“The path and midblock crossings would be paid 50/50 by Ramsey County and the City of Roseville, with the city’s portion paid using the Municipal State Aid funds from the statewide gas tax”
While I appreciate the effort of this coverage, the article omits some things.
“Municipal State Aid” may cover the City’s cost to construct the roughly half-mile asphalt walkway, but who’s targeted to pay for the maintenance? If the walkway is covered with ice and snow, or a thick layer of frozen sludge deposited by Ramsey County plows, or piles of pop bottle-plastic wrapper crap flying out car windows and discarded by youth commuting to and from school, it benefits no one. What’s the cost to maintain this less than highest priority segment of a far from complete pathway system?
Roseville’s piecemeal approach to building a pathway system, dependent on this “when a parallel roadway is going to be under construction”, “Municipal State Aid” funding mechanism, is not about “every Roseville resident being within short walking distance of a pathway network that links them to numerous local and metro-wide destinations.” This funding mechanism is about maximizing construction costs, ignoring maintenance costs, and completely discarding any notion of prioritizing construction of an incrementally-built pathway system.
While some may wish to believe the proposed half-mile of asphalt and “mid-block” crossings are about improving pedestrian safety, clearly, the funding mechanism is about something else. Placing “mid-block” pedestrian crossings between existing, tightly-spaced pedestrian crossings, where most pedestrians cross, is just plain stupid. Improving the safety of the existing crossings at all 7 existing intersections, as the Council recommends, should be the goal.
The addition of “mid-block” “refuge islands” plugging up the center turn lane, one house away from the intersections where crossings already exist, is a public safety hazard.
• It plugs up the center turn lane at a point where turning vehicles would be entering the center lane to turn.
• It distracts and confuses drivers who may think the 2 “mid-block islands” are the only pedestrian crossings, and that the 7 intersections where most pedestrians cross are not crossings.
• And, assuming the bike lanes are occasionally occupied, the center lane barriers would create choke points where the cars and bikes would be sandwiched between concrete curbs.
Pure genius.
Kudos to the Roseville Council for getting it right. Hopefully, the absurdity of this latest “pedestrian refuge island” and accompanying half-mile asphalt pathway proposal also points to the absurdity of spending more than $60 million to triple the size of an already anal road maintenance operation. My short-length residential street works fine without the truckloads salt and sand and road chemicals Roseville dumps on it after light snowfalls.
thank you for reporting on this. i wonder why the council didnt consider a sidewalk instead of a trail after hearing residents concerns.
the public comment process seems to be less than ideal. residents concerns seem to rarely impact the final design, and in the end the council is forced to either steamroll opposing ideas or drop their plans altogether. there should be more opportunities for discussion.
Really loving local news stories. I don't have time to go to many meetings, but it's nice to hear updates on things literally down the street from me. 😊
“The path and midblock crossings would be paid 50/50 by Ramsey County and the City of Roseville, with the city’s portion paid using the Municipal State Aid funds from the statewide gas tax”
While I appreciate the effort of this coverage, the article omits some things.
“Municipal State Aid” may cover the City’s cost to construct the roughly half-mile asphalt walkway, but who’s targeted to pay for the maintenance? If the walkway is covered with ice and snow, or a thick layer of frozen sludge deposited by Ramsey County plows, or piles of pop bottle-plastic wrapper crap flying out car windows and discarded by youth commuting to and from school, it benefits no one. What’s the cost to maintain this less than highest priority segment of a far from complete pathway system?
Roseville’s piecemeal approach to building a pathway system, dependent on this “when a parallel roadway is going to be under construction”, “Municipal State Aid” funding mechanism, is not about “every Roseville resident being within short walking distance of a pathway network that links them to numerous local and metro-wide destinations.” This funding mechanism is about maximizing construction costs, ignoring maintenance costs, and completely discarding any notion of prioritizing construction of an incrementally-built pathway system.
While some may wish to believe the proposed half-mile of asphalt and “mid-block” crossings are about improving pedestrian safety, clearly, the funding mechanism is about something else. Placing “mid-block” pedestrian crossings between existing, tightly-spaced pedestrian crossings, where most pedestrians cross, is just plain stupid. Improving the safety of the existing crossings at all 7 existing intersections, as the Council recommends, should be the goal.
The addition of “mid-block” “refuge islands” plugging up the center turn lane, one house away from the intersections where crossings already exist, is a public safety hazard.
• It plugs up the center turn lane at a point where turning vehicles would be entering the center lane to turn.
• It distracts and confuses drivers who may think the 2 “mid-block islands” are the only pedestrian crossings, and that the 7 intersections where most pedestrians cross are not crossings.
• And, assuming the bike lanes are occasionally occupied, the center lane barriers would create choke points where the cars and bikes would be sandwiched between concrete curbs.
Pure genius.
Kudos to the Roseville Council for getting it right. Hopefully, the absurdity of this latest “pedestrian refuge island” and accompanying half-mile asphalt pathway proposal also points to the absurdity of spending more than $60 million to triple the size of an already anal road maintenance operation. My short-length residential street works fine without the truckloads salt and sand and road chemicals Roseville dumps on it after light snowfalls.
thank you for reporting on this. i wonder why the council didnt consider a sidewalk instead of a trail after hearing residents concerns.
the public comment process seems to be less than ideal. residents concerns seem to rarely impact the final design, and in the end the council is forced to either steamroll opposing ideas or drop their plans altogether. there should be more opportunities for discussion.
Really loving local news stories. I don't have time to go to many meetings, but it's nice to hear updates on things literally down the street from me. 😊