Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

City council approves design for overpass

May 14, 2014

MARSHALL — A group of Marshall residents opposed to the construction of a pedestrian overpass and traffic safety measures at the intersection of Saratoga Street and Minnesota Highway 23 spoke out......

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(13)

monkeyman5

May-16-14 12:16 PM

Having the bridge on the east side would have effected housing on the north side of 23 and the entrance to the trailer park on the south side. Obtaining right of way from Western Community Action and the already public space was easier. I think there were utility location and reconstruction issues with the east side as well.

10 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Hitter

May-15-14 10:04 PM

A question that I was wondering about is why isn't the overpass on the east side so the kids don't have cross the road twice. Thoughts?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

56two58

May-15-14 2:32 PM

I would suggest the city should allow for redevelopment, but should include tax provision on that development that helps fund eventual overpass or traffic easement projects resulting from that specific zoned area.

Not crazy to close that. Efficient, safe access exists out onto Hwy 59 (leading to Hwy 23) via stoplights. There are 'restricted' access points all over. We are really talking "convenience".

I do find it funny that the overall body of residents complained about the Madrid Bridge (build in advance of development) and here there is lots of struggles with a solution (primarily because we didn't proactively build one).

10 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

OIIOHH

May-15-14 1:22 PM

Saying that the city should not allow development on the “far side” of a highway is completely unrealistic. That’s like saying that the Twin Cities never should have allowed development on the “far side” of Hwy. 494 or 694, or some set of railroad tracks. Cities constantly grow outside of old boundaries. Also, to suggest closing the Saratoga intersection is preposterous. How would emergency response vehicles get to the housing developments (current and future) south of Highway 23 in a safe and timely manner?

1 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Wharog

May-15-14 9:52 AM

I'm fine with the pedestrian overpass, despite feeling like the city should not have ever zoned residential on the far side of 23 in the first place. There needs to be one safe crossing for kids, bicycles, and people with mobility issues now that it is there. As for the actual intersection itself I'd rather they just close the Saratoga intersection to crossing traffic and put in an alternate means of access off of 59 at one of the traffic lights. Just put in an acceleration lane for right turns on either side of 23 and if people want to cross they can use 59, which is an actual controlled intersection instead of these ridiculous u turn things MNdot has come up with.

2 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

56two58

May-15-14 9:29 AM

I agree - the amount spend on this compared to use is crazy expensive. Sure, you can cite safety and say if it saves 1 life it is worth it - I agree too. However, if that was justification, there would be no project that would go unfunded and eventually no money to spend on anything.

Aside from closing/restricting crossing at that intersection altogether, there is no other truly viable alternative.

If the Fed is funding it, let's take it and keep the dozen or so kids per day safe and move on.

9 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

farmkid

May-15-14 6:46 AM

Wow, there's a shocker. You stay up all night thinking about that?

What about the ones in between? You know, the ones for which this is intended?

3 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

westline

May-14-14 10:14 PM

Do you seriously think this will get used? This is not 1950. People old enough to drive will drive into town, instead of walk on an overpass. The younger people will either get a ride, or their parents will feel it is unsafe for them to be walking around all alone. At least this 3.5 million dollar project will be a good place to hide a dead guy if the need arises.

0 Agrees | 13 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

farmkid

May-14-14 4:02 PM

Hilarious. 150 people want to stop the plans because they're not happy. Do any of you 150 morons have any idea how many others use that highway?

4 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

56two58

May-14-14 10:01 AM

Is there a place where people can go online and view the design proposal?

10 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

56two58

May-14-14 10:00 AM

The residents don't own the property being used, so they can't cite privacy. They've simply enjoyed that perk for years. Build a fence.

I agree with Mr. Brink's comments - it is surprising that a group of residents doesn't have any facts to support their reasoning, and blasts away at the transportation committee. Seems as if this is just a "selfish" position (what's in it for me). Reducing speeds for all on the by-pass is the exact opposite direction that needs to happen - it is a bypass that is essential to economics in our area!

13 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

monkeyman5

May-14-14 9:41 AM

Point 1 - You live next to a highway so unless you bought your house before the bypass was built and placed next to your house(doubtful), you should have considered the headlights before you moved in or decided to build where you did.

Point 2 - To Mr. Bero, the residents to the north of the intersection may have an issue with the headlights of u-turning cars unless the u-turn lanes will extend all the way to Action Sports. Cars turning south of that intersection will be facing away from all current housing while in the u-turn lane.

13 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

InMyOpinion

May-14-14 7:38 AM

"...possibility of nuisance issues with vehicle headlights as they used the U-turn lanes."

Wow, residents with these issues need to live in the country, far from roads and possible car lights shining on their home. (rolls eyes)

3 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 13 of 13 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web