My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 09/13/2000
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2000
>
Agenda - Council - 09/13/2000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2025 1:47:28 PM
Creation date
9/8/2003 12:33:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
09/13/2000
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
261
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
City Administrator Norman noted that Arncor is not aware of this plan, but had indi~!~l~a~,~ i; <br /> their expansion would be to the north of the current building. <br /> <br /> City Engineer Jankowski explained that the road would go into the Maken prop~', ~:~'~ ~t.and if <br /> Amcor plans to construct an expansion in front of their existing building it,.~t be tigh~?i~ii~i: <br /> <br /> Consensus of the Committee was to direct staff to contact Altr0n. to 0b~;,,their <br /> regarding the location of the road and offering an access from 143~ A~¢ '~4/ <br /> <br /> Case//4: Update on Rademacher/T.H. #47 Access Iss~/¢i*¢~'' <br /> <br /> City Engineer Jankowski stated that the Committee had: a~.rlumber of ~o~berns with the proposal <br /> and suggested that the action be delayed so they w~Ul'~t'h2:ke an op~0ii'U~:.to meet with the <br /> <'i ~ '..~ .- :*;;:i '-, <br /> property owners to discuss the proposal further. ':~ ~;~ <br /> <br /> Councilmember Zimmerman stated that the preferred decision w0~t':~e no accesses from T.H. <br /> ~47. MnDOT's position is that they 59~uld accept a fight-in accessi~i-:~p Ci~i~as to buy the <br /> fight-of-way and the City would need~:~g~eth~g of value in exchange fo~ ~t[~}~:;'' <br /> Councilmember Hendfiksen Etat~ thE~;,he hop'e's':.to¢(~ee ~e preservii/6h status of T.H. //47 <br /> upgraded and does not want ~3:~:'See th~'i'~ity in a si~i~iBhi:whe~e~ ~ several years, the City is <br /> requested to pay funds to Rademacher t(~::}Sose the a~&'~. He'do~'~:~°t see a benefit for the City <br /> with the expansion of Cobalt Street. '~¢:5~i~ ~-:!~' <br /> <br /> Councilmembe,:Zi~i~ noted that the':e~ty Council has not gi,~en any other entity access <br /> <br /> Terry, Sfi~dler, OperationsM-Jnager.Radem~ach~Companies, stated they understand that in the <br /> devei~5~e~hi!~greement::l~Y:':are required t$:.~Cate the access, but they feel the fight-in only <br /> access woul~-:'-accomm~sdi~gZall::-thre~'~':~l{eS ~d prevent all three parcels from having separate <br /> access. '~i¢i:i'!,.~(i' <br /> <br /> City En~eer Jankowg~exp[amed the deal that MnDOT proposed ~s to allow one ingress 600 <br /> feet from ~e :mtersectmn.,,.,::, and dedmate all other access from the other parcels. When the parcel <br /> develops, th'~.;3nly way ~affi~'~Would be able to access the site would be to come up Cobalt Street <br /> h,: : .: <br /> and have a r/ghMn accesJ~Would allow for another access. <br /> <br /> Councilmemb~ Hendriksen stated that he understands the implications, but the only way he <br />~;,)~.:,would consi~l~F a plan would be if Rademacher Companies would enter into another <br /> *~;(}!:~evelopme~ a~jreement stating that if the status of T.H. #47 is upgraded the fight-of-access goes <br /> l hy, imbfi't any money from the City. But the deal would still need to be part of a package that <br /> wo~d ~ake sense to everyone. <br /> <br />-24- <br /> <br />Public Works Committee/June 27, 2000 <br /> Page 4 of 6 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.