My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 01/14/2003
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2003
>
Agenda - Council - 01/14/2003
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/24/2025 3:38:53 PM
Creation date
6/23/2003 8:32:01 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
01/14/2003
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.
/
375
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
I <br /> I <br /> ! <br /> ! <br />i <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> <br />staff engage the services of a consulting firm to conduct a traffic generation analysis for the <br />proposed development, discuss with the developer the cost of upgrading the existing signals on <br />U.S. Highway #.10 and how the cost is to be distributed, and provide clarification on. how the <br />existing berm will be maintained. The Planning Commission met on October 10, 2002, and <br />continued to review the proposed Rivenwick 3rd Addition. development. There was no citizen <br />input during the continuation of the public hearing. Staff engaged the services of SRF to <br />complete a traffic generation analysis for Ihe Proposed development. The traffic generation <br />analysis concluded that all key intersections, with the exception of Sunfish Lake Boulevard and <br />Highway #10, will operate at acceptable levels of service .with full buildout of the proposed <br />development. The intersection of Sunfish Lake Boulevard and Highway #10.is scheduled to be <br />improved with dual southbound left mm lanes and separate left mm, through and right turn lanes <br />on the northbound leg. The poor level of service at this intersection is due to the general increase <br />in traffic on Highway #10 and not solely based on-the proposed townhouse development. <br />MnDOT has stated that the intersection of U.S, Highway #10 and Ramsey Blvd. must be <br />upgraded to facilitate this development. Staff engaged the services of SRF to provide a cost <br />estimate to upgrade U.S. Highway #10. It should be noted that MnDOT is proposing to Upgrade <br />the intersection of U.S. Highway #10 and Ramsey Boulevard in the year 2004, and the estimated <br />cost to the City at that time will be $5,000. If the developer chooses to move forward with the <br />connection of Riverdale Drive to U.S. Highway #10. prior to 2004, MnDOT has stated that the- <br />signal poles placed at the intersection of U.S. Highway #10 and Ramsey Boulevard will need to <br />be permanent type and must be placed at the location that complies with the ultimate design <br />when the intersection signal rebuild project goes-through. The cost to install permanent signals <br />prior to the 2004 upgrade will be approximately $150,000 - $200,000. MnDOT submitted a <br />letter dated September 16, 2002, that states there should be at least a 500 foot separation between <br />U.S. Highway #10 and where another intersection can occur (i.e. the entrance to Anoka County <br />Park and the continuation of the frontage road to the west). In order for the developer to comply <br />with this requirement, the developer will need to purchase additional land from Anoka County <br />(south of the proposed Riverdale Drive alignment). This presents a problem as Anoka County <br />owns the land through a life estate contract. Anoka County has contacted the .landowner and has <br />been unsuccessful in obtaining permission-to construct a road through a portion of the property at <br />this time. Anoka County is looking into their legal options as they agree with the City of Ramsey <br />that Riverdale Drive should go through the future parkland to continue to serve as a .frontage <br />road. The legal matters may take awhile to resolve and, therefore, an interim option Staff <br />discussed with the Planning Commission is to plat the portion of Riverdale Drive that runs from <br />Lot 1, Block 2 to U.S. Highway #10 as an outlot for purposes of preliminary plat approval. The <br />developer would then only final plat Lots 8, 9, and 10, of Block 2: at. this-time. This would allow <br />the developer the ability to construct three, 8-unit structures (24 units) and construct Riverdale <br />Drive from Garnet Street to where 138th Avenue.intersects P,_iverdale Drive. The Planning <br />Commission recommended that the City' Council. approve the 'preliminary plat contingent upon <br />compliance with City Staff review letter dated September 27, 2002, revised November 8, 2002, <br />and further subject to modifying the proposed plat to include Outlot A as proposed by Staff, and <br />the Developer receiving a rezoning of that portion of the subject property which is zoned B-1 <br />Business. The Planning Commission also recommended that-the City Council accept the <br />proposed landscape buffering along the southern .boundary line of the plat as fulfilling density <br />transitioning requirements. The Planning Commission also recommended that the developer final <br /> <br />City Council/NOvember 12, 2002 <br /> Page 12 of 22 <br /> <br />-127- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.