Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />~ <br />EN HILLS <br /> <br />MEMORANDUM <br /> <br />DATE: <br /> <br />April 12, 2007 <br /> <br />AGENDA ITEM B3 <br /> <br />TO: <br /> <br />Mayor and City Council <br />Michelle Wolfe, City Administrator <br /> <br />Kristine Giga, Civil Engineer ~/ <br />Greg Hoag, Public W orks Director~ <br />Michelle Olson, Parks and Recreation Manager 1W <br /> <br />FROM: <br /> <br />SUBJECT: <br /> <br />Old Highway 10 CP Rail Bridge Update <br /> <br />BACKGROUND <br />As a part ofthe 2002 Parks, Trails & Recreation Master Plan, Old Snelling and Old Highway 10 <br />(Snelling to Hwy 96) were identified as a regional trail conidor. In 2004, the City started work <br />on the feasibility of constructing the portion of this pathway between Snelling and County Road <br />E2. As a part of this preliminary planning, it was determined that the existing CP Rail Bridge <br />that crosses Old Highway 10 to the north of County Road E would be a significant bottleneck for <br />this pathway conidor. <br /> <br />On October 5, 2004, the City sent Ramsey County and CP Rail a letter describing the proposed <br />trail improvements and requesting that they consider making improvements to the bridge and <br />Old Highway lOin conjunction with a City pathway project because of the risks the bridge may <br />pose to public safety. The safety risks were identified through a review of the MN/DOT <br />Structure Inventory Sheet followed by a field inspection of the CP rail bridge. <br /> <br />In their response, CP Rail did not share the concerns expressed by the City with regard to public <br />safety or with the railroad traffic it currently handles. They indicated that they had no immediate <br />intention to rehabilitate or reconstruct the bridge. They did, on the other hand, bring up the <br />possibility of modifying the bridge to accommodate a pedestrian path and they referred to a <br />similar case of a modified bridge on Old US Highway #8 in New Brighton as an example. <br /> <br />At the same time, Ramsey County also responded with regard to improvements to Old Highway <br />10 saying that the road segment is not included in the County's long range Capital Improvement <br />Plan. As a result, funding for these improvements has not been identified and there is no <br />timeJine for the roadway improvements. <br /> <br />\\RVNAS I \AHdata$\PR&PW\Engineering\2007\ Work _ Sessions\4- I 6-07_ Memo _ CP _ Rail.doc <br />