CC 06-28-1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JUNE 28, 1999 6 . Mr. Tolaas noted that Ramsey County began the Highway 96 design process with a concept of an at-grade intersection at US Highway 10 and Highway 96. Because of existing and anticipated significant growtll of traffic volumes, Ramsey County felt that the intersection would reach a level service F, which relates to high levels of traffic with stop and go movement. An at-grade intersection could still be built; however, it may not be the right solution to invest a great deal of money into. Mr. Tolaas suggested that, ifit takes the TCAAP site to develop in order to gain support of the broader improvements, this would be an option. Mayor Probst stated that another issue related to this discussion is the City of Arden Hills and Ramsey County's ability to complete the reconstruction of Highway 96. It was his understanding that the Minnesota Department of Transportation would not allow the I-35W bridge work to commence until this issue is resolved. Mr. Tolaas stated that, when Ramsey County originally proposed an at-grade intersection, there had been minor bridge widening proposed at I-35W. When considering capacity issues and how to improve them, in order to get support of an improved interchange at I-35W, the Minnesota Department of Transportation felt that the intersection of US Highway 10 and Highway 96 was an integral part of the whole issue. . If Ramsey County strongly supported an at-grade intersection, minor changes could be made to the bridge at I-35W; however, this would only be a temporary solution. Ramsey County is trying to focus on the long-term results and if, when the TCAAP site is ready for development, the City is not in the position to create an interchange at that point, it could have a serious impact on how quickly the TCAAP site could be developed. With regard to the neighborhood concerns for the future of their homes, Councilmember Larson askcd if the original proposal, approved by the City Council, would have required the acquisition of any properties. Mr. Tolaas stated that it would not require the displacement of private homes. However, the mobile homes within the park itself would be affected. Approximately seven to 10 mobile homes would be displaced. He extended his apology to Ms. Olson for the use of the term displacement, however, he did not mean to use the term casually. He noted that there is a program, which is very fair in assisting displaced homeowners in finding new homes. Councilmember Larson confirmed that, in comparing the two options, the new option proposed this evening would call for the removal of private homes. Mr. Tolaas concurred. . Mr. Rex Markle, 1859 Todd Drive, Arden Manor Mobile Home Park, asked if there would be any northbound access to US Highway 10 near the Big 10 bar. Mr. Tolaas stated that there would not be an access to northbound US Highway lOin that area. Mr. Markle asked if there would be access to the Mobile Home Park from US Highway 10. Mr. Tolaas stated that there would be access from the frontage road. He indicated that the only access point onto US Highway 10 would be at the Scherer Lumber entrance, which exists today. This access would be configured in such a way that northbound traffic on US Highway 10 could enter the frontage road at Scherer Lumber and travel south on the frontage road to Highway 96.