10/20/94 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Januar~ 20, 1994 Page 3 ~ The Met Council has not given Dayton any indication that it supports the new bridge. The Cou. ~cil has suggested, however, that Dayton should coordinate its study with the Anoka C )unty Transportation Plan. Mn/DOT has told Dayton that if it does not want a bridge,:it will not force the city to accept one. Dayton city staff understand the need to plan ~_r a bridge, which they feel is inevitable, albeit 20 years away. It is staffs concern that Dayton should be intensely involved in the location decision rather than outside ~gencies and jurisdictions. [ In 1992, ~he Dayton City Council adopted a resolution informing affected jurisdictions of its coriditions for considering a river crossing within its borders and its preferred alignment. The City of Dayton's conditions were: · T~e bridge alignment must extend south of Dayton River Road (Hennepin CR 1~) to future TH 610 in Maple Grove, to prevent bridge traffic from circulating tl~rough the comm,,,~ity on collector and local streets. · Tl~e north/south alignment for the road link between the bridge and future TH 6~ should be located so as not to impact existing residential development. InStead, the preference is that the alignment should be located in an u~developed area. This will give the City an opport,~,~ity to plan for future de~velopment along the road alignment. An aligngpent one-half mile west of Fernbrook Lane (Hennepin CR 121) was selected as the preferred route. Because this alignment passes through Elm Creek Park, the City ent~ed discussions with Hennepin County tb explore potential land swaps. To date the ~ity has not received a firm response from the County, but is confident the County vJpuld participate in a swap (additional park land for necessary right-of-way). : The deba~e has continued in Dayton since 1992 when the resolution was adopted, and opinions ~bout the selected alignment have changed. Many residents are voicing oppositio, to any new river crossing in Dayton. It is their opinion that the river crossing ~ould benefit Ramsey and other comm,,,~ities to the north, at the expense of Dayton's ~esidents. This sentiment has led the task force to look at two other options, Zanzibar ~ane and Hennepin CR 13. A map is ~ttached to illustrate these alignments. Descriptions of the alignments are presented~ below: · Zapzibar Lane (appro~iraately 1 1/4 miles west of CR 121). The Zanzibar Lane lali d~swent is along the western edge o£Elm.Creek Park and would not require aps with Hennepin County. Its extension to the south to future TH 61~) would impact lakes and wetlands, hoWever. The Zanzibar Lane bridge ali~nent could be linked to CR 83 in Ramsey. · He~_. epin CR 13, west of Dayton, in Hassen Township. If selected as the pr4{erred alignment, Dayton would ~n=ex CR 13. The CR 13 bridge alignment {