Minutes - Council - 02/09/1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I i I I IO I i I I I I ',. equal $902 annually for 10 years. If the project proceeds, there will be a 60-day waiting period from the date of the public heating in which opposition could be petitioned. If 51% or more'are against the project, Council could not proceed. If there is no opposition, Council decides if they want to order the project or not. CITIZEN INPUT Southern portion: Andries Hillebregt, 16926 Bison Street N.W., Ramsey, inquired why the City is wasting the peoples time again and why the City did the study again for a through street. The majority of the people on the south side really want a cul-de-sac. This proposal failed last time because of the cost. The cost is more reasonable this time but stated that the cul-de-sac would be cheaper yet. Mr. Jankowski stated that Bison Street N.W. was planned as a through street. Mr. Hillebregt stated that the City takes for granted they have the easement but they don't. For that reason, everyone is thinking it should be a through street. Mr. Jankowski stated that he received a number of letters from residents in Golden Eagle Estates supporting the through street. These letters will be entered as part of the public record. Randy Keyser, 16967 Bison Street N.W., Ramsey, stated he lives adjacent to the cul-de- sac. He stated that "all of us (100%) on the south side want cul-de-sacs. We get heckles from behind us but they won't be paying for it." He inquired if the other people on 168th have b~n notified as there would be more traffic. He suggested keeping the street as a cul- de-sac and asked why others should have input when they don't share the cost. Resident, 169th, Ramsey - stated that Mr. Keyser was partially right. 169th will get a flow of the traffic and a through street would help eliminate the traffic. He stated he has three children, aged 2, 3 and 5 and he is more concerned with the children's safety than with the cost of the project. John Anderley, 16917 Bison Street N.W., Ramsey, stated he has lived here for 26 years and this .controversy has gone on and on and on. Meetings have occurred with Councils and Commissions. Discussions have ensued about more traffic, four in forty, no more construction, City sewer and water, etc. Nothing has really changed and he doesn't understand the concern about all the traffic. The cul-de-sac is already there on 169th which means the ordinance was violated when it was new. Now you're asking us to put in a through street because the City erred. The residents are asking for a cul-de-sac; the City says no; .the developer asks for a cul-de-sac; the City says yes. He added this shouldn't be considered two projects, that's silly. He stated he doesn't know why it's two projects other than the controversy over the traffic. On the last study there was a benefit for Trott Brook, not so on this study. Mr. Jankowski stated it was proposed that Trott Brook would have a share. Mr. Anderley stated the City hasn't handled this matter well at all from the beginning. In 1990, the City Council came to the conclusion that if the taxpayers pay $6,1300 a piece, they should have a say in the construction. We petitioned for the cul-de-sac and we've been totally ignored every time a new study is done. Ninety-five percent of the people on the southern :end won't sign it. It is a waste of time if the City is proposing it as through street. Public Hearing - Bison St./City Council/February 9, 1993 Page 2 of 4