CCMin_89Apr26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES APRIL 26, 1989 PAGE 3 which two cities requested the walkway, and 5 (b), felt there should be some survey of impact on property values and wanted to know if it was the responsibility of the homeowner or the City to obtain this information. She also felt that environmental issues should be addressed. Baldwin explained that in at the time the feasibility study is approved the City has to determine if there is inordinate denigration of property, and if residents feel they have been seriously affected there is recourse through the appeal system. BILL SOUKOUP, 1763 Hamline, stated he is opposed to the project, and that even though the County has standards the city should see how people feel. He was of the opinion that what the people say makes no difference. Baldwin explained that with the traffic count on Hamline the County would be derelict in its duty to not use the public land for public safety, and that the street construction is a County decision. Soukoup suggested that if a sidewalk is installed it be placed next to the street, and asked who would have to shovel the walk. Baldwin stated that it was his opinion that the present feeling of the Council is that the pathway would be a City service. Soukoup also expressed concern that with the new construction, Hamline would become a truck route in a few years. JOHN ENGELHART, 1889 Hamline, requested that the City pursue a variance to have turn lanes at intersections instead of a middle lane all the way, which would narrow the street and not intrude so far into the intersection. He felt most of the residents would prefer a sidewalk with no boulevard. Maurer explained that the City could request a variance to reduce the street from 52 to 48 feet, however, part of the County's funding is from State Aid Funds and State guidelines require a 52 foot street. If it is reduced the County will pay only for 20 feet down the center and the remainder would be a local cost. The reduction in size would gain two feet on each side and double the cost to the City. MARGERY MCPARTLAND, 1789 Hamline, was concerned that the street will become a truck route and wanted to know what protection the residents have that the street will not be increased from 3 to 4 lanes in the future. Maurer replied that the 52 foot street is based on traffic counts and the 3 lane configuration carries traffic as well as a 4 lane. He stated that there is no guarantee, but that the County has been happy with the 3 lane configuration. CAROL BROWN, 1835 Hamline, was concerned that Hamline could be used as a 4 lane street with the 52 foot width. TERRY SOUKOUP, 1763 Hamline, was not sure the County is an unstoppable entity and felt the residents have not been properly represented. Baldwin again stressed that the design standards are the County's and suggested those concerns should be addressed to County Commissioners Finley and Salverda. MICHAEL MAZANEC, 1897 Hamline, felt the pathway would not be practical for bikers and suggested that an area along the street