Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - June 30, 2008 <br /> <br />23 <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden stated that another Whereas could be added that states: <br />Whereas the cost to the State of Minnesota by Trunk Highway I 0 reducing the <br />traffic on the Interstate 694 and Interstate 35W interchange therefore the City <br />requires the State to provide funding for neighborhoods appointed by the City. <br /> <br />City Attorney Filla stated that the focus here was on the local access project and <br />even though the Position Paper does cover areas north and south, this Resolution <br />deals with areas north of County Road 96. This would mean that noise abatement <br />measures would refer to the Arden Manor and this issue will come back for other <br />reviews. This Resolution is structured to deal with the local access project. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant stated that assuming the County grade separates Highway <br />1 0 at County Road 96, approval of this Concept Plan will enable them to look at the <br />noise that is along that entire segment. Therefore Council is taking the position of <br />noise abatement caused by the TCAAP interchange. <br /> <br />City Attorney Filla stated that he is not suggesting that the Council not add more <br />language but if the Council is comfortable with the Position Paper it is being <br />incorporated into the Resolution. If the Council would like to emphasize certain <br />portions of the Position Paper then they should add that language. He stated that <br />the Resolution incorporates the map that is included in the documents and this <br />shows the grade separation at Highway 10 and County Road 96. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead stated that the Resolution references the Position Paper that goes <br />beyond the local access interchange being discussed. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden stated that the Position Paper states: review noise <br />abatement and impacts. The Council did review the analysis and Mn/DOT stated <br />that area does not meet the criteria. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant stated that the area does not meet the criteria for sound <br />walls but nothing was ever done in terms of other measures for sound mitigation. <br /> <br />City Attorney Filla stated that it was important to emphasize those areas that are <br />critical to the Council in the Resolution. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead asked if it was appropriate form to include an expectation <br />clause. <br /> <br />City Attorney Filla stated that if the Council did not feel the Position Paper was <br />strong enough then the Council should start using more mandatory language. <br />