Laserfiche WebLink
flight pattern. <br />It has been stated that these businesses would be grandfathered in. it <br />is our contention WHY CREATE A HAZARD FOR MANY, JUST TO BENEFIT A FEW? <br />III) The statement that an improved airport will increase both business <br />and residential property. valuations is in fact both misleading and an <br />insult to one's intelligence. It is a well known fact that airports <br />cause a devaluation in residential properties located in the immediate <br />flight patterns. why do you suppose that the Veteran's Administration <br />requires a buyer to sign a VA Airport Noise Clause when he is considering <br />buying a home located close to an airport (enclosed find a copy of the <br />clause). <br />IV) Let's all face the fact that industrial development will not become <br />a reality for .Ramsey .in-the near.. future. I -94 has taken the majority of <br />truck traffic away from Highway 10. There are many lots and industrial <br />sites located in Hennepin County which are waiting for development with <br />sewer and water already in and present landowners in a precarious situation. <br />It is IMPERATIVE that the city of Ramsey in its zeal to move forward does <br />not create a situation which_ will place Its present landowners in a <br />position where they will be unable to,pay high -taxes and face possible loss of <br />their properties. <br />V) Why would the city consider airport development and create a situa- <br />tion that would put airplanes and residents in jeopardy? The landfill <br />is now close to the.maximum height limitations and with the permits al- <br />ready issued will soon exceed maximum height. This landfill attracts <br />birds which are also a hazard. <br />Some questions to be considered: <br />#1) At the last Public Hearing why was-our City Attorney not present to <br />answer questions? <br />#2) Why has the attorney been absent for alot of the meetings recently <br />held in the city? <br />#3) Why did the Airport Commission have an emergency meeting during the <br />last Public Hearing for the airport? <br />#4) During the last Public Hearing when a city official was asked if the <br />airport was already a fact of life the official stated that the City <br />Council has not approved it. Then, why later during the meeting did that <br />same official state that in order for the airport to be stopped a petition <br />had to be signed by residents forcing a vote to be held. Does this sound <br />like the airport is not going through? <br />