04-11-11-WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—APRIL 11, 2011 4 LA I-694 Noise Analysis Review (continued) Councilmember Holden stated the homes along Highway 10 could benefit from a noise wall as well. Mr. Lindeberg noted this area was modeled but was not being considered at this time. Mayor Grant questioned if MnDOT would monitor the corridor if a noise wall were not built. Mr. Lindeberg stated MnDOT would study the area and if it becomes cost effective a wall could be built. He indicated the level of cars would have to double to increase the decibel level by five. Councilmembcr Holden asked if the speed of traffic affected the decibel level. Mr. Lindeberg noted consistent speed was lower than accelerating or changing speeds. Discussion ensued regarding the speed limit on Highway 10. Councilmember Holmes questioned if the State could be forced to pay the full price of the sound wall. Mr. Lindeberg indicated this would not happen as it would set precedence and every future sound wall would have to be funded by the State. He noted MnDOT understands that noise is an issue which led to the 2007 and 2010 analysis. MnDOT has been in communication with the Council, City Staff and residents. He reiterated that the analysis presented by the City's consultant were similar to MnDOT's findings. At this time, MnDOT did not feel a noise wall was a cost effective option. Councilmember Holden requested that a link be created on the City's website for the noise analysis results. Wayne Norris, from MnDOT, thanked the Council for working with MnDOT to resolve the 14 conditions. He looked forward to continuing to work with the Council and its Staff. B. 1-694 Municipal Consent—Appeal Board Presentation City Attorney Filla presented the City Council with information on the noise wall assessment process. He explained sound barriers were considered public improvements and could be assessed to the benefitted residents. Only a special benefit amount could be assessed to properties. Staff presented the Council with a handout with further information on the process and how the City of Edina handled this situation. City Attorney Filla felt the noise wall would be a difficult project to assess. Discussion ensued regarding the pros and cons of the noise wall for surrounding properties. City Attorney Filla indicated the Council could go before the Appeal Board if the Council felt the noise wall was necessary.