11/05/91 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Case #2: iBoandary Adjustments Ramsey City Administrator Schroeder stated that there are two small parcels, one in Ramsey and one in Anoka~i which seem reasonable to trade by annexing to one city and detaching from the other. The fir.~t parcel is located at the southwest intersection of Trunk Highway g47 and County Road gl 16. ,.The parcel is a small triangular piece currently located in the City of Ramsey but is too small to realistically develop; however, it can be attached to a larger parcel within the City of Anoka. CitY ~$taff; is proposing that Ramsey detach this parcel and allow for annexation by the City of Anoka. The second parcel is located north of Highway gl0 and crosses the Burlington Northern Raitl-oad tracks behind the ParaBody facility at the southeastern limit of Ramsey. Currently, ther~ is a small triangle of Anoka jutting into Ramsey at that location. This is too small to be of any v~ue. to the City of Anoka, ownership is controlled by the same owner of a larger piece in the Ci.iy of Ramsey, and annexation by the City of Ramsey would follow a section line. It is proposed that Anoka allow for detachment of this parcel and Ramsey be allowed to annex the parcel. Mr. Sehroeder stated he is asking for the two Councils to give their "blessing" to this proposal. Anoka MayOr 'Beberg asked if there are any buildings involved, to which Mr. Schroeder answered there are none.[ Ramsey CitY ~ngineer Jankowski stated that the County owns the right-of-way so quit claims would have to ~ signed. Anoka Corem ~anity. Development Director Kirchner stated he has spoken with the County and there is access propertY to deed away. Mr. Nagel stat~l the proposal makes sense as it makes the properties more valuable. Mr. Schroeder !agreed and commented that neither parcel has significant value by itself. Mr. Nagel expressed agreement with an even exchange of the land. He felt that City Staff's could adjust the boundaries and he and Mr. Schroeder would handle it from that point. Motion by CoUncilmember Cich and seconded by Councilmember Beyer to direct Staff to adjust the boundaries and-transfer ownership from one municipality to the other. Motion camed. Voting Yes: Councilmembers Peterson, Cich, Beyer and Hardin. Voting No: None. Absenti Mayor Gilbertson. Case #4: t Joint Economic Development Authority Ramsey City Administrator Schroeder stated that recently the City of Ramsey passed upon an agreement with two property owners to construct an extension of McKinley Street N.W. from Sunfish Lake Boulevard N.W. east to the Ramsey-Anoka boundary contingent upon the City of Anoka agreeiri~g tO'complete the extension east to Thurston Avenue. He stated that City Staff's have discussed this issue further and have determined that a planning area much larger than that should be loOk[ed at. The proposal is this: The City of Anoka has within its boundaries north of Highway gl0 [and west of the Mineral Pond Addition, a fair amount of sparsely developed, industrial Pr0P~rty. The City of Ramsey, basically south of County Road gl 16, north of Highway gl0 and east o!~ Armstrong Boulevard N.W., also has a fair amount of industrially-zoned, sparsely developed p?.~erty. Currently all of this property is under different ownerships, the property is in two or three di~f'ferent zones and has a great disparity of uses. Staff is proposing that the entire area be placed und~ on~ planning and marketing arm. Staff would also tike the Council's to consider the possibility of placing all of this property within the operational confines of one Economic Joint City Councii/Ramsey/Anoka - September 4, 1991 Page 5 of 10