dahlgren: According to the map, it
is single family residential or R-l. At one time there vras a small strip of that
land zoned industrial - a small frontage on Cleveland that went 6~;est to the Golf
Course. Qur feeling is that it would be improper to encourage any further in-
dustrial development in a section occupied by single family residences or uses
permitted. in a single family residential district such as golf courses. It
does not affect your present use. Bilskis The land is there, the only thing I
can. put on it is a one-family residential building2 Dahlgren: Yes. Bilski; I
couldn't enlarge the greenhouse any? Dahlgren: Greenhouses are a permitted
use in a single family area.
Dahlgren: Regarding the University Property, we are not attempting to dictate
to the University. Frankly, lacking any knowledge of the University's plans,
our sole intent in zoning properties like the B-1 was that we go on record as a
Village knowing vrhat land use we would propose for that area in case it were
ever released for private development. The sole benefit to the University would
have been, if vre leave this zoned B-1, is that if they vaere to release it or sell
it, then the price they .^rould get for it would be based on the intended land use
and not on single family development or the possibility that they could get it
zoned for so~.e thing else. In other words, the real control of this land e~evelops
only when it becomes private property at which time it would come under tYze con-
trol of the zoning ordinance. If the University does sell it, it should. be
sold for it's intended use, not tir9_th the possibility that it might become
com° ercial or so~?ething else . In vi.w of vrhat Dean Fenske has said, maybe this
should be changed - that is up to the Planning Commission and the Council.
Dean Fenske: If the Zoning '~:ap is not changed, vre would like to request
th?t anyone inquiring about University Property be told we do not intend to sell
it.
?~tilsen: In our dealings vrith the University about a year ago, we
were given the impres sion that the R-3 zone on Cleveland would be the projected
use of that property, phase ~ of the student housing development. It vras with
this thought in mind that the R-3 Zoning vras considered for this particular
piece of property North of Larpenteur and East of Cleveland. It was our under-
1681
standing that that was seriously considered.
Fenske: This was a very tentative plan. The Legislature is not
very enthusiastic about Student Housing.
Cartwright: Dean Fenske, I would like to comment on two remarks you
made. For instance, your reference to the pre-existing non-conforming use regula-
tions. ~'Te did not intend, in drafting this ordinance, that the pre-existing, non-
conforming use regulations apply to the University. The Planning Commission would
not recom-mend the enforcement of the nre-existing, non-conforming use regulations.
The second point I ti°rould like to make is the likelihood that our regulations under
this Public Institution District, the likelihood that those would be enforc~ble may
ultimately be a matter for the Courts. The purpose for putting that in there was
that we felt we should make an attempt to protect the ~orivate property owners from
any unfavorable use tha±, might be made of nearby University land. For instance,
we wouldn't want you to but a tannery in next to a private home, and as you know, a few
years ago there was objection to a stadium. Those are the reasons we put it in,
and we hope that whatever land use you propose will be agreeable to those citizens
affected.
Fenske: Let me assure you we ti^rant to cooperate with the citizens of
the Village. 'ost of them ?re our neighbors or our employees.
"airs. James Jenkins, In showing this map to members of the League of Y+Tomen Voters,
2190 Folwell: we felt that having B-1 or B-lA on University land is mis-
leading and that it should be PI and then perhaps an adendum saying "If the University
releases land, this is what the map would look like.tr
Cartwright: Howard, could you cross-hatch that land to show that it be-
longs to the University?
Dahlgrens Yes, we could do that on the map. This map will be a reference
map that will be available here at the Village Hall for anyone interested in land
anywhere in the Village. The Village could use the original land use map which goes
even further than the map vre are discussing but indicates that if this land should
be released for private development, this would be the land use proposed. The Village
can adopt such a land use plan. This puts the Village on record that this is their
intent Vrith regard to future uses without zoning it. At least that gives the prospec-
tive buyer of University property or any other property, the contemplated use of the
land over a long period of time.
Dean '4acey: It seems to me that it would clarify the matter if the Univer-
sity Land were to be marked as P-1 and then vrith notations stating that if the land
were to become private property, it is intended that the Village had in mind that it
would be zoned in these categories. Anyone picking up the map now would infer that
the zoning as shovan would indicate that this is the use to vrhich the land will be put
from now on.
Cartwrights I would like to ask the Attorney what our position would be
tonight if we changed proposed zoning of the University property to include all
University property as Public Institution.
Galvin: The problem we are trying to solve is one of mis-leading the
1682
public into believing tha±, this is privately owned property. I think
that perhaps in that we have given notice to zone it, whether the zoning
is effective, of course, is an open question, it would seem to me that
the solution of our problem is to just simply identify the broperty by
otivnership at the time the official map is printed un with no change in
the zoning. In other vrords, print the map as it is shown, and identify
the properties by stating; that ~~roperties with such and such a mark are
owned by the University of T,Zinnesota. ~~e have now given notice and we
would have to amend our proceedings here this evening.
Cartwrights If a formal hearing is established for a rezoning and if
at that hearing you decide not to complete the rezoning, then vrould the
property remain as it was originally zoned?
Galvin: Yes, because we are in fact amending our existing ordinance.
Dahlgren: Couldn't we make any adjustments in the map that are de-
cided upon from this discussion at the suggestions that have been brought
forth from the audience, revise the map, publish the ordinance again and
just repeat what we are doing tonight?
Galvin: That is correct.
Cartwright: I asked that because I think it vras mentioned but maybe it
wasn't clear tha+„ when tive proposed an R-3 zone up on Cleveland and when we
proposed a B-2 zone at Cleveland and La,rpenteur, it was based on the under-
standing that the University did, in fact, Alan to use that property for
such purposes. 1~te understand now that those were not plans but only ten-
tative ideas. The zoning we would propose now wouldn't apply.
Dean 1~~4acey: The R-3 vras a tentative plan. The 13-2 we never expected to
use that way. Perhaps the best thing to do would be to revise the zoning
at a later meeting,
Dahlpren: I think our intent here tonight is to accept these suggested
proposals a.nd then evaluate them, make whatever adjustments we feel are
adaptable in the map, and then adjust the lines, hold another meeting and
then adopt the amendment as we see best.
Galvins I didn't mean that it was impossible to change our course
of direction. If we feel that the meeting needs to be continued or if we
feel there are some necessary adjustments to the zoning map, under our
zoning ordinance, we would set the procedure we are g^ing through this
evening for a p~~riDd of from 10 to 30 days. ~r.re could set another meeting
for December .:21st. It is up to the Council to decide on the course of action.
T~Iilsen: V'Tell, dean Fenske, I ~~rant to point out that we did have those
conferences with the people on the main campus, and in those discussions,
we went so far as to discuss serv cing the area vrith sanitary sewer. For
example, constructing sanitary sewer from the Farm Campus vrhen the ~.~illage '
already has sewer facilities at the Southeast corner of the University
property at Larnenteur and Cleveland would not be a vrise expenditure.
In other words, it would be improper use of public funds. I'm not
suggesting that that would be done. I'm simply pointing out the r_ecessity
for close cooperation between the University and the Village.
1683
Pilsen: Let's get back to the property between Fairview and Tatum.
Firs. Jenkins: I feel that the map as suggested is misleading. $,~Fr.
Anderson's point and my point are the same and I don't have any vested in-
terest.
Cartwright: I think the ?Tanning Commission vrould be guided by the
recommendations of the University and change those zonings on University
Property to P-l. They are P-1 which means we answer that cuestion when we
answer your question. If we had listened to ?~Zrs. Herdie a month ago, we
wouldn't have had this problem. I think we should complete the Hearing on
this and then I would like to recommend to the Council that we establish
another Hearing, within the existing ordinance, between ten and thirty days,
for the adoption of the revised map showing the new P-I zoning for all
University property, and that vrill answer rdr, Anderson. U1e didn't answer
regarding... the change between Tatum and Fairview. The change involved a
striti of land about 75' wide. The Planning Commission felt, that for uni-
formity, we might as well move the line up. All the property ov~iners
immediately concerned, t~~a± is those wher~~y the change of zoning would be
made, requested that change. ~N'h~t, effect that minor change would have
on your property is hard to say. Is there another lot between you and the
next house dov¢~ on Fairview?'
Anderson: To the North?
Cartwright: To the South.
Anderson: Sommers who are directly South of us. In =act, Sommers
will be affected more than we are.
Cartwright: I eras under the impression that Sommers were in agreement
with this change.
"a7rs. Sommers: No, we didn't know it. ti~Ie didn't know anything about that.
Cartwright: tifiell at our la$t hearing, I understood, I don't know whether
it was Nick or Art who gave me the im?~ression, that you agreed.
".4rs. Sommers: No, this is the first I heard of it.
Cartwright: Then I can't answer your question. I'll have to think about
it. ~.7aybe we'll have to get the planning Commission together.
Shavors Is there one more residential lot South of Sommers?
Nilsen: No, then you run into the Sipe property. I notice the peti-
tion excluded. the Sommers and .Anderson property.
Anderson: I don't see what advantage it would be to exclude those two
properties, ours and Sommers', because it would put us practically on an is-
land if you go ahead with the plan as it is paw with B-1 property to the
front of us and Commercial property to the South. Just making a little
island out of our tyro lots would make very little difference to Sommers and us.
rJilsen: That's not contemplated as Commercial. It says R-3.
168l~
Anersons ~'+e11 they have some suggestions for that too, I understand.
S'~hether it is R-3 or D property, it is still more or less commercial.
Cartwright: There is really quite a difference bettiveen retail business
and apartments.
Dahlgren: I think the thing to do is change the UniversitT,T's ~rox~erty
to P-1 and use the comprehensive land use elan as an indication for the
future. Instead of making the transition in land use at this point dir-
ectly adjacent to that single family house, perhaps the transition should
be ~?ade with the property so the people who are getting the benefit of the
R-3 zoning would have the problem of transition from the R-3 to the
Single Family. 'T'his vrould tend to leave your horge not as an Island on
Fairview. T feel very strongly this should not be commercially zoned.
I don't think there is a potential here for any type of retail center.
Keen in mind this property is not now zoned commercial. In o+„her words,
vre are up-~-rading the property to a higher use by going to the R-3. In
this instance, the property owners that are affected are getting a break.
1t,'hat we are recognizing here is tha+., the frontage along Larpen-eur
Avenue is not ideal for single residence homes. Thee is very fine front-
age to the North on perpendicular streets for single family homes. 3e-
cause of the open space across La;:~penteur, eve feel it is very des~.rable
for R-3 c?evellings. ~?eavy traffic is not such a problem to Taultiples a.s
it vrould be for single family homes. The value of this property h=s been
upgraded considerably by planning to zone this to R-3. The kind of
commercials you would. get there if it tiaras zoned commercial, well one of
the proposals was a used car lot. I don't think t'_~ere is any advantage
to either the University or the people to the North by rezoning it for
that kind of operation. Apartments would be perfectly ap-~ropriate and I
think you could get very good quality apartments there and ~;et ga^d.
rer_tal because of the amenity of the area, to the Dlorth and the open space
to the South. I+ ~-ruld be an ideal situation in our opinion.
Nilsen: Dean Fenske, going back to our present ordinance, ire have
commercial zoning Z"`est of the Village Hall now that, ~nras adopted in 19Lt9
at the request of the University.
Galvin: Ordinance 8 shovrs a _cor~mercia.l area on the South side of
Larpenteur from Snelling to one block y'.`est of `r'ry.
Fenske: '?'~a± was a different administra+,.,ion. Neith:~r Dean 'racey
or I had anything to do with it. That is -presently zoned busi-:e"s at the
request of the University.
Dahlgren: One of the reasons we brought this line across is that the
University property comes up along the Village Hall, down. Larpenteur, down
and over, le wing a f-i.nger of private property into the U~.iversity area.
One of the s~~ggestis~ns we made :~ras that perhaps the University vrould care
to acquire the property as shown on the reap giving them the advar.t.age of
having a mare regular niece of property ~r;~ith vrhich to work, and the
Village ti~rould have the advantage of greater depth for H--lA because the
depth we have, for instance, at '-undo Photo is very limited in its scone
becat:se of the shallow depth. This would be an advantage to both the
University and the Village. ti'~ihether or not the University could accom-
plish this is a ruestion.
1685
Nilsen: Is there anyone who z~rishes to speak further regarding the
contemplated zoning between Tatum and Fairview.
~ndersons I vrouldn't argue with the R-3 zoning,
IV'ilsen: You are speaking with reference to what line now? The
one that is shown on the present man or the one as indicated?
~,nderson: I think the line that is presently shown vrould be better.
That means the R-3 zone vrould come up to the South side of Somriers'
property, and then continue ~~~esterly as shotivn by the red line. 'IYzat's
the suggestion that is already on the map. The other one was to bring it a
little further North and continue the line East from the Gasparro property,
then cut gown in back of Sommer's property. That would be R-3.
Nilsen asked for au ,scions pertaining to ~:~est of Tatum.
Ewald Hermes: Could we build our store bigger? Could we move it back and
build a new store?
Nilsen: That vrould be R-3 and preclude (correct me if I'm wrong)
the enlargement of the existing facilities.
Cartwright: He could still come in under the variance provision and ask
for permission to do it.
Galvin: Normal construction or maintenance to a non-conforming use
is permitted inclu~!ing non-structural repairs and incidental alterations,
which do not extend or inter_sify the non-conforming use. Al±.e~~ations may
be made to a building containing a lawful, non-conforming use. The essenee
of li1,..39 is that you couldn't build the building any bi~-ger vrithout a
variance permit from the Council. In other v~•ords, despite the fact that it
is re-zoned R-3, you are lawfully in there and the new zoning would have no
effect on it as long as you continue your business, but there would be a
restriction on your expanding your physical building unless you came to the
Planning Commission or the Council for that permission.
iVilsen: Is there anyone else who has a question vrith respect to that
property? Then we will move on across to the R-3 tiJest of the Hermes property
vrhich is or~ned by I~~Ir. Hawkins. Is .~~r. Hawkins here? I guess he indicated
his desires by signing the petition presented earlier. Then South of
Larpenteur, the property listed. as B-lA.
dir. ~3ilski: I'm opera±,ing a retail store in front of the greenhouse.
Does that still bring it under the one family zoning?
Galvin: If Pdr. ~3ilski will take a look at Section 1.t.3. In other vrords,
you are in there and you can continue your usage despite the zone. By zoning,
we can't take away what you already have.
Nilsen: Qne of our problems, and vre have a lot of them as one can see
from the disci^.ssion this evening, _s as to the present use of the land and
possible future use of the land. Dean Fenske, I realize it is difficult for
you to project possible increases of purchases of property in the Village
of Falcon Heights. That's one of the difficulties we run into in handling all
c7f these things.
1686
Fenskes Some .years ago we had a meeting with the Village Council
in which we indicated the possible future purchases by the University.
This included the finp~er that P~.4r. Dahlgren talked about. Since that
meeting we have x~urchased the Gibbs-Nelson property and a couple of lots
adjacent to it. There is one house fronting on Larpenteur Avenue now
that is private property. It could be that the iJniversit~r might buy it
if the people who live th ere want to sell it. ti'r'e are not particularly
interested in acquiring f ront land. on Larpenteur Avenue. That's one
problem that's settled.
Nilsen: ,';ell I V~rant to be very frank too. Having studied this
~?roperty for a number of ;rears and looking at it, tive only have to look
at that map and note the University Golf Course and we can readily
visualize or poss~.bly assume that there would be acquirement by the
University ~~f P;Rinnesota of properties like that to round out - I'm just
guessing as you are. But then we have the other situation too - not
knowing what is contemplated, it is difficult to project •~°.h at might be
done there. Your investment in property and things like ±hat, you or
the o~^m er seriously has to consider, you see.
~ilski In other ?worr~s, I have to ramble the investment I put
in there?
:Nilsen: ',r~ell I don't knoUr ho~rr we handle a situation like that.
I just don't know, '7r. 'ilski. It's a real tough problem, but, just
facing facts and looking at the mar it, just seems possible that that
might happen some time to round out th-~t barticular area. I don't know.
I can't say.
Nilsen: T:?ow is there anyone else who has a question of any kind
with respect to the zoning districts or the zoning ordinance?
TdcNulty, °~Tinn. V~rould we be permitted to unload gasoline into a fill pipe
Petroleum +.,hat was in the front ~rard set back?
Council
Dahlgren: I'm sure it isn't the intent of the Planning Commission to
restrict the unloading of gasoline into a fill pine. Perhaps we should
have the attorney check the wording and make our intentions clear.
'.?cNulty: To get the best effect from floureseent fixtures, they are
quite frequently placed ~t about a 15 degree angle. In that position,
they tivould be, quite obviously, visible from the street. 1~fould this be
non-conformance?
Dahlgren: Perhaps we can change the wording so it doesn't restrict the
use of flourescent lights. Flourescent lighting is a diffused source of
light and not objectionable.
i:cAJulty: Under the definition of a ;yard, the set back goes from the
property line back to the wall of the principal building and I just wanted
to clarify the fact that the pump island will not be construed as being
included in this set back.
1687
Dahlgrens It is our intent to have the pump island set back to conform
with the yard requirements, which in this case is 30'. A frequently used distance
in the past has been to set the pumz~ islands back -~~ 20' from the road. Our
suggestion here is that we set the pump islands back 30' instead of the 20'.
~~cNulty: What would be the purpose of that?
Dahlgren: Vie fei.l that the pump islands as such are a structure and we
want to hold them back further. There is also the requirement that the drive has
to be set back somewhat from the property line - 5'.
~~IcNulty: Our objection to that, of course, would be in the case of a
station where there would be two pump islands in front of the building in which
case you run into a lot depth that would be expensive and perhaps not very com-
patible. We would all like to have large driveways but we can't afford them.
Cartwright: hiell the point being, if a filling station is in a commercial
district, we didn't vrant the pump islands to stick out beyond the established
frontage of all the other businesses. They should conform Urith the established
frontage of the business row of buildings.
~a4eNulty: Vlell then you have a conflict with your yard definition.
Dahlgrens That's why it is definitely stated that the pump islands
are to be set back the same as a building, 1Ale have been using this set-back in
other communities. Now if on any particular lot, this is a hardship, this might
be varied according to your peculiar conditions. The intent was to move the
structures back from the right-of way greater than the usual 20'. Now do you
feel that, in general, this would be a hardship to the industry?
A,4eNulty: I would say t.h:~t, as a general thing, it is more space than
we would like to allot to driveways. Z"What it ti~rould probably do is give us a v,~ide
30' drive on the outside, :pie vrould then have to stint on the distance between
the inside of the island and. the front of the building. It would make impossible
the usuage of a lot less than 75' in vridth.
Dahlgrens The optimum for the major filling stations, to our knowledge,
has been 150 x 150'. There is a tendency toward fewer and larger stations. ?JIany
of them have gone into metropolitan areas up to as high a.s 300 x 300', in which
case a 30' set back is no problem at all. It may be, in Falcon Eeights, 30'
might be a problem, but vae general vre feel 30' is reasonable unless we run into
peculiar circumstances. In this case, a variance might be in order. Roseville
uses 30'. Recently we granted a variance but there we had an existing lot that
was not of adequate size.
~~,?cNulty: I don't think our stand on this is particularly strong if
there is a possibility of some redress.
`~cA?ulty: Regarding signs ~rre are dealing with people going by on wheels.
trJe have two ways of getting to them. One is our identification sign. The other,
quite frequently, is a price sign or a sign that brings out some special item.
you insist that we put our pedestal sign somewhere in our driveway by moving it
back 6' from the property line. In the case of a sign which measures 9' or even
10' across, you then have moved the sign pedestal back some 10 or 11', You force
1688
us to nut the sign back. into valuable.drivewa~r'property and you force us
off the highway to the point where our identification sign is not visible
soon enough to the on-coming traffic. V:re vrould recommend tha+ we be allowed
to nut these signs inside the curb line, as they are everywhere.
Dahlgren: Our intent here is that all signs be set back beyond the
~.Tard requirements - that is the 30'. This is one of the reasons vae are
requesting that the pump island be put back 30' - realizing that this is the
obvious place for you to put the sign. If all suns are set hack 30', all
of them get better visibility. As you close the canyon of signs tighter and
tip~hter you have less and less visibility, The signs must be set back 30' but
may protrude 18" on the required yard. Vqe wi71 allow service stations to nut
their identification sign within 6' of the right of way. Service stations
are the only ones that get this break. The other suns we would prefer to
have back ±,he 30'.
x~icNulty: You are actually moving us back 10' or Il' with our
pedestal.
Dahlgren: 1'.'e held several conferences with the sign companies and
the Petroleum industry and they feel that by holding all suns back 30', they
are actually getting getter visibility, but everyone did feel that. service
stations have a peculiar problem in the sense that they are catering to fast
moving trade. Elie figured 6' for service station signs would be reasonable.
Some communities are using 5' and. some 3'. The Ordinance specifies 61~ square
feet.
Six or seven o_f the oil comranies are settling for 100
square feet.
Dahlgren: All vre are asking for, basically, is that we keep the
signs back 30' except for filling stations and whether this exception should
be 6', 5' or 3' is open to debate. The 6!~' dimension was agreed upon at a
meeting vrit,h the petroleum industry about a voar a.go. 6!~' is the actual square
surface area.
'acNulty: ~~e reoornmend that the pedestal be just inside the curb.
You will have to decide what you can do for us. You specify 16' from grade
level for pedestal suns. The standard in t~~e industry is about 1?_'. T know
of no-one who has any 16' pedestals. ti,re would be forced to put in a concrete
base that would be about !.t' high in order to use the pedestals which vre have.
Dahlgren: That's from the grade of the nearest driveway or parking area.
Z know that the usual considered clearance for a truck is 14'. This is v~rhat we
were thinking of. perhaps it should be 1~.'.
°:ZcNulty: The standard in the industry is 12'. Vtihere we have transport
traffic, we move the si~*ns so they don't get hit because they -3 re quite expen-
sive. I think that must be changed- or no-one can conform vrith it without some
special poles.
Dahlgren:
This may be an error on our part. Thank you
for bringing
it out.
''cNulty: ~.~,"e would recommend that we be allowed an additional sign in
the front ~rard. They are vital to our particular business. die do feel also
1689
1
1
1
that 100' total is not adequate. Gities Service would be out of the ball-park
right away. They couldn't get in anything more than the word tRCities". Vde
would recommend 200 sq f t as a minimum .
Dahlgren; It says no individual sign shall be more than 100 sq. ft. The total
square footage is based on the size of the lot. R11 we say here is that no in-
dividual sign s'-gall exceed 100 square feet.
I~4cNulty: Vie would like to recommend that your 20' set back on the
corners be changed to 15'. Is that being measured from the street curb line?
Dahlgren: Property line.
':ZeNulty: Property line, then we feel that 20' is too much. Normally,
it is 10'.
Dahlgren: From the side street line? Service stations aren't normally
constructed 10' from the side street line.
°.?cNulty: No, ~~re aro talking about the driveway.
Dahlgren: That's measured from the curb line. That's at the point
where the drive ray crosses the pro-~erty line. That should be 20' from the inter-
section of the property lines on the corner. The State Highway Department re-
quires 6' of horizontal distance from the tangents from the curb on the corner.
You will find that ti^Jhen you angle your driveway in, by the time you hit your
property line, that is something like 12' from the intersection of the property
line. The State Hi~:hway Department feels that this 20' is very appropriate. If
you allow this 20' then you will have at least 1 car length to get out there or
to get into the lane before you make your turn.
P.~cNulty: Vie are not going +.,o <~rgue very hard on that one, but we will
still make a recommendation for ls'.
Dahlgren: Here, again, it is subject to variance if you have a peculiar
problem on a certain lot.
i~7c~lulty: ~,'ie feel that service stations should be a conditional use in
Areas ?~-1 and. B-1,A and a normitted use in 3-2.
Nilsen: Is there anyone else who Twishes to be heard? It is my under-
standing that we can continue this hearing.
Galvin: Vfe can continue it, t~.4ayor, by .resolution and also giving
notice for 10 or 30 days.
°,Zayor Nilsen moved the following resolutions
VVHERF~I.S a number of changes have 'peen suggested to the comprehensive zoning plan
proposed as an amendment to Ordinance No. 8, and
~17HEREf~S the Falcon Hei ~^~'.nts Village Council desires to include some of these
changes in the comprehensive zoning elan,
NOV~t THEFEFO~?E BE IT F'L'SOLUED:
1. The Special Village Oouncil meeting and hearing on the proposed comprehensize
zoning ordinance of December 7, 1961 be and hereby is continued until December 21,
1690
1951 at 8:00 P. Td. in the Falcon Heights VilJ_a~e Hall.
2. The Falcon Heights Vi~la~e Council will consider the ~ronosed compre-
hensive zoning plan as an amendment to Ordinance No. 8 at the ~-eetin~ of the '
Village Council to be held at 8;00 P. 'I. in the Village Hall December 12th,
1961.
3. -The Clerk will ;give such notice as is required by Ordinance No. 8.
Seconded by Stone and carried.
?:~ieetin~? adjourned at 10:x.5 P. ?~. ,~ ( 11
t;lerk
~n~roved ~i2~
?Mayor
1
D