09-19-2005 CC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City COlUlcil1vIinutes September 19, 2005 Page 10 anticipated that no 11unicipal State Aid monies VJill be utilized for this project, there would be no need for a MnDOT review and therefore, the city could chose whether or not to prepare a Signal Justification Report. Mr. Maurer indicated that this intersection may not rise to the level of needing a signal based on a Signal Justification Report and noted that the report does not measure personal safety such as a community service officer placing themselves in the center of traffic in order to facilitate a reasonable traffic flow during exiting school times. lvlr. Maurer noted that his recommendation would be for the restriping of School Street to be studied as the signal project proceeds. :Mr. Maurer explained that as with previous signal projects, this work could be completed during the fall with -wiring and concrete bases installed prior to the onset of \V:inter. He indicated that due to the delays typically experienced in receiving signal mast arms and controller cabinets to the site, it would likely be later in the \V:inter that the equipment would be available and could be installed and signal operations instituted. Councilmember Dietz questioned if the school district is open to paying for half of the cost of the signals. City Administrator Pat I<Iaers stated that there has been positive feedback from school district officials in the past but that the decision would be that of the School Board. MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOTIN AND SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FARBER TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 05-113 ORDERING THE PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS IN THE MATTER OF THE SCHOOL STREET/HIGH SCHOOL PARKING LOT SIGNALIZATION IMPROVEMENT OF 2005. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 6.9. Gateway Business Park Preliminary Development 'Xlork City j\.dministrator Pat I<Jaers stated that at a meeting \V-1th Great River Energy (GRE) questions were raised regarding additional information on the Gateway Business Park site. :Mr. I<laers stated that follo\V:ing that meeting, he asked City Engineer Terry Maurer to prepare some information on work that could be completed that would be beneficial whether or not GRE decides to locate on the Gate,\\Tay Business Park site. :Mr. Maurer indicated that he '\vould suggest that a boundary survey, wetland delineation, topographic dra\V:ing, and geotech.nical investigation be completed as outlined in his staff report. He explained that he would estimate that all of this work could be accomplished for approximately $25,000. He noted that this would include hiring a geotechnical firm to perform soil borings and an environmental firm for delineating the wetlands on the site. He estimated this work could be completed in three to four weeks. lv1r. I<laers noted that this timeline may not meet GRE's deadline but staff feels that the work should be completed regardles s. Ivfayor I<J.inzing stated that she agrees that the \vork should be completed regardless of GRE's decision as she doesn't believe any time or money would be wasted in completing this ,\\7ork for future development of the site. Councilmember Dietz questioned \vhere the funding for the work would come from. 1Yfr. I<laers stated that it would come from reserves and the costs are planned to be recaptured when a project is developed.