My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 08-21-2000
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
CCP 08-21-2000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:16:11 PM
Creation date
11/13/2006 1:25:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
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
<br />INGERSON PROJECT REVIEW GROUP RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> <br />e determine if they are or are not in favor of the closure. If Hamline Ave. north ofIngerson Road <br />is closed, the Review Group recommends that not only the design/landscaping be appropriate for <br />thc area but also that considerable safety design consideration be given (e.g. installation of stop <br />sign on HamIine Ave. at the Ingerson Road intersection). <br /> <br />STREET STRUCTURE <br /> <br />Review Group Reeommendations: <br /> <br />Tbe original BRW feasibility report suggested tbat all roadways witbin tbe Ingerson <br />Projeet be reeonstructed down to tbe subbase. The Review Group members recognize and <br />aeknowledge tbat tbe City must maintain tbe life of a roadway. The majority of Review <br />Group members recommend that the current subbase strueture of eaeh roadway be <br />reviewed individuallv. taking into account the roadway usage, to determine if it is <br />necessary to reeonstruct the subbase for that particular road. If a subbase does not need to <br />be reeonstrueted, the road should merely undergo a 2"- 6" cold recyeIe overlay, provided <br />that tbe end product is a road witb a eonsistent life expectaney throughout, which is <br />commensurate with reconstructed roads of the same type. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />There was considerable debate during the Review Group meetings over the existing street <br />subbase. Greg Brown contends that the roads in questions should be dug up approximately 2- <br />2.5'and that the subbase should be replaced. This is obviously a costly endeavor to both the City <br />and thc residents. Some Review Group members believe that, based upon the appearance of the <br />roads in the area, a complete reconstruction of all roads in the neighborhood is not warranted. <br /> <br />The roads in the Ingerson Project area were constructed in the 1950s. Some or all ofthe subject <br />roads have undergone 1-2 pavement overlays. The majority ofroads within the project do not <br />show any evidence of deterioration such as cracking, crumbling, etc., which would be signs of a <br />poor subbase.64 Fernwood Ct. was constructed in 1961, was overlaid in 1989 and was sealcoated <br />in 1996. If the roadways are not deteriorating, it would seem reasonable to assume that the <br />current subbase is adequate and sufficient for the neighborhood needs. According to Greg <br />Brown, an overlay would not "seal"/correct any underlying roadway cracks. However, both <br />Dwaync Stafford and Greg Brown acknowledge that even a newly installed road will eventually <br />show cracks and deterioration. <br /> <br />Some Review Group members believe that the cost of reconstruction is exorbitant to both the <br />residents and the City. Greg Brown advised that the cost of a full reconstruction of the roadway <br />would cost approximately $180-$200 per foot vs. $65-$85 per foot for the cost of a 4" cold <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />64 There are areas on the roadway that do appcar to have "sunk" or cracked. However, these <br />areas were dug up by the City and/or utility workers for repair of utilities. Poor <br />repavcment/patching is the cause of any deterioration in these areas. <br /> <br />27 <br /> <br />August 17, 2000 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.