My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2003/02/10
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
Agenda Packets - 2003/02/10
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:46:23 PM
Creation date
8/8/2018 9:38:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
2/10/2003
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
2/10/2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
93
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
Mounds View City Council January 27, 2003 <br />Regular Meeting Page 7 <br /> <br />Public Works Director Lee reviewed with Council the options for the path and indicated the next 1 <br />step would be to finalize the feasibility study and develop plans and specifications for the project. 2 <br />He then indicated that Staff had met with SEH and the engineering fees for these services are 3 <br />estimated at $21,350 to be derived from the City’s special projects fund. 4 <br /> 5 <br />MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Gunn. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5936, a 6 <br />Resolution Approving a Supplemental Letter Agreement with SEH for Work Associated with the 7 <br />County Road H Pathway Project from Edgewood Drive to the Western City Limits. 8 <br /> 9 <br />City Attorney Riggs asked that the Resolution be corrected to read that the Mayor and the Interim 10 <br />City Administrator are authorized not the Public Works Director. 11 <br /> 12 <br />Council Member Stigney indicated the EDA had discussed using TIF funds to fund trailways. 13 <br /> 14 <br />Public Works Director Lee indicated that Staff had recommended that the monies come from the 15 <br />special project funds but TIF or grants could be used to assist with funding the project. 16 <br /> 17 <br />Council Member Marty indicated he agreed that residents should not be assessed for the pathway. 18 <br />He then said that he heard from some residents that they do not want a sidewalk in their yard and 19 <br />then asked that the narrowest pathway possible be used to make it seem less imposing. He 20 <br />further commented that he would like the width to accommodate City equipment so that the City 21 <br />could be responsible for clearing the sidewalk and not the residents. 22 <br /> 23 <br />Council Member Quick asked if all sidewalks are cleared by public works. 24 <br /> 25 <br />Public Works Director Lee indicated that they are. 26 <br /> 27 <br />Council Member Quick asked what the width of the sidewalk along Long Lake Road was and 28 <br />commented that a little wider would be better because there are sometimes issues with passing 29 <br />others on the sidewalk. He then commented that he did not see an issue with putting in the 30 <br />sidewalk as it is within the City’s right-of-way and is not on private property. 31 <br /> 32 <br />Council Member Quick asked if some residents have things in the right-of-way. 33 <br /> 34 <br />Public Works Director Lee indicated that there are some residents with things in the right-of-35 <br />way. 36 <br /> 37 <br />Mayor Linke asked why bituminous was not recommended until the 8-foot width. 38 <br /> 39 <br />Public Works Director Lee indicated it was due to construction methods as the narrowest paver is 40 <br />8 feet. 41 <br /> 42 <br />Council Member Quick indicated he wanted the trail done right the first time so it does not have 43 <br />to be redone. 44 <br /> 45
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.