My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2003/12/08
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
Agenda Packets - 2003/12/08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:51:35 PM
Creation date
8/8/2018 11:42:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
12/8/2003
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
12/8/2003
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
263
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
6 <br />As the first phase in developing a plan to provide noise abatement along TH10, several meetings <br />were conducted to discuss the proposed project and solicit input. Staff and representatives of <br />Ulteig Engineers met with representatives of Mn/DOT on August 13, 2003. Next, a meeting was <br />conducted with Ramsey County on August 28, 2003. And finally, Staff and representatives of <br />Ulteig Engineers met with Rice Creek Watershed District and their engineering consultant on <br />October 21, 2003. Ulteig Engineers is currently working on developing a draft plan. It is <br />anticipated that this will be available in late January/ early February 2004. <br /> <br /> <br />WELL REHABILITATION PROGRAM -WELLS NO. 1 AND 2 <br />Bids were received and opened on December 3, 2002 for the rehabilitation of Wells No. 1 and 2. <br />The successful bidder was Keys Well Drilling Company. The notice to proceed was issued on <br />December 20th and work commenced early in January of 2003. Staff had the opportunity to <br />inspect the pump and piping at the contractor’s shop and the necessary repairs and replacements <br />were decided upon. Both wells were videotaped to their full depths. The videotape did not show <br />any necessary repairs for the casing of the wells. The videotape also showed that the depth of <br />the wells had not changed since the last maintenance, so bailing was not required. Both wells <br />have been reinstalled, tested, and are back in operation. <br /> <br />The project was completed on schedule. Wells No. 1 and 2 will not be up for maintenance for <br />another 7-8 years. <br /> <br />WELL REHABILITATION PROGRAM -WELLS NO. 3 AND 5 <br />Wells No. 3 and 5 are scheduled for rehabilitation in 2004. As with wells No. 1 and 2, Staff will be <br />writing the specification, obtaining bids, and inspecting so as to avoid consultant charges. The <br />City will also be draining the 2 million gallon ground reservoir for inspection in the spring of 2004. <br />As a result, the rehabilitation of wells No. 3 and 5 are scheduled for the fall of 2004. <br /> <br /> <br /> ADDITIONAL UPDATES <br /> <br />COUNTY ROAD 10 RECONSTRUCTION AND REVITALIZATION PLAN – IMPLEMENTATION <br />PHASE <br />On September 26, 2002, the City Council approved Resolution No. 5824 formally adopting the <br />County Road 10 Redevelopment and Revitalization Plans as prepared by URS Corporation. <br /> <br />The next step in the process is to develop an implementation plan. On October 20, 2003 Staff <br />met internally to develop a strategy for implementation. This item has been placed on the January <br />5th Work Session Agenda. Dan Solar, Traffic Engineer, and Ken Haider, Public Works Director <br />for the County will be in attendance. The purpose of the meeting is to obtain direction from the <br />City Council as to what they see as a priority in im plementing the County Road 10 Plan. <br /> <br />As previously discussed with the City Council, one of the first steps will be to hire an engineering <br />firm to survey the corridor and develop a pathway alignment throughout its length on both sides. <br />Other questions that will be posed to the City Council are: <br />• “When should the emergency vehicle preemption (EVP) devices be installed in each <br />traffic signal?” These allow emergency vehicles to safely navigate through the signalized <br />intersections without conflict from opposing lanes of traffic. <br /> <br />• “What intersections does the City Council see as a as higher priority?” The plan calls for <br />several intersections to be upgraded and the geometrics to be changed. <br /> <br />The goal of the January 5th meeting is to have a fair understanding between the City Council and <br />County as to what the general implementation plan should be. Staff will then send out requests
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.