My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 12-16-2002
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2002
>
CCP 12-16-2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:17:37 PM
Creation date
11/13/2006 4:07:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
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.
/
217
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
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Arden Hills Parks, Trails and Recreation Committee Meeting Minutes <br />November 26, 2002 <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />3. <br /> <br />HIGHWAY 96 RECONSTRUCTION / RICE CREEK CORRIDOR MASTER <br />PLAN AMENDMENT DISCUSSIONS <br /> <br />Mr. Parrish presented the Rice Creek Corridor Master Plan Amendment. He requested <br />comments from the Committee. <br /> <br />Greg Mack, representative of Ramsey County, answered the Committee's questions regarding <br />access Issues. <br /> <br />Committee Member Henry stated he agreed with putting the wildlife corridor where it was, but <br />he objected to a road going through it. He stated it was sensible to run the road north/south along <br />35W to County Road I. <br /> <br />Council Member Larson stated it was possible for the City to build a crossing that was sensitive <br />to wildlife, if they needed a north/south connection. He noted the Council did not want to <br />foreclose on that idea. He stated Council did not know ifthey needed it or not at this time. <br /> <br />Joan Galli, DNR representative, stated the DNR did not want a north/south connection through <br />the wildlife area. She noted the DNR did not have a good design or any assurances that it was <br />possible to have a connection that was sensitive to wildlife. She encouraged a connection where <br />it would not impact the wildlife. <br /> <br />Committee Member Crassweller stated he was against a tunnel or an elevated roadway and <br />precluding the possibility of a north/south access. He noted he was all for Ramsey County to <br />have access, but he was sympathetic to the City's argument regarding access across the area <br />without restriction. <br /> <br />Committee Member Henry pointed out there was plenty of other options to put in a road and <br />from the standpoint of the Parks, Trails Committee, it made no sense to support a road through <br />the wildlife area. <br /> <br />Committee Member Crassweller stated he agreed to give up control of the wildlife corridor to <br />Ramsey County provided the City had some assurance that the potentially landlocked piece of <br />property had at least the option of some kind of a connection through it at some future time. <br /> <br />Committee Member Thompson stated they needed to look at what the goals were and it was not <br />a matter of control, but how would the land be used and what were the priorities for that land. <br /> <br />MOTION: <br /> <br />Committee Member Henry motioned, Committee Member Messerly, seconded to <br />"gleefully" recommend the Rice Creek Corridor Master Plan Amendment. <br /> <br />Committee Member Crassweller requested a friendly amendment on page 2, first <br />paragraph, last sentence add the following sentence: "However, the City <br />recognized that it is possible that road access to the Tracer site may require the <br />City to have access to the south across site C and D. Therefore, our approval of <br />this amendment is contingent upon the City maintaining with Ramsey County the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.