Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-04-81 Council Special MinutesMINUTES OF TFIE SPECIAL MEETING CT.TY COUNCIL LITTLE CANADFl, MINNESOTA March 4, 1981 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a special meeting of' the Council of the City 0F L1$$~P. Canada, Minnesota was held on the 4th day of March, 79Q1 at the Little Canada Schoo7 located on E1i Road in said City. The Mayor, Mr. Raymonc( Flanson, chaired and called the meeting to order at 7:31 P.M. MEP76FP,S PRESENT: Mayor Mr. Raymond Flanson Councilman Mr. Plichae7 Fahey Councilman Mr. Dennis F'orsberg Councilwoman Mrs. Mugs Nardini Councilwoman Mrs. P,everly Scalze FlLSO PRESEDII': City Clerk Mr. Joseph Chlebeck City Attorney Mr. Clayton Parks City Planner Mr. Drad nielson Recording Secretary Mrs. Kathleen G7anzer Public Mayor Hanson informed the audience that 'the purpose of tonight's meeting Hearing is to consider for rezoning a71 ~he C,ity's R-3 zoned property. The On The Council has requested this public hearing to consider reznn9ng this Proposed property to R-2. The only piece of R-3 property not heing considered Rezoning Of for rezoning tonight is a small piece in the Terrace Fleights Trailer Schrier Park. Property, Waite The first piece of property the Council will hear comments on is the Property, property known as the Schrier property, referred 'to by Counci7 as Parkview Flreas 1, 2, and 3. This property is located on County P,oad C. Realty Property, Fls background irrformation, the hiayor informed the audience that in 1977 and Vv'hite P1r. SchrSer appeared before the Council and requested a builtling permit Oaks Builders on this R-3 property for apartments. Flt that time the Council declared Property a moratorium on apartments unti1 such time as the City's water system was completed. The Council felt at that time that the City's water system was not adequate to support another apartment bui1ding, This went to court and the court supported the moratorium until the water system N1dS completed. The City's water system has now been fin9shed. ~uring the past year the Schrier property was considered as a possible site for a senior citizen housing deve7opment. Other properties were also considered. The City is present1y proposing to down-zone the Schrier property which is zoned R-3 to R-2 and up-zone the Schrier property which is zoned R-1 to R-2. Counci1man Fahey informed the audience that the Council may or may not take action on this proposal tonight. The Council would lil<e everyone's input on this proposal. At some meeting other than tonight's action may be taken. Paae -1- MINUTES City Council March ~, 1981 P1r. Don Pearce commented to the Council that they picked a poor night to hold this public hearing as it is Ash Wednesday and many people could not attend the meeting. Mr. Fred Kippers, Jr. appeared before the Council. Mr. K9ppers is an attorney representing the North Suburban Company, the owner of the Schrier property. Mr. Schrier is one of the owners of this company. Mr. Kippers stated that the North Suburban Company has owned the property since 1978. Mr. Kippers stated that in the 1977-1978 law suit the court ruled that because of the water situation the City should not issue a building permit, but that the court agreed that the plaintiff, Mr. Schrier, has the right to assume that he could proceed with the construction once the water system was completed. Due to this court action, the property was purchased b,y the North Suburban Company. The present R-3 zoning has been in place since 7968. Mr. Kippers stated that the property is proper1y and legally zoned for apartments. Mr. Kippers also commented on the meetings held with Mr. Schrier regarding the senior citizen housing development. Mr. Kippers stated that apartments are a 7egitimate style of housing and the Schrier property may not be the worst location for an apartment building. Kippers commented that County Road C is a well trave1ed street. There ~s undeve1oped land to the east and the land on the west is zoned for single family housing. Kippers felt the property was fairly well su5ted for apartments. Mr. Kippers also pointed out that North Suburban Company has not requested that their R-1 property be upzoned to R-2. This was a proposal by the City Council. Mr. Kippers felt the R-7 property was a buffer to the west. Mr. Kippers asked that the position of the North Suburban Company be considered by the C~ty Council. Counci1man Fahey stated that the pla9ntiffs named in the 1977-1978 lawsuit Hiere Mr. and Mrs. John E, Boss. Fahey informed Mr. Kippers that it was ~he intention of the City as early as May of 7978 to try to rezone this property to something other than R-3. Fahey requested that he be able to see the contracts between the Boss~ and the North Suburban Company to determine if at the time of purchase of the property there was any indication of the possible rezon~ng. Mr. Kippers informed Mr. Fahey that Mr. Schrier was also a party to the 1977-197II lawsuit. Mayor Hanson asked Mr. Schrier if the North Suburban Company might still entertain the idea of senior citizen housing. Mr. Schrier commented that June or Ju1y of 1980 was the last contact he had with the City on this proposal. The only question is that the purchase price was based on the zoning of the property, Page -2- MTPlUTES City Council March ~, 1981 Mr. Schrier informed the Council that the plans the City Planner laid out for the senior citizen housing development did not meet the density of the property. Schrier stated that he then had his architect lay out some plans for the housing that met the density. These were submitted to the Planner. Since 'that time P4r. Schrier has not heard anything on the senior citizen housing. Fle contacted the City A,t.torney who informed him that no action had been taken by the City Counci7. P~ayor Hanson commented that if the property remained P,-3, but developed as a PUD, the Council would have more control over the development of the property, Mr. Schrier informed the Council that he has invested several hundred dol1ars to give the City some alternatives in the development of senior citizen housing on the property. Mrs. Scalze asked Mr. Schrier if the apartments he is considering for his property u~ould be owned and managed by the ~lorth Suburban Company. Mr. Sr,hrier informed Mrs. Sca1ze that all the apartments they have 6uilt they have retained ownership and manage the buildings. P1rs. Nardini asked if it would be possible to interest Mr. Schrier in putting up a senior citizen home and funding it. Mr. SchrSer stated that he would have to check into the money market. P~r. Fahey commented tha't City records indicate that the property was not transferred to North Suburban Com{~any until 4/2/79. Fahey asked if Mr, Schrier had knowledge that the property was scheduled for potential rezoning by the City. Mr. Schrier stated that he had no knowledge of an official act by the City to indicate that the property would be rezoned from R-3. Mr. Kippers commented that the reason the property was not transferred until 4/2/79 was due to a title problem. Mr. Bob Nash, a resident of the area, commented that when the 1977-197t3 lawsuit went in to court the judge commented on safety to the community as being a problem with the insufficient water system. There would not be adequa~e water for fire protection. Mr. Nash stated that safety is still a concern vdith the traffic on County Road C. Apartments would add to this hazard. Mr. ~!ash stated that he would be willing to go into court nver this issue. Mr. Nash stated that developers come into the City and the residents of the City are stuck with problems caused by the developers. Mr. Dennis Doody, another resident of the area, stated that the property was rezoned in 1968. There was a pub7ic hearing on the rezoning, but Doody was not notified of the hearing. The residents of the area appeared before the Council voicing their objection to the rezoning. Then on a Friday evening, the property was rezonecl at a closed meeting. Pa.ge -3- MINUTES City Council March 4, 1981 Mr. Doody informed the Co~thcil that in 1977 apartments were pronosed for the Schrier property. At that time 64% of the City's population were in apartments. In two days res~dents of the area aot a petition signed opposing the apartments. Even apartment livers were opposed to more apartments in Little Canada. Safety of children, cost of police protection, and down grading of the area were some of the concerns expressed over additional apartments. Mr. Doody asked that Counc9l investigate the 1968 meeting to see 9f the property was legally rezoned. Mr. Doody also commented that in i978 the City had more apartments than any other community in the Twin Cities. Mr. Doody stated that the Counc9l knows what the citizens of Little Canada want. Mr. Fahey asked Pnr. Doody if he were willing to have his tax dollars go to Mr. Schrier to pay damages for the downzoning of Schrier's property. Mr. Doody stated that he is willing to pay his share. Doody felt he would pay one way or the other. Apartments would cost him more in tax clollars due to increased police protection costs and public works costs. Mrs. Scalze commented that the City of Litt1e Canada is financially sound and Council would 19ke to keep it that way. Mr. Fahey commented that he was not opposed to paying damages to property owners to get the City back to the way it should be. Apartments have generated greater tax benefits to the City. However, fahey is willing to spend a reasonable sum of money to preserve the residential areas of the City. Mr. Nash commented that if Mr. Schrier feels some money is due him for damages, he shou1cl take cour't action. Mrs. Sca1ze clid not fee1 the City was ready for a 1n~gthy court case and large legal fees. Scalze felt that something in the way of a compromise would be best for the City. Mr. fahey assured Mr. Nash that the C,ity would not just write Mr. Schrier a check for damages; the courts wou1d be the one to determine if any damages were due. However, the City may settle out-of-court. Mr. Don Behr, a resident of the area, informed the C,ouncil that he was opposed to any more apartments in little Canada. Mr. Behr stated that even though Mr. Schrier may build fine apartment buildings, the buildings cou1d be sold antl run down by different owners. Behr also felt the Schrier property was worth more money today than it was in 1977. 8ehr stated that he was not opposed to a senior citizen development on the property. Mr. Qehr also stated that he was wi1ling to pay his share of any damages that might be determined to be due Mr. Schrier. Page -4- MznuTEs City Council March ~4, 19H1 Mr, Harold Fiechert, a property owner on Jackson Street, stated that he was willing to pay his share of damages. T.f additional apartments went up, the citizens would have to ~ay for additional police and fire protection, Mayor Hanson stated that this was a very important decision for the Council. The City also has the situation of apartments converting to condomini~ims, Hanson stated that he does not know wfiat this will mean t4 the City in terms of tax dollars, The Council has a certain amount ot responsibility in running the City, hianson also stated that this was probably one of the last pieces of property availa@le for senior citizen housing. Senior citizen housing is still an apartment building. I~f' t~e Counci1 rezones this property, they might close the~door on themselves for senior citizen housing. Hanson stated that the Council may not make its decision'on this property tonight. The Council obtained appraisals on the pro~erty:to.determtne the amount of damages the City may have to pay should they.rezone the property. Fahey stated that he was not in favor of bui1ding more apartm~nts due to a tax concern. Fahey stated that he was not going to make a clecision on this property tonight, Fahey wanted to give citizens the op or~unity to contact him on their feelings regarding apartmentsin Little ~anad~, Fahey did not feel that a senior citizen housing deve1opment on the ~?roperty was realistic. The property is too expensive in terms ofi the guidelin~s the government sets. Pahey stated that he was in favor of seeing the property go R-2, fahey also commented that P~r. Schrier has some rights as a property owner. Mr. Fahey thought that past record would reflect that Mr, Schrier knew the property might be downzoned. Fahey also thought the City could grant Mr. Schrier a conditional use permit under the R-2 zoning allowing quadraminiums and townhouses. Fahey felt this would not be in conflict with the area, This would be granted as a part of the downzoning. Fahey also felt that the City would not derive any benefit from upzoning the R-1 property to R-2, The City would just be doing Mr. Schrier a favor. Mr. Bi11 Thul, a resident of the area, informed the Council that there is more concentration in his area of the City by aparurents than in any other area. St. Jude's is now building and this will cause more traffic problems. Mayor Hanson informed Mr. Thul that the State Highway Department is requiring St. Jude's to build a road to County Road a-2, Councilman Forsberg informed the audience that he is opposed to any more apartments in Little Canada. Forsberg also d9d not want to see the R-1 property upzoned. P~r. Forsberg felt the R-3 property should be rezoned to R-1. Page -5- MTNUTES City Council March 4, 1981 Mr. Fors6erg stated that this rezoning may cost the City a lot of money in damages, but that he will support the people of Little Canada. Mrs. Scalze was also opposed to more apartments, Scalze felt the R-1 should not be upzoned, especially since Mr. Schrier is not willing to compromise with the City. Mrs. Scalze stated that on the R-3 ~ortion of the property she was willing to wait and see what type of proposal Schrier came in with before the Council should take action on the property. Mrs. Scalze is also in favor of senior citizen housing in the City, but is not willing to upzone property to get it. The Schrier property would be a good location for the housing as it has the correct zoning. Mrs. Nardini was opposed to more apartments in the City. Nardini felt the fact that senior citizen housing is an apartment building was not being faced. Mrs. Nardini stated that she would volunteer to sit down with Mr. Schrier to see what could be worked out with him, Mrs. Nardini stated that the C,ity got appraisals on the properties under consideration for rezoning, The appraisals cost $1,200, She was against spending this money. The appraisals determined that there could he a $60,000 damage to the Schrier property by downzoning it to R-2 and possibly a$8,000 7oss to the Waite property. ~~ardini felt that if the City might incurr these types of expenses, there should be a referrendum of the citizens to determine if they are willing to spend this money. Nardini thought something might be worked out with Mr, Schrier. Mr. Doody stated that the City should determ~ne how the land was rezoned in the first place. Nardini agreed that this should be investigated. Nancy Schlett, a resident of the area, asked if a buildinq could be built for senior citizens and then changed. Mr. Fahey commented that the building would have to remain senior citizen for the life of the financing, if the financing is subsidized by the governmerrt. h9r. Doody stated that he was opposecl to a HUD project for senior citizens and with low income townhouses. If the project was just elderly housing, that would bE no prob1em. Mayor Hanson stated that the Washington Square Project in White Bear Lake is a HUD project and it is a beautiful building. That project is elder7y only. Nancy Schlett stated that she was opposed to senior citizen housing because the City could not ensure that it remained elderly an~ the Schrier property is too far from shopping centers, Mayor Hanson stated that vendors will come right to a senior citizen apartment building. Mr. Doody stated that he did not believe the City should compromise with Mr. Schrier on this. Page -6- MINUTES City Council March 4, 79~1 Mayor Hanson stated that the next area under consideration for rezoning from R-3 to R-2 is the property owned by Parkview Realty located on the east side of Ruth Street 6etween the proposed Lake Street ancl County Road C. P9ayor Hanson informed the audience that there has been no clevelopment request on this property. Mr. Ulaite has come in with a proposal for the development o~f his property located to the south of the Parkview Realty property which includes three four-plexes and two duplexes. Mr, Waite had requested that his property be rezoned R-2 PUb to accomplish this. Fl public hearing was held on this request, and the residents of the area would like to see the property downzoned to R-1. The City Planner stated that the Council tabled action on Mr. Waite's request so that the Council could consider the development of the whole area. This is the purpose of this portion of the public hearing tonight. Councilman Pahey stated that the Nlaite proposal would not need a variance under the R-2 PUD zoning. Fl representative of Parkview Realty informed the Council that the company has no immediate plans for their property. The gentleman informed the Council that he could possibly 1ive with the R-2 zoning proposed by the City, but that he is against R-1. Nancy Schlett asked if the Counci1 knew of any plans to vacate the railroad track within the next 4 or 5 years. The Council was not aware of any such plans. The planner informed the audience that R-2 zoning allowed single family hornes and duplexes. A conditional use permit under this zoning would allow multiple fami1y housing up to quads, 4-plexes and townhouses, Under R-? PUD the same uses are allowed, but there is more flexibility in terms of site design. On the Waite property under R-2 zoning three 4-plexes and one duplex would be al1owed, Under the R-2 pUD you could build three n-plexes and two duplexes. With a pUD the City has more contro7 as the zoning is written into a contract with the developer. The Planner also stated that any cons,truction higher than a single family home must have Council approval, Mr. Joe Morelan, a resident of Ruth Street and County Road C, informed the Council that he was not ~otified of tonight's meeting. Mr. Morelan stated that he would like to see the Parkview Realty property rezoned R-1. The Parkview Realty representative informed the Council that they purchased the property in 1978 and it was zoned R-3 at that time. Councilman Fahey asked Parkview Realty if they would contest the rezoning of the property to R-2. The representative of Parkview Realty stated that he was not prepared to comment on this. Page -7- MINUTES City Council March 4, 79II1 Councilman Forsberg asked if anyone was opposed to the Parkview Realty Property being rezoned to R-2, Approximately five to si,x residents within 350 feet of the property raised their hands that they were opposed. Mayor Hanson stated that consideration of the R-2 PUD rezoning of the Waite property located to the east of Ruth Street was tab7ed unti1 this evening, so that the Council could consider the entire area.. Mr. k~aite is proposing three four-plexes and two duplexes for the property, Mayor Hanson stated that the appraisals the City has on the Waite property indicate damages of approximately $8,000 should the City rezone the property from R-3 to R-2, Mr, Ulaite has requested R-2 PUD zoning. Mr. Fahey felt the Waite proposal was an alternative to the City that would not cost the City any money. Fahey felt that given the location of the railroad tracks R-2 zoning might be appropriate for the property. Under R-3 zoning, Mr. Waite could construct a 39 one-bedroom unit apartment building. Under Mr. Waite`s proposal only 16 units would be constructed, Mr. Fahey stated that he would like to spend the tax dollars in the area it will do the City the most good, namely the Schrier property. Mrs. Scalze pointed out that Mr. Waite owns the property across the street and he will not construct something that will prevent him from selling this property. Mr. Waite stated that he comes up with a figure of 50.3 units that would be allowed under the present R-3 zoning. VJaite also stated that his property will act as screening firom the railroad tracks. Mr. Waite stated that he was not opposed to the P.-2 PUD zoning, but was opposed to R-2 without the PUD. Mr. Harold Fiechert asked if it were possible to have owner-occupied units. One of the possible owners of Mr. Waite's duplexes proposeci for Ruth Street appeared before the Council. It was pointed out that at taday's prices anyone investing in income property screens their tenants very carefully. There is too much money invested for the owners not to be very careful of who they rent to. Sandra Yunker, a resident of Lake Street, stated that she wou7d like to see owner-occupied housing. Yunker stated that when people rent they do not give the property the same care as an owner would, Mrs. Scalze stated that the Waite proposal is not owner-occupied, but that does not mean the property would never be owner-occupied, Another consideration the Council must give this development is off-street parking. Fahey stated that under the PUD zoning the Council could require the buildings to be constructed so that they could be split in the future. Page -8- MZr~urEs City Council P1arch 4, 1981 Mr. Waite stated that the duplexes would be side-by-side and the four-plexes woulci be split entry. Kathy Jansen informed the Council that she would like to see this property zoned R-1. Mayor Hanson indicated that the next area for consideration was the White Oaks Builders-Serco, Inc, property located on Viking Drive south of the Sleepy Hnllow Flpartments. This property is proposed to be rezoned from R-3 to R-2. Mr. Bill Thul, a resident of the area, appeared before the Council. Mr. Thul informed the Council of the severe topography of the property, Mr. Thul a1so pointed out to the Council that this area consists of 10% of the property of Litt7e Canada and has 45% of the population. Mr. Thul stated that the area in question was zoned R-1 approximately 10 years ago. Mr. Thul stated that he was notified of a meeting on the rezoning which was to be held on July 19, 1971 at 8:00 P,M. Mr. Thul stated that he arrived at the meeting at 5 minutes to 8:00 and the meeting was over. Mr. Thu1 stated that he was not opposed to the downzoning of this property to R-2.. Thul said that he would have a hard time accepting quads on this property. The property consists of three acres with only about two of the acres being buildable. Mr. Fahey stated that if a developer comes in with a plan for the development of this property the Council ~~ill take into consideration the drainage of the area and the topography. Mr. Thul stated that under the R-2 he was in favor of single family homes and duplexes but he would oppose quads. Mr. Thul also requested that the City Attorney check on the lega1ity of the rezoning. Mr. Doody made the same request regarding the rezoning of the Schrier property. The City Attorney stated thaL at the time closed meetings were very common. The Open Meeting Law did not exist as it is known today. Mr. Parks also stated that if anything improper took place it wou1d be impossible to go back this many years and correct. The courts would not hear such a case. The results have stood for too many years. Mr. Fahey stated that in 1977 or 1978 the Concerned Citizens came to the same conclusion. Mr. Greg Tomerlin requested the name of the person making the appraisals for the City. Flttorney Parks stated that Tom Delaney, a St. Paul appraiser, made the appraisals and that Mr. Delaney does a great deal of this type of appraising. Mayor Hanson stated that the figure Mr. Delaney came up with is just the cost of the damages to the property due to loss of value caused by the rezoning. Page -9- MINUTGS CITY COUNCIL March 4, 1981 Closing The Public Hearing Mr, Fahey introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. 81-3-100 - CLOSING TFIE PUE3LIC HEFlRIMG ONTFIE ROPOSED REZONING OF THE SHCRIER PROPERTY, TNE WAITE PROPERTY ON RUTH S7REET, THE PARKVIE4J REALTY PROPERTY ODI RUTH STFEET, AND THE WHITE OAKS BUILDERS-SERCO, INC, PROPERTY ON VIKING DRIVE The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mrs. Nardini, I{yes (5) Fahey, Nardini, Hanson, Scalze, Forsberg, Nayes (D). Resolution declared adoptEd, This resolution appears in Resolution Book No, 7, Pages 61 and 62, Mayor Hanson pointed out that the decision on these rezonings does not have to be made tonight, Mrs. Scalze suggested that the Schrier rezoning be tabled and thai: the Council hold an informal work session with Pnr. Schrier to see if something could be worked out with him, P1r. Fahey suggested that a time limit be set for this situation to be worked out. Fahey reminded the Council that the City has a moratori~am on building permits for R-3 ~roperty for a period of 90 days, Fahey also stated that he was opposed to a work session. Fahey felt the matter shoulcl be handled at a meeting where the Council could take action ifi they wished. Mrs. Sca7ze introduced the following resolution and moved its acioption: RESOLUTION N0. 81-3-101 - TABLING ACTION ON THE PROPOSE.D REZONIPIG OF AREAS N0. AND 2 OF THE SCHRIER PROPERTY ADID SChIEDULING A WORK SESSION BETWEEN THE COUNCIL AND MR. SCIiRIER SOME TIME DURING THE MONTH OF APRIL AT WFIICH DIO ACTION WTLL BE TAKEN ON THf.. PROPOSED REZONING AND INSTRUCTING TFIE CITY GLERK TNAT THIS WpRK SESSIOM SHOULD BE PUBLISHEQ IN THE CITY'S OFFICIAL NEWSPFlPER The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by P4rs, Mardini, ~yes (5) Scalze, Plardini, Hanson, Fahey, Forsberg. Nayes (0}, Resolution declared adopted, This resolution appears in Resolution Book No, 7, Page 62. Mr. Fahey stated that the results of this work session will be brought back to a regular Council meeting. Mrs, Scalze introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0, 81-3-102 - TABLING ACTION ON THE PROPOSED REZONING QF AREA 3 OF THE SCHRIER PROPERTY WITH THIS AREFl TO BE HFlNDLED I~I TFIE SFlME MFlNnIER AS FlREAS 1 AND 2 Page -10- MINUTES C~ty Council March 4, 79II1 The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mrs. Plardini. qyes (5) Scalze, Plardini, Hanson, Forsberg, fahey. Nayes (0). Resolution declared adopted. This resolution appears in Resolution Book No. 7, Page 63. Rezoning Mrs. Nardini felt that the Waite property should be considered before Of the Parkview Realty Property. Nardini also expressed concern over the Parkview quickness in whi.ch the property would be rezoned shou7d the Council do Realty so at this time. Property ~ Mr. Fahey stated that the Council has been considering this for a long time and there has been nothing quick about it. Mayor Hanson stated that any rezoning would have to pass by a 4/5 th's vote of the Council. The Attorney pointed out that should a rezoning motion fail, the matter would have to wait until another rezoning request came up again. Fahey stated that he felt R-2 was a reasonable alternative. The current owner does have some rights on the property. Fahey again stated that he would like to see the money spent on the larger piece of property, The Attorney stated that it would be improper to consider the Waite property before the Parkview Realty property as this is their order on the agenda. fahey felt that Parkview Realty will accept the R-2 zoning and the rezoning will not cost the City any money. Mr. Fahey introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTIODI N0. H1-3-103 - REZONING THE PROPERTY OWDIED BY PARKVIE4d REALTY LOCFlTED ON THE EAST SIDE OF RUTH S7RFET FROM R-3 TO R-2 The foregoing resolution was du7y seconded by Mrs. Scalze. qyes (4) Fahey, Scalze, Hanson, Forsberg. Nayes (1~ Plardini. Resolution declared adopted. This reso1ution appears in Resolution Book No. 7, Page 64. By Resolution No. 81-3-103 the Council rezoned the following property fi'rom R-3 to R-2: That part West of M.St.P, and S. Ste. Marie R/R B7ock 1, North Heights Addition. Rezoning Of Mayor Hanson stated that tonight's hearing on the rezoning of the 4laite Waite property was for rezoning it from R-3 to R-2. On January 13, 1981 a Property request was made to rezone the property from R-3 to R-2 PUD, Flction On Ruth Str. was tabled on this request until the March a~, 1981 meeting, Page -11- MIPlUTES CITY COUNCIL March ~i, 19II1 Mrs. Scalze pointed out that the Planning Commission voted 7-0 to approve the R-2. PUD rezoning. Mrs. Sca1ze felt that the vacation of Lake Street, the concern of off-street parking and the availability of dividing the property later could be handled in the PUD developer's agreement. The Flttorney informed the Council that before they can resume consideration of the P,-2 PUD rezoning request they must remove i1: from table. Mrs. Scalze introduced the following resolution and moved its acioption: RESOLUTION N0, 81-3-10~4 - REMOVING FROM TFlBLE MR. WAITF's REQUEST OF JANUFlRY 13, 1981 FOR A PUD R-2 REZO~IING OF HIS PROPERTY KNOWN AS LOTS 5 THROUGH 23 AND 36 ThiROUGH 48, BLOCK 13, NORTH HEIGHTS FlDDITION The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Fahey, /{yes (5) Scalze, fahey, Hanson, Forsberg, Nardini. Nayes (0), Resolution declared adopted. This resolui:ion appears in Reso7ution Book No. 7, Page 65. Mrs. Nardini suggested that Mr. blaite's property be a part of the work session that Council has already scheduled with Mr. Schrier as Mr. Waite is requesting three variances. Mr. Fahey stated that under R-2 PUD zoning no variance would have to be granted. Mr. Fahey stated that a PUQ agreement would be worked out with Mr. Waite and the City and this agreement would become the zoning for the property. Fahey also stated that with the PUD the City has more control over what the deve1opment will look like. Fahey stated that by rezoning to R-?. PUD it wi11 not cost the City anything. P9rs. Scalze introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. 81-3-105 - REZONING THE WAITF PROPERTY KNOWN AS LOTS 5 TFIROUCH 7_3 AND 36 THROUGH hII, BLOCK;1~, DIORTH HEIGHTS ADDITION FROM R-3 to R-2 PUD ~~~ ~_ The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Fahey. /{yes (5) Scalze, Fahey, Hanson, Forsberg, Nardini. Nayes (0). Resolution declared adopted. This reso1ution appears in Resolution Book No. 7, Page 66. Rezoning Of Mrs. Scalze pointed out that there was no one present from White Oaks ulhite Oaks Builders-Serco, Inc, present at tonight's meeting. Builders Property The City Clerk stated that notices went out by certified mail. On Viking Drive Page -12- minuTEs City Council March 4, 1981 Mrs, Scalze stated that one of the reasons for the rezoning was the drainage ofi' the area. Mr. Fahey stated that this is not the sole reason for the rezoning and the record should not reflect it as being the sole reason, Mr. Fahey introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTIOM N0. 81-3-106 - REZONING THE WHITF OAKS BUILDERS- SERCO, INC. PROPERTY LOCATE~ Of~1 VIKING DRIVE FROM R-3 TO R-2 The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Hanson, Pyes (5) Fahey, Hanson, Nardini, Scalze, Forsberg. Nayes (0). Resolution declared adopted, This resolution appears in Resolution ~iook Mo. 7, Page 67, By Reso1ution No. 81-3-106 the Council rezoned the following property from R-3 to R-2: Unplatted Lands. Ex. W, 150 Ft, of E. 1841 Ft, of the N. 153 Ft, & Ex. GI, 520 ft, of E. 1691 Ft, of N, 203 Ft,; The W. 670 ft, of E. 1841 Ft. of Part of SE 1/~4 lying N, & W, of Hwy. 36 & 35 E. Connection `'ec. 7, Township 29, Range 22. Parcel No. 53-00700-170-79. Frattalone Mr. Frank Frattalone appeared 6efore the Council, Mr. Frattalone stated Property that he owns a piece of R-1 property next to the Schrier property, Mr. Frattalone stated that he would like to develop this property, Mr. frattalone suggested that the City could consider this property for Senior Citizen housing. Mr. Fahey stated that he might be interested in considering this ~roperty for senior citizens, but that he was not in favor of upzoning any R-1 property, Mr, Frattalone informed the Council that due to the closeness of the railroad tracks it is difficult to get FHA f9nancing for single family homes, It m~ght be easier to get this financing for duplexes, Mr. frattalone stated that when he bought the property he thought it was zoned R-2, It wasn't until this summer that he found out it was R-1, Mr, Fahey suggested that Mr, Frattalone get together with Mr. Schrier and perhaps together they could come up with a proposa7 for the develop- ment of the area. Page -13- Mz~iu-rEs City Council March 4, 19II1 Fldjourn Mrs, Scalze introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOCUTION N0. 81-3-107 - ADJOURNIDI6 The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Hanson, Pyes (5) Scalze, Nanson, Forsberg, Fahey, Nardini.. Nayes (0). Resolution declared adopted. This resolution appears in Resolution Book No. 7, Page 68. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:36 P.M, Respectfully submittecl, ! i i~ `' 'r ~ ,~~--~ , ~~ ;-~z--~:c? ~ Ka~n Glanzer ~ Recording Secretary Page -1~4-