Minutes - Council - 07/12/2022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mr. Fincher replied he would have to defer to the project team on the location of the entire fence but he know they talked about the fencing around the field but wasn’t certain what was shown on the site plan at this time. Councilmember Musgrove commented it was hard to tell if it is a fence or an outside easement area but that would be a safety feature for the trail if there was fencing along that side where the trail is too. City Engineer/Interim Public Works Director Westby replied he wasn’t aware of any proposed fencing along that property line. Mr. Fincher agreed it isn’t on there right now. Councilmember Riley commented he had heard an idea from the Planning Commission to consider removing the football field because then that fixes a lot of problems such as the water, sound and light but they are still building a school which is meeting the main goal. He asked if that has been considered. Mr. Fincher replied Councilmember Riley is correct that that is a comment that came up at the Planning Commission meeting but it wasn’t considered because the long term needs of PACT included a football field. To consider relocating it opens a logistics conversation and site location. He stated also if it isn’t here the football field would be somewhere else. Since PACT is investing in a long-term facility they would prefer the field to be at the same location. Councilmember Heineman stated having the football field makes a lot of sense because they are trying to draw families to Ramsey and create a better community environment and the football field does that with PACT. He thought the location was suited being next to a park made a lot of sense and was confirmed by the light and noise studies. He understood the concern with noise and light but felt the team at PACT has done a great job of addressing the concerns and the results are exceptional. rd Ron Lindenberg, 7600 163Lane NW, has the property the farthest northeast corner of it. He stated his concerns remain the same and questioned whether the results of the studies are accurate. He stated there are 80-foot light poles 60 feet from neighboring homes. He stated fences are being discussed but they haven’t determined whether the retention ponds are accurate and the final numbers haven’t come back for that. He stated that is a top concern for him and his property. He stated he is being pushed into a corner where it is either a fight or flight situation for his property. He stated he didn’t feel they would be able to maintain the water properly because of the shape of the land and the land north of them. He stated he understood dropping the football field wasn’t ideal but suggested considering other locations. He mentioned the traffic studies and putting all st of the traffic on 161 and questioned if they were accurate. He stated this is not a good safe plan for the location and the neighborhood. He felt his property would be in jeopardy if this project goes through and would consider legal representation to protect his property if issues don’t get resolved prior to the project going any further. City Council /July 12, 2022 Page 13 of 22