Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - SEPTEMBER 1, 1999 <br /> <br /> <br />22 <br /> <br />, <br />, <br />t <br />I <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Commissioner Rye expressed concern for the old City Hall site. He felt if the property were to a <br />be sold the current zoning could create a conflict of interest over what sort of development ,., <br />should be allowed. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sand felt that the old City Hall site was an ideal area for a Neighborhood <br />Business if done correctly. The site could serve as a nice commercial area for the local homes <br />and townhouses. He felt that the area was important due its proximity to the gateway entry to <br />Arden Hills and the City must be cautious in how this property is allowed to be developed. Mr. <br />Post noted that there was a paper road on this site to the south side ofthe property, extending up <br />to the R -1 zoning, that most people were not aware of. <br /> <br />Commissioner Baker requested an update on the status of the impasse between Ramsey County, <br />the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the City of Arden Hills regarding the Highways <br />10/96 reconstruction. Mr. Post stated that the City had a proposal to offer to the 135W Corridor <br />Coalition that considered the entire triangular area that contains the mobile home park. This <br />would be a large undertaking that would require funding from several sources. The Metropolitan <br />Council will be in New Brighton for their October meeting and this proposal may be presented at <br />that time. <br /> <br />Mr. Post stated that if the City's current proposal was not supported, there would be three other <br />options: to rebuild the road as is; to construct a ramp allowing northbound and southbound <br />access from Highway 96; or to construct a frontage road which would set the stage for a future <br />intersection at TCAAP near the Big 10 Supper Club. All these alternatives have plusses and a <br />minuses and the City has presented a preferred plan for a ramp which was rejected by the _ <br />Minnesota Department of Transportation. The State had safety concerns of the weaving patterns <br />that may result from northbound traffic onto Highway 10 from Highway 96 wanting to access the <br />businesses on the west side of Highway 10 at a high speed. <br /> <br />Commissioner Baker stated that the worse thing that could happen would be to further divide the <br />communities, remove properties from the tax roll, and then not allow proper access to the local <br />highways. He noted that Highway 118/610 will carry a great deal of traffic in the future. He <br />asked if a traffic projection had been accomplished with the Minnesota Department of <br />Transportation's proposal. Mr. Post stated a rough projection was for an approximate 33 percent <br />increase in volume as a result of opening Highway 610, as this road essentially becomes an exit <br />ramp for 135W. <br /> <br />ADJOURNMENT <br /> <br />Commissioner Sand moved, seconded by Commissioner Nelson to adjourn the meeting at 10:37 <br />p.m. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). <br /> <br />e <br />