My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Public Works Committee - 05/17/2005
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Public Works Committee
>
2000 - 2009
>
2005
>
Agenda - Public Works Committee - 05/17/2005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/13/2025 2:26:45 PM
Creation date
5/13/2005 3:21:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Public Works Committee
Document Date
05/17/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
66
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) 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 />oi' 8 Ibm. Trail funds would be used for the trail portion of the road, and would be part of the 50 <br />pcrccm contribution. <br /> <br />Councihnember Zimmerman noted with only three residents on this street the 50/50 split might <br />bc ,t higt~ cost for them. Staffwas directed to bring back scenarios with trails and what the costs <br />might be. He does not know that the Committee totally agreed with the 50/50 split on this case. <br /> <br />Coundlmember 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 Gmnec commented when this was previously discussed, the cost for paving this road was <br />al most $9,000. At a 50/50 split the cost would be $4,500, which is still excessive. <br /> <br />Assistam Public Works Director Olson suggested 25 percent from the trail fund could be. taken <br />of¥'the top. The remaining 75 percent would then be figured at the 50/50 split. <br /> <br />Cotmci Ime~nber Kurak asked if there is any other scenario other than the 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 />issttc 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 />o I: thc cul-de-sac is normal, those three residents will also be paying for a larger portion of the <br />cub-dc- sac, <br /> <br />Councihnember Kurak inquired if these improvements could be finished this year, so children <br />walking to school could use the trail. <br /> <br />Councihnember Elvig commented this is one of the only two non-linking areas of the trail. If <br />tltere, was ever a sense of urgency or need, this is a great win/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 />('ouncihnember Cook stated it is important in cases like this for the City to get it completed, and <br />t{~ .¢iw.: 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 />13 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.