My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-12-1996 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1996
>
11-12-1996 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2023 1:46:53 PM
Creation date
9/5/2023 1:44:49 PM
Metadata
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.
/
231
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
i £1^ Minnesota Department of Transportation <br />Metropolitan Division <br />Waters Edge <br />1500 West County Road B2 <br />Roseville, MN 55113 <br />October 28, 1996 <br />Mayor Todd Olson <br />City of Long Lake <br />1964 Park Avenue <br />Long Lake, MN 55356 <br />RE: TH 12 Improvement Project <br />612-582-1293 <br />'NOV il 199G <br />Dear Mayor Olson: <br />I am writing this letter to update you on the issues and concerns with moving the Burlington <br />Northern Santa Fe Railroad as proposed in Alternative 6 North of the TH 12 Corridor Report. <br />At this time, no formal agreement has been made with the railroad and would be somewhat <br />premature at this point in the project development. We have had two meetings with the railroad <br />representatives to present our Alternative 6 North of the tracks and discuss issues with the <br />concept. Our contact with the BNSF is Spencer D. Arndt, Manager of Public Projects. We are <br />also being assisted with the railroad negotiations by Leroy Vague from Mn/DOT’s Office of <br />Railroads and Waterways. At both meetings the railroad gave favorable suppon to the north of <br />the tracks concept. <br />Mr. Arndt expressed three main concerns at our first meeting; maintaining existing grades, <br />alignment, and service to industry. Railroads have different design standards and specifications <br />and must be followed and the current right-of-way for two tracks must be maintained for the <br />possibility of future expansion. At the second meeting we discuss in more detail the Alternative 6 <br />North and identified through the corridor the proposed changes to the railroad. Issues that were <br />expressed were related to the existing sidings and the elimination of 3 bridges near Watertown <br />Road and May Street. There is concern that pedestrians used to having access under the tracks <br />may try to cross over the tracks. Benefits to the railroad will be the elimination of three at-grade <br />crossings and the maintenance of the three bridges. <br />Mr. Arndt is setting up a field review for Mn/DOT and BNSF representatives for the near future. <br />Mr. Vague will be developing a Memorandum of Understanding with the railroad as the project <br />development continues. <br />Mr. Arndt telephoned me to let me know that he was asked for information related to the project <br />and Mr. Arndt indicated to the person that they must go through Mn/DOT for TH 12 project <br />related information. <br />An equal opportunity employer
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.