Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> ~ ~~~i <br /> MINUTES <br />. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA <br /> WORKSESSION <br /> MONDAY, MARCH 16, 1998 <br /> 4:45 P.M. - ARMY RESERVE CENTER, 4655 LEXINGTON A VENUE NORTH <br /> CALL TO ORDER <br /> Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Dennis Probst called to order the City Council <br /> Worksession at 5: 15 p.m. Present were Council members Dale Hicks, Beverly Aplikowski, <br /> Susan Keim, and Paul Malone; City Administrator, Brian Fritsinger; Community Development <br /> Director, Kevin Ringwald; City Accountant, Terry Post; Parks and Reereation Director, Cindy <br /> Walsh; Public Works Superintendent, Dwayne Stafford; and Administrative Secretary, Sheila <br /> Stowell. <br /> APPROV AL OF MEETING AGENDA <br /> MOTION: Councilmember Keim moved and Councilmember Aplikowski seconded a motion <br /> to approve the meeting agenda tor the March 16, 1998 Worksession. The motion <br /> carried unanimously (5-0). <br /> CITY ISSUES - SHORT TERM <br />. a. Hwy. 96/Hwy. 10 Traffic Study <br /> The City's consulting engineer, Greg Brown ofBRW, Inc., along with Tony Heppelmann of <br /> BRW, Inc., the firm's traffic and transportation engineer presented a study the Highway <br /> 96lHighway 10 interchange. Mr. Brown and Mr. Heppelmann presented various intersection <br /> configurations for the Highway 96 and 10 interchange and related short and long-term impacts. <br /> The scope of the study and discussion included evaluation of existing traffic patterns; traffic <br /> modeling of alternative scenarios; levels of access; pedestrian movements and access; Gateway <br /> Boulevard alignment; existing Highway IO accesses; Gateway Business District access; storm <br /> drainage; ramp metering and HOV facilities; TCAAP property acquisition; and a summary of <br /> benefits, property acquisitions, and cost implications of each alternative. <br /> Mr. Ringwald pointed out several positive aspects of Layout No.2, consisting of a grade <br /> separated interchange, with north access, and suggested the Couneil may wish to direct staff and <br /> engineers to review various pending MnDOT traffic projects and their implications to a proposed <br /> new interchange. Mr. Ringwald questioned whether the proposed interchange in Layout No.2 <br /> could provide enough capacity to accommodate future traffic requirements from the Gateway <br /> Business District (GBD), given that access to southbound Highway 10 was eliminated. <br /> Mr. Heppelman confirmed that it would have sufficient capacity. <br />. <br /> ---- <br />