My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
12/11/2000 Council Packet
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
1982-2020
>
2000
>
12/11/2000 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/19/2014 12:49:50 PM
Creation date
2/18/2014 9:50:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Packet
Meeting Date
12/11/2000
Council Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
124
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
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION OCTOBER 4, 2000 <br />• CSAH 49 RECONSTRUCTION UPDATE, JOHN POWELL <br />• <br />Staff inquired about any additional questions the Council may have to forward to the <br />County. The County has provided a specific response to questions. Options for the <br />project have not been explored. <br />Council Member Reinert advised he would like to review options for the plan. Staff <br />advised a letter will be sent to the County Engineer requesting possible options. The <br />letter will indicate the options should be available for the November 8, 2000, meeting. <br />Council Member Reinert suggested the City have a meeting with everyone involved with <br />the project to come up with a solution. <br />Council Member Carlson stated she has seen different plans from the County. The <br />County has shown a 120' right -of -way with a path. The County's . ponse indicated the <br />120' did not include a path. She stated she needs clarity regard the'ounty's proposal. <br />Staff advised the trail can not be confined in a 100' rights -w LL in areas of the <br />roadway. <br />Council Member Carlson stated she would like t <br />take a vote. The key point on their proposal <br />convey to the County what the Council is c <br />ns and then be prepared to <br />,aseme t. Staff advised they will <br />with and ask for a response. <br />Council Member O'Donnell request rnation on the impact of all the properties <br />along the roadway. <br />Staff asked the Council for <br />Council Member Car on <br />arding what they are looking for in the plan. <br />e is waiting for the County's proposal. <br />Staff clarified that the I nc is looking for a proposal that minimizes the right -of -way <br />and impact. The City of oreview is looking at shared turn lanes. <br />Council Member O'Donnell advised he is willing to look at other options that don't <br />included the median. <br />Council Member Carlson asked if the County is willing to have three (3) lanes with <br />shared turn lanes. <br />Council Member Reinert asked if the roadway will have to be four (4) lanes immediately <br />after construction. He suggested the four -(4) lanes be phased in over time. <br />• Council Member Carlson suggested the bridge be built wider than the roadway for future <br />use. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.