Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />November 24, 1987 <br /> <br />As there were no further questions or comments, Williams moved, <br />seconded by Blomquist, to CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. <br /> <br />5 Ayes - 0 Nayes, Motion Carried <br /> <br />Benke indicated council has listened to everyone who has wanted to <br />be heard and, because the council cannot agree with everyone, it <br />must blend all of the concerns and make a decision. <br /> <br />Benke stated there is a logical need for sidewalks and believes it <br />makes sense to construct a sidewalk between 14th and 18th to join <br />the two pieces; with regard to the width of the road, he indicated <br />cost was not the only factor and, because an important point is <br />that the projections relate to policies and standards, it seems <br />prudent to allow the extra width for left turns; believes the bike <br />path on the roadway, rather than detached, makes the most sense; <br />and feels this would be the most appropriate time to do the under- <br />grounding of utilities, but noted he would only support a fee only <br />for this project. <br /> <br />Blomquist agreed with most everything and noted the hardest part <br />of his decision has been the width of the road south of 14th; <br />believes there is a significant change in traffic volume south of <br />14th Street to justify the wider roadway, and wants to include a <br />provision in the agreement that there would be input from the <br />council and the residents regarding any restriping of that sec- <br />tion. <br /> <br />Williams also suggested it be absolutely mandatory that council <br />have input on changing the striping on that section; impressed <br />with Proper and Leonard being sensitive to the situations and en- <br />couraged the County and the City to work closely with residents <br />along Long Lake Road (with the cost and time limitations) to mini- <br />mize any negative impact; and indicated a lot can be done to move <br />and replace trees so people can be proud. <br /> <br />Gunderman generally agreed with the discussion; regarding individ- <br />ual differences, is concerned we have some form of communication <br />and asked that some form of directive to staff that if they have <br />an exception that we get it in writing; agrees with safety factor <br />for any restriping changes; and, regarding city-wide franchise fee <br />for undergrounding, stated a city-wide meeting/hearing should be <br />scheduled. <br /> <br />Benke agreed we need to make it be known that council is looking <br />at the possibility of a franchise fee. <br /> <br />Brandt stated we need the road as wide as we can afford, but the <br />key for her is that when the county set their standards, they did <br />it with regard to safety and would be very uncomfortable approving <br />anything less than the minimum safe width; this is the fifth meet- <br />ing on the project; residents have consistently added good sugges- <br />tions which have resulted in a significantly better proposal than <br />council looked at five meetings ago. <br /> <br />Page 7 <br />