Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Faulkner County panel approves sending Resolution 25-02 on Highway 2866 intersection to full court
Summary
A Faulkner County infrastructure meeting voted to forward Resolution 25-02 — authorizing an application for a safe-intersection grant for Highway 2866 — to the full court. Staff outlined a federal-state-county cost-share and said the county would manage the project; exact total cost was not specified.
Faulkner County infrastructure meeting members voted to forward proposed Resolution 25-02, addressing proposed improvements at the Highway 2866 intersection, to the full court for consideration.
The resolution authorizes pursuing a Safe Intersection grant through the highway department and asks the full court to consider the county’s participation and cost share. Road Administrator Mr. Anderson told the panel the highway department approved participation in the grant application but requires the county pass the resolution by the stated deadline.
Under the cost-sharing arrangement described at the meeting, the project would be funded roughly 80% with federal funds, 10% with state highway funds and 10% with county funds up to $1,000,000; the panel was told that costs above the $1,000,000 threshold would become the county’s responsibility. Mr. Anderson said the county would manage the project, bid the work, and the highway department would inspect it and has approved the plans that were submitted for the improvement.
Panel members asked whether the application was the only grant the county was pursuing for the intersection and whether initial plans included a cost estimate. Mr. Anderson said this was the single grant being pursued and that plan-level cost estimates were not specified in the discussion; one member said, based on a street-view check, the intersection appears busy and in need of improvement.
A motion to send Resolution 25-02 to the full court was moved and seconded; members approved by voice vote. The meeting record shows the resolution “does pass to the full court”; individual roll-call tallies were not provided in the transcript.
The panel did not adopt final project funding beyond committing to seek the grant and to cover the stated local match if the project cost stays within the described threshold. The county indicated it would return to the court for final approvals if costs exceed the threshold or as later project phases require further authorization.
