My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Public Works Committee - 02/15/2022
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Public Works Committee
>
2022
>
Agenda - Public Works Committee - 02/15/2022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/14/2025 11:36:30 AM
Creation date
2/11/2022 9:19:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Public Works Committee
Document Date
02/15/2022
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
80
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
Civil Engineer IV Linton stated that designations were made in western Ramsey attempting to <br />anticipate where needs would be. He stated that staff is attempting to rebalance and review <br />collector road needs. <br />Councilmember Woestehoff asked how often this process is completed. <br />Civil Engineer IV Linton replied that the City has to certify its routes annually. He noted that the <br />segments along Highway 10 have been on his mind for a few years and this would be a natural <br />time to do that. <br />Councilmember Woestehoff asked if it would be smart to ensure the 4.42 miles are claimed now <br />in anticipation of future needs in order to maximize funding, with the knowledge that the routes <br />will be reviewed again in two to three years. He stated that he would prefer to have more route <br />possibilities to maximize the return because of the needs that are anticipated. He asked if Green <br />Valley Road would be a good option. <br />City Engineer Westby replied that is a County road. <br />Councilmember Musgrove commented that the map does not appear to include all of Ramsey. <br />Civil Engineer IV Linton replied that was done on purpose with the intent to focus on this area. <br />Councilmember Musgrove commented that she is glad to see adjustments made, removing the <br />roads no longer needed. She referenced the potential new designations and asked if any of those <br />would also be eligible for TIF funds. <br />City Engineer Westby replied that TIF funds cannot be used for reconstruction or overlay of roads <br />and could only be used for construction of new roads. He stated that if a road qualified, both TIF <br />and MSA funds could be used, but generally staff would not combine those funding sources. <br />Councilmember Musgrove asked for details on the designation that goes from Sunwood to <br />Variolite, shown in purple. <br />Civil Engineer IV Linton replied that is Center Street, which currently goes from Sunwood to <br />Bunker Lake Boulevard and then to 1471h. He stated that north of that is a section that has not yet <br />been built, another segment that goes through a neighborhood, and a segment that goes through <br />the tree farm property. He noted that would only go forward if the tree farm were to redevelop. <br />He noted that MSA routes have to begin and end on another MSA route, including City, County <br />or State routes. He explained that an MSA route cannot dead-end. <br />Councilmember Musgrove commented that she has received comments from residents in Ward 4 <br />that have concerns with accessing Bunker Lake Boulevard near Magnesium Street. <br />Civil Engineer IV Linton commented that it would not make sense to designate Magnesium Street <br />and Bunker Lake Boulevard is a County roadway that already has planned improvements. <br />Public Works Committee / November 16, 2021 <br />Page 4 of 8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.