My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
res_6795
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
06xxx
>
6700
>
res_6795
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:11:43 AM
Creation date
4/25/2005 11:59:16 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Resolutions
Resolution #
6795
Resolution Title
Ordering the Construction of Improvement No. SS-W-ST-P-78-29 Under and Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 and Ordering Preparation of Plans and Specifications
Resolution Date Passed
2/28/1979
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />7 <br /> <br />MR. HUNT: Do you have any projected traffic count for the <br />new road? <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: The new road - usually we predict a two <br />percent increase a year as more and more people drive. If the <br />oil crunch hits (inaudible), but we design a road so we match the <br />traffic we think it will be in twenty years, so at 2% for 20 years <br />it's 50% higher. <br /> <br />MR. HUNT: I know there's a large construction area by the <br />school, and when that's in use I assume they will use C-2 to get <br />to Hamline Shopping Center which probably will increase it more <br />than the 2% in that particular year. The other question - Snelling <br />Avenue - is there any possibility of the state closing that off - <br />that intersection? <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: Any of the roads (inaudible) there is a master <br />plan on file - I don't know if you're aware of it - the master <br />plan does call for Snelling to be higher graded than it is today <br />and no access at County Road C-2. You're a relatively young man <br />but I think you'll be retired before you see that. <br /> <br />MR. HUNT: Is it just for stop signs now? <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: They do not want to have additional signals, <br />but they will have to make their determinations year by year. <br />The closing of C-2 and up-grading of Snelling is not on this or <br />the next five-year plan, and in talking to the state, they don't <br />know when it ever will be done - if ever. <br /> <br />MR. HUNT: The other question - you talked about the require- <br />ments for - I work for (inaudible) to get the requirements for <br />M.S.A. road and he said there's such a large spectrum it could fall <br />into. Is this the minimum? <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: There are four general minimums. There is the <br />standard design and you can always build it bigger, but they won't <br />let you build it smaller. The previous project was 44 feet wide <br />and 9-ton strength. With that you can have parking on both sides <br />if it's safe. The next step down is a minimum of 36 foot width <br />which is what this one is proposed for. You could have parking on <br />one side only. Beyond that there's a 32-foot width which they don't <br />recommend, but it's there. That would be no parking anywhere <br />along County Road C-2, and it was our opinion it would be good to <br />have the flexibility of parking at least on one side. <br /> <br />MR. HUNT: The thing I received on the driveway stated they'd <br />take nine feet into my driveway of the existing driveway. Can I <br />assume that the road is coming nine feet that way? <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: It means perhaps right where your individual <br />drive is maybe it's going six inches higher or lower, and so in <br />order to get a good slope to your driveway that you can negotiate <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.