PL MINUTES 07211987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• 1 -6- 2 Mr. Childs said that an example where a swale was required across a 3 property to maintain drainage would be the Nesser property on St. 4 Anthony Boulevard. 5 Hoxmeier Reiterates Neighbors' Opposition to a House on that Corner 6 Jerome and Marjorie Shaddrick, 2510 and 2508 - 37th Avenue N.E. , and 7 Kenneth Hoxmeier, 3657 Roosevelt Street N.E. , were the only neighbors 8 who had accepted the City Manager' s invitation to attend the meeting and 9 only the latter spoke. He said: 10 *he lived just south of the subject property- and perceived a drive- 11 way off Roosevelt would be "awfully close" to the stop sign at 12 that. intersection and any large object like a truck in the new 13 driveway might obstruct the view of the sign; 14 *since his driveway would be directly parallel to the new drive- 15 way, he would expect he and his new neighbors would be fighting 16 over where to .store their snow in the winter; 17 *St. Paul doesn' t permit certain species of trees, including blue 18 spruce to be planted on the City' s right-of-way and any tree which 19 obstructs drivers ' vision is removed with a chain saw in that •20 City; 21 *the City could also follow St. Paul' s example of sending out 22 someone from the forestry department to assure the right type of 23 vegetation is planted next to the intersection; 24 . *he was still concerned about how the drainage behind his garage 25 would be handled after the lot is built up and wondered who would 26 be responsible for the maintenance of the swale; 27 *continued to perceive there would be a problem with obstruction of 28 view on that corner during a winter of heavy snows if a house is 29 built so close to the intersection; 30 *questioned whether the Supreme Court -ruling meant only a house 31 could be built on that lot; 32 *he understood one of the Flynn relatives were going to contest 33 the will, which could mean the matter could be held up on court 34 for a year or more. 35 Mr. Hoxmeier concluded by saying he was present to represent the 36 concerns of not only himself but of all the neighbors who had signed the 37 petition against the development of this lot which had been presented at 38 the June 16th hearing. He said those concerns continued to be related 39 to the potential for drainage problems and vision obstruction if a house �0 is built on that small corner lot. He also stated that it was the