My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
04/05/88
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Dissolved Boards/Commissions/Committees
>
Planning and Zoning
>
Agendas
>
1980's
>
1988
>
04/05/88
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/21/2025 11:06:47 AM
Creation date
7/26/2006 11:21:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Document Title
Planning & Zoning Commission
Document Date
04/05/1988
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.
/
210
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
Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Reimann, Councilmembers Sorteberg, Cox, <br />DeLuca and Pearson. Voting No: None. <br />Mr. Hartley stated that a proposal was submitted whereby Ramsey would loan <br />Anoka County $650,000 to be used for a portion of the cost to construct the <br />Rum River Bridge and it's related approaches. That proposal also specified <br />that Ramsey would be paid bacx by July 1, 1990 and that Anoka County would <br />borrow funds to build the bridge promptly. Mr. Hartley explained that <br />Anoka County does not have the authority to borrow funds at the present <br />time; their request.is before Legislature. In response to Ramsey's <br />proposal, Anoka County Road and Bridge Committee prepared a different <br />agreement and it provides that the approach area on the west side of the <br />Rum River along Cty. Rd. #116 would be constructed to Hwy. #47 and 300 feet <br />beyond Hwy. #47 to the east with the funds Ramsey would be making <br />available. County Commissioner Haas has successfully argued for adoption <br />of the County's 5 year capital improvement plan and that the schedule it <br />represents be adhered to. There is concern that other needs may arise <br />throughout the County and the Rum River Bridge would lose it's present <br />position in the plan (1990, 91, 92). Ramsey should be more concerned with <br />maintaining the bridge's position in the plan than with accelerating it's <br />construction. Ramsey entering into the County's response agreement would <br />not necessarily bind the County to meeting their 5 year plan as published <br />but the investment in the approach to the. Rum River Bridge provides for a <br />greater likelihood that the bridge funding may come through in the years <br />for which it is planned. <br />County Commissioner Haas- Steffen stated that because of project commitments <br />in other parts of the County, she has no real stand to take that would <br />advance construction of the Rum River Bridge; her concern is, and Ramsey's <br />should be, with holding that project in it's present place in the 5 year <br />plan. <br />Motion by Councilmember Cox and seconded by Councilmember Sorteberg to <br />indicate Ramsey's willingness to loan $650,000 to Anoka County to be used <br />for acquiring right -of -way and constructing the approach area on the west <br />side of the Rum River along Cty. Rd. #116 to Hwy. #47 and 300 feet beyond <br />Hwy. #47 to the east. <br />Further Discussion: Mr. Hartley inquired it County funds committed to <br />improving Cty. Rd. #83 would be diverted to another project if that project <br />fails because of problems in obtaining right -of -way. Commissioner Haas - <br />Steffen replied that the County is not anticipating problems in acquiring <br />right -of -way for Cty. Rd. #83; if the project does fail to proceed, the <br />funds will be diverted but not necessarily to another project within the <br />same city. <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Reimann, Councilmanbers Sorteberg, Cox, <br />DeLuca and Pearson. Voting No: None. <br />City Council /February 24, 1988 <br />Page 10 cf 13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.