12/01/94 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Commissioner De~emer stated he still felt that the Economic Development Commission would benefit from the in:!ormation from the City of Dayton. Motion by Commissioner Holland and seconded by Commissioner Marquart to submit both recommendations f(Figure 7 [Planning Commission] and Figure 7B [Economic Development Commission]) alor~g with their options to C~ty Council for review. Further Discussi°ia: Commissioner Stafki stated he felt that the concerns of the Economic Development Co~nmission were not depicted on any of the maps, including Figure 7B. Commissioner Ke.flt noted that Figure 7 doesnt show a north-south corridor, however Figure 7B shows a dead-end.~ Chairperson Bawden felt these differences should be resolved before going to City Council. He~uggested getting the background information fi'om Dayton for the Economic Development Co~mission to review; otherwise, he felt only Figure 7 should be submitted after allowing the Eco .n~mic Development Commission to color in the land uses. Chairperson Kent objected to Chairperson Bawden's suggestion because Figure 7 does not depict a north-south corridor. Commi~ioner Deemer could see no benefit to Ramsey in allowing the traffic to pass through to another~ity. Motion carded. Voting Yes: Commissioners Holland, Marquart, Wagner, Kent, Stafki, and Ullen. Voting N~: Chairperson Bawden, Commissioners Deemer, Hendriksen, and Terry. Absent: Commissioners LaDue, Thorud, McGhee, and Nelson. Commissioner HeOdriksen stated that if the City Council found it essential to have a north-south road, then they wtould need to see what is available---Ramsey Boulevard N.W., which is not suitable for a north-south collector due to its curving configuration. He noted that Armstrong Boulevard was mo~e suitable, and it serves Bums Township. Chairperson Bawd~n inquired about the next step in this process. Ms. Frolik stated ~at this will go to City Council for their decision, and the Planning CommissiOn will schedule the tSublic hearing. She noted that the Economic Development Commission would like to hold a joint-~ublic heating. Chairperson Bawdgn noted that if both proposals are sent to City Council and they select one, the land use is still up!n the air. Mr. Gromberg suggested selecting land uses on Figure 4 through Figure 7B. Steven Schwanke, iRLK Associates, inquired whether the Commissions were sending forward to City Council both ~he land use and transportation plans depicted on Figure 7 and Figure 7B. r Chairperson Bawd~n felt it was their intention to submit both. Motion by Commi3sioner Hendriksen and seconded by Commissioner Deemer to reconsider the previous motion. Motion carried. Noting Yes: Chairperson Bawden, Commissioners Hendriksen, Deemer, Holland, Terry, an~l Wagner. Voting No: Commissioner Ullen. Abstain: Commissioners Kent, Marquart, and Staf~i. Absent: Commissioners LaDue, Thorud, McGhee, and Nelson. Motion by Commissioner Hendriksen and st~onded by Commissioner Terry to forward to City Council the trans@ortation plan depicted in Figure 7 and the land uses from the Economic Development Corrffnission's Figure 7B. PC/EDC/September 15, 1994. Page 5 of 7