Loading...
01-24-1950 A meeting of the Zoning Commission of the City of Hopkins� Minnesota, was held at the City Hall at 8:00 o�clock P.?�. on Tuesda.y, January 21�, 1954� Present were members; Chairm�an A.G. Larson, Zoning members; Clinton Blomquist� Edward �"� Kokesh, O.J. Parks, City Attorney Fran�c N. Whitney, and City Engineer Frank Q. Laska. �embers absent; A.N. Justus. Chad�^man Larson opened the meetin� and called for a hearing on Resolution #1�; representatives of the National Tea Comg�az�Y and �ccelsior Products Compar�Y appeared in opposition to the proposed a.ffi-�endment. Chairman Larson called for a hearing on Resolution #5; no one appea.red either for or against said resolution except �dr. L.D. Vassar, Who objected to the proposed re—zoning of I,ot 19 Block 1l�, West Minneapolis Third Division as commercial. /Stuart E. Beckman� At the request of the City Council, Mayor W. Harlan Perbix, Joseph T. Anderla, John Ziegler, and Len J. �iilbert, met with the Zoni.ng Commission to discuss the nossible re—zoning of lands adjacent to Trunk Highway No. 7. Mr. F.J. Gleeson and R.J. Hendershott spoke for the residents of Hobby Acres and 5th Avenue North� Mr. Lohman spoke in his own behal.f� Joseph C. Vesely represented Ma^. Dnil Olson�and other citizens also appeared and gave their views. parks moved, Blomquist seconded� that the a�nendment to the Zoning Orcli.nance as proposed by Resolution #!� be aba.ndoned. Carried. � parks moved, Blomquist seconded� that the Zoning �ommission reco;nmend to the City Council the adontion of an ammendment to the Zonin.o Ordinance removing the following described real estate from the residential district and placing the same in the comnercial district; Namel�, Lots Thirteen (13) to Nineteen (19), inclusive, Block Thirteen (13); Lots Thirteen (13) to Ni.neteen (19), inclusive, Block Fourteen (].!4); Lots Thirteen (13) to Nineteen (1Q), inclusive, Block Fifteen (15); Lots Thirteen (1.3) to Nineteen (19), �clusive, Block Sixteen (16); and Lots Five (5) and �ix (6), Block l, and the area formerly described as Lots 1� 2� 3� lt� 21ts and 25, now vacated, Block l, and adjacent vacated streets and alleys, all i.� �est �linnea�olis Third Division and leaving the remaining real estate in t�fest tdinneapolis Third Division i.n the resideutial district. Carried, Kokesh moved, Parks seconded, that the meeting be adjouxmed. \ , . uis , ecre ary .-. N�BII�.S OF ZONIl3G COI�ISSIOAI ATTEST: � � L �G%�� � airman o Zoning ommission, S � ' , A. �. Larson. � �Z•ti� .� } , � - -- `� -�: �,. � ��---= � TO TRE CITY COUHCII, OF HOPBINS � He= C�mmeraial Zoning oY the Iaterssation of FifLh Ave. l�orth and Highwey No. 7. January 17, 195� M� name if Bob Hendershott. reaiding at 112 Wayside Road, Hopkin�, siaas the eummer of 1 j�. I repreaent ao forma,l organization► but am speaking with the �aioxledge and at leaet, the t�.c1t coneent of thoee whoee signatures are oa theee peti�ion• which I now place before you. I eubmit also that I speak for all the citisene of Hopkine iteell. They will in due aourse �peak for themeelve• when a clear uadarstanding of Lhe iasues in- volved ie L�ad. Before I go further I xiah to make it alear to the City Council aad to all present that I have no� Deen retai.ned by any lndiviflval or group nor aan I receiving compeneation for servicaa rendered. The only compensation I hope to get is levoraDle '"� consideration from thie C1ty Council in reaponsa to our plea. I may� therefore. epaak with the greateet goaeiDle $inoerity with no fear that what I feel parsonelly may be in any manner oontradictory to what I have to eay here tonight. I r+ill ae briet. I bave several princi��l pointa to meke. Before aomiag �o them, horever, there are eome questians xhich we are asking ourselve�. and ws turn to you for en anewero �, W2�y la the city couucll foiatia� commeraial zoaing of the 5�h APe. and No. j inter�ectiou oa the resideat• of the ad�acent areas w2�en they have not aeked for itt I�a it to giva us g convenieziae we do not went4 Ie it Deaau�e the eelfieh interaet of one ar two property owners outweighe the intereatn of acoree of familiee ad�acent Lo thie intaraeation.: Or is it beoauee ia the intarest of Lhe city aa a whole. re must nov rtsrt �, developiag a sscond "Main Street?" Z. ��nn wk�t faete and what coa�ifleration• doe� the Zoning Comm�aeioa b�►�e ita rtubboru comtention that this intarsection must be zoned commeroially4 Doe� the Zoa3ng Commieeioa feel Lhat the intereet of �he city as a whole requirea thi�e oommercial developmentt Or ia the Zoning Commisaioa of the opinion thaL the interest of one or Lwo property ormers is of par- ''� amount 3mportancs? j. I8 3! Pelt LhaL theee lot� may never be suilable for resiaezitial deTelop- m�nt.1 we point to a half-doze� familiea now living in houses froatiag oa Wayeide Road vhose lots are ae close to the highxey as theae lotr rould bse Ptiirthermore� the same ie true of houaes presently coastructed a�ad occupiel on 13th, l�th �nd 15th Avea. and as a mstter o! faot. at many looatioas all the �vay betreea St. I+ouie Park aad Ezcelsior. To City Couacil of HopkinQ -2- Jaauary 17, 195� n We ere aeking furthar coaeideration of thia matter Yor the following reasoae: l. Thie zoning irtiperils the best iaterest• of the citisens of the eity o� Hopkiaa. 2. Hr. I,ohmann and Nlr. Oleon who ova the 5th Ave. lots must of neaessity forego the opportunity of makiag a�y further large profit at the ex penee of the entire aity of Hopkias. j. There ie no flemand for commeroial $oning. DnL instead, overahelming oppoeition a� theoe petitions Lestify. u. There i4 a distinoL poeeibility thaL aommercial 2oning rill pre�udic� the State Highvay Department's ul�imata plana Yor traific control oa the hightiey. In eupport of the�e aseertions re aubmit tha followings ^ Commercial Zonin ie Not ia the Beet n ere t _,6 � ��� of the City �e a ylhole 1. It is a poaitive certainty that ao�ercial developme�� rlll iaarea�s an already serious traffic hazard. Surely Lhie point cannot be de- Dnted. The accident record at this intersection ie alread,y crying for oarrection. Any residezit ot IIopkin� oan teatity a• �o th� volume of tiraffia already exi�ting. 2. Commercial development of thie iatertaotiar, xill be the begianiag of a eecond "Nlain Street." Certaialy our Facceleior Avenue merchante� and we who depend upon the fortuaes of our merchantr� do not want ite The pe�iple in thie area would rather trade in Hopkins thau have it. IL would be fouad to be impossible to reeist pleas for further com- n�ercial zoning along the highway. Yt would be a commercial develop- ment that lo not aeeded by the city and will have a seriou� affeot on the welfare of our merchantt. j. The city is abouL Lo experience a eerious ehortage of euit�ble reeldenLial eites. This property ehould be coneerved for residentiel use. This aity is amall in overall area compared with ad�acent com- � muaities. Oar preaent commercial eervices and Yacilitie• are adequute. Se fi h Intereet Muet be SubmerRed For �he (�Qd of Lhe CitF 1. We s_oplaud Mr. Lohmana� e Qiaion and initiative in the 8obby Aare• aact Baollrood developments. But aurely he hae beeu reaeoaably re�►arded for his risk and enterpriee. Remember e.leo tha.ti Mr. Lohm�,na ir not a resident of Hopkiae. Aia intere�E• are striotly pereonal proYite , - � To City Council of Aopkiu� '3- Jan�9 17, 195� � 2. Conditione are diiterent todey then when his plat rae acaeptied Dy the City Council in 19�p. Fi�'th Avenue iti 8lmost all built up. Praeent voluma of traffic wae not fore�een then as�y more th�n otber developmente euoh as NaLional Food, Red Owl, Superior Sspsrator, and others. 3• Many Hobby Acree residente were noL aaere of the oommercial �oning whea they purch�sed their property. Knollwood reeidents xere aot officially a part of Hopkine until �ugt laet month. TheT oou],Q not properly come before this oounoil any earlier. �+. We do not understand that Mr. Olson is preeeing hi s cas�. Per�p� the mdtter is of no importAnce to him. In 8ay event, the first tvo Po�ts apply to his eituation. In Cono1___ ueion Citizens' intere�t is slow to grouae in oivic matters. IL ie 3n �hi• iasue now growing by leapa pnd bounde. Additional ei�t►e,tv,ree will be ad,ded to � this petition in the next sever�,l wePks. We subu�it tr.at thia i8 �uet ae much ein overall cit of any one nei�hborhood. P�adarpental cit y ProDlem aa the problem y poliQy is the issue. Aa for those of ua xho hava alreac'�y si�ned the petitioa, some ere long- time reaid�te of the eit�. Others who have moved here in the lsat ten year• are relativaly new but still re8ldents of Hopkine. We Lrade hera - p�q t�ea here - vote here - eend our children to eehool here - go Lo church here. Moet of us are here to etay beoauee we like iL here. . .. - ' _ ' _ . . . . _ . . _ _R 14 IM R t ! * ^ To City Gouacil of Hopkina � -�- aaauax�r 1T, 195� In conclusion thea Mr. Chairman. we believe we have an�de ouL ths strongeet poesible aaae Yor a reversal of previous Covncil aation. Ne are not quarreling with the fact that at some time in tha past eome prsviov►� City Couacil may have actea in wha,t it thought was the best pos�ibls m�uaer for the city. It me�y have appeared eo at the time. On the other 2ae►ad, it muet ba clearly obvious now that to continue to support that aotioa rrill no longer be in the �eet intare�t� of the City. �'e eubmit tha,t thie meeting ou�t to be regarded ae aa opportuaity. anll perhapa the laet o;�portunity, to aorrect ea error seriously detraaaental to the City. May we ask aox for s definite vote on reveraal from aommsrolal zoniag to residential zoniag the�e three lots on 5th Avenus. � y s� • * � s N s • * +� • �It �r • • �� �� Februury 7, 19SU. City Council Hopkins� tl,i..nesota At the meeting of the �lopkina Zoning Cor�nission held on January 2I�� 1950� the co�miasion wishoe to recor�- mend to thE City Council the adoption of an ar�mend- raent to the 7.� ning Orci.inance removing the folloxing deacribed real estzte from the rcoidential district and placin� the sa�e in the co;rnorcizl diatrict: tJarae�y� Lota 13 to 19, inc�ueive, Block 13; I,ots 13 to 19� incluaive, Alock llt; � Lote 13 to 19� inclusive, Alock 15f Lots 13' to 19, inelusive� Block 16; and Lots 5 and 6, Block l, :uid thv area formerly described as Lota 1, 2, 3, 1�, ?!�, and 25, nrnr vwcated, Block 1� and zdj�cent vacated streets and alleya, a i 1 in �yest Liinr.eaPolis Ttlird Division and loa�� tr.e rocr�inin� real estate in west IbinnezQolis Third Divisior. in the rQsidontial ciiatrict. . I iiUPKINS Zi)FlING CQ;'wISSION Secretary. r