CC 04-12-1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL, APRIL 12, 1999 8 Mr. Fritsinger stated that if the road is rebuilt in the future, the City is obligated under contract to pay back the State of Minnesota. The issue is whether the County could be involved in the pay back or if the State could possibly pay back itself If the project were to be delayed there may be a way for the County to pay a portion of the project, . Mr. Brown stated that the County would be willing to participate, at a minimum 01'25 percent, for some or all of the trail project. He indicated that he was not aware of the State being willing to reimburse funds, If the trail is constructed and is later taken out in order to widen the road, the State would not participate in a future trail. They would consider the trail a preexisting condition as it was built in an area that was subject to be demolished, If the City does not build the trail now and it was constructed with the County project, the cost would be less and County would participate at a minimum of 25 percent, One issue to consider at this time is the amount ofland available, If the road is 36 feet wide, there would be 10 feet of right-of-way to the north and 20 feet of right-of-way to the south, There is a major power line that splits the southern right-of-way. It may be possible to built the trail on the north side, however this would encroach on private property. The trail could be built on the south side now, however, it would make the most sense and be safest on the other side of the power line, . Mayor Probst asked if there would be any chance of moving the funding for this trail project to another trail project since the conditions have changed. Mr. Fritsinger stated that this question would have to be posed to the Minnesota Department ofNaturaI Resources. He was not sure they could be convinced to allow the City to move the funds to a different portion of the trail. In this case, the trail would be connecting two communities together and address the safety issues in the area. Mayor Probst stated that, if the City must reimburse the funds for the project, and the project has a chance to occur in the future, it would not be wise to spend the tax payers money on a project which will be torn down. He expressed his concern that the conversations with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources are handled properly in order for the City to maintain a good relationship with the State. Councilmember Malone noted that there are similar issues with some intersections, such as County Road F and Hamline A venue, where there is a recommendation to install a traffic light that would be torn down when the roads are rebuilt, He indicated that this intersection does not warrant a traffic light at this time as it is only congested during one-haIl' hour of the day. Mr. Fritsinger stated that this intersection did meet two of the warrants that support a traffic light; accidents and traffic levels. The information received was that the traffic lights would be installed to standards and the location would be the same for the future roadway. City staff had indicated that it would support this recommendation. . With regard to Old Snelling Avenue, Councilmember Malone stated that he could not understand why four lanes had been constructed between the railroad bridge and Lake Valentine Road, and now more money will be spent to narrow the road, If the road will be narrowed, he stated that turn lanes must be added.