My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
11/01/88
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Dissolved Boards/Commissions/Committees
>
Planning and Zoning
>
Agendas
>
1980's
>
1988
>
11/01/88
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/22/2025 3:36:48 PM
Creation date
2/24/2006 10:07:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Document Title
Planning & Zoning Commission
Document Date
11/01/1988
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
145
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
City of Ramsey <br /> <br />15153 NOWTHEN BOULEVARD N.W.o RAMSE¥o MINNESOTA 55303 '~ (612) 427-1410 <br /> <br />October 24, 1988 <br /> <br />Mr. Wally Anderson <br />Aradco, Inc. <br />13445 Heather St. N.W. <br />Andover, MN 55304 <br /> <br />Re: Cedar Hills Park Dedication <br /> <br />Dear Mr. Anderson: <br /> <br /> The Parks Commission reviewed your plat with respect to park dedi- <br /> cation requirements at their October 20, 1988 meeting. The recent <br /> survey information which DNR requested was taken into <br />consideration. That survey indicated that the northerly basin <br />would be classified as a separate unprotected basin under the <br />charge of the Corps of Engineers. The Magnesium Pond wetland basin <br />is a protected wetland. As you know, the Corps allows filling of <br />up to 10,000 SF of certain wetlands per development. The estimated <br />fill requirement for park development alone in the proposed plat <br />would be approximately 80,000 SF. <br /> <br />The Parks Commission subsequently found the proposed Outlot A to be <br />unacceptable for the intended park use and passed a motion <br />restating that dedication of wetlands and swamps would not be <br />accepted for park land. <br /> <br />As a point which they wish you to be clear on, they remain favorable <br />towards the concept of a centralized park serving the three <br />developments, however, the three developers will have to submit an <br />alternative plan acceptable to the commission. <br /> <br />I'm enclosing a conceptual layout which indicates development of a <br />football/soccer field, softball field, playground area and parking. <br />As you can see, the proposed area (even if it were acceptabie to <br />fill) marginally accomodates these facilities. A somewhat larger <br />parcel as was first brought to the Parks Commission may be required <br />of the three developments. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.