8A, Motion to Accept CP Rail Bridge Pedestrian Crossing

Home Browse Search

PARKS, TRAILS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES February 24, 2009 Page 2 of8 DRAFT was forwarded to Council where the report was accepted and made the official report for the corridor. Ms. Olson stated the Council further discussed how this item would proceed and approved engineering fees to cover the design of the bridge and working with CP Rail. She explained the Council would like additional PTRC input on the trail placement and design to allow the bridge to be completed yet this year. Chair Peck indicated that the goal of tonight's discussion would be to come to an agreement on the trail placement that would then be recommended to Council. He explained that the Council was looking for a recommendation for this item to move forward and be designed based on this recommendation. Civil Engineer Giga explained that Council has authorized Bolten & Menk to work on the final design of the bridge. She indicated the next step in this process would be to survey the area, which could be completed once the snow melts, along with passing along the plans to CP Rail for their review and comment. Ms. Hilgers questioned if the bridge construction was the same expense whether the trail was on the east or west side of the corridor. Ms. Olson reviewed the expense information within the CP Rail report. The Committee reviewed the trail map and discussed the potential trail location in depth and . detail. Mr. Baumann stated that he would be in favor of placing the trail on the east side of the corridor based on the fact there were fewer intersections for the pedestrians to cross. He added that the trail would be aesthetically more pleasing on the east side due to the fact pedestrians would be walking closer to the lake. Mr. Jones was in agreement stating the large number of driveways that would need to be crossed on the west side would be a hazard to both pedestrians and bikers. Chair Peck stated his preference thus far has been the west side. He explained the west side would provide access to more Arden Hills residents but that there were several steep driveways that would need to be addressed to soften the grade. Chair Peck indicated a resident expressed concern to him that this underpass would bring more traffic into an already congested area and create a bigger problem. While he didn't entirely agree with this statement, safe passage under the bridge would benefit all users of the trail. Chair Peck explained that he walked the trail on the east side against traffic and stated the heavy level of traffic entering Bethel was a detriment. He indicated the west side would serve the residents more conveniently than if placed on the east.