03/09/88 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Reimann, Councilnanbers Sorteberg, 'COx, DeLuca and Pearson. Voting No: None. Case no: Review Status Of Ramsey's Proposal To Anoka County Regardi.ng The Rum River Bridge: Mr. Hartley stated that a proposal was sutrnitted y,'hereby Ramsey would loap Anoka County $650,000 to be used for a portion of thE- cost to construct the Rum River Bridge and it's related approaches. That proposal also specified that Ramsey would be paid baCK by July 1, 1990 and that Anoka County would borrow funds to build the tridge promptly. Mr. Hartley explained that Anoka County does not have the authority to borrow funds at the present time; their request is before Legislature. In response to Ramsey's proposal, Anoka County Road and Bridge Committee prepared a different agreement and it provides that the approach area on the west side of the Rum River along Cty. RO. f.-116 would be constructed to Hwy. *47 and 300 feet beyond Hwy. #47 to the east with the funds Ramsey would be making available. County COmmissioner Haas has successfully argued for adoption of the COunty's 5 year capital improvement plan and that the schedule it represents be adhered to. There is concern that other needs may arise throughout the County anethe Rum River Bridge would lose it's present p:>sition in the plan (1990, 91, 92). Ramsey should be more concerned with rr~intaining the bridge's position in. the plan than with accelerating it's construction. Ramsey entering into the County's response agreement y,'ould not necessarily bind the County to meeting their 5 year pI an as publ ished but the investment in the approach to the Rum River Bridge prov~des for a greater likelihood that the bridge funding may come through in the years for which it is planned. , County COmmissioner Haas-Steffen stated that because of project comrnitments in other parts of the County, she has no real stand to take that y,'ould advance construction of the Rum River Bridge; her concern is, and Ramsey's should be, with holding that project ~n it I S present place in the 5 year pI an. Motion by Cotmcilrrember Cox and seconded by Councilmember So=teberg to indicate Ramsey's willingness to loan $650,000 to Anoka County to be used fo= acquiring right-of-way and constructing the approach area on the west sioe of the Rum River along Cty. RO. #116 to Hwy. #47 and 300 fee't beyond Hwy. #47 to the east. Further Discussion: Mr. Hartley inquired it County funds committed to improving cty. Rd. #83 would be diverted to another project i:t that project fails because of probl~E in obtaining r~ght-of-way. Commissioner Haas- Steffen replied that the County is not anticlFOting problems in acquiring right-of-way for Cty. Rd. #83; if the project does fail to proceed, the funds will be diverted but not necessarily to another project within the same city. . !VlOtion carried. Voting Yes: ?-Kayor Reimann, COuncilrrembers Sorteberg, COx, DeLuca and Pearson. Voting No: None. City COuncil/February 24, 1988 Page 10 of 13