Laserfiche WebLink
<br />CASE#OL <br /> <br />CONSIDER TURNBACK OF CR 63 BY ANOKA COUNTY <br />By: Steven Jankowski, City Engineer <br /> <br />Background: <br /> <br />Recently, the Director of Public Works met with Anoka County officials to discuss the turnback <br />of CR 63 between Armstrong Boulevard and Nowthen Boulevard to the City as a City street. <br />Staff has been provided with a layout map ofthis roadway which will be available at the meeting <br />and a sketch has been attached with this case. At the present time the roadway is in poor <br />condition with two 10 foot travel lanes and no shoulders. Prior to turnback to the City the <br />roadway could be reconstructed with two 12 foot travel lanes and four foot paved shoulders <br />along with 12 foot turn and bypass lanes at Armstrong Boulevard, Variolite Street and Nowthen <br />Boulevard at an estimated cost of $1.25 million. <br /> <br />Development pressures within this area may cause the City to consider two other options which <br />were suggested by the county short of the cost of full reconstruction. The first alternative would <br />be to reclaim the existing bituminous and repave with 12 foot lanes. In addition this alternative <br />would include mucking out the widening required along the wetlands located on the east and <br />west ends of the project. This alternative would reduce the cost of the project to $800,000. A <br />second alternative would consist of a simple overlay and widening to 12 foot through lanes at a <br />. cost of $250,000. The cost difference between the reconstruction and the alternative selected by <br />the City as a condition of the turnback would be returned to the City is in either the form of cash <br />or reduced contributions on other joint projects. <br /> <br />Recommendation: <br /> <br />Staffis recommending that the City proceed with negotiating with the county for the turnback <br />under the first alternative, reclamation and repaving at a cost of $800,000. Under this option the <br />City would receive a roadway which would have a life expectancy that would service the area for <br />the foreseeable future. It however is likely that the area adjacent to this roadway will redevelop <br />with consequences that will affect the roadway and therefore the higher level of expenditure is <br />not advisable. . <br /> <br />Action: <br /> <br />Motion to recommend that City Council direct staffto negotiate with Anoka County for the <br />turnback ofCR 63 with the intermediate level of upgrade as a condition for acceptance. <br /> <br />Reviewed By: <br />Director of Public Works/Principal Engineer <br />Fire Chief <br />Street Supervisor <br /> <br />PW: 07/18/06 <br /> <br />9 <br />