5.3. SR 04-29-1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Honorable Mayor and City Council April 24, 1996 Page Four The benefit of this design option would be that no land acquisition or widening of the street is necessary at the School Street intersection. Thus, there would be no impact to the residential properties or the apartments near the intersection. The negative associated with this design option would be that the 4-way stop at School Street would remain in effect. Thus, any congestion problems that are currently experienced at that intersection would continue. Also, any safety concerns associated with the 4-way stop and no dedicated left turn lanes would also remain. The City Park and Recreation issues can be divided into two separate and distinct issues. The first is the Park and Recreation Commission's desire for a detached pathway along CSAH 1. Dave Schwarting has indicated the County is willing to include this in their plans. He may require that the City do the design for its inclusion. He will clearly require that the City pay all costs associated with a detached pathway. If the City opts to include a detached pathway in this project, Dave would likely narrow up the shoulders from their current 12-foot width to a 6 or 8-foot width. A 10 to 12 foot wide bituminous pathway would cost approximately $15.00 per foot. To build the pathway from the end of the current sidewalk that heads north along CSAH 1 to the north end of the County's project would require approximately two miles of pathway for a total cost of approximately $150,000. The second issue brought up by the Park and Recreation Commission is their desire for a tunnel in the location of the railroad trail crossing CSAH 1. Dave Anderson Commission member, provided me some information regarding a 12' x 8' precast box culvert which indicated the material cost was about $300 per foot. I would think that installation and providing ramps to and from the culverts along with lighting and other improvements necessary could be expected to double this cost. Given the width of the road, side slopes, and end sections necessary would likely make the structure over 100 feet long. Thus, I believe the cost of such an installation would be at least $60,000. I have briefly researched the soils report prepared in 1991 for the sanitary sewer along the railroad bed, and it does not appear that the water table would be a significant problem. However, the soft soils that were encountered when the sanitary sewer was installed certainly are a concern and would have to be fully investigated. This may add additional cost to this type of installation. Finally, with a pedestrian facility underground approximately 100 feet long, I am sure there would also be some safety concerns from the Police Department. Relative to the road design options, I would recommend Option A, the 3-lane design, to the City Council. I base this recommendation on the fact that I believe this design would solve left turning problems at TH 10, would have the least cost to the City, would require no eminent domain proceedings, and, finally, would have the least impact to the abutting properties. However, I do believe that the 230/213 -2405. apr