The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1998-09-02 PACKET 08.C.REQUEST OF CITY COUfVCIL ACTION COUNCIL AGENDA MEETING Il'EI'vl # DATE 9/2/98 PREPARED BY Administration Ryan Schroeder ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT STAFF AUTHOR ��>��.�<��.��.��.��<�<.��,.,��«��.«��.� COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST Authorize Engineering Project Budget for MCES Roadway Improvements BUDGET IMPLICATION $ $ BUDGETED AMOUNT ACTUAL AMOUNT FUNDING SOURCE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS � MEMO/LETTER: ❑ RESOLUTION: ❑ ORDINANCE: ❑ ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION: ❑ LEGAL RECOMMENDATION: ❑ OTHER: ADMINISTRATORS COMMEN' �Jlc�u � �i Date �<��..<..<.�...,�,.�..�«>,�.,��<.�.�,.«��.�..�<„ COUNCf� ACTION TAKEN: ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ OTHER Memo To: Mayor and City Council From: Ryan R. Schroeder Subj.: MCES Roadway Improvements Date: August 28, 1998 As you are aware the City of Cottage Grove has been waiting for a formal MCES response to the Council proposal on treatment piant area roadway improvements. We had forwarded a letter, dated August 4, 1998, proposing that MCES upgrade 110' 100' Ideal and Jamaica. While the formal response is stiii not in hand the MCES has reevaluated Ideal Avenue pursuant to the attachment. They are estimating that an overlay on that roadway will result in a$275,600 cost. On the opposite end is a reconstruction at a cost of $409,000. The original MCES estimate for improvements to this roadway was $100,000. Part of the increased cost is due to the extension of the 30-foot mat south of 110 to 113 Council had discussed the need for greater engineering involvement from BRAA. Enclosed is a proposed workplan from Jerry Bourdon requiring a project budget of $5,440 (piease note the commentary wherein this budget is for review, not design work). 1 have also enclosed a copy of the cover sheet of a petition that you probably all received. The petition is in support of widening the roadway to 30 feet. It also states opposition to acquisition of property west of Ideal for the purpose of widening Ideal. Persons representing 77 of the 112 addresses on Ideal, 110th,113th, Inman or River Acres, south of 100th signed the petition. The MCES has offered to provide for ongoing maintenance of 110� and Ideal. For 110� (that portion east of Ideai) they have offered to provide for 100% of the ongoing maintenance such as future seals so Iong as the uses in the neighborhood do not change dramaticaily. With the same caveat they have offered a 25% maintenance contribution on Ideal. it seems that it may be premature for Council to state or accept a maintenance cost share formula until larger issues are resolved. Council Action: By motion designate an Engineering project budget for review of 110 and Ideal improvements in an estimated amount of $5,440. NO �i��1_' :_.1/_ 1.� To: Ryan Sehroeder From� Jerry �aurdon DAte: August 2l1,194� SubJect: Work pian for ldea1 Avonue and 110'� St Sauth TNTRODUCTION The foflowing outlinea a recommeqded work plen for the project developmsnt mviews for ehc MCES street improvemenu to 110 Stteat Soyth qnd ldoa► Avenue South. HACKGROtIND / PROJEC7' UNDERSTAN!}IIVG MCES is deaigning road improvemenu to 110�" St aRid Idoel Ave as pntt of chc �YWTF' improvements. Since the city owna end mnintaitu theu ctreeta ehe ciry ia concerned about the vnrious dcaign eapecta otthe project. MCE9 has bcen given the raaponsibility for dwi�ing the improvements qnd they havo apparently put signifjCant effort ir,tq the ptojcGt devploptrloqt at this timc, As such I believe our role wiU be that oi project roview rather than W�ing the lead aa projecc design / development. As such I xuggesi thc following projoct r�proaeA and budgct. PROJ�CT APPROACH J BUAGBT Rcviaw and camnaent on propqgod optipna Review drainagG Revicw pavement design cnlculations Review grnding or widening propos�le Review traff�c isaute Review of final planc and specificadona (aptional) Ravicw cost cstimata (apGOnaJ} Tptal CMI�I.:i.'.I:�:rw� 30 hrs 8 hra 4 hra ib hts 4 hrs 4hrs 16 hra 32 hea S 1,600 640 320 �,aea 160 160 1,280 ss,aao Thie estimatc is for review work on1y, Nowevpr, I think I hsva estimatcd thc timc requiroments on the high side so there may be eomc room for othar unforeseeen work cffart, Involvcmcnt in tMe davclopmcat af desigu ia not inciuded in thc scope ot work or thc coct estimata. Howevor, i:uepvct fram my canvarsatiom with Craig Chriatianeon that they will a�k for our involvement in design development. lt ie dilt3euit to know how much time this would tequire. For now I suggest nesurninQ that some assi�tance in design devclopment (such as site mectangs and proliminary raviaw of optiona) is incfuded in tho above estimste. If the acapc of our involvcmant atarU ro cxpand beyond what d have aaeumd herein 1 wi11 catt you bcfore proceoding. � TO: � FaxPhone � yS�'�,;2$g7 I 1.t5 �u.i-Sl�'f't'�� M� Dr�. � I CC: rchry Qo�vt�ar�, B�G� (�3b:f.�/I RrE'MARKS 1 Date �/ '�' � <�CI � Number of pages includrng cover sheet � . ❑ Urgent �"Foryourreview ❑ Rep/yASAP 0 PfeaseCommenf � �_ l'v'rv�c.�et.c� T�•- �st,c1� t��t'�rrww fr �ur- Gonlw��.�,�y � S'�`� a,.,.d1�c ot� u<atoks' �c.c ( Aa� , a��s-ycdGr Q.3q ` w�'��1. . 7"fK� ov�crf�� G.sS�" t� Ysv�rC "�'ksa,, ar��'� �cc.cu.,Ca i! /�e4/ l KGl�1' �a,.-, e a� �-- `fv //3'�'�.. .S .1�- , ° �".o r <'� e� "7�oe� 3'.I�'e�'t� w ,...c�r ,E+ dea !!� t.�l�, sy bp addr,�,, er.l Q ../ / „ / C7 / �AMtGU4Yr �Lal.�f_ TIj,G Le�IX- �ON�f %h gaeC� I � 4"O+'C�.�'PXy'1--p C/ .�' a,.. #�rtM '�. p�f- R �� G..ok�.�fr G /'� w�o� bct�+�c `�� G.t1 i�^ b. S're"a.^R... IC.M Y v "fGTR,! ��, C�- d f. f 1Y `.�` C�a!�a .r!' �.-c. L'�try�, � A�ern�tyA�t"�. ?—Y` (/ pkv�; o-ea.C� C�r�.r+� /1L2.,,S''.- !_+�M..� p �� ^�'" w� Pc.-�aP� wz c�. w r cn.G c, w�+ r,� <»., �- ,�., �j+c ,w,c "�.� '�+f�R�MY'� "�"f�d. �A.�}` O� +ZC�� 1� �+t Ge'F•� �Qkher�� G-�1a /!.� rCSiGarr..et "'�� '�"�i"7�� d3. $f� � � � Y ��B1�f16��21(COVEf.C�C From: <William.Cook(�ius.mw.COm> To: METC CENTRAL OFFICE.METC COUNCIL(craig chnstenson... Date: 8l28/88 8:18am Subjec4: ldeal Avenue Pavi�g optie�s � Attached to this email is a oopy of the revised spreadsheet for pavi�g options on Itleal AVenue. Piease note these estimates are pretiminary end have not heen confirmed by on site observation, soii borings or final design dst&i15. The thickneas of the pavement is listetl on the spreadsheet. The other qua�tities are based on typicaf values and do not reflect any significant foundation problems. Le�gth and unit pricing for quantRies indudes minimal interseCtion improvements. Summery proposed 2" overlay and 6" ianeway $275,600 Proposed Cold Mix Recycie $307,000 Complete ramOVal and replacement $409,Q00 CC: ME7C CENTRAL_OFFiCE.SMTP{"George.Sprause�us.mw.com... ---- To Cottage Grove City Council: We, the petitioners, who use Ideal Avenue, strongly support the City Council in widening Ideal Avenue to 30 feet, and also, realign it to the section line that lies approximately 15 feet to the east. These two improvements would greatly increase the safety of this road. We also feel, that it is wrong to acquire private land from the west side of Ideal Avenue, when there already is an easement for this road on the east side. Thank you �The next council meeting regarding this project will be held on Wednesday, September 2, at 7:30 p.m. ' - ��.t�.�.e.� �..�� ,�.� .��.� � � �d..� �. � /o� 7l .��