Laserfiche WebLink
PLANNING COMMISSION <br />CITY OF LITTLE CANADA <br />515 LITTLE CANADA ROAD <br />LITTLE CANADA, MINN. 55117 <br />Minutes of the regular meeting, <br />Planning Commission - City of Little Canada <br />July 6, 1978. <br />The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of <br />Little Canada was held on the 6th day of July, 1978, at 8 :00 P.M. <br />at 515 Little Canada Road in said City. <br />The following members were present: Peter Costa, Virginia Fisher, <br />Gene DeLonais, Joe Vitale, Ralph Nardini, Mike Fahey, Jack Radford, <br />Earl Rossez, Frank Winiecki. <br />The following members <br />Minutes approved as r <br />SPRUCE DEVELOPMENT: <br />Tom Peterson <br />LITTLE CANADA <br />INDUSTRIAL PARK: <br />Ray Krois <br />were absent: Dick Boss III, Tom Keenan. <br />ead from June meeting. <br />Tom Peterson appeared requesting approval for the <br />concept of a 30 x 32 addition to existing Spruce <br />Development Office Building on County Road C. <br />Joe Vitale moved we approve the concept provided it <br />meets the codes and planners recommendations. <br />Seconded by Earl Rossez. <br />Motion carried 8 -0. <br />Ray Krois appeared with preliminary plat for develop- <br />ment of portion of Little Canada Industrial Park into <br />Light Industrial and R -2 areas. <br />Nearby residents Ray Eckstrom, 73 Labore Rd., Carol <br />Tomaszewski, 2872 Jackson, and Marianne Auge, 92 <br />LaBore Rd., appeared and spoke in opposition to plat <br />since density would be too great and would have an ad- <br />verse impact on neighboring residents. Marianne Auge <br />also objected because of the impact of the density on <br />the already overcrowed Little Canada Schools. <br />Bob Carrier, 29 LaBore Rd., suggested city consider <br />purchasing proposed Beam Avenue for park purposes. <br />Planning Commission had previously rejected this <br />idea because proposed park area was too small. <br />Mike Fahey moved to deny preliminary plat on basis <br />that an R -2 proposal is too dense, property is <br />presently R -1, and development of R -2 on Beam Ave. <br />is out of character with surrounding neighborhood. <br />Seconded by Virginia Fisher. <br />Motion defeated: 5 - 3. <br />