LETTER: City Council creates sidewalk irony
Earlier this year City Council directed staff to move forward with sidewalks on Hallquist and Eunice avenues. The majority of the landowners directly and adversely impacted asked the council to reconsider because the project will destroy mature trees, reduce front yards and increase the width of the street corridor (and increase vehicle speeds).By: Bethany Anderson, The Republican Eagle
To the Editor:
Earlier this year City Council directed staff to move forward with sidewalks on Hallquist and Eunice avenues. The majority of the landowners directly and adversely impacted asked the council to reconsider because the project will destroy mature trees, reduce front yards and increase the width of the street corridor (and increase vehicle speeds).
This project doesn’t solve a data-driven safety problem (since there have been no documented pedestrian accidents), will result in property assessments and will require landowners to maintain sidewalks they don’t want.
The two primary reasons given for borrowing $300,000 for this project are “system continuity” and location within the “walking area” for the high school (whose students drive to school).
Now I read in the Republican Eagle that on March 12 this same council voted to allow snowmobiles to use the trail along Highway 61 from Motel Avenue to the Burnside Cemetery. This trail is the only walking surface connecting these neighborhoods and is within the “walking area” to Burnside Elementary School.
There are no other walking routes except along the shoulder of 50 mph Highway 61 traffic. Snowmobiles will pack the snow and this trail will get icy and dangerous. Even though neighbors asked the city plow this trail, the city declined due to cost.
I’m confused on where our council stands.
Years ago, the council ordered the construction of Hallquist and Eunice without sidewalks. Now they want to change their mind after the neighborhood has been developed?
They ordered a paved path to Burnside Elementary and now don’t want to live up their obligation to maintain it. Yet they don’t have a problem forcing Hallquist and Eunice landowners to maintain sidewalks the landowners oppose?
They want sidewalks where the students drive to school yet don’t support sidewalks where elementary students need to walk.
How can we trust a council resolution when the current council will not honor the decisions, the word, the resolutions of past councils?
I ask that the council find consistency. I ask that today’s council live up to the resolutions of past councils.
Bethany Anderson
Red Wing
More from around the web