Laserfiche WebLink
PW CASE <br /> <br />CORRESPONDENCE FROM MNDOT REGARDING <br />THE SPEED HUMPS ON DYSPROSIUM STREET <br />By: Steve Jankowski, City Engineer <br /> <br />Background: ~ 16% {~x_ ( Iq'~'~ ~,-~'>~ <br />Attached is a letter that w~.rec.eived from ~OT reg~ding ~e speed h~ps on Dysprosi~ <br />S~eet. The le~er suggest/~e h~ps be removed, ~d states ~at ~til ~e hmps ~e removed <br />the Ciw will not be alloCed to collect "needs" on ~s segment of MSA roadway ~d ~e C~ <br />will need to remove ~e~tr~t ~om ~e MSA system. C~ently, the needs on ~is segment of <br /> ~ ~ ~. ~e allocation of Fiscal Ye~ 2000 ~nds ~e estimated to <br />roadway ~e ~ ..... ely $. ~ ~, .... <br />be $24.47 per thous~d doll,s of need which would result in a loss of $3,695. In addition, ~e <br />City would be required to pay back between 40-52% of~e cost paid by S~te Aid in constructing <br />Dysprosim.Street, which is the rem~ning percentage of the street's 25-ye~ semite life. The <br />s~eet was constructed in 1985, 1986 ~d 1988 ~der ~ee sep~ate cons~ction projects. The <br />~ount received from State Aid on ~ese projects is $ l~ ~, ,et It is estimmed ~at the <br />payback would mo~t to $ l z7~.w} c The payback would be deducted from ~e ~ticipated <br />payment on the next State Aid con~act let by the Ci~. ~e City might consider the following <br />co~ses of action: <br /> <br />1. Immediately remove the speed humps and inform the residents along Dysprosium <br /> Street of the reason for the removal. <br /> <br />Respond to MnDOT contending that the speed humps do not interfere with the ability <br />of Dysprosium Street to function as a collector street and request a review of <br />MnDOT's authority to require the removal of the humps. <br /> <br />When the speed humps were installed in November 1995, guidelines for the application of speed <br />humps had been proposed by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. These guidelines <br />recommended that speed humps be used only on roadways classified as "local" streets. <br /> <br />Recommendation: <br /> <br />Whereas alternative 2 listed above is an option, it would be a difficult argument to win if <br /> <br />vigorously pursued by MnDOT. <br />notification of the neighbors. <br /> <br />Committee Action: <br /> <br />Based upon discussion. <br /> <br />Staff recommends the removal of the speed humps and <br /> <br />Reviewed by: <br />City Administrator <br />Chief of Police <br />Director of Public Works <br />Public Works Supervisor <br />.PW: 12/21/99 <br /> <br /> <br />