Agenda - Council - 09/22/2009 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Councilmember Elvig responded they had looked at this, but heard a lot of testimony that this was not a safe area and it was actually more dangerous than walking on a street. Councilmember McGlone stated cul-de-sacs less than 200 feet long were the. only places sidewalks were not recommended. Councilmember Dehen asked if this was a project where the citizens could petition against the project. He also asked how they could petition against the sidewalk if they were not sure one was included. Public Works Director Olson responded this had been done the correct way,' the public hearing notice included that there could be a sidewalk, and there was a 60-day window in which the citizens could petition against it. City Attorney Goodrich noted the project had been identified including the sidewalk in 2008 with a public hearing being held early in 2009 and the citizens had 60-days to petition against the project. No petitions were received so the- time for petitioning had expired.. He noted the petition received on August 11 was an advisory petition trying to convince the Council to make a decision one way or another. He advised that the City had adhered to due process. Councilmember McGlone noted there were some residents in the area with disabilities, including wheelchairs, who wanted the sidewalk. Motion by Councilmember Look, seconded by Councilmember Wise, to adopt the resolution awarding a contract for City project #08-32, Andrie Street and 164' Lane Street Improvements, to Rum River Contracting in the total amount of $896,701.22 for the upgrade of the road without the alternate sidewalk. Further discussion: Councilmember Look stated he was not in favor of not having a sidewalk, and there were other things the MSA funds could be used for. He noted someday someone would get hurt in this area and he did not want the residents coming to the Council asking for sidewalks when that occurred. Councilmember Jeffrey stated a number of years ago, his neighborhood had sidewalks installed on both sides and the kids did use the sidewalks for biking. He stated he was an advocate for public safety and sidewalks on an MSA road were a necessity so he would oppose this motion. Councilmember Elvig stated he had watched this neighborhood grow over the years. He stated his business in Anoka had two sidewalks, they sprinkled at night, and the sidewalks were used heavily by people in the area. With respect to snow removal, he had no dead grass and did not see any of these issues as a negative impact. Councilmember Elvig stated he would not vote for the motion. He noted if people did not want the sidewalk, they could go back to an overlay. Councilmember Dehen stated he struggled as to what to do and the Council was trying to give the community astart -with a concrete curb and gutter, but he agreed that perhaps they should just do an overlay in this situation. Councilmember McGlone stated he backed up his comments with documentation and showed an article from the Star Tribune indicating MnDOT was losing funding .for-road projects. He -noted today -they had a funding source to fix a road to a standard that would save everyone money and any decision he makes was for future benefits. City Council /September 8, 2009 Page 14 of 23