Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Jankowski stated there is no action required on this case. <br /> <br />Case //2: Review of Plans for 153/155 Extension <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski explained that the purpose for this agenda item is to make the <br />Committee aware that the plans for the extension of 153/155 between Variolite and <br />Armstrong Boulevard have been finalized by RLK, Inc. He pointed out that with the <br />construction phasing of Variolite and Armstrong, there would be no road closure and no <br />detours. There will be parking restrictions along portions of this project such as no parking <br />along the curve. No parking will be allowed on the north and west side but there will be a <br />bump-out for parking along the south side up to a point about 300 to 400 feet along <br />Variolite. This is done mostly to conserve space and keep away from the wetlands. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman suggested this project could be delayed this year. <br /> <br />City Administrator Schroeder pointed out that it is for 1997. <br /> <br />Mr. Jankowski explained that we are beginning to look at acquiring the parcels for this <br />project. We will be presenting them to City Council and asking for authorization to make <br />offers so maybe the acquisitions could be done by early to mid summer, 1996. <br /> <br />Mr. Schroeder reiterated that this is a 1997 project and there is not money in the 1996 <br />budget for it, but there is money set aside for authorization. <br /> <br />Councilmember Beahen questioned waiting a year. <br /> <br />Mr. Schroeder explained this has been a difficult issue. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman mentioned the turtles. <br /> <br />Mr. Jankowski reported that the turtle protection walls are in the plan but they are not <br />continuous through the project - only in the area in close proximity to the wetlands. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman inquired if where Variolite hits 155th, will that be built up a <br />bit or leveled out some. <br /> <br />Mr. Jankowski stated that the grades actually will be a positive grade toward the end. For <br />the signalization, they are talking about a three-way stop. He wasn't sure the through <br />traffic would stop. <br /> <br />Councilmember Beahen inquired about the level of traffic. <br /> <br />Mr. Jankowski responded it's a fair amount - up to about 2,000. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman commented that we can always take care of that as we see fit. <br /> <br />Mr. Jankowski reiterated that the engineer is recommending a three-way stop but he <br />(Jankowski) is wondering if we really want traffic to have to stop. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman felt that defeats the purpose of the through road. <br /> <br />Mr. Jankowski explained there is no action necessary on this case. <br /> <br />Road & Bridge Committee/January 9, 1996 <br /> Page 2 of 4 <br /> <br /> <br />