Laserfiche WebLink
Councilmember Musgrove agreed they needed to provide more information, which they didn’t. <br /> <br />City Administrator Hagen thought the key message to send to the public is that Ramsey Staff is <br />reviewing it and have said the plans aren’t good enough. <br /> <br />Councilmember Riley replied that is important information to include because he didn’t know that. <br />He stated he is asking for more information and maybe the attachments are what he is asking for. <br /> <br />Councilmember Woestehoff added he had asked City Engineer Westby at the last Planning <br />st <br />meeting to talk about 161 and he got generalities which he understood that is all they could do. <br />He thought the reconstruction next year could have a lot of issues with that development in terms <br />of turn lanes and things because there are a lot of questions about it still. He agreed there is a lot <br />of information with the case and he planned to send his concerns to City Administrator Hagen so <br />he would have time to prepare. <br /> <br />Councilmember Howell stated that some residents had reached out and said they had a Zoom <br />meeting with JB Vang and asked what the outcomes were from that, were there any positives. <br /> <br />City Administrator Hagen replied not really. He stated the big talking points have been the storm <br />water, traffic and noise. What did come out of it was that the engineer for JB Vang looked at some <br />culverts size and came to the meeting and said one idea was to reduce the culvert size to match the <br />other one. He stated they also talked about adding about four inches to the berm height to hold <br />more water and help with control. He stated another bigger item was the turn lane on Variolite to <br />st <br />get on to 161 northbound and questioning if that is long enough for the busses. Also looking at <br />the internal traffic patterns and ensuring they know how much staging area there is. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove asked what the decision was regarding the road onto Variolite. <br /> <br />City Administrator Hagen replied not at Staff’s recommendation or the traffic study, largely <br />because the direction of the Planning Commission was looking at it from a bus standpoint, right- <br />in, right-out, when not all of the busses come from the north. He didn’t think it made sense for the <br />road. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove asked if that would add more impervious surface for more water runoff. <br /> <br />City Administrator Hagen replied they would just make a bigger pond. He stated there were some <br />good talking points but unfortunately they didn’t put it in memo form to make an addendum to the <br />traffic study but were talking about acceleration of busses if they go on to Variolite as opposed to <br />people driving the speed limit coming over a hill and the safety issues there. He stated he asked <br />for a traffic memo because it is easier to understand. <br /> <br />Councilmember Specht asked about the feelings on both sides and if PACT seemed frustrated. <br /> <br />City Administrator Hagen replied he thought they were mostly concerned about financing and <br />what interest rates are doing and project costs. <br /> <br />City Council Work Session / June 28, 2022 <br />Page 19 of 20 <br /> <br />