Laserfiche WebLink
<br />the notice, all persons present were afforded opportunity to <br /> <br />be heard, and t.he names and addresses of t.he persons appearing <br /> <br />and heard by the Council, and the substance of the views <br /> <br />presented by them were as follows: <br /> <br />lvlR. NILLIA1'I1 l,mRRITT, Hil1nesot.a Highway Department: They <br />agree wit.h the concept of the proposed plan. <br /> <br />NR. DEANE ANI<LAl'J, Ramsey County Engineering Department: Said <br />that Ramsey County proposes to divide County Road B to Pasca~ Avenue <br />on the east side of Snellir!g Avenue with mediaLs and traffic signals. <br />They also propose, with or without the approval of this proposed <br />project, to bring the median on County Road B on the west side of <br />Snelling Avenue up to the existing frontage Road. <br /> <br />~rn. BURI~ M. RA~10ND, Village Manager: Indicated that the <br />village had received notice of suit in wh ic 11. the village is the <br />defendant and l<'lr. Richard Knutson is the plaintiff, to show cause <br />as to why the village should not issue Mr. Knutson a building <br />permit for the construction of a Burger King restaurant on the <br />corner of Snelling and the frontage road (on the southwest <br />corner of the intersection), such construction anticipating a <br />curb cut on County Road B and on the existing frontage road <br />which would be blocked off under this proposed construction. <br /> <br />tm. J. E. BRILL, JR., attorney at law, 512 Builders exchange <br />Building, Minneapolis, Minnesota, representing Dr. Blomberg <br />of the Blomberg Clinic, Hr. Jack Adamson of the Last Frontier <br />Restaurant, ~tt. Harvey Charbonneau af the Roadside Restaurant, Mr. <br />Richard Knutson of the Arden Inn, ltr. Russ Dohlner of l~. Donut, and <br />Hr. C. W. Halverson of NCDonald's Restaurant. They oppose the <br />improvement primarily on the basis of their financial participation <br />in it since their understanding is that they would be assessed for <br />the full cost of the improvement. He said if their assessment <br />would be the minimum of 20% and that could also be spread among <br />other people who abut on the service road both north and south of <br />County Road B, particularly the apartment projects that generate a <br />great deal of traffic, their attitude might be tempered somewhat. <br />They oppose the improvement because they feel it won't help <br />their properties because they will not be benefitted. They also <br />feel it would be somewhat aggravating to the availability of the <br />traffic into their property because of the circuitous route of <br />