Doc9 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

March 19, 2015 Staff Report Page 6 The Council discussed the TH 371 interchange. The County is proposing that the City pay 9% of the cost which is $558,000. Mayor Sjoblad stated that he does not feel the City should be paying for an interchange that is located on County and State property. He further noted that the County receives state aid funding for the interchange and the City receives no funding. • There was a consensus of the Council that the City is not going to contribute dollars / cost share as the County proposed. The legs of the interchange (and the two roundabouts at the top) are and will be made up of State Trunk Highway and County State Aid Highway. Both the State and County have access to gas tax monies; the City does not. The City will be responsible for the street lights for this interchange (even though it is not the City’s interchange). • There was a consensus of the Council to accept the turnback of CSAH 11 from the County; however, there was no consensus on accepting the proposed dollar amount from the County. Existing Highway 371 – The Council discussed the pros and cons of accepting Highway 371 from the County. A huge concern is the amount of money needed for yearly maintenance and eventual rehabilitation of the road. Council Member Pederson was concerned about burdening future Council’s and residents with costs to maintain the road. • There was no consensus from the Council on accepting the turn back from the County. Overall, there were questions on how the monies that the County would give for the proposed turn backs could be used into the future, and if they will be enough to cover the maintenance costs and the eventual rehabilitations of these roadways. Council Member Pederson had submitted a maintenance and rehabilitation ‘cost program’ for existing Hwy 371 should the City accept the turn back from the County. Tim Houle to work with the City on coming up with similar maintenance and rehabilitation cost programs for CSAH 11 and CR 112. Nancy Malecha to coordinate with Springsted on running financial scenarios for the Council. 1.5. Wastewater Treatment Facility / Spray Irrigation Field Tim Houle said that WSN would be submitting the Facilities Plan “as is” to the MPCA. Tim spoke with the MPCA about the on-going updating of these improvements and that they would not yet be in the Facilities Plan. The MPCA suggested we submit the Facilities Plan as is and indicate there will be an amendment coming. Tim brought up the potential of another Public Hearing covering the latest row irrigation plan. The MPCA said it would be a