My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 12-13-2004
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2004
>
CCP 12-13-2004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:19:55 PM
Creation date
11/14/2006 3:36:51 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
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.
/
280
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 />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES <br />NOVEMBER 29, 2004 <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />5. PUBLIC HEARINGS <br /> <br />None. <br /> <br />6. NEW BUSINESS <br /> <br />C. County Road E Sidewalk <br /> <br />Ms. Wolfe stated the Council needed to make a decision regarding the construction of the <br />sidewalk on the County Road E bridge, This decision was needed so it could be provided to <br />MnDOT as part of the application for Cooperative Agreement Program funding. Specifically, <br />the Council needs to decide on which side of the bridge to construct the sidewalk (north or <br />south). The City Council might also choose to determine whether or not to proceed with <br />construction of a sidewalk west of the bridge to Old Snelling, <br /> <br />Ms. Wolfe noted staff had received some e-mails and messages from residents with their <br />comments and those have been provided to Council for their review. <br /> <br />Ms. Wolfe slated in discussions with the traffic engineers regarding safety; they indicated that <br />basically it would be safer to not have pedestrians cross at the freeway ramps. The degree of <br />increased safety, however, might be marginal to significant depending on other information that <br />that they did not have, such as Ihe number of pedestrians and final destinations. <br /> <br />Ms. Wolfe requested the Council indicate whether to build the sidewalk on the north or south <br />side of the bridge and authorize staff to notify MnDOT of that decision and to determine whether <br />or not to proceed with the construction of the sidewalk west of the bridge and to authorize staff to <br />proceed with plans and the funding application process, <br /> <br />Mr. Brown stated he had nothing further to add, but would answer Council's questions, <br /> <br />Councilmember Rem asked what caused the project cost to increase from the original estimate, <br />Mr. Brown replied the initial feasibility report had a cost ranking from $60,000 to approximately <br />$180,000. He noted there were a number of add-ons, such as railings, painting, pilaster, which <br />added approximately $50,000. He stated the north/south sidewalk had also added costs to the <br />project. He presented to Council the various improvement options that were available and the <br />costs of such improvements. He indicated the cost of steel had also skyrocketed and the <br />estimates had been increased to reflect that material cost increase. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden asked for an explanation of the state's grant process. She noted it was <br />her understanding that one side of the street was more favorable in the state's opinion and the <br />City could get grant funds if the sidewalk was put on that side of the street. Mr. Brown <br />summarized the grant process. He indicated he had not heard anything from the State that they <br />would prefer a sidewalk on one side or the other. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.