11-14-11-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETNG—NOVEMBER 14, 2011 8 Joe Lux, Ramsey County Transportation Planner, explained that this project is at a point now where it will not be constructed in 2012. The County also agrees with the City that it's not a good idea to begin this project at the same time that the Lexington Avenue improvements are taking place. The goal is to let the US 10/Highway 96 project in late 2012 for construction as early as possible in 2013. Mr. Lux explained that after the last Council meeting on this item, he, Public Works Director Maurer, and Jim Tolaas from Ramsey County, all met with the MnDOT area engineer Mark Lindeberg. They got permission to approach Peter Wasko; the MnDOT Noise and Air Quality Supervisor, to look at the noise analysis. He stated that he explained to Mr. Wasko that the issue is not noise from Highway 96 but from US 10 that affects the Lake Shore Place homes so his analysis was based on what can be done about the noise from US 10 for those homes. Mr. Wasko concluded that the single line of homes on Lake Shore Place would not meet the cost-effective threshold. Regardless of the wall height or length, the same number of homes would be affected per foot of wall and that does not meet the cost-effective threshold. Councilmember Tamble asked if we had received data from that analysis with decibel readings to confirm their findings. Public Works Director Maurer stated they have all the data from the previous studies. No additional noise analysis was done because there have been several different noise studies prepared by several different consultants. He then referred to a memo in the Council's packet from Chris Chromy, the City's consultant, and he had reviewed Mr. Wasko's analysis and found that there is no way to make this cost-effectiveness. Mr. Chromy also found that even with the addition of three platted lots into the calculation, the noise mitigation costs would remain above the established reasonableness threshold of$3,250 per decibel reduced per residence. In a recent conversation with Mr. Chromy, he indicated that the closest he could get to the $3,250 threshold was $4,400. Mayor Grant stated he needs to see what was considered in this analysis; such as the placement of the wall and varying wall heights. Mr. Lux responded that essentially they looked at a wall from 1,500 to 2,000 feet long shifted north and south along Highway 96 and they looked at two wall heights: 10 feet and 20 feet. The conclusion was that a 10-foot wall would cost $10,785 per decibel reduced per resident and a 20- foot wall would cast $5,839 per decibel per resident. To go any higher than that would be cost prohibitive because of footings required for a greater height. Councilmember Holmes asked when they looked at shifting the location of the wall to the south, did that extend all the way to I-694. Mr. Lux responded that they analyzed various lengths; the original wall proposed was modeled at 1,500 feet long. Mr. Cmiel, Lake Shore Place resident, proposed a wall 2,000 feet long. They looked at shifting both lengths north and south. Councilmember Tamble asked how much difference it would make to use today's conditions versus the 2008 figures used for this analysis.