My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Council - 08/19/1987 - Special
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Council
>
1987
>
Minutes - Council - 08/19/1987 - Special
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/14/2025 2:09:42 PM
Creation date
1/22/2004 10:57:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Council
Document Title
Special
Document Date
08/19/1987
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
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
Council has taken cognizance of the fact that people at North Fork have the <br />same rightm to develop. Ramsey and the residents of 153rd gained some <br />benefit by the construction of 153rd as a State Aid road. Construction of <br />153rd as am MSA road was part of the City's Comprehensive Plan before <br />Northfork came about. The extension of 153rd into Northfork was done with <br />some sacrifice; the developers agreed not to develop certain areas and <br />limit access onto that road with the understanding that the road would be <br />available to help develop the property. The developers of Northfork have <br />done nothing that is inconsistent with the State Aid road. Discussions <br />regarding the development of the lake and appropriate routes began in <br />November of 1986 but no other accesses became available. The developers <br />have had discussions with MN/DoT, Burlington Northern, Elk River and Ramsey <br />city staff and that staff time is appreciated. Mr. Peck stated that he <br />takes exception to anyone saying that the developers have not tried to deal <br />with the problem. In order to continue with the development of Northfork, <br />the trucks have to move the sand out of there and the developers are aware <br />of the truck traffic problem and have tried to solve it. Tonight's <br />proposed solution attempts to deal with a short term solution to the <br />present safety factor and long range planning concerns. Those issues can <br />be dealt with if Puma is closed to regular traffic but left open to <br />individuals needing it as an access to farms and homes. Northfork truck <br />traffic would quit using 153rd if access can be gained across the tracks <br />onto Hwy. #10. The city has considered alternative development of a <br />crossing north of Puma; if that was pursued, it would minimize the long <br />term impact on 153rd, provide a commercial outlet for those properties <br />south of 153rd, and address the immediate situation. Burlington Northern <br />is opposed to a permanent major public crossing on Puma. <br /> <br />Marguerite Henke- 8062 154th - Stated that she doesn't feel any <br />development in the whole of Ramsey has been impacted more than Whispering <br />Pines has been by the creation of this 40 acre man-made lake in Northfork <br />that the public will not have access to. The truck traffic is not a local <br />problem; those trucks travel down Hwy. #10, through Anoka and on to the <br />dumping site on Hwy. #18. Inquired if Council can assure the creation of <br />the lake will not lower the groundwater level causing existing homes to dig <br />their wells deeper; if that happens, who is responsible? Does Council have <br />the authority to stop the creation of a lake? Who is liable if children <br />are hit by the trucks? <br /> <br />Mr. Raatikka - Replied that there was an Environmental Impact Study done on <br />the project; DNR reviewed it and saw no negative impact on the groundwater <br />level. <br /> <br />Mr. Goodrich - Stated that the developers of Northfork have the authority <br />to use their property within lawful means; they are doing what is within <br />the law and the City is trying to work with that. With regards to <br />liability for any accidents, if there is an accident and children were <br />playing in the street or at fault, the trucks cannot be held liable; if the <br />trucks were speeding or violating some traffic law, then they would be <br />liable. <br /> <br />Marguerite Henke - Stated that no child can cross a street on which 200 <br />trucks a day travel. Inquired who is liable if the children are on a <br />City Council Public Hearing/August 19, 1987 <br /> <br />Page 4 of 8 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.