My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC 03-11-1996
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
CC 03-11-1996
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:12:22 PM
Creation date
11/10/2006 2:48:01 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.
/
9
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 />I <br />I <br />I~ <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />Ie <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I- <br />I <br /> <br />Arden Hills City Council Meeting -- March 11, 1996 <br />Comments from Tom Mulcahy <br />3530 Siems Court <br /> <br />And now for the praise -- equally well deserved, I think <br />I refer to the Site Visit Schedule in Feb for five street improvement projects. <br />A very good idea to reach out for comment and input -- outside the formal hearing process. <br /> <br />I spoke to both the Pub Works Dir and the Engineer on site. I'm not sure they shared my <br />enthusiasm on that chilly day, but I'm sure the time and expense were well spent. <br />The written communications on street projects have improved greatly. I even received a call <br />from the Director to be sure I had received a notice. <br />Street improvement communication is something that needs constant attention because it's a <br />different group of citizens every year, every time Good work, good idea. <br /> <br />Here again, let me suggest that a principle, or at least a strong consensus, is emerging in <br />these street renewal projects. It is this: We.iJQn't want our residential streets widened to fit <br />some rule lJ]arte for other circumstance~, <br /> <br />Your decision on Oak Avenue (24' to 26' width and preserve the cul-de-sac island) is a <br />perfect example of accommodation. But, an even better course would be to adopt a policy of <br />maintaining the present width of streets in reconstruction so that the engineer would not <br />bring in proposals to reconstruct to "standard" These guys love their rule books; we have to <br />make it possible for them to look up and see the situation in local terms. Then the Engineer <br />would not say, as he did on Jan 29th: "We want to create a uniform urban-type street in <br />Arden Hills" (See Bulletin Feb 7) No, Greg, we don't. and we shouldn't have to mobilize the <br />neighborhood on every project <br /> <br />There is every reason to rethink inflexible s.tr~et standards. <br />Shoreview did it on Reiland Lane in 1995. Drive that street and see how its character was <br />preserved. It's charming, <br />This year Roseville reconsidered its 32' rule. (See Focus New~ Feb 22) The Roseville Pub <br />Works Dir was quoted: "In my opinion, a 28-foot street is reasonable in most cases." <br />See, there's hope. <br /> <br />Thanks for your time and attention. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.