04/01/93 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

-2- It does not appear to us at this point, that the link between Ramsey Boulevard and Armstrong Boulevard would be of great assistance in alleviating the need for other improvements of TH 10. In the third paragraph of your letter you talk about the intersection of County State Aid Highway No. 5 and TH 47. We are certainly interested in participating in an improvement of the geometrics of this intersection. We have expressed interest to the City of Ramsey on numerous occasions regarding this intersection, but feel that Mn/DOT again should be an integral part, if not the lead agency on the reconfiguration of that intersection. We are disappointed to hear that you hope to extend the TH 47/CR 116 project to include the Coun.t), State Aid Highway Number 5 intersection, since that would undoubtedly cause additional delays in the design of the TH 47/CR t 16 project and delay construction further than 1994. I will assure you that the Anoka County Highway Department Staff is ready to recommend participation in any cost sharing agreement Mn/DOT proposes for the reco_rffiguration of the TH 47/CSAH 5 intersection, provided Mn/DOT is involved as a fult partner in the redevelopment of this intersection. The fourth paragraph of your letter has me somewhat confused in that the 2010 Plan does include the reconflguring of County Road Number 63 between TH 47 and County State Aid Highway Number 5. This is depicted on Figure 24 of the northward extension of the newly proposed Mississippi River crossing in the area of Ramsey Boulevard. That portion of County Road Number 63 between TH 47 and County State Aid Highway Number 5 would be turned back to the City of Ramsey as is indicated in the City of Ramsey's letter to Anoka County mentioned earlier in this letter. This reconstruction of County Road Number 63 would undoubtedly include a better connection at County State Aid Highway Number 5 as indicated in the last half of paragraph number 4 of your letter. One note, Anoka County's current policy on bikeways does not allow for on road bikeway facilities, but would allow for detached walk-bikeway facilities to be constructed on Anoka County Right-of-Way provided that sufficient clear zones and fight-of-way are available. The fifth paragraph of your letter indicates that Ramsey is in a position to begin a re-evaluation of their transportation plan. Again, I would note that Anoka County is interested in participating in that transportation plan update with that the provision that Mn/DOT be an integral part of the solution and of the planning process. Please find attached for your information, a copy of the letter recently sent to the City of Andover.