Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Councilmember Musgrove asked if there are any changes or upgrades to Variolite Road. She <br />commented that she assumes some of the traffic will be diverted that way making that an important <br />intersection to study. <br /> <br />Senior Planner McGuire Brigl replied no improvements were discussed at this time on Variolite <br />Street. She agreed the focus had been on the Nowthen portion because there are two projects up <br />there but both sides of the project need to be discussed. Both were included in the study and she <br />didn’t believe there were any recommendations made. <br /> <br />City Engineer Westby replied Bolton and Menk reviewed the study and recommended a turn lane <br />for Variolite and a bypass for traffic heading south on Variolite. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove asked if that is included in the conditions for approval of the <br />preliminary plat. <br /> <br />Senior Planner McGuire Brigl replied the draft resolution has traffic improvements outlined as <br />recommended in the traffic study as well as approval by the City Engineer and Staff review <br />comments. The Council can add an additional specific requirement about the Nowthen lanes if <br />they don’t move with the traffic study. She believed they were covered under the contingencies <br />that were listed but if they did the traffic study, the Council would want to amend the conditions <br />as well. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove commented she would like to see it as descriptive and specific as <br />possible so everyone that reads the document has the same understanding. <br /> <br />Mayor Kuzma asked where the funding is going to come from. <br /> <br />City Administrator Ulrich suggested the Revolving Fund that is typically reserved for road <br />improvement plans. <br /> <br />Councilmember Riley asked if the Council went ahead with the traffic study, could it be done <br />within the required 60-day time limit. <br /> <br />City Administrator Ulrich replied the quote received indicated the traffic study could begin <br />immediately and the company would work on a timeframe that would be mutually acceptable. He <br />assumed that would fall within the 60-day timetable. <br /> <br />City Engineer Westby replied that 60 days would be a tight schedule to complete a traffic schedule <br />because a lot of it is weather dependent when they can collect traffic counts. It is his understanding <br />that if the company knows the goal, they could make a schedule to make the goal. <br /> <br />Councilmember Riley expressed discomfort with the words “hoping” and “assuming” the work <br />would be done given the requirements the City must meet. He asked if the City could know for <br />sure. He also asked what kinds of things they would find from an additional study that would be <br />helpful. <br /> <br />City Council / November 9, 2021 <br />Page 7 of 26 <br /> <br />