Laserfiche WebLink
Councilmember Riley stated that he would be resistant to adding lights and would want to hear <br /> more about that in the future. <br /> Councilmember Musgrove referenced Alpine and the RCUT intersection, stating that it does not <br /> appear to do anything for the south side of Highway 10. She stated that Jarvis Street has more <br /> connections and may be a better fit. <br /> Ms. Bersaw stated that there are additional plans for the future that are a part of the study, noting <br /> that Elk River may have a future connection to Jarvis. <br /> Councilmember Shryock stated that there has not been a lot of interaction with Elk River through <br /> the Highway 10 Coalition. She asked if there have been conversations with Elk River as part of <br /> the study. She stated that in the past the City has tried to work with Elk River. She noted that <br /> the other partners to the east have been very willing to work with the City as partners on the <br /> Highway 10 Coalition. <br /> Ms. Bersaw stated that an Elk River staff member is part of the technical advisory committee. <br /> She noted that she and City Engineer Westby also met with Elk River staff to have continued <br /> discussions. She stated that this is split between two different MnDOT Districts, MnDOT Metro <br /> and MnDOT District 3. <br /> Councilmember Shryock stated that she wants to ensure that the City continues the mission that <br /> have been expressed through the Coalition. <br /> Ms. Bersaw continued with the east end universe of concepts noting that the ultimate goal would <br /> be signal removal at Sunfish and Ramsey Boulevards. She reviewed some of the concepts that <br /> have been dismissed and conflicting goals. <br /> Councilmember Riley asked if the decision to not do traditional grade separations at both Sunfish <br /> and Ramsey Boulevards is driven by funding. <br /> Ms. Bersaw confirmed there would be a higher cost to have traditional grade separations at both <br /> intersections. She noted that there is also a smaller footprint at Sunfish and a traditional grade <br /> separation would have an impact on more businesses in that location. She was also unsure if <br /> MnDOT would approve traditional grade separations for both intersections because of required <br /> spacing. <br /> Ms. Bersaw continued with railroad underpass options noting that it would be ideal to have grade <br /> separations at both Sunfish and Ramsey, but noted that there would be a distinction between an <br /> underpass and overpass for the railroad crossings. She explained that in order to construct an <br /> underpass, a shoofly, which is a temporary rail, would need to be constructed and removed. She <br /> explained that for Sunfish Lake, a rail crossing shoofly would impact and require the acquisition <br /> of four properties and would also impact power lines and therefore they would not like to <br /> continue to review an underpass for that crossing. She stated that the option of an underpass is a <br /> possibility for the Ramsey rail crossing and they would like to continue to review that option. <br /> She summarized the list of concepts that they would like to carry forward in the study for both <br /> City Council/December 11,2018 <br /> Page 14 of 18 <br />