Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Steve Jankowski <br /> <br />From: <br />Sent: <br />To: <br />Subject: <br /> <br />Grant Riemer <br />Tuesday, May 20, 2008 9:28 AM <br />Steve Jankowski <br />FW:. Proposed 164th Lane NW Expansion <br /> <br />From: Geo Rule [mailto:georule@civilwarstlouis.com] <br />Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 5:20 PM <br />To: Brian Olson; Grant Riemer <br />,Cc: deb@dahoudek.com <br />Subject: Proposed 164th Lane NW Expansion <br /> <br />Dear Messrs Olson & Riemer-- <br /> <br />Through the efforts of oneof our neighbors, Greg Fritz, we (my wife and I) have just become aware of a proposed <br />project to widen 164th Lane NW in front of our house in Northfork, taking a foot or more of our land for the purpose of <br />adding a sidewalk and bike lane to just the 164th Lane NW portion of Northfork. We understand we will be charged for <br />the privilege as well. This would be in addition to the couple thousands of dollars we'd have to spend to redo the <br />sprinkler systems on both sides of the outer boundaries of our property. As I like to say "we live on the corner of 164th <br />and 164th", so I would guesswe own the most frontage on 164th Lane NW in all of Northfork and thus would bear the <br />heaviest burden. <br /> <br />I'm writing you today to express our complete opposition to the expansion project. I understand from Greg that we <br />should have received some type of survey from the City, but I do not recall ever seeing any such thing --and we certainly <br />open/review every piece of mail we receive that says "City of Ramsey" on it. At any rate, please accept this email(or <br />pass this on to whoever needs to see it) as our vote AGAINST widening 164th Lane NW. <br /> <br />Quite aside from the personal consideration ofthe damage and repair costs such a project would incurto our property, <br />we just do not see the need for it. Both my wife and I ride our bicycles in Northfork and its trails on a regular basis, and <br />have never felt threatened or unsafe in doing so. The streets in Northfork are plenty wide for walking, riding, and <br />motorists. Further, as I'm sure you must be aware, Northfork's streets do not attract "through traffic" of any degree. <br />The only people who drive back here already live here, and thus the volume of traffic is not all that great. Lastly, it <br />seems to me to be pure idiocy to add such an "amenity" to just a small portion of the neighborhood. All or nothing is <br />definitely the way to go for such a thing. Not to mention that the 164th Lane NW portion of Northfork is at the back of <br />the development and gets the least amountoftraffic.ofthe entire community. For all these reasons, quite aside from <br />the personal inconvenience and cost, my wife and I are opposed to this project. <br /> <br />Thankyou for your time in reading this missive, and your consideration in making sure it comes to the attention of the <br />appropriate members of city government, whether that be yourself or others. <br /> <br />Cordially, <br /> <br />George ("Geo") and Deb Rule <br />9165 164th LaneNW <br />Ramsey, MN 55303 <br />763-205-6436 <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />-94- <br />