Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - MAY 29, 2007 <br /> <br />7 <br /> <br />7. NEW BUSINESS <br /> <br />D. Motion to Approve Resolution 07-61: Supportin2: a Concept Plan for the State <br />Hi2:hwav 10 and County Hi2:hwav 96 Improvement Project <br /> <br />Ms. Wolfe stated there have been discussions for several years regarding improvements to the <br />intersection of Highways 10 and 96. She reviewed the 2007 discussions to-date regarding this <br />project. She recommended Council approve the resolution supporting a concept plan for the <br />State Highway 10 and County Highway 96 Improvement Proj ect. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden asked why they would want to pass this before the June 19 meeting. <br />Ms. Wolfe responded the timing of supporting the concept plan was driven by some of the items <br />she mentioned previously including pre-design engineering. <br /> <br />MOTION: Councilmember Holmes moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a <br />motion to table this until after the June 19, 2007 public meeting. The <br />motion carried unanimously (5-0). <br /> <br />Councilmember McClung stated he was concerned about how this process went and that the <br />benefits are for future residents and the current residents had to deal with this now. He stated he <br />would not vote for this if the plan stayed the way it was. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden stated she looked forward to the future and like it or not TCAAP was <br />part of the future of the City and they had to plan for both current and future residents. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant stated in 2000 Council had told the County to start at White Bear Lake <br />and move down Highway 96, which they had done and now was the time for Arden Hills. He <br />stated he wanted to design something that was good for both the current residents as well as the <br />future residents. He did not see Highway 10/96 remaining as it was. He noted neither Highway <br />10 nor 96 were City roads and the City could fight this, but probably would not win and the final <br />decision rested with the State and Federal governments. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead stated he worried about the neighborhood in this triangle because it was not <br />easy for the residents to have access. He indicated if they created an appropriate face and did <br />things right on the frontage road, he believed the vitality and nature of that neighborhood would <br />be enhanced and not hurt. He acknowledged it was devastating if residents had to move because <br />of this project, but it might be a necessity. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes stated the reason she tabled this was because she wanted good <br />solutions and she was extremely concerned about the homes being taken and she hoped they <br />could come up with a solution. She indicated they needed to stand up for the rights of the current <br />residents. She recommended everyone show up at the June 19 meeting and come with their <br />thoughts and solutions. <br />