My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC 01-25-1993 & 1-25-1993 WS
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1993
>
CC 01-25-1993 & 1-25-1993 WS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:12:14 PM
Creation date
11/9/2006 4:42:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />. <br /> <br />Arden Hills Council <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br />January 25, 1993 <br /> <br />however, some things mentioned during this evening's <br />discussion are not relevant. School buses did not use the <br />intersection for many years before its closure because they <br />identified the unsafe circumstances, but the School Board <br />has indicated buses would use a signalized intersection. <br />I've heard that a cost sharing arrangement between the City, <br />County, and State is a possibility. MnDOT is the expert in <br />this matter and they are not opposed to reopening the <br />intersection with a safer design, <br /> <br />Janeen Kaier, 1434 West Gounty Road E - Convenience alone is <br />not a valid reason to open the intersection. It should be <br />opened safely, not in its former design. It is council's <br />duty to the citizens of the City to consider reopening the <br />intersection in a safer design. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />John Swanson, 1468 Lametti Lane - I favor some sort of <br />access, but not a traffic signal. County Road E and other <br />alternate routes are inadequate to handle diverted traffic <br />load or pedestrian/bike traffic. Volume and speed of <br />traffic were the primary concerns surrounding the former <br />intersection. There is no method to reduce volume, only <br />divert it, however, we can try to reduce the speed on Old <br />Snelling/T.H. 51, then traffic controls could be added. <br /> <br />Georqe Morse, 1540 Edqewater Lane - I moved to this area <br />three years ago, and because of safety concerns, stopped <br />using the intersection even before it was closed. The <br />intersection should not be reopened in its former design and <br />a 1/2 million dollar cost to reopen it in a safe design is a <br />very high price to pay for convenience. The best option is <br />to do nothing other than perhaps try to reduce the speed. <br /> <br />Ray McGraw, 1427 Bussard Court - (Gave background as to the <br />creation of the Snelling/T.H. 51 and County Road E <br />intersections.) MnDOT closed the intersection without due <br />process moving the traffic to other routes. citizens have <br />been denied the right to a safe and convenient access and <br />emergency response time has been negatively impacted which <br />could result in deaths in other ways. Let's not make any <br />further mistakes, let's build a safe and sane intersection. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mary Miller, 35Q5 Glenarden Road - There is a problem with <br />emergency response time now that the intersection is closed. <br />Because of the closing of the T.H. 51/Snelling intersection, <br />we are forced to use alternate routes to access our <br />residences. Recently, I was caught in a traffic jam created <br />by an accident around one of the alternate routes which <br />would have made emergency response impossible if emergency <br />response would have been needed in my neighborhood. The <br />former intersection was dangerous, a redesigned intersection <br />is appropriate, simply closing an access is inappropriate. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.