My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2005
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
Commissions, Committees, and Boards
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Minutes
>
PC Minutes 2005
>
2005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:28:27 PM
Creation date
2/15/2007 9:24:34 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
81
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 /> PARKS, TRAILS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MEETING <br /> JlIL Y 26, 2005 Page 4 of7 <br /> . Community Development Director Clark indicated that the Economic Development Commission <br /> is ClllTently discussing the TCAAP area noting that ultimately the area would have to be <br /> renamed. He stated that discussions would soon begin to discuss the marketing and promotion of <br /> the area. He stated that this process would be done in stages with the first being how to promote <br /> name recognition for the City of Arden Hills and secondly detennine the name for the <br /> development. He stated that the sports facility concept is one of the big issues that would be <br /> discussed noting that it has always been very clear that the City of Arden Hills is not going to <br /> purchasc the property. He stated that currently the discussions have been very gcneral in nature <br /> adding that the initial discussion is planned for the Septemher City Council work session and <br /> encouraged both groups to attend the work session and listen to the discussion. <br /> City Planncr Hellegers invited the PTRC to participate in the annual Planning Commission bus <br /> tour. He stated that he would forward an email to each of the Committee Members that would <br /> include the datcs, times, and subjects of the tours. <br /> 4. OTHER ITEMS <br /> A. Highway 10 Bridge <br /> City Engineer Brown statcd that he has prepared a budget view to determine the feasihility of <br /> what a trail placed under the CP Rail Bridge would cost. He indicated that this has bccn a <br /> . concern for several ycars and recently came up in a discussion with the Council as a part of the <br /> ongoing County Road E discussion. He explained that he contacted the County and CP Railroad <br /> to discuss the bridge and the finances. He indicated that the proposed trail was approved as long <br /> as it did not impact the bridge. He stated that thcy did a quick structural review of the bridge <br /> abutment and pier and determined that they could install a trail six to eight foot trail between thc <br /> abutment and pier. He indicated that CP reviewed the proposal approximately one month ago <br /> and came back to the City stating that the trail looked feasible and that they were comfol1able <br /> with the possibility of adding the trail. He stated that the rough cost estimate is approximately <br /> $130,000, plus an additional $100,000 for a path to the wetlands area for a total minimum cost of <br /> $230,000. He indicated that he spoke with Mr. Moorc and Ms. Olson regarding the costs and it <br /> was detennined that the next logical step would be to detel111ine the budgct and whether it would <br /> be viable to run the trail up to County Road E and the Vento crosswalk. He stated that the <br /> Master Plan does include a trail that would go all the way up to Highway 96 adding that there is <br /> talk of pushing this project out to 2007. He noted that the roadway up to and north of the <br /> railroad bridge is already curb and guttered, which would require minimal grading with a two- <br /> toot buffer strip. He stated that the City's tirst interest was to present an option tor a crossing <br /> over the bridge and then shoot for a County Road E or a Highway 96 conncction. He noted that <br /> Highway 96 is a regional trail and it is their hope that thcre would be some f0I111 of connection <br /> with County Road E. He reviewed the State funding process and trail size with the Committee <br /> and Planning Commission. He indicated that an 8-foot trail would be an acceptable width that <br /> would allow multiple uses and would include a few additional restrictions on clear zones and <br /> safety zones. Hc stated that this could add some additional costs to the project noting that it <br /> would be matched with State aid funding. He asked the PTRC to review the proposal and <br /> . provide the Planning Commission with their feedback. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.