04-14-08-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - April 14, 2008 17 Councilmember Holmes stated that the only costs that should be considered are the construction costs and the relocation costs as the other costs were speculative. Once these numbers are excluded a different number for factoring is used. Mayor Harpstead asked for clarification regarding the numbers that Councilmember Holmes was excluding. Councilmember Holmes stated that she WQuld exclude the costs for the groundwater monitoring system wells and TCAAP R/W impacts costs. She also stated that the cost for moving 15 units is a substantial amount of money that the City would have to pay under Alternative l. Mayor Harpstead stated that the costs on the other side were also real as the City was paying money to purchase land from the Federal government and cleaning it up and Alternative 4 was to build a road on it. Councilmember McClung stated that the City could look at a higher density on the remaining TCAAP property in order to make up for the acreage that would be used for Alternative 4. Councilmember Holmes stated that if there was a way to avoid impacting Arden Manor then the City should look at that alternative. Mayor Harpstead stated that Alternative 4 looked like it was impacting North Heights Church. He also stated that someone is going to be affected by the project and as a community it was up to the Council to be sure that they were fair and equitable to the citizens. Councilmember McClung stated that he would like to see more details on Alternative 3 as this alternative provided that all the parties involved would have to compromise and give a little. Mayor Harpstead verified that Councilmember McClung would be open to looking at a higher density for the remaining TCAAP property to offset the land used for this project. Councilmember McClung stated he would be willing to look at it. Councilmember Grant asked for clarification on what is the outcome of this agenda item. Mayor Harpstead stated it was his understanding that in order to be most effective as the City continues to move forward through this evaluation of the project proposal one of the key determinants in future steps is the footprint path for TH 10. If the Council could give guidance to the team to move forward that would narrow the analysis and improve the quality of it. Staff has asked for direction on what the City is willing to consider. Interim City Administrator Willis stated that this decision will lead to moving toward the preparation of preliminary engineering drawings which get into issues of grade and elevation, cuts and fill, and construction easements. Because this process is expensive it is not cost effective for the City to do this with four alternatives.