HomeMy WebLinkAboutgr00090_000057_pg309Mounds View City Council November 9, 1981
Regular Meeting Page Four
-arch 1, 1982.
3 ayes 0 nays
Official Rose reported that Staff is still
working with the developer on the final
submissions, and the review will be moved to
the November 23, 1981 agenda.
Motion /Second: Blanchard /Doty to table action
on the Tyson Trucking final development review
until November 23, 1981.
3 ayes 0 nays
Official Rose reported that Mrs. Wilmar
Menke, 2736 County Road H2, had been in to
see him to voice an objection to a curb cut
from the Silver Lake Woods project that would
line up with her front window. Official Rose
drew a sketch of the area involved. He explained
that after he had reviewed the project with her,
she had seemed satisfied but he had told her he
iould bring the matter to the attention of the
puncil. Official Rose added that this problem
,gas becoming quite common in new developments as
the roads were planned specifically to have many
corners and turns to slow down traffic. He also
stated that the road could not be moved either
direction without causing a problem for another
resident along County Road H2.
Motion Carried
11. Final Development
Review, Tyson
Trucking, Development
Agreement #81-50,
Resolution No. 1383
Motion Carried
12. Report of Building
and Zoning Official
Attorney Meyers reported that the City had been 13. Report of Attorney
served a lawsuit by Harstad and Todd, asking for
damages and a preliminary restraining order on
the Eigenheer plat, with a court date of
November 12, 1981. He pointed out that Mr.
Eigenheer had not been named in the suit, just
the City.
Attorney Meyers reported that, based on previous
Council action, he would proceed with legal
action on the airport issue, as the reply from
the chairman of the Metropolitan Council had not
been satisfactory.
Attorney Meyers informed the Council of recent
action by the Supreme Court, where in one case
city was ruled against for denying the renewal
a liquor license, and in another case the
Supreme Court determined that the reclassification
of water from private to public was not a taking,
which should be kept in mind on Ordinance No. 48.
He added he would give copies of the rulings to