My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
10/20/94
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Dissolved Boards/Commissions/Committees
>
Economic Development Commission
>
Agendas
>
1994
>
10/20/94
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2025 2:52:00 PM
Creation date
10/21/2003 12:04:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Document Title
Economic Development Commission
Document Date
10/20/1994
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
117
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
March 2,f1994 <br />Page 3 ! <br /> <br />Mr. Haas! objections to additional bridge crossing are listed below: <br /> <br />· Ti <br /> ad <br />· Tr, <br /> off <br /> de: <br />· Th <br />· Th <br /> <br />Mr. Carl~ <br />members <br />Ramsey's <br /> <br />e Rum River has scenic river status, and the DNR would never permit an <br />Jitional crossing. <br />~vel demand in Andover is toward the east and the south. Without services <br />;red to Andover residents in Ramsey (to the west), there would be no <br />aand for an additional crossing. <br />e two existing crossings are sufficient to meet demand. <br />e cost of an additional crossing is prohibitive given the level of demand. <br /> <br />~rg suggested that the idea of an additional crossing could be pursued by <br />)f the Andover and Ramsey City Councils, pending recommendations from <br />comprehensive plan study. <br /> <br />Three issue areas were discussed with Mr. Elwyn Tiuldenberg, who is the manager <br />of the Comnty's Public Services Division. It is the Pubhc Services Division that is <br />contractin~ with BRW to prepare the transportation plan update. The three issues <br />are listed ~elow: <br /> <br />· Trqnsportation proposals and plans for Bu-vn. s Township <br />· Co ,~uty interest in an additional Rum River crossing <br />· Co~uty interest in an additional Mississippi River crossing <br /> <br />Burns Td. wnship: <br /> <br />There arei no proposals or plans to improve or add to the road system in Burn <br />Township..~ <br /> <br />Rum River Crossing: <br /> <br />Mr. Tinkl9nberg felt the bridge strategy could have some merit, although its <br />implemen ~flation would be many years into the future. At this point, land uses that <br />would be ~rved by an additional crossing are large lot residential without services. <br />Because s~'vices would not be brought to the area for many years, commercial, office, <br />or industrial uses would not be developed, and travel demand for an additional bridge <br />would be lbw. <br /> <br />The bridg~could possibly be beneficial as part of a strategy to relieve traffic volumes <br />on TH 47. iTraffic on TH 47 that is produced from residences between CSAH 27 and <br />the bridge {alignment, could cross the Rum River from Ramsey into Andover and travel <br />south to T~. 10 on CSAH 7. Traffic volumes on CSAH 7 are relatively low, and it <br />could function as a reliever for TH 47 if a bridge were constructed. <br /> <br />%\ <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.