Laserfiche WebLink
March 12, 1979 Page 4 <br />MSP (Rowley- Hodges) to continue the public hearing until April 23, 1979 <br />at 7:40 PM. 5 ayes <br />Mayor McCarty closed the public hearing and opened the next public <br />hearing. <br />PUBLIC HEARING - DAILEY KNOLLS <br />Mayor McCarty stated that since the representative from Dailey Knolls <br />was not present that the Council would not discuss the item and would <br />close the hearing. <br />Mrs. Kremer stated that she had spoken to Mr. Thorson regarding the <br />meeting. Councilmember Rowley added that Staff has a copy of the letter <br />that was sent to him on February 15 notifying him of the meeting. She <br />added that since she has some very specific questions that she would <br />like answered, he would have to be present to answer them. <br />Mayor McCarty stated that since Council has changed the policy on requir- <br />ing developers to be present, they will continue the public hearing and <br />allow him one more chance to appear. Acting Administrator Anderson <br />added that all letters to developers, notifying them of meetings, will <br />be sent registered mail in the future. <br />MSP (Rowley- Hodges) to continue the hearing until March 26, 1979 at 7:40 PM <br />and that Mr. Thorson be sent a registered letter to that effect, and that <br />the letter also indicate that if he chooses to not show up, the action <br />will be totally denied. 5 ayes <br />Councilmember Ziebarth stated that the Council had directed Mrs. Kremer <br />or anyone else interested in getting services in to present the City <br />with a petition, and asked if that had been done yet. Mrs. Kremer <br />replied that it had not since she could not get the required 35 %. <br />Mayor McCarty closed the public hearing. <br />HIGHWAY 10 /PLEASANT VIEW DRIVE SEMAPHORE <br />Acting Administrator Anderson reported that Staff had received a letter <br />dated February 5 from District 5 of MnDOT regarding the installation of <br />a semaphore at Highway 10 and Pleasant View Drive. Acting Administrator <br />Anderson reviewed the two proposals that are being considered and stated <br />that of the two, Alternate #3 was the better. <br />Mayor McCarty polled the Council for their thoughts on the plans. All <br />members stated that they agreed with the Planning Commission recommenda- <br />tion, that they reject the proposed semaphore since it is of no warrant <br />or need to Mounds View residents and would simply infringe on the <br />residential nature of that area. <br />MSP (Forslund- Hodges) to reject the proposed semaphore since it is of <br />no warrant or need to Mounds View residents at this time. 5 ayes <br />