08-09-10-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—August 9, 2010 11 6. B. Mn/DOT Interstate 694 Improvement Project—Public Hearing (continued) Mr. Lindeberg stated businesses such as Boston Scientific or Deluxe Checks would also benefit from the improved flow of traffic on I694. Councilmember Holden asked for clarification on the efficiencies for local roadways and if this was also modeled. Mr. Lindeberg stated through traffic modeling and traffic projections. An improved I694 will -- pull traffic off the local roads because the roadway will not be stopped like it is currently. Councilmember Holden asked if this modeling included the closure of I694 going east and the impacts all the way back up to Lydia. Mr. Lindeberg stated these items were taken into consideration in the modeling. Councilmember Grant stated noise and noise abatement was important to the City, the residents and the Council. He asked what Mn/DOT was going to do to mitigate noise. Mr. Lindeberg stated no noise mitigation was deemed to be cost effective and Mn/DOT does not have any plans for noise mitigation at this time. Councilmember Grant stated a lot of the circulation would be putting more stress on the City and County roads. As a Council they need to be aware of the needs of the City. This design is putting additional burden on Lexington Avenue and other County Roads. He asked Mr. Lindeberg to explain the pedestrian safe options that were brought into this design. Mr. Lindeberg stated this current design does not provide for a safe pedestrian crossing at Interstate 694. Mn/DOT had looked at crossing Interstate 694 at Hamline or at Snelling Avenue but these were not safe situations. The only safe pedestrian crossing would be the construction of a separate pedestrian bridge and when viewing the City and County's future trail plans, the City had a trail on their plans but the County did not. when the County plans do not match the City plans Mn/DOT needs to work with both entities to find a design that will work for both. He clarified that there was no safe option in the plan because there is not an option that meets a County plan or there is a City plan but there is no connection on the south end of the trail and Mn/DOT wants to look at the whole pedestrian flow and not put a crossing into one area. Councilmember McClung stated it may not be on the County's plan but it is on the City's plan. The City's plan should have some weight since Mn/DOT is looking for Municipal Consent from the City. He asked what capacity for future pedestrian crossings are being built into the plan so that something could be added at a future date. According to the design being presented there is no capacity for this type of future development. He also clarified Mn/DOT will not be doing anything in regards to noise mitigation for the residents of Arden Hills. Mn/DOT is asking Arden Hills to carry all these burdens but there are no benefits for the residents.