Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Minutes of the Arden Hills Special Council Meeting, 6/3/91 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />HRING. (Cont'd) <br /> <br />Maurer explaine:l. the roadway will be constructed to <br />allow low boulevard areas to drain toward the street. <br /> <br />Council1neInber Malone questioned how the 36 ft. width proposed for North Snelling <br />Avenue compares with other streets in the area. <br /> <br />Maurer stated three streets in the area were measured; McClung, Briarlrnoll and <br />ROyal Hills, and all three are 36 ft. from gutter line to gutter line, with the <br />only difference being the type of curbing. <br /> <br />Mayor Sather asked for camments from the floor either in fav= of or opposed to <br />the proposed improvement. <br /> <br />An unidentified resident questioned if the roadway improvement is eJqJeCted to <br />increase traffic in this area. <br /> <br />Engineer Maurer stated increased traffic would not be exclusively due to the <br />roadway improvement. He explaine:l. future development of the vacant land and <br />growth in traffic volumes will corrtriJ:ute to traffic increases. Maurer advised <br />cu=ently there are approxilnately 700 cars per day using the street and a typical <br />lot generates six to ten trips per day; the increase will be based on the number <br />of developable lots multiplied by ten vehicles. He did not foresee a significant <br />traffic increase solely based on the roadway improvement. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />George Reiling, 661 Heinel Drive, Roseville, stated he is amazed this matter is <br />being discussed this evening. He 8}(plaine:l. that the residents were clear at the <br />previous public hearing they did not favor the improvement of the roadway and it <br />appears improvement will be made even though the residents opposed the <br />improvement. <br /> <br />Dennis Pirkel, 1553 Briarlrnoll, stated he has lived in this neighlx>rhood f= four <br />years and expressed concern that the street is in such disrepair. He explaine:l. <br />the roadway corxlition is dangerous and creates a safety hazard f= children and <br />drivers. <br /> <br />O1arles Allen, 1575 Briarlrnoll Drive, stated all residents favoring the <br />improvement should be asS0Ss'9d. He indicated it is unfair to assess only the <br />adjacent property owners. Allen 8}(pressed concern that the removal of trees to <br />a=mplish the ~vement will devalue prcperty in this area. He stated it is <br />unclear as to why this matter has returned f= consideration. <br /> <br />Mayor Sather 8}(plained this item is being recOnsideration based on one of the <br />dissenting Council votes requesting reconsideration of this matter. <br /> <br />Jim OstlllIKl, 1576 Royal Hills Drive, 8}(pressed concern relative to the allcx::ation <br />of MSA funds. He offered backgrCll.UXi on the utilization of the funds designated <br />f= roadway improvements; indicated the funds are not specifically dedicated for <br />this project. OstlllIKl stated the residents are proposed to be 6SS<?Ssed at the <br />same rate as a roadway which is not extensively used, such as a cul-de-sac. He <br />further indicated that safety should be the main concern and recamrnended stop <br />signs may have to be installed to insure safe vehicular traffic. <br /> <br />. <br />