My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2015_0706
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2015
>
CC_Minutes_2015_0706
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/27/2015 3:43:32 PM
Creation date
7/27/2015 9:28:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
7/6/2015
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
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
Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday,July 6, 2015 <br /> Page 7 <br /> Mr. Culver responded that the total cost for a traffic signal is more in the area of <br /> $200,000 and above for all components and wiring; and the $25,000 estimated <br /> cost for the City represents the reimbursement to the state for the traffic signal <br /> controller(e.g. cabinet) and related electronics. Mr. Culver noted there is special- <br /> ized equipment required by the state to maintain the signal compatible with their <br /> other components. <br /> Councilmember McGehee questioned if the fact that the City of Roseville is pay- <br /> ing most of the cost for this particular interchange beyond the state and county <br /> costs, was based on the City requesting installation of it before those jurisdictions <br /> determined there was a need. <br /> Mr. Culver responded affirmatively; and confirmed for Councilmember McGehee <br /> that this would typically be the case when making such a request. <br /> Specific to the Best Value Procurement process, Councilmember Etten suggested <br /> future RCA's include categories clarifying rating systems of each proposal. <br /> Regarding the City's cost for installation of equipment, such as signal lights, on <br /> property belonging to other jurisdictions, Councilmember Etten asked that staff <br /> alert the City Council if and when they can provide impetus to Ramsey County or <br /> MnDOT, whether at the staff or City Council level, to accelerate their timeframes <br /> in improving intersection and roadways as appropriate. Councilmember Etten <br /> noted the significant number of roadways in the City of Roseville that were con- <br /> trolled by other jurisdictions, and suggested by the City becoming more proactive <br /> in encouraging improvements, the County and/or MnDOT may revise their <br /> timeframes accordingly to serve the overall community and region better. Coun- <br /> cilmember Etten advised that he would look to staffs leadership to advise the <br /> City Council how they could best assist these efforts. <br /> Mr. Culver thanked Mr. Etten for bringing that up; and as an example noted <br /> staffs current lobbying to move up on the County's priority list the intersection of <br /> County Road D and Fairview Avenue. <br /> Mayor Roe noted that the Public Works Department had in fact used both the Best <br /> Value procurement process and the Lowest Responsible Bidder process. Mayor <br /> Roe agreed with Councilmember Etten's request to provide more detailed infor- <br /> mation in future RCA's related to particular categories. <br /> Mayor Roe noted that, while the City applied for and received the $1.2 million in <br /> Federal funding for this project, those dollars were still Federal dollars and not <br /> City dollars. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.