Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES <br />NOVEMBER 29,2004 <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Council member Grant stated he understood if the sidewalk goes all of the way to Snelling <br />Avenue, it would score better. He also heard if they chose not to do a sidewalk, it would also <br />score better. He asked which was correct. Mr. Brown stated there was an article in the <br />newspaper that if the sidewalk to Old 10, it would score better. He indicted he had checked into <br />this and found out this was a subjective decision and it would not be necessarily affected by any <br />type of a rule, <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden asked if they would also get points for an 8- foot shoulder. Mr. Brown <br />replied she was correct and they would probably weigh on the merits if it were wise to have an <br />alternative route for pedestrians in this corridor. <br /> <br />Mayor Aplikowski stated she has been challenged this week to think to the future and she <br />believed it would make sense to put sidewalks on both side of the bridge - north and south. She <br />stated she had spoken with the City Engineer if this was feasible and he has indicated it was. She <br />asked Council if they would be interested in considering this option. <br /> <br />Councilmember Rem stated she believed the safest side to put the sidewalk in was on the north <br />side, but she realized the north side was more expensive than the south side, but believed this <br />was a better option for safety reasons. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden stated she was not sure they would get the pedestrian volume to put . <br />sidewalks in on both sides, even 20 years from now. <br /> <br />Mayor Aplikowski noted this was a connection to the retail part ofthe City and the two different <br />parts of the City. She stated she had heard from the residents if the path were safer, they would <br />walk or bike to the retail section. She stated she did not know about the pedestrian volume, <br /> <br />Ken Birk asked if anyone had every considered a pedestrian bridge instead of modifying the <br />existing bridge. Mr. Brown replied the cost increase for a pedestrian bridge was extensive. <br /> <br />Jean Lumberg, stated she had just heard about this sidewalk this past week. She stated from <br />past experience, one State Department did not necessarily know what other State Departments <br />were doing. She asked if they had explored if the State and County together were thinking about <br />making a four-lane bridge. She noted this was an entry into the retail area and she believed a <br />four-lane bridge might be in the future somewhere. Mr. Brown stated he had checked with both <br />the County and MnDOT and a four-lane bridge were not being proposed in the foreseeable <br />future, <br /> <br />Howard Kern, 1400 West County Road E, stated he appreciated the Council's comments <br />tonight. He believed this came down to a choice between cost and safety. If cost were the only <br />concern, they should only put the bridge improvement in and not put in a sidewalk. However, if <br />safety was a concern, then they should put a sidewalk on the north side because it would . <br />eliminate the mixing of pedestrian traffic and vehicle traffic, He noted they could eliminate the <br />crosswalks entirely on the south side of the bridge so pedestrians would not cross across the <br />bridge on the south side, He indicated all of the homes on the north side, except for two, had <br />