Agenda - Council - 04/25/1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

snowmobiles would be allowed there; this would be for equestrian use. The State standards for the equestrian trail is six feet wide but we propose it as ten feet wide. We also show a trail from the stable area and a trail head where you can park your car and unload your horse or snowmobile right below the existing saddle club. The trail surrounds the North Fork neighborhoods. Mayor Hardin stated this has been an on-going process since 1993. The map presented shows one scenario at this point in time. Council realizes this map will change. This is used as a planning tool - it is not cast in stone. Tom Kurak, 15001 Sunfish Lake Boulevard N.W., Ramsey, stated he would support an employee hired by the City to take detailed minutes of meetings as most residents are in the dark about details. He felt if detailed minutes were available, residents might be able to get comments to the City Council quicker. Comments could be given before Council is ready to adopt something. With regard to the park and trail plan, Mr. Kurak stated he attended a meeting and there was not a lot of Support from the property owners for the off-road trail system. It would be difficult to police and ir was suggested the homeowners could do it, however they are not interested in doing so. Another problem of off-road trails is the cost. Mr. Kurak expressed support for the on-road trail system or trails where you would expect to see a sidewalk. He added that he cannot support trails in pe6ple's backyards. He is distressed because after a couple of years of planning for a bridge corridor over the Mississippi, it is now omitted from this map. He suggested it may not be the time t° vote on this plan if the bridge corridor is not decided. Mayor Hardin stated, with regard to Mr. Kurak's comment about the minutes, that each Committee meetYmonthly and minutes are taken and are available for residents to review if they wish. The Ramsey Resident contains a shortened version of Council's actions; detailed minutes are available. Terry:Hendriksen, 15631 Ramsey Boulevard N.W., Ramsey, stated that up until this public hearing, there was no horseback riding trail that went to the riding arena because it supposedly was not feasible to do so. Now there is such a trail shown. He suggested we find a better trail because it probably still is not feasible today either. If a 35' trail corridor is taken, it will automatically have to be Paved. In the rural area it is not affordable to have paved trails - they should be left unpaved. If we~are going to talk about using on-road trails, we should remove some of the impediments along: these roads. Mr. Hendriksen continued that it be communicated in the potential Transportation Plan that the earlier bridge crossings have been removed but there will be verbiage that says the bridge will be somewhere between Ramsey Boulevard and Puma Street. That's a very middle-ground approach. MnDOT will probably build the bridge and the corridor will be built by Anoka County. This potential plan is endorsing the east proposal. Mr. Hendriksen disseminated the Anoka County 2010 Transportation Plan. He suggested if we say we will support the bridge crossing, the County will say they already backed it. He reiterated that this endorses the east location. The claim was that the plan will not disrupt businesses on Highway #10; however, at the last meeting, it was stated that businesses would have to be removed - but not at a c6st to the City. Whether the City pays for it or the State pays for it, we, as taxpayers are all impacted. He suggested if the choice is between impacting commercial and residential, it would be betteg to impact the commercial; however, if it's a choice between commercial and future residential, he felt the future residential would be the better choice. Mr. Hendriksen stated that MayOr Hardin proposes the east location going as far noah as County Road #1 t 6. We would have no collector street associated with the bridge crossing unless it is extended as the County has depic~d. If it is as the County depicts, Ramsey would have the burden of all the traffic without the benefit because there is no commercial benefit with the eastern alignment. The City of Dayton withdrew support of the east location as they would prefer the western alignment. He hoped City CounCil would act according to the citizens' opposition to the east location. The west alignment would turn and go to County Road #116 and would provide an east/west collector. There would be no homes or development disturbed. The east alignment would be a net loss of jobs - the west alignment would show an increase in jobs. The west alignment Would be cheaper to build and /(~ Public Hearing/CitYPageCOUncil/March3 of 10 21, 1995