My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2006_0821
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2006
>
CC_Minutes_2006_0821
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:40:28 AM
Creation date
9/6/2006 4:41:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
8/21/2006
Meeting Type
Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
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 />City Council Study Session - 08/21/06 <br />Minutes - Page 16 <br /> <br />Public Works Director Duane Schwartz noted that staff s <br />last contact with the Minnesota Department of <br />Transportation (MnDOT) had been in July with them <br />questioning the status of the City's progress, and the City <br />responding to MnDOT that the City's Public Works <br />department had submitted a request in the 2008 Capital <br />Improvement Program (CIP) with development of plans <br />for access proceeding. Mr. Schwartz advised that he <br />anticipated contact with MnDOT every few months to <br />determine the City's progress. <br /> <br />Mayor Klausing opined that the City was aware of the <br />options; however, the neighborhood was not in consensus <br />with one option; thus the Task Force of Councilmembers <br />Ihlan and Kough to work with the neighborhood in <br />achieving neighborhood consensus for one proposal to <br />further develop. <br /> <br />Al Sands, 2612 AIdine <br />Mr. Sands opined that additional options were available, <br />specifically one developed by Mr. Craig Christianson; but <br />that staff needed Council direction to study that proposal <br />further. Mr. Sands further opined that options for only <br />Fairview needed to be pursued at this time, rather than to <br />confuse the issue with Snelling and County Road C <br />options. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued regarding the options presented to- <br />date; impacts to the neighborhood; cost-prohibitive nature <br />of all options; lack of interest in neighborhood finding <br />consensus and a solution; engineering feasibility studies <br />of several options; residential and business impacts with <br />the "Christianson" proposal; possible funding from <br />MnDOT; and the length of time already spent in seeking a <br />solution. <br /> <br />Councilmember Ihlan supported the PWET revIewmg <br />options and making a recommendation. <br /> <br />Mr. Sands opined that the PWET didn't have the <br />expertise, and he was looking for engineering expertise of <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.