My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
05/06/98 Special
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Dissolved Boards/Commissions/Committees
>
Road and Bridge Committee
>
Minutes
>
1998
>
05/06/98 Special
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/29/2025 11:51:10 AM
Creation date
6/10/2003 2:13:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Document Title
Road and Bridge Committee
Document Date
05/06/1998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
Charles Johnson, 6010 - 159th Lane NW, stated that one of the things he has listened to <br />for the last year and a half were complaints of traffic going too fast through <br />neighborhoods. Now Council would have the opportunity to nip another such problem in <br />the bud before it's an issue. He understood that the lead link fence would be a bit of an <br />inconvenience, however, if it saves one little child from getting run over, it's worth it. <br />The issue here is safety. <br /> <br />Councilmember Haas Steffen reminded Mr. Johnson that if the lead link fence is <br />installed, it will dictate that 17 houses have to go through Mr. Johnson's neighborhood. <br /> <br />Mr. Johnson commented that 17 homes is a pittance compared to 120+. He noted that the <br />elementary school is on County Road #5 and that will have all the people from the new <br />neighborhood going through the existing neighborhood to get to school functions. <br /> <br />Mr. Jankowski stated that Council will be looking at the development agreement for the <br />fifth addition of Apple Ridge on Tuesday. Staff will put wording in the agreement about <br />installing a lead link and Council can decide if they want the language stricken or not. He <br />reiterated that staff is recommending against the closure. <br /> <br />Case #2: <br /> <br />Change Order No. 1 for Improvement Project #98-13 Casing Pipes for <br />C.R. #116 Crossing <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski stated that Improvement Project #98-13 involves the fitting of <br />Well No. 4 with a pump and transmission main. The project has 2,000 feet of ten-inch <br />transmission pipe from Well No. 4 to the well house containing Well #3. This ten-inch <br />transmission main crosses the future C.R. #116 extension. Mr. Jankowski stated that <br />although the County does not require casing pipe under its roadway, (the State of <br />Minnesota does), casing the crossing has significant advantages should it be necessary to <br />repair the main at some point in the future. The advantages are that it greatly reduces the <br />cost of excavating the roadway for repair, it avoids patching of a major county arterial <br />roadway, it eliminates inconvenience caused by traffic control associated with detouring <br />of the highway during repair, and it greatly increases the safety of the workers by making <br />the repair outside of traffic. Mr. Jankowski presented a proposal for the installation of <br />casing pipe associated with the Well No. 4 transmission main and other future crossings <br />of watermain beneath the roadway. Item #1 is a cost of $8,700 for casing the ten-inch <br />transmission main. The contractor has already started installation, therefore, Mr. <br />Jankowski authorized the work to be done to avoid delay damages. Item #2 calls for the <br />extension of a twelve-inch watermain and casing on the west side of C.R. #56. This work <br />has not been authorized. Finally, item #3 presents prices for installing a casing pipe of <br />various sizes for future use in installing sewer and water casing pipes to avoid boring and <br />jacking costs which will cost up to $16,000 per crossing. He included a sketch <br />illustrating where future watermain crossing of the highway would be located consistent <br />with the City's current comprehensive water system plan. <br /> <br />Road and Bridge Committee/May 6, 1998 <br /> Page 4 of 5 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.