Laserfiche WebLink
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Agenda Section 11 r <br /> t'iii l^ STAFF REPORT Report Number (IA-1 ;61 C <br /> �; 1 . Report Date: 3/21/96 <br /> iA -- <br /> CITY COU"vCILTLNG DATE <br /> 'P i' '" March 25 1996 <br /> E Special Order of B <br /> °zit."-Pantos""° Consent Agenda <br /> PubIic Hearings <br /> • <br /> X Council Business <br /> Item Description: Consideration of Surface Water Pond Abandonment, Long Lake Road & TH10 <br /> Administrator's Review/Recommendation: <br /> -No Comments to supplement this report X_ <br /> -Comments attached <br /> Explanation/Summary(attach supplement sheets as necessary) <br /> Summary: Staff presented a proposal to Council at the March 4, 1996 work session explaining the <br /> possibility of abandoning the surface water pond at the inter section of Long Lake Road and TH 10 for the <br /> purpose of constructing the pedestrian bridge. Staff was directed to consult with the City's engineer for an <br /> estimate of the cost pertaining to the filling of the pond and subsequent storm sewer pipe construction. Staff <br /> - <br /> spoke with Steve Campbell regarding this matter. Steve explained that any estimates given at this time, prior <br /> to surveying, computer modeling, and negotiations with the agencies involved, would be extremely <br /> conservative. Cost estimates for the construction portion of the projectare as follows: <br /> Storm Sewer Revisions(A) $5,000 - $10,000 <br /> Fill Existing Pond $5.000 = $ 7.500 _.. <br /> • <br /> Subtotal $10,000 - $17,500 <br /> Construct Mitigation Pond(B) $10.000 - $15.000 <br /> Total Est $20,000 - $32,500 <br /> (A) Assumes that the existing storm sewer along the west boulevard of Long Lake Road is high enough to be <br /> relieved by the existing system under long Lake Road and parallel to STH 10. This will be verified by the field <br /> surveys. <br /> (B) I required by re=ulatory agencies. To be located on City property south of Public Works Facility. <br /> The two proposals received for this study were from BRW Inc. for$7,620 and SEH for $6.900. <br /> Staff met with Paster Enterprises on Tuesday, March 19, 1996 to discuss issues regarding the preferred bridge <br /> design. Mr. Paster requested-seve:al items of information from staff regarding traffic counts on Hwy 10 and <br /> any pedestrian patterns in the area. Staff would request that this item be tabled until the April 1 Council <br /> work session for further discussion. <br /> Accompaning this report is the Pedestrian Bridge Work Plan requested at the March 4, 1996 work session. <br /> - COMMENDATION: Michael UL_ch, Di_eccor of Public Works <br /> fable this issue until the April 1 Council work session, at which time more information will be available. <br />