res_6677 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

C about mid-way alona the proposed 9roject. I'd like to speak for a minute to make a fairly strenuous objection to the pro- posed assessments - at least upon my company. Briggs is a r~innesota domiciled motor carrier and we operate in l3 states under regulations of the Interstate Commerce Commission and (inaudible). Our territory generally extends from Duluth to Kansas City, Denver ane Cincinnati on the east, and we employ 2200 employees, and in 1977 had an annual payroll of approxi- mately $38 million. As pertinent here, our terminal and facilities operating in conjunction with the terminal, are located at 2360 West County Road C and this facility includes a 73-door terminal, loading platform, office space, tractor repair, tire storage and maintenance facility along with emryloyees and equipment parking. This facility serves as a consolidation and distribu- tion hub - for lack of a better word - for our Twin Cities r~tropolitan operations. It's the sole station ~Te operate in the Twin Cities (inaudible) base our operations here. This tract consists of about 13 acres and 350 people are employed at the location. (Inaudible) the project contemplates the widening of County Road C and takina of private property along both sides of the roadway. In our case, the strip of land to be taken involves a strip approximately 12 feet deep, 1100 feet in length - approximately 13,000 square feet. Let me say in the clearest possible way, this taking is going to (inaudible) my coropany grievously. Arnonq the adverse effects of ~he taking are several - maybe a couple which I could enumerate todav. The takinq involved will reduce and eliminate a substantial series of parking facilities or spaces that we presently use at that facility. In order to compensate or adjust for that, it's going to require the relocation in other portions of the faCility. We're not, frankly, at this stage able to determine how that can be done. We use a large portion of the facility in the winter for removing and storing snow that we grade off the lot and yard to provide a reasonable and easy maneuvering in the yard itself. We have toyed with and are frankly undecided, but we're of the view that the only solution to the parking problem will require the building of a rather substantial parkinq ra~p at substantial cost. Other problems include, we think, ~he reduction of the safety effectiveness of our company. t1e need what we call a drive-through lane along the north edge of our property or the south side immediately adjacent to ti1e portion to be taken, for drive-through safety inspections. ~~ could use more space than '~e have, and this will foreclose that forever. Those are among the problems, but in short, the widening project and the takinq outlined there is something before us and we're opposing the project (inaudible) we objected; or we