Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />City Council <br />March 4, 1981 <br />Mr. Doody informed the Co~thcil that in 1977 apartments were pronosed for <br />the Schrier property. At that time 64% of the City's population were in <br />apartments. In two days res~dents of the area aot a petition signed <br />opposing the apartments. Even apartment livers were opposed to more <br />apartments in Little Canada. Safety of children, cost of police protection, <br />and down grading of the area were some of the concerns expressed over <br />additional apartments. <br />Mr. Doody asked that Counc9l investigate the 1968 meeting to see 9f the <br />property was legally rezoned. <br />Mr. Doody also commented that in i978 the City had more apartments than <br />any other community in the Twin Cities. <br />Mr. Doody stated that the Counc9l knows what the citizens of Little Canada <br />want. <br />Mr. Fahey asked Pnr. Doody if he were willing to have his tax dollars go <br />to Mr. Schrier to pay damages for the downzoning of Schrier's property. <br />Mr. Doody stated that he is willing to pay his share. Doody felt he would <br />pay one way or the other. Apartments would cost him more in tax clollars <br />due to increased police protection costs and public works costs. <br />Mrs. Scalze commented that the City of Litt1e Canada is financially sound <br />and Council would 19ke to keep it that way. <br />Mr. Fahey commented that he was not opposed to paying damages to property <br />owners to get the City back to the way it should be. Apartments have <br />generated greater tax benefits to the City. However, fahey is willing <br />to spend a reasonable sum of money to preserve the residential areas of <br />the City. <br />Mr. Nash commented that if Mr. Schrier feels some money is due him for <br />damages, he shou1cl take cour't action. <br />Mrs. Sca1ze clid not fee1 the City was ready for a 1n~gthy court case and <br />large legal fees. Scalze felt that something in the way of a compromise <br />would be best for the City. <br />Mr. fahey assured Mr. Nash that the C,ity would not just write Mr. Schrier <br />a check for damages; the courts wou1d be the one to determine if any <br />damages were due. However, the City may settle out-of-court. <br />Mr. Don Behr, a resident of the area, informed the C,ouncil that he was <br />opposed to any more apartments in little Canada. Mr. Behr stated that <br />even though Mr. Schrier may build fine apartment buildings, the buildings <br />cou1d be sold antl run down by different owners. Behr also felt the <br />Schrier property was worth more money today than it was in 1977. <br />8ehr stated that he was not opposed to a senior citizen development on <br />the property. Mr. Qehr also stated that he was wi1ling to pay his share <br />of any damages that might be determined to be due Mr. Schrier. <br />Page -4- <br />