Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL ~ May 22, 2006 <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br />Mayor Aplikowski stated she wanted to do this project and she wanted staff to look at cutting <br />some costs, but she believed thcy put a lot of time and efIort in lhis project and 10 delay it was . <br />not appropriate. She noted they had the money, but they just needed to shift some funds around. <br /> <br />Councilrnernber Holden stated she wanted to go with Option 3 to see what thc PMP was going <br />to do, She stated she would like to see some cost savings and put off lhe reconstruclion, <br /> <br />Councilrnernber Larson stated he agreed with Mayor Aplikowski and believed they needed to <br />do everything they could to make this work this year. He noted the neighborhood wanted to see <br />this project donc. He indicated the City had neglected infrastructure over the ycars and now they <br />were playing catch up, He indicated this would continue to be a problem for them and the street <br />improvement program would be a costly one. He believed they would need to look at bonding in <br />the City to address some of these future needs. He stated he was not sure the cost was going to <br />be any less next year and he did not believe they would be able to reduce the eos(s significantly <br />and still be able to do a good job. He indicated he wanted this project to go forward. He stated <br />they needed (0 move forward and do the improvements to the street system, He believed il was <br />an important role of Council to maintain the infrastructure, <br /> <br />MOTION: Couneilmember Granl moved and Couneilmember Larson seconded a <br />motion to table the 2006 PMP Ridgewood Neighborhood Improvement <br />Project in order to allow staff time to research potential cost savmg <br />options and bring this back to Council. <br /> <br />Councilrnember Holden slated she did not see any effort of the City to maintain the streets that . <br />were still in good shape and this concerned her. She stated she would vote no on this motion. <br /> <br />The motion carried (4-1 Councilmember Holden opposed). <br /> <br />B. Resolution No. 06-35: Supportinl! the Ramsev County Rel!ional Rail Authority's <br />interest in Acquirinl! the TCAAP Railroad Corridor in Arden Hills <br /> <br />Ms. Barton stated the United States Army had declared excess the Twin Cities Army <br />Ammunition Plan (TCAAP) railroad corridor extending from the TCAAP site over Highway 10 <br />in Arden Hills and into New Brighton, The General Services Administration (GSA) on behalf of <br />the U,S, Army was in the process of attempting to sell this rail corridor, with priority being given <br />to a negotiated purchase with local government. <br /> <br />She stated the City of New Brighton had expressed interest in maintaining the railroad corridor <br />for the purpose of preserving it for future use as a transportation corridor, possibly including it <br />within a regional mass transit system, The Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority (RCRRA) <br />had also expressed interest in acquiring the corridor to preserve it for future lransportation <br />purposcs, The City of New Brighton adopted a Resolution supporting the RCRRA in acquiring <br />the TCAAP railroad corridor area in November of2005, <br /> <br />. <br />