Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City Council Regular Meeting - 11/08/04 <br />Minutes - Page 3 <br /> <br />over at Oakcrest and Snelling Avenues, and resultant <br />impacts to the neighbors and businesses. Mr. Stock noted <br />the current congestion at Oakcrest and Fairview; negative <br />impacts for access to the soccer fields at Rosebrook Park; <br />and other detriments to the neighborhood and traffic flow. <br /> <br />Mr. Stock requested that the City Council seek MnDOT's <br />halt to this proposal, even thought cutting on the road had <br />begun that morning. Mr. Stock opined that while MnDOT <br />representatives cited traffic concerns as their rationale for <br />closing the cross-over, his review of a five-year traffic <br />accident study had noted only three accidents, which had <br />all been attributed to driver error. <br /> <br />Mr. Stock concluded his plea to the City Council by <br />presenting a petition with in excess of 700 signatures from <br />people in the area, requesting City Council intervention to <br />MnDOT for reconsideration of closing the cross-over. <br /> <br />Mayor Klausing noted that the City Council had also <br />received an e-mail from Mr. Stock alerting them to his <br />concerns. Mayor Klausing sought information related to <br />process from City Manager Beets. <br /> <br />City Manager Beets suggested that the City Council <br />forward comment from tonight's meeting, along with a <br />copy of the petition, to MnDOT. Mr. Beets noted that, <br />when MnDOT determined an area to be a potential safety <br />hazard, their response was to take action without public <br />notice or hearing. <br /> <br />Councilmember Maschka suggested a Council resolution <br />be provided to MnDOT, along with the above-referenced <br />information, in support of not closing the cross-over; noting <br />the numerous access issues such a closure created for <br />residents as well as area businesses. <br /> <br />Maschka moved, Schroeder seconded adoption of a draft <br />resolution to MnDOT seeking non-closure of the cross- <br />over, as it would: <br />1) Be detrimental to businesses <br />