Laserfiche WebLink
<br />- <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 11, 2000 <br /> <br />18 <br /> <br />using these roads as short cuts, however, the entire neighborhood uses the roads as an access to <br />the larger streets, <br /> <br />Mayor Probst added that on'street parking occurs in this neigbborbood and this creates a very <br />narrow street for emergency vebicles to travel through. He felt that the City Council had the <br />responsibility oflooking out for the neighborhood as well as other members of the community, <br /> <br />An audience member suggested that the streets be posted for no on-street parking. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst stated that here must be a civil discussion in order to get through this issue, He <br />acknowledged that there will be disagreement between the Council and the residents and he <br />stated that the Council wanted to hear the resident's opinions, however, he did not believe it <br />would help to debate whose opinions are correct <br /> <br />Mayor Probst stated that he supported Staffs recommendation regarding street widths, <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant asked how a consensus can be reached on this issue since the Council <br />seemed to be divided. Mayor Probst had hoped that the Council would not have to vote on each <br />issue, rather he had believed that the Couneil would reaeh a consensus on each issue and take one <br />vote on the Resolution. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson suggested that if eertain issues do not have a broad eonsensus, those <br />items eould be taken to a vote with the result being passed on as direction to the City Engineer. <br /> <br />Council member Aplikowski stated that the City should postpone the entire project since she felt <br />that the City was so far away from any sort of agreements, She stated that the City Council has <br />the options of either accepting the City Staffs recommendations, accepting the original <br />feasibility study, or postponing the entire project since this issue has moved far away from the <br />City's standard procedures, She stated that she was not comfortable with taking these issues <br />piece by piece since all involved have their own opinions and that she was hesitant for the <br />Couneil to be voting on each issue, She suggested that City Staff review the City pavement <br />policy and, if extreme exceptions are going to be made, then the policy must be changed. <br /> <br />MOTION: <br /> <br />Councilmember Aplikowski moved to postpone the decision on the 2000/2001 <br />Street Improvement Project and to direct City Staff to review the City's pavement <br />policy in order for an understanding and agreement to be reached regarding the <br />street widths in the Ingerson neighborhood. <br /> <br />The motion failed due to lack of a second, <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson stated that a vote should be taken and he was willing to accept being on <br />the minority side on this issue. He noted that the City Council will be recommending to the City <br />Engineer and Staff further revisions to the feasibility study which will be brought back once <br />again to the City Council for a final decision to be made. Therefore, there will be at least one <br />more review of the project. He acknowledged that all parties involved in this decision will not <br />