My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 06-19-2006
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
CCP 06-19-2006
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:21:37 PM
Creation date
11/15/2006 10:10:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
127
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />~ <br />~HILLS <br /> <br />MEMORANDUM <br /> <br />DATE: <br /> <br />WORK SESSION ITEM 2.C <br /> <br />June 19,2006 <br /> <br />TO: <br /> <br />Mayor and City Council . <br />aJLr <br />Michelle Wolfe, City Administrator (rhVt <br /> <br />FROM: <br /> <br />SUBJECT: <br /> <br />Transportation Discussion: Highway 96 and Highway 10 Intersection <br /> <br />BACKGROUND <br /> <br />11 has been quite some time since the City Council discussed the topic of regional transportation. <br />When the City decided to re-join the I-35W Corridor Coalition, Council indicated that it was <br />important to try and reach agreement on City positions regarding various transportation topics <br />and issues. As a starting point, we agreed to talk about the intersection of Highways 10 and 96. <br /> <br />HISTORY <br /> <br />A few years ago there were some discussions about this intersection. In reviewing minutes from <br />the last five years, there really didn't appear to have been any real in-depth discussion, nor were <br />any positions formed. Items for consideration included: <br /> <br />. Local access concerns <br />. Should Highway 10 remain a part of the State's highway system, or become more of a <br />local street or parkway? <br />. If Highway 10 remains part of the highway system, should it be a full interchange or <br />simply an over pass over Highway 96? <br /> <br />Since the last time the Council discussed this topic, we have completed and approved TCAAP <br />framework Vision. The framework provides a better background for discussion regarding <br />transportation improvements by laying out a conceptual development (in very general terms). <br /> <br />A few years ago City staff met with MnDOT and Ramsey County staff to discuss transportation <br />needs as they relate to TCAAP, At that time MnDOT expressed concerns about merging and <br />safety issues on I-35W, and they desired to limit the nwnber of interchanges, They <br />recommended limiting the current access at County Road 1. This recommendation led to the <br />decision to show the north-south TCAAP arterial street on the west side of Rice Creek rather <br />than the east. We are aware that the Cities of Mounds View and Shoreview have concerns about <br />that current design and about limited access from County Road 1. Since that discussion a few <br />years ago, the Medtronic development deal occurred which resulted in a County Road J road <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.