Minutes - Public Works Committee - 03/18/2003

Home

Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Zimmerman, and Councilmembers Elvig, and Cook. Voting No: None. Mr. Curry stated that he was adamantly opposed to closing the access as proposed in the C.R. #116 study. Case #2: Update of C.R. #116 Corridor Study City Engineer Jankowski stated that in the fall of 2001 the City of Ramsey, Anoka County and the City of Anoka entered into a Joint Powers Agreement to prepare a corridor study for CR 116 from 7th Avenue west to its western terminus. At this point, a draft of the study has been reviewed by the Staffs of the three governmental organizations. Attached to this case is a copy of the Table of Contents of the draft plan along with Chapters IV and V, and Appendix B, which provides specific information on the access management proposal. At this point it is appropriate that public input and comment be solicited on this plan. A proposal for expanding the scope of services has been requested by SRF Inc., the authors of the draft plan. The total cost for the public involvement is $9,000, with 35% of this cost, being the responsibility of the City of Ramsey. Staff recommended that the City enter into a revised agreement with SRF Inc., to provide for a public involvement element for this program. Councihnember Cook inquired as to where the funds would come from to p ay for the public involvement element of the study. Counci hnember Zimmenuan inquired if they could use MSA funds. Principal City Engineer Olson replied that C.R. #116 is not on the MSA system. Director of Public Works/Fire Chief Kapler stated that they would look into funding options and forward the information to the City Council. Motion b y C ouncilmember E lvig, seconded by Councilmember Cook, to recommend that the City Council enter into an agreement with SRF Inc., to provide a public involvement program for the CR 116 corridor study at a cost not to exceed $3,150. Further discussion: Councilmember Kurak inquired as to what the City's position is with adverse condemnation with property owners opposing the closing of an access. Councilmember Zimmerman replied that it has been documented legally that a right-in fight-out access is acceptable. Councilmember Kurak explained that what she was questioning is if the access is completely shut down and it was a County decision is the City going to be responsible if the property owner claims adverse condemnation. Councilmember Cook stated that accidents do not support business. Councilmember Zimmerman stated that they are not able to close off someone's business entirely, but they may be given an access in a location they are not in agreement with. Public Works Committee/March 18, 2003 Page 5 of 10