CCP 08-21-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e . . INGERSON PROJECT REVIEW GROUP RECOMMENDATIONS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The following summarizes the recommendations ofthe Ingerson Project Review Group ("Review Group"). Information relevant to the recommendations and background information follow the Executive Summary: . Shonld the Ingerson Project roadwaysl be included in the pavement program? The majority of the Review Group members do not believe or recommend that the Ingerson Project should proceed unless major modifications are made to the original BRW feasibility report, alternative methods are developed and designed and the needs and desires of the residents are incorporated into the final proposal. Some Ingerson Project residents feel that the implementation of the original BRW feasibility report would be destructive to the aesthetic quality of the neighborhood. If the Council believes the original BRW feasibility proposal should be incorporated, it is the Review Group's recommendation that the residents be allowed to reject the project in its entirety. In years past, Pavement Management Programs (PMP) dealt only with roadway projects. The amount of impervious surface drastically affects water quality. In today's society and environment, any PMP currently adopted should not only serve the needs of the City and the residents but must incorporate good sound water quality standards. . Ifthe Ingerson roadways are included in the pavement program: . General Street Design Comments The Review Group members agree and acknowledge that the City has a responsibility to maintain existing roadways. The Review Group recognizes that it is the desire of the City and Council to deal with entire "neighborhoods" as opposed to only certain streets within a neighborhood in the various PMP projects. However, each roadway within a PMP should be reviewed and the PMP proposal should not merely incorporate rigid standards for every roadway within the project. The review should include, but not be limited to, the purpose of the roadways; the amount of traffic on the roadways; the current condition of each roadway within the project; the needs of the City; the needs and desires ofthe affected community/neighborhood; the end effect of the project on the neighborhood; the value of any project to the neighborhood; the end effect of the project on any water quality issues; etc. For example, both FeTIlwood Court and Ingerson Court only provide access to two (2) homes each whereas the remaining roadways within the Ingerson Project provide multiple vehicle access. FeTIlwood Court was repaved in the 90s and is in excellent shape. However, Ingerson Court has not been repaved lately and is not in good shape. The Review Group does not believe that FeTIlwood Court should be included within the Ingerson Project and/or held to the same standards and designs as Ingerson Court. In other words, each roadway within a PMP project should be reviewed to detcrmine how it "fits" within the project. ] The roadways included in the Ingerson Project include Ingerson Road, Ingerson Court, Femwood Road, Femwood Court, Hamline A venue, Cannon A venue, Tiller Lane, and Carlton Drive. 3 August 17, 2000