My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7B, 10-96 Update on Position Paper
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2008
>
04-14-08-R
>
7B, 10-96 Update on Position Paper
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/11/2008 11:24:02 AM
Creation date
4/11/2008 11:21:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Document
10 & 96 Update on Position Paper
General - Type
Agenda Item
Date
4/14/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
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 />4/ I 0/2008 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />a copy to the City: the report is ineludcd in this packet. Bolton & Mcnk rcvicwed thc <br />results on bchalf ofthc City: thcir revicw mcmo is also attaehcd. <br /> <br />Chris Chromy, Bolton & Menk, will prescnt a summary of the findings of the <br />additional study at thc City Councilmccting. <br /> <br />II. Grade Separation of Highway 10 and County Road 96 <br />Dcsign Constraints #1-6 <br />City staffhas requested infclrIllation Irom Ramsey County relating to tbese design <br />constraints. Their rcsponse will be brought to the City Council once it is received. <br /> <br />III. Preserve full 'I'll IOILocal Access Interchange <br />Design Constraint III - At grade signalized intersection <br />City staff has requested inlclrIllation li.om Mn/DOT relating to these design <br />constraints. We have received a response; it is attached. <br /> <br />J)csjg!lS'onstraints #2-3 <br />Additional analysis for each of these constraints will occur once direction is received <br />1i"om the City Council Ic)llowing discussions of Design Constraint #4; phasing will be <br />dependent on the alignment selected by the City. <br /> <br />Design Constraint 114- Review cost associated with realigning Hig!nvav 10 and the <br />interchange further northeast <br />SEll. Inc. has evaluated alternative alignments. and has summarized their findings in <br />the attaehcd mcmo. Bolton & Menk rcvicwcd the rcsults on behalf ofthc City: tbcir <br />review mcmo is also attachcd. <br /> <br />Chris Chromy. Bolton & Mcnk. will prcscnt a summary ofthc lindings of the <br />additional study at the City Councilmecting. <br /> <br />RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION <br />City stalfrccommends thc Ic)llowing: <br /> <br />Iliglnvav 10 Noise Barricr Studv: <br />. Accept report <br />. Discuss options <br />. Provide direction to staff <br /> <br />Highv"av I 0 Alignment Alternatives: <br />. Accept report <br />. Discuss alignmellt alternatives <br />. Selcct an alignment alternative fClr the purpose of lileilitating discussions on Design <br />Constraints #2 and if3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.