1987-08-11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.'.~~11' III I I Council Meeting Minutes August 11, 1987 Resident stated he is basically interested in cutting down the traffic; believes council is coming up with the proper form of re- view; and the No Right Turn signs and Silver Lake Road are both problems. Because Benke had seen drivers using Robert Lee Restaurant for a turn-around, he believed that would be a good argument for remov- ing the signs; and asked Proper if it would be helpful to have a traffic engineer do an analysis. Proper felt it might give the city a new look at the situation and will make a few calls to de- termine what the cost of such a study might be. Williams indicated he had the same questions as Brandt, and felt he could not make a decision until there is better information. Dana Harris, 1203 Brighton Square, indicated Police Chief John Ke 11 ey talked wi th Ramsey County about i nsta 11 i ng a "No Right Turn on Red" sign on Silver Lake Road/Palmer Drive; the county stated it could not place such a sign at that intersection. Harris also noted that Silver Lake Road, between 1-694 and Mississippi, is the most traveled county road in northern Ramsey County; and indicated the Silver Lake Road/Palmer Drive intersection is somewhat unsafe and suggested anything to remove the unnecessary traffic through this section would be helpful. Harris indicated those entitled to a permit live at 2287 Palmer Drive, the senior citizen housing development, and noted most of them do not drive; and stated Robert Lee is irritated with people using his parking lot as a turn-around. Motion by Benke, seconded by Gunderman, to ASK STAFF TO (1) CON- SIDER BRANDT'S AND WILLIAMS.S QUESTIONS OF ATTORNEY, ENGINEERING, AND LAW ENFORCEMENT; (2) ARRANGE FOR A TRAFFIC STUDY BEFORE/AFTER SIGNS; AND (3) REPORT BACK AT WHICH TIME COUNCIL MAY SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING. 4 Ayes - 0 Nayes, Motion Carried Mattila briefly reviewed staff report regarding the placement of a transformer (4 feet by 5 feet by 3 feet) in conjunction with Reso- lution 86-28. Gunderman asked if residents and developers have met together; Mattila responded he has discussed with both groups individually. In response to Benkels question, Mattila stated it is Harstad Com- panies's prerogative to construct the fence as long as it complies with the ordinance, and explained the transformer is a technical deviation from the resolution (which addresses mechanical equip- ment) . Williams asked for clarification that Harstad Companies wants to leave the transformer where it is and construct a fence on the west property line; Mattila so confirmed. Page 4 Planner Inter- pretation of Resolution 86-28/ Harstad Report 87-200