Laserfiche WebLink
<br />County Road E Sidewalk Discussion <br />September 1 I, 2006 <br />Page 2 of 4 <br /> <br />7. Minutcs from Novcmber 29, 2004 Regular City Council Meeting <br />8. Minutes from January 24, 2005 Work Session <br />9. Exhibits/photograph of3609 Pascal driveway <br />lO. Current 2006-201 I CIP spreadsheet <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />The City Council passed a rcsolution at the Novembcr 29, 2004 mecting approving thc sidewalk <br />for the north side of County Road E from Old Highway lO to Connelly A venue. Thc project was <br />rcviewed by Mn DOT with thirty five other projects and rankcd fourteenth in priority for funding. <br />A total oftcn projects were fundcd with the next four listcd as alternates. <br /> <br />CURRENT STATUS <br />As discussed at the July 17, 2006 Work Session, the City Council is contemplating the County <br />Road E pcdestrian improvements as a 2008 project. Mn/DOT is again accepting candidate <br />projects for the 2008 Municipal Agreement Program. Project proposals for the cooperative <br />agreement need to be submittcd by October] I, 2006 to be considered for the 2008 program. It is <br />anticipatcd that the actual project selection will occur in early January of 2007 with the funds <br />becoming available July 1,2007. <br /> <br />Staff requests direction from City Council to apply for the agreement by the City Council <br />mceting on Monday, September 25, 2006. While it would be advantageous to make a decision <br />on which side of the bridge to have the walkway at the time of application, there is time to <br />discuss this further. Staff has spoken with Mn/DOT reprcsentatives, who have indicated that a . <br />change in location on the project is permissible after the application is submitted. What cannot <br />change is thc scope of the project, for exanlple, thc length of the proposed improvcments. <br /> <br />Thc City could submit the application to include the north-side option (most cxpensive). This <br />amount could then be lowered if the City decides to proceed on the south side. If this project is <br />selected, the City will have to prepare plans and submit them to MnDOT for review and <br />approval, as is typical of any project receiving Mn/DOT funding. The final decision for the <br />location of the improvements will be needed for plan submittal. The cooperative agreement <br />would fund the bridge improvements only; any sidewalk improvements to the west of the bridgc <br />would need to be funded through other means, such as City funds or Municipal State Aid <br />funding. Thc options available to the City Council for the pedcstrian sidewalk on County Road <br />E are as follows: (All bridge options include ornamental railing, concretc pilasters, and form <br />lincr surfacc treatmcnt as requcsted by the City Council in earlicr discussions.) <br /> <br />A. Proceed with a 7.5 foot width sidewalk on the north sidc of the bridge with no <br />sidewalk connection to Old Highway lO. The estimated project cost of this option is <br />$376,700, which includes a cast in place retaining wall on the west side of the bridge. <br /> <br />B. Proceed with a 7.5 foot width sidewalk on the south side of the bridge with no <br />sidewalk conncction to Old Highway 10. The estimated project cost of this option is <br />$346,000. <br /> <br />. <br />