My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9-19-11-WS
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2011
>
03-21-11-WS
>
9-19-11-WS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/25/2011 11:37:28 AM
Creation date
10/25/2011 11:36:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Document
Worksession Minutes
General - Type
Worksession Minutes
Category
Worksession Minutes
Date
9/19/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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).
View images
View plain text
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — SEPTEMBER 19, 2011 11 <br />of US 10 will actually be lower which should be beneficial. MnDOT also claimed there isn't a <br />sufficient accident history in that area indicating a problem. <br />Mr. Lux also pointed out that because of the changes being made; the traffic on US 10 will no <br />longer be starting and stopping in that area which should reduce traffic noise. <br />Councilmember Holden stated she has four issues she would like to see considered: <br />- The City and County agree to the staging of these projects. <br />- Complete another review of the noise wall analysis. <br />- The addition of a fence, something on top of the retaining wall, to mitigate the car lights. <br />- Reduce the speed limit proposed for US 10. <br />Mr. Lux recommended that instead of requesting a change in speed limit that the City may want <br />to request a speed study. <br />Mr. Tolaas added that MnDOT sets the speed limits and any change in the speed limit would be <br />done as a part of a speed study. The County has no control over speed limits. He also stated he <br />does not think MnDOT can raise the speed limit above 55 mph on this segment of US 10 because <br />of its classification. <br />Councilmember Holden was concerned that just requesting a speed survey does not mean that <br />MnDOT will actually do one. <br />Mr. Lux explained that if there is a County Board resolution requesting a speed survey, it will be <br />done. <br />Councilmember Holden asked if the City is granting Municipal Consent to the County and <br />MnDOT. <br />Mr. Tolaas responded this is a County project so the Municipal Consent is to the County. He <br />explained that because the County is working on a trunk highway, and if the State were doing the <br />work they would have to request Municipal Consent so the County decided since they are acting <br />as an agent of the State on this project, they should request Municipal Consent. <br />Councilmember Holden commented that this project involves US 10 and Highway 96 and the <br />Council can comment on concerns related to US 10. <br />Public Works Director Maurer commented that the County is following the statute for <br />Municipal Consent and that statute says that the City can make comments regarding the area of <br />construction only. He stated this project does include US 10 because they are building the bridges <br />and off -ramps on US 10, but it does not affect the whole stretch of US 10. He added that the <br />Appeal Board would not consider any items that were not within the project area, such as the <br />speed study on US 10. He then suggested the Council consider asking for a barrier on top of the <br />retaining wall greater than 38 inches in height. <br />Council consensus was not to add a condition requesting a speed study. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.