My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-22-24-WS
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
2020-2029
>
2024
>
04-22-24-WS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/14/2024 10:51:53 AM
Creation date
5/14/2024 10:51:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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—APRIL 22, 2024 3 <br /> Councilmember Holden questioned how many of the intersections were categorized at a Level <br /> C. She was of the opinion the City should not be happy with a Level C when there were <br /> opportunities to make things better with this new development. <br /> Mr. Rojer stated building appropriate infrastructure would be the key to supporting this <br /> development. He said that Level C is considered standard. He indicated expanding Highway 96 to <br /> six or eight lanes would assist with improving traffic flow, but this was not reasonable. He <br /> explained Level C would require a 30 to 45 second delay at traffic signals. He stated this was not <br /> anything he was concerned about. <br /> Councilmember Holden inquired how many of the intersections were at Level C and how many <br /> were better. <br /> Ms. Haase stated there was a mixture between AM and PM peaks. She explained County Road H <br /> and I 35-W southbound and northbound ramps were anticipated at Level A in both the AM and <br /> PM peaks under both scenarios. She indicated the CSAH 96 and the Northern Heights access <br /> point would be Level C. She stated the CSAH 96 and Highway 10 southbound ramp would be <br /> Level C and for the maximum development scenario would be Level D for the AM peak and <br /> Level C for the PM peak. <br /> Councilmember Holden reported Ramsey County owns the traffic signals. She asked if this had <br /> been taken into consideration. <br /> Mr. Rojer stated he had coordinated with Ramsey County and they provided the initial signal <br /> timing. He noted they have had additional coordination since then. <br /> Councilmember Monson pointed out the information for the intersection grading was on Page <br /> 13 of the packet. She appreciated the Kimley Horn staff speaking to the realities that if you want <br /> everything to be a Level A, you're talking about mass spending and big roads. She said so to keep <br /> an A and hold an A, there is a trade-off. <br /> Mr. Rojer commented that with roadways and developments, it is a grading scale but not like the <br /> scale in school where everybody wants an A. He said it was all about right sizing for <br /> developments and so D and E are what are considered to be the right size for a roadway. <br /> Mayor Grant reported back in 2014 when a roundabout was being proposed, he recalled an ADT <br /> of 29,000 was discussed and CSAH 96/Northern Heights would support 9,700 ADT. He <br /> questioned if the roundabout would support a greater ADT than 29,000. <br /> Mr. Rojer stated this was evaluated and commented on how traffic would be spread out <br /> throughout the day. He indicated he was not seeing anything in his updated analysis that shows <br /> the roundabout would be over capacity throughout the day. <br /> Mayor Grant asked what the turn signal at CSAH 96/Parkway would support. <br /> Mr. Rojer anticipated 23,000 cars per day would be added and noted this intersection would <br /> operate effectively. He stated the development would have 46,000 trips per day and with the <br /> general distribution, half would use the north entrance and half would use the south entrance. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.