Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council October 9, 2006 <br />Regular Meeting Page 13 <br />t C. Resolution 6948 Approving the County Road 10 Pedestrian Crossing Options <br />2 Report <br />3 n n ~ ~ Sono A. *~h«oi: n ~f 1 .+ <br />~icCiJV-ra i~ esig:i vz r~i.i.uua,uYe <br />4 A.-~L.:~o~~.. o ~I~ .,~~ f...- •L.~ !`~ .,+. 0~,.,.1 1!1 T.-n:l~ar ~'' r:~l <br />uj' a~vr .uvi <br />5 <br />6 MOTION/SECOND: FLAHERTY/GUNN. To Approve the Consent Agenda as amended. <br />7 <br />8 Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 Motion carried. <br />9 <br />to D. Resolution 6949 Approving the Preliminary Design of Landscape <br />11 Architecture Elements for the County Road 10 Trailway Corridor <br />12 <br />13 Councilmember Stigney stated his concern is that the Resolution does not specify the funding <br />14 source or cost. <br />15 <br />16 Director Lee explained that within the capital improvement program that passed in August, the <br />17 trailway plans were approved and adopted. He shared the plan with the Council. <br />18 <br />19 Councilmember Stigney stated his concern is that there are many areas in the plan that should be <br />20 considered further, rather than be voted upon in the Consent Agenda. He suggested the <br />21 Resolution be brought back for further discussion. <br />22 <br />23 Councilmember Thomas explained that the Resolution does not approve spending money, and <br />24 that the plans will come back to the Council before any money is spent. She explained that the <br />25 Resolution approves various elements that will be included in the plan, not authorizing such <br />26 elements to be constructed. <br />27 <br />28 Mayor Marty said his and Councilmember Stigney's concern is that such projects do not go <br />29 forward without Council approval. <br />30 <br />31 Director Lee pointed out for each segment, the feasibility report will come back to the Council. <br />32 In addition, the plans and specs would come back and the project would have to be ordered and <br />33 approved by the Council. <br />34 <br />35 Councilmember Thomas stated the current Resolution is before the Council because it saves <br />36 money by approving all of the proposed elements that could potentially be used in the design. <br />37 <br />38 Co~ulcilmember Gunn agreed with Councilmember Thomas that the Council is approving the <br />39 preliminary design. She suggested that the elements the City has so far be brought together for a <br />40 more comprehensive look at the trailway corridor. She said it is a big project and before the City <br />41 loses sight of the project, a discussion should be held. <br />42 <br />43 Councilmember Stigney stated that each segment is made up of many individual elements and his <br />44 concern is approving all elements. He said he would like to look at each element before they are <br />45 installed and that his problem is with the vague language of the Resolution. <br />