Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - April 14,2008 <br /> <br />19 <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant asked Ms. Kvilvang if the loss ofTIF had been calculated in on the loss <br />of acres on the TCAAP property. <br /> <br />Ms. Kvilvang stated that there was no TIF analysis in regards to the loss of this acreage. She <br />also reminded the Council that the City was looking for less density. <br /> <br />MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a <br />motion to extend the Regular Council Meeting for an additional 30 <br />minutes. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant stated that Alternative ] would be preferable but the City needs to be <br />sure to do right by the citizens. He also stated that if doing right by the citizens was the focus <br />then a win-win situation could be created. <br /> <br />Conncilmember McClung pointed out that the City is also constrained by what they could do <br />for the citizens affected. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes stated that looking at the construction costs there was not a large <br />difference and Alternative 4 was not impacting any residence. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden stated that the cost for TCAAP would need to be factored in because <br />the City would be purchasing this land to put a road on it. <br /> <br />Public Works Director Hoag stated that the overlay that was discussed is a MnDOT <br />maintenance project and the cost would not need to be factored into the construction costs. <br /> <br />MOTION: Mayor Harpstead moved and Council member Holden seconded a <br />motion to Direct Staff to Move Forward with Alternative #1 as the layout <br />for the Project. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead stated the City would have to quickly and appropriately figure out what the <br />City can do for those citizens who are impacted but this decision. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden asked what the next phase would be. <br /> <br />Mr. Chromy stated that the next phase would be a preliminary design and formal environmental <br />review, further investigation and confirmation regarding the impacts to residents, and investigate <br />potential relocation costs for those individuals. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden asked what the cost would be for preliminary design. <br /> <br />Mr. Chromy stated that this cost would be about 20% of the construction costs and about 4% for <br />the environmental review. <br /> <br />Civil Engineer Giga stated that there were other factors that needed to be discussed concerning <br />Design Constraints 2 and 3 before preliminary design could proceed <br />