My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 08/24/1982
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
1982
>
Agenda - Council - 08/24/1982
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/15/2025 12:31:47 PM
Creation date
5/19/2004 10:44:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
08/24/1982
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
259
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
I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />July 3, 1982 <br />Delano D. Skeim <br />Seoul, Korea <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Ramsey City Council <br />Ramsey, Minnesota <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Re: RAMSEY COMMONS SUBDIVISION <br /> <br /> I HEREIN REQUEST APPROVAL OF THE ABOVE FOUR (4) LOT <br />SUBDIVISION AS PER MY ORIGINAL PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMISSION. <br /> <br /> Concerning the driveway access to County Road #5 (Nowthen <br />Blvd.) I would ask further that a variance be granted, if one <br />is required, to allow the two (2) access points as our initial <br />request defined and was subsequently reviewed, approved, and <br />accepted by the Anoka County Highway Engineer as per the City <br />of Ramsey requirement. <br /> <br /> The placement of a "frontage road easement" on this <br />particular property cannot be facilitated without detriment <br />to the subdivision. <br /> <br /> The Councils request that a "frontage road easement" <br />across the adjacent property of Mr. Kerrsen concurrent with <br />the approval of my subdivision is without precedent and <br />inconsistent with known subdivision ordinances. <br /> <br /> The reasoning behind the subdivision design and of our <br />request herein, is as follows: <br /> <br />1. The topography of the land dictates that a <br /> "frontage road" would not be practical. <br /> <br />2. Emergency access would be best provided by the <br /> two (2) locations in our initial proposal. <br /> <br />3. A "frontage road" would be a maintenance item <br /> for the city. <br /> <br />4. The "frontage road" would dead end on the north <br /> side into a single family subdivision. <br /> <br />The layout of proposed buildings on all lots <br />would have to be changed drastically and <br />would impact on site sewage system design.. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.