Laserfiche WebLink
Further discussion: Commissioner Ullen suggested, and the Commission agreed, that <br />there may be no need for another joint meeting relating to this issue. <br /> <br />Motion carded. Voting Yes: Chairperson Wagner, Commissioners Stafki, Ullen, Kent <br />and McGhee. Voting No: None. Absent: Commissioners Marquart and Nelson. <br /> <br />Commissioner Ullen extended a thank you from the Commission to the consultants. <br /> <br />Terry Hendriksen to Mr. Gromberg inquired if he had said that the westerly alignment <br />would take out one business but that no business would need to be acquired for the easterly <br />alignment to which Mr. Gromberg stated that is true. <br /> <br />Mr. Hendriksen then inquired if he understood correctly that 53 businesses would be <br />closed as a result of this proposed plan to which Mr. Gromberg explained that Mr. Smith <br />had stated that 53 direct accesses to Highway #10 would be closed. However, these <br />businesses would gain access via a frontage road system out to Highway #10 N.W. The <br />businesses would not be closed. <br /> <br />Mr. Smith concurred that this is what he said. <br /> <br />Mr. Hendriksen then inquired about the businesses under the proposed cloverleaf to which <br />Mr. Gromberg stated that there would be a 200' swath of land taken and it would not affect <br />the businesses. He explained that the proposed comparisons do not provide for a <br />cloverleaf on either alignment. <br /> <br />Mr. Hendriksen stated that as a citizen, he believes City Staff has a history of providing <br />numbers that are seriously skewed to present what Staff wants to present. He stated that <br />the easterly alignment would impact a number of businesses and that there would be <br />businesses under the bridge. There would be a cloverleaf and you would not be allowed to <br />have an intersection at Ramsey Boulevard N.W. and Highway #10. He stated he is very <br />offended Staff will do these things to promote their own personal agenda. <br /> <br />Mr. Smith stated that one of the things he did in the study was to look at an interchange. <br />He stated there are several designs such as the traditional diamond, cloverleaf, one-half <br />diamond combined with cloverleaf, etc. Mr. Smith stated that Mr. Hendriksen's concern <br />about the size of the interchange is a legitimate concern. He sketched some examples of an <br />interchange and stated that exact geometrics are not used at this stage. <br /> <br />Mr. Hendriksen stated that if the swath is one-half mile, Ramsey Boulevard N.W. would <br />be taken out. Businesses such as the Holiday Station, the recreational vehicle business, the <br />veterinarian clinic and the car lot would be lost. A number of businesses will lose access to <br />Highway #10 and Ramsey Boulevard would be lost as well. <br /> <br />Mr. Schwanke stated that exact distances are not known at this time and that would be part <br />of the next phase study. <br /> <br />Mr. Hendriksen stated that one of the concerns of the Economic Development Commission <br />was for a north/south access. This proposal does not provide a north/south access. It's the <br />same as Anoka County has. He stated that one of the differences is the Planning <br />Commission is considering the impact on the City of Ramsey before the impact to citizens <br />outside of Ramsey are considered. He stated that they went with their decision because <br />they took into consideration that many of the residents would lose their houses with the <br />other alignment. <br /> <br />Economic Development Commission/October 20, 1994 <br /> Page 6 of 7 <br /> <br /> <br />