My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 07/12/2022
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2022
>
Agenda - Council - 07/12/2022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/14/2025 2:34:08 PM
Creation date
7/12/2022 9:10:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
07/12/2022
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.
/
614
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
Councilmember Riley asked if there were four options. <br /> Mr. Lonnes confirmed this. <br /> Councilmember Riley asked if the reason they are not talking about number one as being separated <br /> out by the County is that having the City doing it separates it from the Federal project. <br /> Mr. Orcutt confirmed this adding number two also. He added this makes sense to pull out of the <br /> project because of supply chain issues, it's a City utility and they aren't using Federal dollars on <br /> the watermain and sewer either way. <br /> Councilmember Riley asked if they couldn't just separate that part out from the rest of the project <br /> and do it a year early for instance. <br /> Mr. Orcutt replied this is the option that is most agreeable. He stated half of the MnDOT meeting <br /> on July 5, 2022 was spent to talk about this and that is why they wanted Council input first. He <br /> stated these are the two options that really impact the City stretch and allow things to keep <br /> operating. <br /> Mr. Lonnes referenced the fall 2023 construction start and asked the earliest they could do this. <br /> He suggested not going much later than September 15, 2023 but hoped it could be started earlier, <br /> such as September 1,2023. He stated with the current supply chain issues that may not be possible. <br /> He stated if issues arose it wouldn't be feasible to rely on. He thought option three was hopeful <br /> and put too much risk on an outcome that is unlikely in the current environment. He explained the <br /> temporary access plan for businesses but highlighted that a problem with putting utilities at the <br /> end of project would mean it would be right along Highway 10 in a tight area. He stated option <br /> four wasn't ideal because it would be the only access road. He thought option one or two were <br /> more advisable ways to go for acceleration of the project. He continued his presentation with cost <br /> estimates. <br /> Mr. Lonnes asked for comments and preferences on this topic, City-led and County assisted bid <br /> package, utilities, local access for acceleration purposes. He stated next steps would include <br /> refining options and a recommended approach to proceed with. <br /> Councilmember Woestehoff stated the area is already zoned for MUSA but asked City Engineer <br /> Westby if it actually exists there and if there is a reason why the City needs to do it at this point in <br /> time, in terms of adding sewer and water connection through there or if it could be left as is. <br /> City Engineer Westby replied they wouldn't absolutely need to do it but he agreed with what Mr. <br /> Lonnes said that as long as they are working there, to get it set up for those businesses that have <br /> septic and wells that are aging. He stated it is preferred to have them on City septic and water, and <br /> this is the time to do it rather than waiting and doing it in a tight corridor. <br /> Councilmember Riley asked if they couldn't use another system. <br /> City Council Work Session/June 28, 2022 <br /> Page 3 of 20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.