Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Paving topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ward County to study paving of County Road 23; funding to appear in next budget
Summary
After hearing from landowners and businesses about heavy truck traffic and safety concerns, the Ward County Commission directed the highway engineer to include reconstruction and paving of County Road 23 and funding for related studies in the upcoming budget proposal.
Get email alerts on the Transportation Paving topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Ward County Commission on June 17 directed Highway Engineer Dana Larsen to include reconstruction and paving of County Road 23, plus funding for any needed studies, in his upcoming budget proposal. The action followed a petition from landowners and public comments about heavy grain-truck use and safety.
The petition was presented by Dana Larsen, Highway Engineer, who said landowners along County Road 23 requested the road be reconstructed and paved and indicated they would not object to right-of-way acquisitions if needed. The petition, Larsen said, affirms the landowners are “in full support of the project.”
The request drew several public speakers. Angie Heilmen, of DMG Elevator, estimated the road carries heavy grain traffic and told commissioners, “It is estimated that about 2500/3000 trucks going one way use that road yearly.” Property owner Eric Wold described the road’s deteriorating condition and the amount of gravel maintenance required, and Garth Klein raised school-bus safety concerns. Mark Vollmer, chairman of Surrey Township, spoke in favor of paving.
Commissioner Rostad moved and Commissioner Schuler seconded a motion directing Larsen to include reconstruction and paving of County Road 23 and funding for necessary studies in his upcoming budget proposal. Roll call votes by Commissioners Rostad, Merritt, Olson, Schuler and Chair Fjeldahl were recorded as yes; the motion passed. The motion directs staff to include funding in a budget proposal but does not authorize construction or appropriate funds at this meeting.
The commission’s direction places the project on the county’s budget planning agenda; any contract awards, right-of-way acquisitions, environmental reviews or final appropriations would require future formal action by the commission.
