My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 07/08/1980
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
1980
>
Agenda - Council - 07/08/1980
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/15/2025 2:04:29 PM
Creation date
9/9/2004 2:43:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
07/08/1980
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.
/
211
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
-3- <br /> <br />Page 33. The wild and scenic river standards for the Mississippi River are <br />superceded by the Critical Areas program as long as the critical areas plan <br />is at least as restrictive as NR 79-81 and NR 2600. This was specified in <br />the memorandum of understanding dated July, 1977 and signed by the Cities <br />of Ramsey and Dayton, the EQB and the DNR. (memo attached) <br /> <br />Page 42. General Provisions. Some of the standards specified in the Critical <br />Areas report are in error and do not conform to the wild and scenic river <br />standards. These cannot be used to meet the intent of these regulations as <br />per the memo of understanding. <br /> <br />5) <br /> <br />Map 11. This map shows the Bi (business) district extending to the Mississippi <br />River. In past conversations with Dexter Marston, an agreement was reached <br />that the City of Ramsey could continue commercial and business districts along <br />Highway 10 corridor within the Mississippi River land use districts in Section <br />34. However, this did not mean that business or commercial uses could extend <br />all the way to the river. At least a 100-foot buffer zone must be maintained <br />between commercial and business development and the river. <br /> <br />6) Page 44. The standards as listed in Table 9 are not in compliance with NR 79, <br /> NR 2600 nor NR 83. <br /> <br />7) <br /> <br />Page 44. Item 3. The present regulations and permitted use are not in com- <br />pliance with municipal shoreland and ~ftd and scenic river standards. I have <br />previously addressed the dimensional standards. Uses permitted in the Bi <br />district are not permitted under wild and scenic river regulations. <br /> <br />8) <br /> <br />Page 16. Item 3. There should be no clearcutting within 150 feet of the <br />ordinary high water mark within the Rum River rural scenic district as per <br />Nil 79 (g). <br /> <br />The following are general comments which probably should be corrected. <br /> <br />1) Page 7. Incorrect reference to wetland classification. The DNR uses the <br /> Fish and Wildlife Circular No. 39 for its wetland classification. <br /> <br />2) Page 9. The shoreland standards apply to watercourses also. <br /> <br />3) Page 31. The Rum River has only one set of regulations in regards to <br /> wild and scenic rivers. <br /> <br />4) The basin inventory as shown in Map 1 is subject to change pending completion <br /> of the public waters inventory for Anoka County. <br /> <br />5) <br /> <br />Map 8. The reference to the "General Flood Plain District" is incorrect. <br />The general flood plain district is those areas where a "floodway" and <br />"flood fringe" haven't been determined. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.