HomeMy WebLinkAboutgr00090_000049_pg040February 12, 1979 Page 3
Mayor McCarty presented a placque to the Sno- Mounties Club and thanked
them for all they had done for Mounds View.
Mayor McCarty recessed the regular meeting and opened the public hearing
for Dailey Knolls.
PUBLIC HEARING - DAILEY KNOLLS
Acting Administrator Anderson reported that the request was originally
submitted on November 9, 1977 and has since been before the Planning
Commission several times and before the Council once.
Councilmember Rowley added that Council had directed the developer and
property owners in the area to determine on their own how to put in
services.
Margaret Kramer, 7663 Groveland Road stated that she was objecting to
the plat because she wanted all services to be put in together. She
added that at one time five of the seven property owners had been
interested in having services put in, but two were against it and the
Council had then directed them to put in their own services if they
planned to develop.
Mayor McCarty explained to Mrs. Kramer that the required 35% petition
was only to insure a public hearing on the matter, not to have the
project put in.
Jim Celt, 2700 West 106th stated that he owned the east half of Lot 4.
He stated that with Project 1978 -6, it was proposed to bring the ser-
vices in but it was determined through study that Lots 5, 6 and 7
were not buildable. He added that Dailey Knolls has since bought Lot 7.
Attorney Meyers explained that the Council was concerned with the hearing
under the ordinance regarding preliminary plats, and that they were now
at a stage with a petition from a property owner to subdivide his property.
The Council had told him to get more land to bring the lots up to code,
which the owner has done, and now the Council must consider the public
health, safety and welfare with this request. He added that setting a
public improvement hearing would be beyond the scope of the hearing
that was now going on and also added that 35% of the property owners
would have to petition for an improvement hearing.
Leonard Kramer stated he was representing his parents. He added that
Staff had presented a report on March 13 recommending the utilities be
placed along Silver Lake Road. Attorney Meyers replied that the issue
of utilities was discussed at the public hearing and one of the main
issues was the cost, as it would be very expensive to put services in
along Silver Lake Road for all the lots as some were not buildable,
and that cost would have to be paid for some way along the line.
Mr. Kramer stated that Twin City Testing had tested the lots during the
summer and determined that Lots 5, 6 and 7 would require additional
work and money but they could be prepared for building on.