My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-13-07-WS
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
08-13-07-WS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/22/2008 10:58:44 AM
Creation date
11/15/2007 8:29:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Document
08-13-07 Worksession
General - Type
City Council Minutes
Date
8/13/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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 />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION - AUGUST 13, 2007 <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden asked if there would be lights at the ramp terminals. A representative <br />of Mn/DOT, responded they have not done the engineering yet, but they believed that would be <br />the correct solution. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead stated he was in favor of the grade separation. He believed this would move <br />people though the City faster and safer. <br /> <br />Councilmember McClung stated he has not decided yet. He noted they also had two other <br />safety problems at 10/35W and 10/694 and anything in the short term would just exacerbate <br />those problems. He was concerned they were trying to do a band-aid approach in dealing with <br />traffic issues in this part of the city. He noted they left the issue of traffic go for too long and <br />now they were trying to play catch-up and they were now overreaching and grasping at straws <br />and missing other alternatives that were not as much of a detriment to the current resident. He <br />saw them putting in the grade separation, which would not give local access to the residents. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes indicated she was in favor for the grade separation at 10 and 96. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant indicated this needed to be looked at as a whole system change just not <br />10 and 96. He stated he wanted the noise issue addressed before he would support the grade <br />separation. He also feels there will be increased traffic. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead wanted to know what kind of commitment Councilmember Grant was <br />looking for since they could not make a commitment before getting the funding. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant felt it depended on the solution and felt it was a small cost to reduce the <br />nOIse. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead asked at what stage of the development sequence decisions like these needed <br />to be made. <br /> <br />Mark Goess indicated that noise analysis is completed and available in the environmental <br />document that needs to be written for the proj ect. He felt it could be a Ramsey County proj ect <br />and that the Mn/DOT design is a concrete post with a plank wall. The City of Arden Hills would <br />have to pick up the cost for anything above that. He indicated there would be an evaluation of <br />the noise conditions on Hwy 96 and the intersection area. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead asked if they could see if the environmental assessment could extend to 10. <br /> <br />Mark Goess indicated the environmental document addresses the scope of improvement being <br />provided and he thinks the assertion is that the volume changes due to the grade separation. He <br />indicated he did not know ifthe assessment would address the issue, but felt it should be <br />evaluated. <br /> <br />Mark Lindeberg discussed the I-694 plans and indicated that the part he was pointing to on 10 <br />just north of 694 where the black and yellow ends is where they are actually tying into the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.