04-14-08-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - April 14, 2008 16 Mr. Chromy stated that a signalized intersection would reduce the capacity of a 4 lane highway from 70,000 to 40,000 vehicles. Mayor Harpstead verified if Bolton & Menk was recommending that the City not pursue this option. Mr. Chromy stated that if he were the City Traffic Engineer he would not. Mr. Chromy presented the four altematives for Highway 10 alignments. Alternative I is utilizing the existing Highway 10 alignment. This is the base altemative for comparisons. Alternative 2 is to shift eastbound Highway 10 lanes 23 feet east within the median and use urban road section to reduce impacts. Alternative 3 is to shift all of Highway 10 to the east 4 I feet within the existing right-of-way and use an urban section to reduce impacts. Altemative 4 is using the same rural Highway 10 centerline as Alternative I, shift all of Highway 10 east onto TCAAP property 217 feet so that all impacts to the land uses west of Highway 10 would be avoided. He also stated that Table 1 showed an overall comparison summary between all the altematives including costs and impacts. He also stated that there would be a potential added cost of about three million if Highway 10 was to be reconstructed in this area, which has not been confirmed yet. Councilmember Holmes asked for clarification for the cost of the reconstruction on Highway 10 and how the City would find out if the highway was going to be reconstructed. Public Works Director Hoag stated MnDOT had responded a couple of different ways regarding the potential reconstruction of this section of Highway 10. One was that in their 2030 Plan the grade separation interchange of the Highway 10 and County Road 96 has been identified as a project and the other was that the corridor between 694 and 35W sometime in the next five years was slated for an overlay, not a reconstruction. Mayor Harpstead asked what the rough cost of an overlay would be. Mr. Chromy stated that it would be substantially lower, maybe in the area of $500,000. Public Works Director Hoag stated at this time the overlay is a general maintenance project, not a reconstruction project. Councilmember Holmes asked what the differentiation in cost was with the groundwater monitoring system wells because in altemative 4 there are additional costs for wells but if the City planned to build on the TCAAP property anyway the cost of impacting those wells would be incurred anyway. Ms. Kvilvang stated that the development has been laid out to avoid those on the north side of the road so you would not be impacting those extraction wells anyway.