My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Parks and Recreation Commission - 05/12/2005
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Parks and Recreation Commission
>
2005
>
Agenda - Parks and Recreation Commission - 05/12/2005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/26/2025 3:07:46 PM
Creation date
5/10/2005 8:16:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Parks and Recreation Commission
Document Date
05/12/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
41
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
Mis. Silz stated in some areas, they may not want habitat and people together. Her concern was <br />they arc writing ordinances for future development and they need to figure out how they can tie <br />into what is already there. She indicated this can enhance the developments and aisc provide <br />d ew~lopm ont. <br /> <br />Mr. McDilda explained he was curious about the southeastern part of Ramsey that is more <br />developed. It was noted this will be treated differently on the Comprehensive PIan. He <br />wondered if they should not reconsider how they treat the greenway corridor and maybe they <br />wahl to put a greenway corridor through there. <br /> <br />Mr. Go~'don stated a greenway consists of wetland and upland areas and the developed area does <br />not have a lot of both so it needs to be treated differently. He stated in the ordinance they do <br />have ways to protect these areas in other ways. For the majority of the greenway effort, they <br />want to get ahead of what will be developed in the future. <br /> <br />Mr. MeDilda hoped to see different tiers of greenways within the plan as they develop this plan <br />more. l[e stated if they do not get some designation of a greenway in some areas in Ramsey, it <br />could be more difficult to map out the areas because it won't have a greenway designation on <br />lh <br /> <br />M r. Max thought they could have different designations for greenway corridors like they do for <br />wetlands. <br /> <br />Ms. S/tz noted that expanding beyond corridors; birds fly so isolated areas can have advantages. <br /> <br />M ~'. Gordon stated in his memo, he has talked about ways they can protect the corridor. They can <br />establish an overlay and protect the areas at the time of development. <br /> <br />Mt'. Mcl)ilda indicated they have a map th_at shows a draft of the greenway corridor. He <br />wo]~.dercd if there was a way to put the master trail plan on this map also. He thought that would <br />be beneficial. <br /> <br />Engineer I[ Linton stated they could do this. <br /> <br />Associate Plammr Wald explained the purpose of the meeting was to give the Commissions an <br />overview of the Greenway Corridor Plan.' <br /> <br />Ms. Sitz stated the Mississippi River Corridor is the critical area boundary. She stated they <br />discussed the Itasca Rest Stop as a potential canoe drop and a trail area. She wondered if this <br />will ever happen. <br /> <br />Mr. Gordon stated this is a good idea since much of this land is upland area. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Ostrum, seconded by EPTF Member Sitz, to close the joint meeting of <br />lilt t~PTI~'. <br /> <br />Park and Recreation Commission/April 14, 2005 <br /> Page 3 of 10 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.