My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 05/10/2005
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2005
>
Agenda - Council - 05/10/2005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 1:48:57 PM
Creation date
5/9/2005 9:27:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
05/10/2005
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
434
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
4) <br /> <br />Consider Feasibility Study on St. Francis Boulevard Frontage Road <br /> <br />Assistant Public Works Director Olson advised this case is similar to the previous case that was <br />just discussed. It abuts Highway 47 and has three properties owners adjacent to it. The <br />discussion at the Public Works Committee was that there is also a bike trail through there. The <br />Committee discussed the City contribution of the 50/50 split that was discussed with the previous <br />case. The road would be constructed at 32 feet wide, with the trail on the road.striped at a width <br />of 8 ~'eet. Trail funds would be used for the trail portion 0fthe road, and would be part of the 50 <br />percent contribution. . <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman noted with only three residents on this street the 50/50 split might <br />be a high cost for them. Staff was directed to bring back scenarios with trails and whit the costs <br />might be. He does not know that the Committee totally agreed w!th the 50/50 split on this case. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cook commented it makes sense to use the trail fund. for this. He stated this <br />needs to be fixed, due to the cost of maintaining the cul-de-sac. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec commented when this was previously discussed, the cost fo~ paving this road was <br />almost $9,000. At a 50/50 split the cost would be $4,500, which is still excessive. <br /> <br />Assistant Public Works Director Olson suggested' 25 percent from the.trail fund' could be taken <br />off the top. The remaining 75 percent Would then be figured at the 50/50 split. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak asked if there is any other scenario other than l}he park dedication for the <br />trail, and the 50/50 split. <br /> <br />Assistant Public Works Director Olson replied that is generally what was discussed. The biggest <br />issue was the cul-de-sac near the end and how big that needs to be. It needs to be big enough for- <br />the snowplow to turn around. The road is fairly short and only services three houses. If the size <br />of' the cul-de-sac is normal, those three residents will also be paying for a larger portion of the <br />cul-de-sac. <br /> <br />Councilmember'Kurak inquired if these improvements could be finished this year, so children <br />walking to school could use the trail. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig commented this is one' of the only two non-linking areas of the trail. If' <br />there was ever a sense of urgency or need, this is a great w/n/win opportunity, These residents <br />have petitioned and asked for improvements and now they can close up the gap on the trail <br />system, which is as important as the road. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cook stated it is important in cases like this for the City to get it completed, and <br /> .give a little more latitude to the people negotiating with the residents to.get something worked <br />out. '- · ' <br /> <br />City Council/August 10, 2004 <br /> Page 16 of 27 <br /> <br />-135- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.