CC 10-09-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - OCTOBER 9,2001 4 Councilmember Grant agreed with changes two and three. He stated he did not agree with . change one since many streets currently do not have sidewalks. He asked if the intent was to put in sidewalks. Councilmember Larson responded he was not proposing sidewalks. He noted the Council needed to consider how the road was used. He stated many residents walk in the streets since there were no sidewalks. He added that before they decide on street width they should discuss how the street was being used and how it affects that street. He stated some streets were designated as trails and had many pedestrians walking on them. Councilmember Rem agreed the use should be considered. She stated they should not just look at road width, but also consider lane width and shoulder width. She noted her concern it would not be easy to put in sidewalks in some neighborhoods. Councilmember Larson suggested the term "sidewalk" was incorrect. He noted the correct wording should be "pedestrian use of the road". Councilmember Rem suggested the following change: on the first page, in the first paragraph, in the second to last line, replace "expand" with "expend". Councilmember Rem stated that concerning neighborhood streets if the width were 32 feet there would not be much difference from a community width street. She noted it should be left with a 30-foot width. She added she could agree with a width of 28 to 32 feet. She added she was not ready to say they were widening streets. . Councilmember Grant stated he would prefer neighborhood streets to be listed as 28 to 32 feet, but could agree with a 30-foot width. He noted to set the width at 32 did not give any flexibility. He added to there would be little distinction between a neighborhood street and a community street. Mayor Probst stated there was a significant distinction between a neighborhood street and a community street. He noted the recommended width was 32 feet. He added the presumption for a neighborhood street was that it would not get wider than what was listed. He stated a community street had a 32 width as the minimum, but it could go wider. Councilmember Larson stated his position had not changed either. He noted there was a difference between a community and a neighborhood street. He added one was stating a minimum and the other was a recommended width that could be enlarged. He stated he believed 32 feet was an appropriate width for neighborhood streets. He noted there should be an ability to grant an exception if it was warranted. Mayor Probst suggested the Council take action to make the modifications suggested by Councilmembers Larson and Rem. He asked the Council to approve the plan with recommended street width blank for neighborhood streets. He noted they could come back to it at the work seSSIOn. . Councilmember Rem stated that would be fair. She noted Councilmember Aplikowski was not at the meeting where this was discussed and was not here tonight. She added this would be one last chance for Councilmember Aplikowski to give input.