My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
10/11/89
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Dissolved Boards/Commissions/Committees
>
Economic Development Commission
>
Agendas
>
1989
>
10/11/89
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2025 12:23:04 PM
Creation date
11/20/2003 11:17:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Document Title
Economic Development Commission
Document Date
10/11/1989
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
59
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 COUNCIL <br /> PUBLIC HEARING <br /> CITY OF RAMSEY <br /> ANOKA COUNTY <br />STATE OF MINNESOTA <br /> <br />The Ramsey City Council conducted a public hearing on Tuesday, September 5, 1989 at the <br />Ramsey Municipal Center, 15153 Nowthen Blvd. N.W., Ramsey, Minnesota regarding <br />assessments for Improvement Project #87-18 and 88-09. <br /> <br />Members Present: <br /> <br />Mayor Gary Reimann <br />Councilmember Richard Cich <br />Counciimember Stephen F. DeLuca <br />Councilmember Alan Pearson <br />Councilmember Kenneth Peterson <br /> <br />Also Present: <br /> <br />City Administralor David Hartley <br />City Engineer Peter Raatikka <br /> <br />CALL TO ORDER <br /> <br />Mayor Reimann called the public hearing to order at 7:31 p.m. <br /> <br />PRESENTATION <br /> <br />Mr. Raatikka stated the improvements were to Front Street N.W., Tungsten Street N.W. and <br />Sunfish Lake Boulevard N.W. He stated the total cost for the project was $6749,577.96; <br />$469,371.48 is the proposed State Aid participation; $66,000.00 would be assessed to storm <br />sewer taxing district and $114,206.489 would be assessed to benefitting properties. <br /> <br />There was some discussion as to what is the fairest way to assess projects, it was noted that the <br />City has found that assessing on a per unit basis is the fairest way, although it is difficult in <br />unplatted areas. <br /> <br />Ed Hamilton, 6615 Highway #10 N.W. - Stated he is not satisfied with clean up of the area. <br /> <br />Mr. Raatikka replied that the contractor would not be paid in full until the project is completed <br />to the City's satisfaction. <br /> <br />Mr. Hamilton noted thai cars are trespassing on his property and he'd tike to see the street <br />barricaded. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley replied that the City is responsible for erecting dead end signs when it has created a <br />dead end street; this matter will be taken care of within one week. <br /> <br />Mr. Hamilton inquired if seeding the boulevard was pad of the project. <br /> <br />Mr. Raatikka replied restoration of the boulevard is included in the project. <br /> <br />City Council Public Hearing/ September 5, 1989 <br /> Page 1 of 2 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.