Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES <br />MARCH 31, 2003 <br /> <br />12 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mr. Parrish explained that since staff was not aware that the reconstruction of <br />Highway 96 was being considered as a 2003 project, no funds were budgeted <br />within the 2003 budget for City expenses related to the project. He noted since <br />this project has been in queue for a number of years, there is revenue in existing <br />fund balances to accommodate City costs relative to his project. He stated a fund <br />balance has been accumulating in Fund 409, the Non-Assessable Road <br />Improvement Fund to accommodate for these types of expenditures. He suggested <br />State MSA funds be used for eligible expenses. He noted the signal and EVP <br />Maintenance Agreement as proposed would not have any adverse fiscal or <br />operational impacts. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mr. Parrish stated the preliminary review of options for an underpass or overpass <br />would cost $642,000 for an underpass and $850,800 for a pedestrian overpass. <br />This would also require that the project be delayed at least a year. He noted if the <br />Council wished to consider an underpass, financing for part of the project could <br />come from both the park fund and the non-assessable road improvement fund. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson asked what the implications would be if they delayed the <br />construction for a year. <br /> <br />Mr. Brown stated presuming they were to use some State Aid Funds, they would <br />need to get the State approval. He stated if all of the money was City money, the <br />design could be executed. He noted State approval was the issue. <br /> <br />Jim Tolaas, Ramsev County, noted any delay from this point on would involve a <br />two-stage process, where the south half would be reconstructed this year and <br />completing the north half in 2004. He noted they would not lose their funding by <br />delaying it. He noted a tunnel in this instance, would be a long tunnel, which <br />could lead to safety concerns. He indicated there could also be ground water <br />issues with a tunnel, which was also a safety concern. He stated it was possible <br />they could add some type of a pedestrian bridge at Highway 10 and Highway 96 in <br />the future. He indicated they could bid this with a staging sequence, which would <br />buy additional time for Council to make a decision. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Bill Henrv. 3521 Ridl!ewood Court, PTRC member, reminded the Council that it <br />had adopted a Comprehensive Plan for Parks and Trails. He noted the plan was <br />the result of intense interest by citizens' concerns regarding City parks and trails. <br />