My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1B, TH10/CR96 Preliminary Design Issues & Positions
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2008
>
03-17-08-WS
>
1B, TH10/CR96 Preliminary Design Issues & Positions
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/18/2008 12:18:31 PM
Creation date
3/18/2008 12:16:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Document
TH10/CR96 Prelim Design Issues
General - Type
Agenda Item
Date
3/17/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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 - March 10, 2008 <br /> <br />DRAEJ <br /> <br />14 <br /> <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden explained the need for design constraint #1 to assist in <br />accommodating 19,000 plus commuters once the flyover was completed. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant stated that he would not agree with striking design <br />constraint #1 because the turn lane would be small and it would benefit the <br />residents ofBriarlmoll, McCormack, and Snelling, <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes questioned why there would not be one west on County <br />Road 96 to turn right onto Highway 10 or any additional places. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant gave examples of traffic movement to better explain the <br />need for this turn lane to reduce the need of residents to go to far out of their way. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden stated that this turn lane would eliminate the need for an <br />additional ramp to get onto Highway 10. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead clarified that they do try to space apart any ramps that exit in to <br />traffic that is going onto a different ramp. So the one that is included in this plan is <br />the only one that would work. He also stated that this would not be his first choice <br />for design constraint and did not feel it was the highest priority. <br /> <br />Councilmember McClung stated he felt the design was a lot of elevation changes, <br />reminiscent of a rollercoaster. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden stated that some of this may be addressed when the 694- <br />35E to 35W project is done. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead stated that there was a need for additional engineering and <br />design. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant stated under Design Constraint #2, City Perspective, the <br />first sentence, remove the word "possible". <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead asked Councilmember Grant to explain having the trail on both <br />sides of the roadway because he would like to have a choice in this. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant stated that there needed to be a trail on at least one side and <br />the addition of trails does not add to the noise. The only question would be if the <br />width of the trails takes away homes. And if it doesn't, then there could be trails on <br />both sides. If it does take away homes, then the Council will need to decide which <br />side they want the trail. He stated that he would like to see a trail on both sides to <br />Highway 10 to alleviate people having to cross County Road 96 in order to get onto <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.