Laserfiche WebLink
Item No. 7 <br />Meeting Date: March 3, 2008 <br />Type of Business: WK <br />WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing; <br />CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business <br />City Administrator Review _______ <br /> City of Mounds View Staff Report <br /> <br />To: Honorable Mayor and City Council <br />From: Greg Lee, Director of Public Works <br /> <br />Item Title/Subject: Trunk Highway 10 Noise Wall Project Update <br /> <br />Background: <br />On Tuesday, February 12, 2008, Interim City Administrator Jim Ericson and <br />Public Works Director, Greg Lee attended a meeting with the Mn/DOT Project <br />Management Team for the Trunk Highway 10 Noise Wall Project. <br />The purpose of this meeting was to discuss construction design issues <br />associated with this project. <br /> <br /> <br /> Discussion: <br />Proposed Wall <br />The project, as currently defined, is to extend the noise wall east along the south <br />side of Trunk Highway 10. The wall would be extended 864 feet. The typical <br />height of the wall is 15 feet. The last 72 feet of the existing wall will be removed. <br />The posts will be salvaged and reused at the far eastern end of the new wall, <br />where it will step down in height. Looking at the east end of the existing wall and <br />counting to the fifth panel that is stepped down, the top of this fifth step down <br />panel will be the elevation of the new wall. The new wall will start where the fifth <br />and sixth step down panels meet. <br /> <br />The current project schedule indicates a May 16, 2008 bid letting (contract <br />award). Construction will most probably commence in late June. The contractor <br />will access the site from Long Lake Road. <br /> <br /> <br />Alignment / Easements <br />The wall is proposed to be located just outside the existing chain link fence <br />except in one location where the wall will make a jog to the south to avoid a utility <br />junction box. The chain link fence is NOT located at the edge of Mn/DOT right-of- <br />way. The fence is actually located slightly on City property. Therefore, a portion <br />of the wall is proposed to be located on City property. There are several utilities <br />located north of the proposed wall, thus making it difficult and more expensive to <br />move the wall to the north and completely avoid City property. Because the wall