1995 Working Papers - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

.. SJl oi eX-- MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: February 1, 1995 Ramsey Mayor and Councilmembers Ken Wagner, Chairperson, Economic Developement COmmiSSiO/~' SUBJECT: Land Useffransportation Study I am writing this memo out of frustration over all of the turmoil regarding the Land U seffransportation Study currently being worked on. The EDC was asked to review proposals that were generated by P&Z, and we were asked for our input We had two joint meetings with P&Z, and we met separately with the consultants on two other occasions. The EDC ultimately chose an alternative different then the option that P&Z was promoting. We (the EDC) based our decision on the facts presented to us, and we were unanimous in our decision. We view the current study as a long range planning tool. It will not be etched in stone, and I am sure it will be revised as the years go by. My opinion is that long range planning is a moving target Unfortunately, Terry Hendriksen appears to be on a mission with his point of view, and it appears as though he will not tolerate those that have a different opinion. Which brings me to the reason for this memo. I am tired of Hendriksen's accusations, innuendos, half truths, and fabrications. He has taken numerous verbal and written "shots" at the EDC, certain EDC members, city staff, and others over this matter; and I feel compelled to respond to his latest shots. I feel it is useless responding to Hendriksen because he does not appear to let the facts stand in the way of his mission. So I have chosen to direct this memo to the Mayor and City Council. I have attached a copy of Hendriksen's Draft of Transportation Plan Update to P&Z dated 1/3/95, and also a copy of the memorandum from Ramsey Planning Commission Comprehensive Plan Subcommittee dated 1113195. You will note that they are basically the same documents from "SHORTCOMINGS OF THE EDC PLAN" (East Bridge Location) on, so I am taking the subcommittee report as coming from Hendriksen. I take exception with a number of items he has listed, and I wish to respond. First and foremost, the plan that the EDC unanimously endorsed is one of the P&Z alternatives presented to the EDC at one of our joint meetings with P&Z. The EDC basically took P&Z's Figure #7, but put in an easterly bridge alignment rather then their west alignment. Moving the bridge from the west alignment to the east alignment did caused several road changes, but minor ones. I have attached copies of P&Z's Figure #7 and EDC's endorsed map for your review. As for the SHORTCOMINGS OF THE EDC PLAN (East Bridge Location) section of Hendriksen's memo, I have listed my responses below by number: 1) The EDC worked with the information supplied by P&Z, staff and the consultants to reach our decision. If Hendriksen has proof that the information is in error, he should submit that proof and get the correct information out. Ranting and raving about staffs personal agendas and conspiracies accomplishes'nothing. 2) EDC's position is that the eastern alignment is more centrally located in the City of Ramsey, not centrally located between the Ferry 81. and Hwy 101 bridges. .