Laserfiche WebLink
-7- <br /> The amendment to the resolution was duly seconded by Councilman Dougherty. <br /> Voting on the amendment: <br /> Aye: O'Connor, Dougherty, Springer, Sorenson <br /> Nay: None <br /> Absent not voting: Bailey <br /> Amendment declared adopted. <br /> Voting on the resolution as amended: <br /> Aye: O'Connor, Dougherty, Springer, Sorenson <br /> Nay: None <br /> Absent not voting: Bailey <br /> Resolution declared adopted as amended. <br /> Councilman Sorenson left the meeting at this point. <br /> A petition was received by the Mayor requesting a reopening of the Public <br /> Hearing on the Street Improvement proposed for Silver Lane from Silver Lake <br /> Road to Oakwood Drive. The Council discussed the improvement and the legal <br /> aspects of reopening the hearing at length. Mrs. Arvid Johnson asked if the <br /> • Village had proposed to assess 33rd Avenue N.E. on a 1/3 side street basis <br /> and she was informed that she was correct in her statement. Mr. Robert Mes- <br /> enbring asked who decided the 44' street width. He was informed that the <br /> Village engineers of New Brighton and St. Anthony had projected the traffic <br /> load and made the recommendations for the 44' width. <br /> Councilman Dougherty moved and seconded by Councilman Springer that the <br /> Village engineer prepare plans for a 32' width roadway in addition to the <br /> 44' width which has been approved and that the Village of New Brighton be <br /> contacted to inquire of any objections they might have to a 32 ' wide roadway. <br /> Motion Carried. <br /> James Daly, attorney for the petitioners, asked if the width was definite and <br /> why the Village did not consider a normal width residential street satis- <br /> factory. He was told the width was a recommended width by the enginocrs and <br /> that a 32' width was being considered. The Village engineer stated that <br /> anticipated traffic warranted the design as proposed. Mr. Daly stated that <br /> he would work with the Village staff on any questions he might have. A <br /> property owner at 4029 Penrod questioned the advisability of the 44' width. <br /> Mr. Don Gearhart, 4016 Shamrock Drive asked if the property owners will <br /> be notified of the Council 's decision. He was informed that it would be <br /> possible to notify several of those present when figures were available on <br /> the 32' roadway. <br /> 46 Ordinance 63A was considered for third reading. After discussion, Councilman <br /> Springer moved and seconded by Councilman Dougherty that Ordinance No. 63A <br /> be approved on third reading. <br />