Concord B & C Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction

I live in the neighborhood and have for some time. As a kid I used the current asphalt path between W. 64th and Nancy Lane when it was just a dirt trail and Rose Court was just an undeveloped area a local developer used to dump construct debris. I wholeheartedly support the project and also support the location of the W. 64th Street shared use path on the north side of the street. A south side path will require users of the trail to make a dangerous crossing of W. 64th at the intersection with Concord. When travelling south on Concord to 64th, it is very difficult to see traffic coming from the west on W. 64th due to the greater than 90 degree angle that exists at the intersection. This could be alleviated if W. 64th is one-way in the westerly direction from St. John's or Ashcroft. Who clears the snow from the path if it is relocated to the south side of W. 64th? My guess is ongoing maintenance is one of several reasons some owners do not want the trail on the north side adjacent to their property. Comments were made at the public hearing about the lack of parking on W. 64th between Miller's Lane and Rose Court. While a legitimate concern, the only parking that area sees is on July 4th. Otherwise, parking in that area is almost non-existent. There were also comments about possible conflicting traffic on Woodale between Nancy Lane and Garrison Lane. With all due respect, the likelihood of that happening is virtually non-existent. That stretch of road is like a private road that serves only Nancy Lane. Looking forward to the final design and completed project.

My wife and I live on Concord Avenue with our three children. We strongly support narrowing the road and adding a sidewalk to improve safety and improve walkability. We were surprised to hear the sidewalk described as a shared use path at the December 11 Public Hearing. An 8' asphalt path is different than a sidewalk and unclear in the initial information sent to residents. An 8' asphalt path is inconsistent with the look and feel of the neighborhood - the sidewalk should continue south of Valley View on Concord as it does to the north. We do not support the plan with asphalt.

I understand the want of a sidewalk coming down the Wooddale hill from Valley View to Garrison, however, I see some very practical problems with narrowing the road. As it is currently, if I am in my car on Wooddale at the top of the hill, and a school bus needs to turn into my neighborhood (which happens ten times daily for two elementary, two middle school and the high school)--not to mention garbage trucks, recycling, construction etc--I physically have to reverse my car down the hill (if no one is behind me) so they can get through the turn! And as I was contemplating this project, I was thinking that if the street was narrowed with the addition if a sidewalk, there is NO WAY a bus or any other large vehicle could turn down the hill if any other car is going the opposite direction.

I live on West 64th Street in the area of this plan.

I strongly believe 64th Street between St. John’s and Wooddale is best as it currently is.

I am very opposed to having no parking on 64th Street between St. John’s and Wooddale. We need parking for guests, yard maintenance and snow removal services, delivery trucks, roofers, remodelers, etc.

This street is a dead end and has such low traffic volume that a sidewalk isn’t needed.

If there has to be a sidewalk, it would be much more dangerous to have it on the side of the street with driveways and other streets (i.e., I want the sidewalk to be the much safer south side of the street rather than the north side). And, I’d like it to be 6 ft wide instead of 8 ft wide to preserve space for the street parking and take less space from yards. Bikes can use the street (it would be a “Sharrow” as proposed for Wooddale).

In the worst case, a lower speed limit on a “Sharrow” would be preferable to no parking.

Also, I am opposed to having West 64th St from Concord to St. John’s reduced to one way traffic. Why reduce that to one lane, increasing the planting strips from 12 ft total to 19 ft total? I think that will make the road more hazardous. People won’t expect that to be a one way street so I worry there will be wrong way accidents on that road. Access would be reduced.

In addition, I think there should be bollards on the ends of the walkway path (Wooddale between 64th and Nancy Lane) to more safely exclude cars from the path.

Although I don't live on 64th St., I do live in the Concord B&C project area and am more concerned about the proposed sidewalks along 64th. Please, this just doesn't make sense for all the reasons previously mentioned and also from a budget perspective. I understand there is a separate sidewalks fund and so that part of the reconstruction is not included in property owner assessments, but it is wasted tax dollars all the same. Instead use those dollars for sidewalks that are needed in other parts of the city, or perhaps use the savings to reduce the assessments. Furthermore, eliminating parking along 64th hits those homes with a hardship--there is no other reasonable guest parking nearby.

Speaking of assessment...of course not happy about it, but for years many other residents have not liked the policy. Concord B& C is 42% higher than the last project in Morningside. Engineers said that is because they have more homes to help defray the cost. HOWEVER, there is supposed to be a transition plan that should lower our cost--not seeing that happen in this proposal.

I think the biggest problem in B&C is what is proposed for the sidewalks. I think many of us in the neighborhood would feel much happier if the city would revise it's proposed plans.

I agree with the thoughtful analysis and comments of Ashley Godfrey regarding the sidewalk considerations for 64th Street.
I've attended events for over 50 years at 4500 and always viewed this as a low traffic, dead-end cul-de-sac. Taking away parking and dealing with the many issues for a northern sidewalk doesn't make sense here. This small area is truly unique and should be viewed accordingly, an exception to the "rule" really applies here.
If a decision to proceed is made don't compound the issue with a north sidewalk. Place the "straight shot" sidewalk on the south side and maintain it with the same equipment that the City uses to clear the "walking path" from Wooddale between the ponds to the pedestrian bridge.
Bruce Carlson

In addition to the thoughts already shared on the sidewalk on 64th, I have one area of concern, as well as a question:

Area of Concern
The current proposal recommends adding a sidewalk on Wooddale between Garrison and Nancy. I have the following concerns about this:
1. Sidewalks were not a part of the pedestrian master plan – a sidewalk feels unnecessary given the limited amount of car traffic
2. There is concern around the speed of bikers on this road – they go too fast down the Wooddale hill; a stop sign on southbound Wooddale at Garrison would slow bikes (and cars) down, which would do more to limit risk to pedestrians than a sidewalk
3. Pedestrians will continue to share the path between the lakes just south of this proposed area, so adding a sidewalk would not solve the pedestrian/bike challenge
4. Several mature trees would need to be removed
5. If a sidewalk is approved, I would kindly ask that the city maintain the area; upkeep of roughly 400 feet of sidewalk is a lot to ask of a homeowner; the city already maintains the mixed use path between the lakes so it would make sense to continue that service further north

Question
While I support the sidewalk proposal on Wooddale between Valley View and Garrison, will this leave enough space for large vehicles turning onto Wooddale? Specifically, school buses turning from westbound Valley View to southbound Wooddale Ave. It is already very tight, so want to ensure that this has been reviewed.

Thanks

1. The new sidewalk along frontage road, West 64th Street, is proposed to be installed on the same side of the road as driveways and street intersections. These points are the biggest threat when taking children on a walk/bike ride. The sidewalk would be much safer if installed on the southside of 64th street, avoiding eight additional conflict points. Why interrupt the sidewalk with eight additional dangerous conflict points if you don't have to?

2. Conflict Points
North Sidewalk on 64th Street frontage road
a. Concord Ave at 64th Street
b. 64th - Ashcroft Ln
c. 64th - St Johns Ave
d. 64th - Millers Ln.
e. 64th - Bridge
f. 4698 Driveway
g. 4508 Driveway
h. 4504 Driveway
i. 4500 Driveway

Verses south Sidewalk on 64th Street frontage road
a. Concord Ave at 64th Street

3. West 64th Street, east of France between Ewing and Beard Pl., has a newer sidewalk along the south side of West 64th St., avoiding the intersections and driveways. Why wouldn’t we do the same on this portion of 64th street?

4. Driveways are blind spots for both pedestrians and drivers. The new bridge will increase bike travel on this street. Directing bikers to the side of the road without driveways would be the safest.

5. The current design has pedestrians crossing at West 64th street and Rose Court - another conflict point. The driveway of house 4500 is closer to the ped. bridge entrance. People would most likely skip walking to the corner where the crosswalk is located and jaywalk over diagonally to get to the bridge. People avoiding the crosswalk is dangerous.

6. This road has low vehicle and pedestrian traffic. It is a dead end frontage road. It is a quiet road with very few walkers. Have any studies been done to assess public usage?

Thank you.

Sidewalk is NOT needed on 64th.

1. No sidewalk Will prevent making a ONE WAY on 64th
One way traffic will make St. John’s a busier road.
2. Safety
3. Parking

Please do NOT add a sidewalk on 64th street. It is NOT needed. Keep the streets as they are.

The sidewalk proposed on W 64th St. should be put on the south side of the road. This will provide one long continuous path from Concord to the walking bridge which is a much safer option.

If a sidewalk will be put in on W 64th St from Concord to the walking bridge it should definitely be put on the south side of the street. The main reason is that it will be much safer on the south side. It will limit conflict points meaning bikers and pedestrians don't' have to worry about crossing Ashcroft, St Johns, and Millers lane, Also homeowners along 64th St don't have to worry about hitting a speeding biking or pedestrian when exiting their driveways. Please for the safety of everyone in Edina and the people living along 64th St put the sidewalk on the south side.

These updates are certainly unnecessary and will present potential inconveniences for the neighborhood, specifically the shared-use paths on Concord Ave. and 64th. St. I would like to see the studies that have been done to show why these make any sense. I walk these streets regularly and have never felt that a sidewalk would be beneficial especially when it is taking away off-street parking for the residents who live on these 2 streets (I do not). I would also like to see why our assessments are so much higher than past and current projects with similar project scopes. Thank you for your time.

With so little traffic on 64th St, we do not believe a sidewalk is necessary. We regularly walk along this street and we've never felt unsafe or thought a sidewalk would benefit the neighborhood.

We believe a sidewalk from Concord to Wooddale Ave ( the walking path) should not be included on 64th St reconstruction. This is a street that is a dead end and not heavily traveled. If a sidewalk has to be done is should go on the south side of the road which would be safer because pedestrians would not have to cross the other streets including Millers lane, St johns and Ashcroft intersections. Putting on the south side would also not ruin peoples lawns and have a less impact on residents homes. Lastly during certain large events like Charity races and fireworks people will park on 64th and take the walking bridge over to Rosland park. If there is no parking on 64th what will these people do? Please leave the street as is.

Thank you

The South end of St Johns Ave, on the East side of the road, always floods every Fall/Spring. Water will sit there for weeks and turn into a small swamp. In the early Winter the water freezes and becomes a potential hazard for pedestrians. A drain in that area should be considered.

Jackie and Andrew Brand

I am not pleased with some of the changes to this plan.

1. Sidewalk is NOT needed between St. Johns and Wooddale Ave. It’s a dead end with very little traffic. This will kill many trees, plants and create an inconvenience for people living here since we don’t have any street parking options. We would like you to leave this section of the street as it is!!!! Additionally the power lines are very close to where you will be placing the sidewalk. Have you already allocated money to move all of those?

2. It doesn’t make sense to place the sidewalk on 64th street on the North side… people will constantly be crossing traffic. If the sidewalk is on the Southside they will never have to cross the street it can be completely continuous.

3. If the construction crew kills trees do they can to play for the damage? Who pays when property is damaged?

Please do NOT add a sidewalk on 64th street. It is NOT needed. Keep the streets as they are.