Is a Southend Bridge Necessary for Greater Grand Forks?

EAST GRAND FORKS, MN (trfnews.i234.me) East Grand Forks and Grand Forks officials talked about the possibility of a south end bridge Monday night.
maybe if Earl would mind giving us the kind of an overview of kind of where we’re at with the the two bridges upcoming matters and and from there I think once you kind of summarize I think then I people can engage so do we want to do a short recap of the staff meeting that we had – yeah I think if a role could just give us an overview I know there’s some meetings coming up and then okay no the one that we okay sure Earl Hagen forks MPO the two City Council’s that joint meeting which everybody’s familiar back in April 10th after that meeting the two city administrators and myself met to go further steps and we agreed on a three point plan I’ve I recall what’s coming on August 5th is one of those Street points and that is a joint County meeting that’s happening over at the Grand Forks office building starting at 3 o’clock p.m. 6th floor and that specifically to have the counties talk about Muirfield and push to try to get movement towards further development of that project towards construction so it’s probably the first of many meetings hopefully on that topic another point that we discussed as dapped was to look at some of the alignments or corridor alternatives that were raised at that April 10th meeting we did look at those and produced a report on those alternatives and then the last one was to talk about moving forward on the next study and to that point and may the MPO Board did ask staff to present if they were to move forward on 32nd Avenue what could it look like and could the MPL budget achieve that and so it was presented to do a potential study similar to the Muirfield bridge feasibility study that was done in 2005 ish and that there was some budget ability to do that if they so desired and in May the request was to present a more formal work program amendment at their August meeting and also draft RFP language and that’s where it sits right now the joint County meeting is scheduled for tomorrow August 21st is there anything these two City Council’s need to do for that joint County meeting push the counties I would say in talking with their administrators and County Commissioners that are on the appeal there’s lukewarm interest in pursuing a Muirfield bridge anytime in your future it’s a fifth or sixth meeting Tuesday would be to 6:00 then it would be the 6th it’s Tuesday people show up and or send correspondence to you or to the county so they know this and we’re are taking this serious and we want them to work their level best in in moving it forward yes I would encourage all signs of support all signs of importance of Muirfield to the members of the each county board to talk to you by a chance of a list of all the county commissioners and pull from Grand Forks with email addresses to make life easy for us I’ll send it out to our council and then David I’ll send it to you so you can can get into a three o’clock meeting on a Tuesday isn’t the easiest for some people so we could manage the correspondence we could collect that and he deliver it that’s fine too or sometimes a direct message from each of us might be well could you discuss once they have accounting meeting we’ll say the coming takes up mirror filled bridge what happens what could you project happening over the that five year tenure of the current MPO long-range transportation what happens if we really encouraged it moved along will what will be the steps hello moves through in the next five years it would be of course entering the counties would enter into an agreement one would be a lead County on the development of Muirfield bridge they have done this in the past most recently with the Thompson bridge replacement and they typically will or they for the Thompson bridge they did move forward with project development to design without having known funding source for their reconstruction of the Thompson bridge it got them and we’ve heard the term project shovel-ready they were but they were benefiting from the stimulus package during the Obama presidency that they were able to secure them that funding by having a project development that far along so that would be that would the counties would have to find funding sources to do the project development that takes 18 months to 24 months on a new structure over the Red River probably after that either if they have funding they can go towards construction or they try to find financing that for them they don’t have it prior to that time very well what was the cost here then the Thompson bridge was 50/50 50/50 between states then in the count each county paid um the generic cosplay was 50% Minnesota side 50% the North Dakota side how each individual county and state participated on their 50% details I don’t know I thought ahead and that’s been the approach that has been in the NPO plan and presented to both counties throughout the past several planning five year cycles to each county on the mare field bridge structure would be suggesting a 50/50 cost share on the class I’m sorry if you’re familiar enough with each county highway network the Grand Forks County system ends virtually almost at the riverbank on the North Dakota side and there’s a maybe an eighth of a mile Township broad on the Minnesota side that connects to a county highway but as part of their bridge approach etc it would span that distance on the Minnesota side to connect to their county highway so there’s no need for expanded county highway networks beyond the bridge itself from the bridge work and with that Muirfield bridge they’ve done the feasibility study but no need for work or design to date what’s the timeline for the dollars well currently it’s an annual solicitation like most competitive national competitive it’s ten times the request for the funding available they in their write-ups they talked about wanting to have the shovel ready projects awarded but if you are awarded funds you have your typical one plus three years of appropriation to get the project done you mentioned we need for the counties to come to an agreement for America’s bridge if there was a bridge in town here’s the same typically not both counties are an agreement with Muirfield it’s part of their motions that they’ve passed the most recent transportation plan and as we’ve discussed about sites outside of 32nd Avenue on the Minnesota side it depends on the site because if you get past the flood protection system on the Minnesota side you’re most likely aren’t dealing with the City of East Grand Forks directly as the responsible agency so then most likely at Polk County then but not automatically so 32nd could be Forest City 32nd Avenue would be inside the East Grand Forks foot protection system so would likely be the City of East Grand Forks in Grand Forks City intercity projects no yes they are available too I think you might be alluding to urban setting the past federal solicitation opened it up to also being in inside urban areas lower considers are smaller urban areas to be rural so under that specific program so many dollars after he spent to Gural America and they broaden the definition of rural America to include Grand Forks these grants works there was discussion out of me with the two mayors and in accounts of presidents that we should not do anything to we should do everything we can to continue to move forward from air-filled bridge and so that was kind of the thought of making sure that we don’t wait for one to catch up that we should keep moving forward with Merrifield Road bridge and then the other further discussion was on the inner city or the urban bridges world discussed of looking at 32nd Avenue and maybe looking at other possible locations that would be befitting both Grand Forks and East Grand Forks opening up that conversation I think the other conversation was what kind of study should we do and where should we do them as part of moving that forward so there was some discussion with East Grand Forks that there’s an institution and I think in certain neighborhoods in Grand Forks it’s an ADD solution but how do we continue to move forward with the harder part which is the second bridge the neighborhood bridge and I think there were some conversations David on that so if you want a highlighting well yeah just gonna step back and go through how that meeting between the mayors and it came about is because I know there was some concern about some actions that were on the Grand Forks side as far as the potential for a Capitola fora for a 32nd Avenue Bridge and that that was in the news in it so based on that there was some discussion about trying to get the these from our mayor to try to get ahold of the Grand Forks Mayor having a little meeting like I said with a with the mayors and the council president can I see what’s happening with that in what the I guess how firm that was and what our options were at that particular point so then we had that meeting here at East Grand Forks City Hall except between the mayors and the council presidents and there were some staff there as well so the discussion was if 30 second is not going to happen I guess what would what were some of the other available crossings that maybe would be palatable and that would have a chance of crossing and then that’s because some of those came out and I believe the one that was talked about the most was the potential of 17th on the Grand Forks side so it was know if that’s doing it justice for what we’re what I’m eating was there I think there was a discussion of Alex do we keep 32nd on on or not and and I think it’s just how much how much we want to move forward with things if we’re going to put in a lot of work and effort and it’s and something’s gonna happen on 32nd and schools that pretty well makes that not a not a good choice comes off the stream the schools not till after you get past Washington some people come over to where they’re gonna go without going past the school where everything is Earl’s 47th that would be outside of East Grand Forks flood protection correct so that would be we would have less influence on that one so the discussion was you know that we’re moving for that MPO executive meeting where they’re gonna possibly move forward with some further study and discussion how the council’s engage on it before the MPO moves forward and maybe there’s not concurrence in that so that was kind of starting the conversation before the end of August went so that we can become more well informed and this could be a start of that you know conversation and with the plan program that you had coming back in August maybe could describe to everyone here kind of what we look yes yes as part of that study just inform everyone well it’s essentially taking the report that was done from Muirfield in that corridor and sighting it for 32nd Avenue there are two major differences obviously between the two Muirfield is rural so it looked at different rural more rural type issues it also had Coal Creek drainage issue tied to it when you look at 32nd so the study wouldn’t be looking at the drainage issues as in-depth as ahead – and Muirfield instead would be looking at the 32nd Avenue urban developed corridor and school crossings in the place of the drainage but otherwise it was looking at the similar traffic impacts the traffic volumes the more refined cost estimate the little deeper dive into environmental concerns although not getting through the NEPA process itself and also the other big thing that it would do that Muirfield also did was look at the hydraulic impact to see whether or not any structure at 32nd would arm the flood protection systems and therefore not be allowed so that’s the framework around which the MPL who discussion was held on me I think the two big things that I see different is the hydraulics because you’re looking at a lower bridge versus a hybrid and you’re also looking at the pedestrian school safety that you didn’t have to look at the other one those are both potentially game changers if you if you hydraulics no work that changes a lot whether you can build a bridge and if we can’t have pedestrian safety that makes a big that’s a big deal – and we don’t know that but you know there’s going to be additional traffic 9/32 with the 32nd Avenue Bridge what are the impacts of that and how can they be mitigated or can they even be mitigated that would be the questions that we don’t know David you can correct me I’m gonna paraphrase mayor gander and if I misspeak he’s feel free to step in I wish he were here today but I know he’s working this evening mayor Gander has the very pointed question of Mayor Brown related to a 32nd Avenue Bridge and whether he would be in supportive of a 32nd Avenue Bridge or not Mary Brown had maintained his consistent message which is he disagrees with the bridge and 32nd Avenue so that whether this council or past councils have made promises to the neighborhood they’re right now in I believe in Mary ganders opinion there isn’t a political will and city of Grand Forks to try to push a bridge at 32nd Avenue South and men.there Brown again you can jump in as well you agreed with him and that you didn’t believe that you would be supportive of a bridge at 32nd Avenue South and therefore it would be very difficult to get funding for a bridge at 2nd 32nd Avenue South and at which time Mary Gander suggested that we should voice this to the MPO because he didn’t believe spending monies on studies for a bridge of 32nd Avenue South would make sense if there’s never going to be a bridge it’s 32nd Avenue so so he suggested that we should as a council group suggest to the MPO that they shouldn’t spend their money on a they study your series of studies of 32nd Avenue so as well as we should take 32nd Avenue South off the table and we should together our communities and our councils work towards finding a location where we have both the political will as well as the the resources to put a bridge and the capabilities of getting a bridge in place for the neighborhoods and so we had NAR gander has suggested north of 32nd Avenue South and south of 13th Avenue so and so in general we had said yeah 17th somewhere in there made a work of course Mayor Brown suggested 47th Avenue South was originally purposed in Grand Forks for a bridge but again that’s just paraphrasing but I’m very clear that Mayor Gander said we should not spend money on an MPO study on a 32nd Avenue Bridge and we should direct the NPO to take 4 32nd Avenue off the table correct correct you don’t need to live in certainty praising it again I don’t like to speak for other mayor that comes my relay but I could remember there do I think he was very adamant then as well as that if if the 32nd afternoon comes off like that that we identify soon very soon where the the neck word would work yeah you’re correct I think what what you said was correct and what the discussion was they biggest thing for me was if we keep going back and forth of 32nd or wherever we’re gonna not move forward with Muirfield and I said we need to keep moving forward with Muirfield because we need to get something done plus you agreed with Merrill keep moving forward with the neighborhood bridge and keep the discussion moving so I that was my response out of a meeting and understanding that the mayor said yeah exactly why why are we going to spend money on this study if it’s not going to go there anyway I think that’s where we left it and said that we get back together and that’s when we decided have discussion tonight and I agree that if it’s not going to happen you know why will you spend the money on it and I think we just need to keep the discussions moving forward to a solution in discussion wherever maybe and I don’t think your forty seventh is gonna work for anyone especially when it’s out of our purview of you know the city limits you know I think it what you said you know the north of 30 seconds so 13 is probably where you know you’re gonna have to look and I know that for years and we’ve talked about it you know and I think I said this to Ken today we briefly talked and I said you know look what we did with the interconnect we talked about it years ago was a way to and I and we came back and we all knew we had to do something work together and we did it I think we just heaped that same approach and keep moving forward and getting to a point where it’s benefiting both cities both counties both states something that you said is we can’t let the neighborhood bridge be a detriment to the to the Muirfield bridge so we have to keep moving forward and we my opinion a very unified voice to all of our county commissioners that we need their support so that we can all go to our legislators and tell them we are unified on this location it’s our top priority we want to get that bridge done and then in parallel we should continue working together to try to find a location for a neighborhood bridge I’d like to present a different sense on that I I agree about working together absolutely and the interconnect is a great example of what can happen when we do that I’ve often felt that this discussion about bridges is kind of academic hypothetical because there was never going to be any funding anyway however the current national administration has provided us with many surprises and if the Trump administration is successful in passing an infrastructure bill there could suddenly be money available for this kind of infrastructure and we should be prepared to take advantage of that in fact in some ways maybe that’s the greater possibility than getting money out of either of our state legislators but legislators but that could also happen as far as so this this is important work and we need to be engaging together and if we can come together with the unified voice that would be even better however mara field as somehow this agreed upon default with even the suggestion that mara field should move forward with or without a city bridge is is problematic for me we’re finishing up construction downtown Demers which has been designed to accommodate agricultural traffic and the idea that we would make our largest infrastructure project a bridge that’s so far removed from our two communities that would serve primarily AG which which is terribly important although we’ve we’ve allowed tumours to be designed to serve AG that we would design our most important or most expensive infrastructure project for something that would be used for a limited number of weeks per year at the possible expense of the city bridge which seems to me to be one of our highest infrastructure needs in both communities is is worrisome to me now due respect to both mayor’s but current Authority has it if I understand correctly that both City Council’s now have a vote saying move ahead with 30 second Avenue and even if the mayors were to both come forward my understanding of process is that it would require individuals on both City Council’s who voted in favor of 30 second to call for a new vote that sounds extraordinary to me especially in light of the things that I’ve just discussed I’m not sure that that’s even going to happen so I don’t understand why we wouldn’t move forward with the hydraulic the hydraulic study for 30 second to find out if that’s feasible or not whether that’s moving it ahead we’re waiting for the year that’s that’s up to MBO but that that would be my son so that the currently we have an authority to move ahead with 30 second and what actually requires something somewhat extraordinary to move away from that current Authority I think we were told if we didn’t pass it there would be no funding for anything so I think that’s why the council said we’re gonna pass it because there’s no funding if you don’t thought that they were in favor of it they wanted to funding oh my vote well I think I was just looking at the data and pulled some of these studies out we have a significant safety issue especially in the Minnesota four and two to improve that does require a bridge south there’s very little improvement with the rear field Road bridge to the issues on Minnesota and forth there’s some as I look at the numbers but very very little you starting with 30 seconds is probably I think one of the better but it could be north of that but you know one of the issues we’re trying to do is solve with this is the safety not just at that location but citywide now you know there is gonna be more traffic on 32nd that’s why I guess I was in favor can we handle the pedestrian safety with a bridge on 32nd and if we need to study that to know whether we can or can’t do that we can only speculate unless we have better data to know whether that can or can’t happen and the same thing with the hydraulics we don’t know if we can make that work because it cost difference between a low bridge and high bridge is considerably the intent regional intent was to keep this as a lower neighborhood type of a bridge versus a higher level bridge you know artillery or my word I’m thinking arterioles yeah Bridge is what we didn’t want to see happen we wanted to keep it but it does you can’t question it impacts 30 second having yourself and to what level we don’t know until we do a little more study so we thought I thought to make an informed decision we just need more data we’ve got great data so far it gave me enough information to know that we just needed to take it to the next level in light of the action that our City Council has taken so that’s kind of why I voted for it because I guess I looked at it the benefit cost ratio if you look at all of the bridges locations is best at 32nd though that’s not the only reason why we would do it there it does have to play into what works with both communities and there’ll be politics they’ll have to be involved it’s just necessary but at least have the data so we can figure we can know how to make more of an informed decision when I heard you mayor Berlin say that you were gonna be toll bridge on 32nd the first question that came to my mind is if we don’t build a bridge how do we fix the problems the the trivia bridge Minnesota Avenue Bridge is going to have an F rating Minnesota Avenue 4th Avenue Belmont Reeves they all have traffic problems already your South Side neighborhood has been trying to do stuff on Reeves Drive to curb the the traffic flow and that there and that I don’t know if that’s done any good my guess would be that it hasn’t we’ve got problems with biglan Road on our side so I approach that question to mr. Hagen if we don’t build a bridge what’s the solution and he kind of chuckled a little bit and said turn 4001 into a four-lane road now we’re really an app to buy houses out and disrupt fully so I posed a question if we don’t do a bridge how are we going to fix the problem if we don’t do a bridge on 32nd we do a bridge on 17th I can guarantee all those citizens on 17th are going to come up and argue if you do it on Elks all the citizens on Elks are going to come up we’ve studied the bridge locations and what did you say four times now we’ve studied the locations and every time 32nd has come up is that’s your best alternative to put a bridge on this time we added 47th of because of mr. sandy asked it so we said well let’s look at it but 47th your cost-benefit ratio is so low you never to get any federal funding for it that’s one of the reasons why that one was thrown out our planning department has been asleep at the wheel because they’re supposed to have a bridge every mile when you have two communities to connect so we should have had planned this is going to be an arterial this is going to be arterial and we haven’t so then all of a sudden we have all this here which is not it’s not ideal you know it’d be fun to count the driveways and see in the schools let’s see what’s the least impact I tend to agree with mr. bean and mr. Weber that we’ve got an agreement between the two cities and the two colonies already on a plan so let’s further study 30 second to see can we actually build a bridge here or not you know that’s the question I mean we’re all saying yeah let’s but maybe there’s something there that says no we can’t do it there and then that will push the problem for us you know as well as I do that they’re going to come back and say that we can build a bridge there because one way or another all it takes is money right I think the question is is the City of Grand Forks where is the mayor of Grand Forks going to go along with putting a bridge there I think the answer to that today is no and so with that being the case why would we waste the money on a study when we know the end result is that study will just go right into the garbage because it’s worthless in my opinion spending the money on a study where we know that we’re not going to locate a bridge doesn’t make sense if we want to move a bridge forward I think everyone’s in agreement that we need a bridge I think ultimately the folks on 32nd Avenue South have been sold a bill of goods for a long time that there’s not going to be a bridge but there and so I’m of the opinion that we need to stop looking at spreadsheets and start looking at what can we actually do in an our community to get support for a local bridge and I think that takes certainly a lot more than studies that talk about hydrology we need to start getting public piñon we need to start going towards your door and talking to people we need to start finding out more than what the actual dollars of cost-benefit are or what are the actual benefits to the people that might live in an affected area so we can tell you tell them about that and so ultimately if we have those discussions and we come to some sort of Revelation that 32nd Avenue South is the only place where the bridge can go perhaps the mayor perhaps myself will change my mind I don’t think that’s gonna happen though I think there are lots of places where we could locate a bridge that may cost four times as much but we can get public support here I’d rather spend four times as much and put it in a place where people are gonna be happy with my point is the reason why we have MPO is for that reason right there’s because governments have been put on the block for so many years the saying you can’t have the bridge to nowhere don’t spend money recklessly let that be a group I think pretty effectively has done up until now is tried to take the emotion to try to take those the the political expediency of a bad promise out of the picture and try to lay out what the best I what the ideal is for the community you’re never gonna have something that is a perfect and I mean you can slightly like you said you can put a bridge in any one of these corners none of them is going to be easy to do politically especially me and they’re on Grand Forks side I mean you guys have to take your words Venice Lee for the world and that’s why from our perspective on the other side of the river we’ve listened to this we’ve heard 13th refered 17th we’ve heard all these things and this is just another kicking the can down the road and I and like I said if that’s the case then we’re gonna have to look eastward we’re gonna have to look at something else look my goal is a greater great grand forks and I think well I want other this is a vibrant community that has connections that is you know I have talked I’ve listened to Todd talk about the future of Grand Forks work many times and your guys’s future is tied to being a service provider to the region and I guess at some point you’re gonna have to do some sacrifices in order to get to us and like I said I picked on it give us give us which one you’re gonna do like I said if you’re gonna be the one that’s gonna kill it tell us where to go and that’s my point before we kill this 32nd instead of saying well let’s not do this 30-second study let’s let’s let’s kill it and then we’ll pick something later no let’s pick it now we got all the people in the room you know council presidents we got city administrators we got everybody here pick a spot 17 we could make 17th work if you want to tear down the bridge if you I mean pick a spot I picked it we have a unified voice both councils have voted for 32nd there’s your unified voice there’s your pick but unified voice puts up 30 seconds and everybody’s alone before with mayor fill your comment about simultaneously that’s what it’s what happened to kills it and that was my comments last week every time we do this Muirfield stops nothing happens we just sit here exactly what happens and that’s the other problem with 47th is I know for a fact Oconee isn’t going to try to build two bridges you know they’ve got one that they’ve been trying to build for a while and it’s going nowhere so like I said I don’t mean to be frustrated I’m trying to build there just seems like we’re getting to a spot where it’s just like you said we just kicked the can down the road next I mean that will be the next bridge is a barrowful bridge and we’ll have this giant gap and next thing you know they’ll be the same type of intersection issues on that you have a Minnesota for that you have on 17th then you’re gonna have more on 32nd you can have them every down the line when MPO was doing the study mrs. Marshall had a neighborhood meeting in everyone 47th was at that meeting and voice they’re concerned they didn’t want a bridge on 47th and they looked at the data 17th Elks 32nd everyone at that neighborhood meeting said yeah 32nd looks like the best one mr. Weber and this is mock you both had a joint neighborhood meeting and looked at it no one wanted it on 17th no one wanted it on Alex they looked at the data and they said yep 32nd looks like the best spot 32nd you never had a neighborhood meeting you waited till after everything was done and I don’t want to be pitting one neighborhood against another one seven children is more precious than another set so we need to be working to make sure children are safe throughout the city and have transportation plans that address childhood safety everywhere regardless of the where the bridge goes but the idea that suddenly a bridge is going to make that dangerous it depends on how you build it if you build it in a reckless way yes you can increase harm to the risk of harm to those children if you build it in the right way you can make it safer than what it currently is and that needs to be part of the discussion as well how to build a bridge that enhances pedestrian and childhood safety and that would go for any location any location that has to be probably as you’re gonna get those right on any location yeah so no matter where we have and we have to try to figure out from a citywide perspective what’s in our best interest as a formal recommendation it has been since about 2001 when you say that those people along 32nd has been promised that they wouldn’t have a bridge there where is that promise coming from if it’s been in the plant since early 2006 years ago they filled the council chambers 12 years ago they filled the council chambers talking about the transportation plan talking about the bridge and you know in all instances the bridge hasn’t moved forward and just in again this is my opinion I think our MPO does an amazing job of building spreadsheets and coming up with data in numbers and dollars and sharing that with a very small group at a new meeting the nobody in the general public either can get to or even knows is going on if we don’t start actively participating with our residents about major projects like this we will continue to have people that show up for meetings to say nobody bothered to tell me and I know seven times Ken this has been in the newspaper I understand that that doesn’t mean anyone actually solicited an opinion from something they read it in the newspaper and said oh my god they’re talking about 32nd Avenue Bridge again who do I talk to I have no idea I don’t even know when the meetings are going on so right I don’t disagree with you there’s public outreach and then there’s public outreach but if it’s been in the plan since the early two-thousands and they filled the council chambers and it continues to be in the plan they’re frustrated with that point but they shouldn’t be being told that it no I’m very sure Doug Christensen and ask him what he told the neighbors a very good story about he promised them they will not have a neighborhood bridge for everyone’s welcome because I’m sure we can drag them in here to tell us except Doug has no authority to say I understand he has no memory that doesn’t mean that what he told his constituents is valid well it isn’t right it’s not it’s clearly not valid but it isn’t right that we can’t do that [Music] I’m sure I’m sure I’m the one that everybody looks at and says this is all Dana’s fault I’m okay taking the heat on this because I’ve had a pretty consistent message that those people in that neighborhood have been told over the years is in my opinion you know whether it’s right or wrong and so when there was no neighborhood meeting held because people on 32nd Avenue didn’t show up for the 47th Avenue meaning because they didn’t think it was necessary because they didn’t think it was happen in their neighborhood which goes back to we’re really good at generating data we’re not very good at actually talking to people about well I I do think the MPO process though has how many people showed up for the various input meetings Earl well we had four general public input meetings outside of any City Council or Planning Commission County meetings at those four meetings physically show up maybe 150 at all four we had that was two meetings with three Awards I think there were somewhere around 15 at the Ward 5 meeting and maybe 18 at the combine 3/4 board meeting we and I think our process I guess we’ve always looked is it can’t be improved but a lot the amount of comments we’ve had online and the things that have been through social media there’s there’s the word has been out and we’ve gotten comments back I guess in the social media – have we not girl yeah we had over 2,000 participants on the website for the plan update our Facebook page had several I don’t know the number up top my head anymore so what do we do to move forward how do we how do we move forward how do we proceed how do we get this done how do we keep Muirfield going how do we do a neighborhood bridge I guess that’s what we need to figure out anything we don’t I mean it’s something that we all know it’s not gonna be easy but you know we all sit on the council because we want to see the council do what we can do and we need to figure out what we can do already in motion doesn’t both councils approve but the content is that you keep stalling everything and that’s the problem and it just goes back and forth every Bay goes back and forth it’s just nothing goes forward it just stalls and I think we need to make sure that we go forth you can attend the County meeting things show them the support that we need to move forward and keep things moving forward with the mayor field and we need to figure out what we’re gonna do in a neighborhood bridge it’s it’s not gonna go away one issue that I think we need to keep in mind is that right now the focus has been on 30 seconds so you’re hearing from people who don’t want the bridge at 30 second but if you were to say move it to Elks Drive or 17th I think you’re going to elicit a very similar response from those folks and I don’t think it would be fair to not give them the opportunity then to purchase because that will completely blind tag those folks in those neighborhoods and I don’t think that that is fair I mean I have various concerns about both of those locations I’m personally not supportive of those like locations but if your work well 17th I believe is too close to the point bridge to really benefit problem that we’re trying to address and to get traffic off of that location and we’re talking about possibly a 40 million dollar bridge that seems like a lot of money for infrastructure that doesn’t then fully serve both cities to the maximum potential and Elks Drive I guess I have concerns with them Iram use iam being right there I I don’t think it’s fair to spring that on people that live there I mean they they won’t have had any notice and now you’re talking I mean you said in the council meeting a couple weeks ago that you were concerned about it going through an established neighborhood which I understand and unfortunately on the Grand Forks side that’s what we have is established neighborhoods but to move it to 17th or Elks Drive is also an established neighborhood so we still have that issue we’re just impacting different people so if we’re I mean if the point is that we need to have more public input that is advertised as a bridge input meeting so that people will come and attend and say don’t put it here because I don’t want it here I mean that is our job that is something that we can do from the legal standpoint I think 32nd has been voted on by both councils and is frequently in the long-range transportation plan so I would assume that that stays until there’s a reconsideration 5 years and we vote on it again exactly exactly so in that time span there could be more public outreach done I’m just not sure I feel like we need to have some sort of matrix for how we’re going make that decision because as you said we’re really good at putting it on paper we’re really good at calculating a cost-benefit ratio but that’s what’s been done and we keep having one location kind of rise to the top and you’re saying that that’s not the location so I think all I’m saying is we need we haven’t taken my opinion the human aspect the political aspect we haven’t done a good job of engaging with our citizens especially those that have already been sold a bill of goods that’s just my opinion I certainly won’t I don’t have any ill will if MPO decides if you guys think it’s okay or a good idea to spend a few hundred thousand dollars doing a study on 32nd Avenue so more power to you when the if and when the time comes to spend money on on a bridge or anything further I don’t think there’s going to be funding for it which is why I simply suggested in my opinion we should instead of spending any time or money doing that we should form a subcommittee of councilmembers from Grand Forks and East Grand Forks and actually start looking at areas between 32nd Avenue South and 13th Avenue so where perhaps we can get some political will to get it to get the job done and then start going out and talking to people that’s just my needs to start knocking on doors why is 47th designate as an arterial if it’s not in the mix why is it why they even there’s a little driveways it’s wide it’s great on our side it just doesn’t work in Minnesota so you drive into extra block box for box this is our side of the river eat I Drive an extra mile to avoid traffic by without 47th to avoid thirty-second mark was trying to say earlier but is if there continues to be a non unified voice even though we have both cities have approved long-range transportation plan if there are political figures in Grand Forks that are being negative to a 32nd Avenue South Bridge he doesn’t believe that will get support from the counties to get anything done if we’re pushing that and the Muirfield bridge at the same time which is why having a unified voice on the Muirfield bridge and then perhaps quietly working together on a on a neighborhood bridge would be a better political concept than moving 32nd and Muirfield forward and having me in the mayor about bad-mouthing the whole process in the press just stop doing that we spend the money on the Muirfield bridge it’s hard enough to find money for one bridge is it even remotely possible to get money for two so if we can only have one bridge my priority would be the city bridge then then one what does Muirfield serve in relation to a city bridge we’ve just done Demers two so there won’t be drunk college students dropping on feet trucks and we say that’s not gonna happen drunk college students that’s another discussion we’ve we’ve designed for the next decades tumors to handle this so why would we put all of our money on one bridge that’s that’s not going to serve our communities designed averse to handle beat trucks over night that was not how we did it yeah we had the council meeting where all of the farmers came in to argue about my thoughts we changed our design so it would be best but we have also a safety issue with the additional I mean it shows right now Minnesota and forth we have 7000 what 585 and without the know build that goes up to 12,000 650 to ADT average daily traffic that is huge what’s going to happen in that area we have a right and responsibility to try to figure out how to keep people safe and that’s what we’re trying to do and it isn’t come you know without some stress and some other issues here but what are we going to do now and that doesn’t improve with the Muirfield Road bridge it’s very little impact up there with the Muirfield Road bridge if you look at the numbers and the numbers are critical because we can’t design on what we wish it’s what we have for good data and data is going to support whether we can do it data is going to tell us whether we can even put one in a little bridge because of the hydraulics we don’t know that so even if we did have us get together and have neighborhoods there we still need the data that’s why I’m saying that the MPO get at least this level of data as we go forward it could prove it can’t be used and then we have to go to something else we just don’t know and that’s all we’re trying to do is find that sooner rather than later because if we find that out then maybe we can tell the people at 30 seconds that they don’t we it isn’t going to go there because it doesn’t it isn’t supported that that’s all we’re trying to do here with the MPO question for the engineers maybe if you do the study and specifically on the hydrology stuff necessary school safety and whatever how transportable is that to other corridor say I mean if you’re talking about a bridge at a certain elevation anywhere within a two quarter probably has I guess be dependent on ladders or whatever but it has a fairly similar hydrological impact I would imagine or know so much of it depends on the space you have like between the levees you know I get 47th you don’t have a levee on the east side it’s 7/32 you do it 17th it gets narrow or so I think it would give you an indication it depends on the order magnitude about how the numbers come out but I would want to suggest that it’s particularly transportable these in my opinion too many unknowns I just you know that’s this good question I’ve honored it myself I don’t have a good answer for is there a decision point for us tonight or is this just kind of posturing an anticipation of the August 6 meeting girl 1 is the NPO Executive Board 21st 21st that’s the next decision point right yeah right now are you a fruit a plan you need you would have needed to come back the next successive council meeting to modify it so really short of something coming back for action to st. council you’re not gonna have another bite at the Apple but part of staff means we just want to make sure before we move forward that there you know there’s some alignment right there there is something to move forward with right now we’re supposed to follow the policymakers wishes and if we don’t it’s at our own risk right if we don’t and so right now I agree that is official position but there’s more you know after the fact there was more conversation than I need to be frankly past the plan and then in in this case that all the a lot of the public input came in it would have been better to have that beforehand so I think that if you’re gonna criticize there’s some criticism I think there but we’re in the mode of it really is in a appeals court it’s in Earls Court here but real estate administrators and we’d like peace and harmony and try to move things forward in interconnect was easier there were a lot of win wins for your size yeah right I mean it was easier I guess I I take that same example I mean for our side this bridge seems pretty simple pick a spot a little bit will work with the other fielding we understand that there’s a political there’s political downside the grand foresight I was here to tell them you know 10 through 12 when we had votes and we had people promise and that there would never be an interconnect between Grand Forks and East Grand Forks and that we were going to throw our we might as well flush our identity right down the toilet and all these other things that happened I guess my point is is we had to come and it took maybe it up the elections I got first set they don’t come back and they’ll be heck no you’re never gonna do it at 30 seconds no 7 knows against I don’t know but my point is you still you have to do what’s right and not just what’s politically expedient and that’s been my my point is it took it took people losing elections a couple of times or whatever and they came back and we we kind of finally fought our way through getting that done because why because in the long run to that service thing about Grand Forks it’s better for Eastern force is better for grant force first all to have one central wastewater thing than two separate systems and that’s essentially what we’re trying to do with the bridge we’re trying to make it better for listen I know every time we fill out the room everybody says it’s all about East Grand Forks but all those East Grand Forks people are going somewhere in a Grand Forks our land with our employer they’re going to shop they’re going to you know use the facilities over there so it’s what makes us all we we’ve been preaching the greater Minnesota or greater Grand Forks community for a long time and we’re just trying to make it better and like I said will it decimate each of this if we put a breather don’t put it no but we’re trying to make the right decisions with without without the political that question I get I get what you saying you know yeah we gotta go and face the people yeah you gotta face the people and sometimes yeah there’s no sometimes the answer is yes you know it’s it’s tough good stuff yes I have just one I’m going to try to make this is staff friendly as possible because I don’t want to try to something like I’m a council member or ever I’m going to try to completely get in one thing that I think that I see on as far as the staff side of it too is that on our side of the river when we were doing that it what really seemed like it pushed it forward was when we really couldn’t ignore it anymore we are pawns we’re at capacity you know and we were we had to do something at a certain point so and I I think the lesson to be learned on that that here’s as far as this is well is that when we get to the point the the traffic numbers are only gonna go up the bridge crossings that we have now we’re only going to get busier the problems are only gonna get worse the other thing is with with a bridge we don’t have it we can’t do it as quickly as we could with the interconnect you know someone it really becomes a problem and something has to be done you’re still going to be four or five years old I can something to think about you know we it seems like and I think that to change that direction that’s already been approved by councils is is difficult at the 11th hour recognizing we’re ready to start the next long-range transportation plan process over again here shortly something to be thinking about is perhaps that public input you know should still be captured under the MPO communication planks I think that’s the best brought us place to get it maybe we need to prioritize that bridge discussion in the next transportation plan you know so it’s it comes in in here you know I’m gonna say you’re to instead of your four or five in the long-range plans that you get a chance to look at it here in the next in the next couple of years anyway that’s my thought on on the public communication process in the mean time and again this is maybe an opinion to Mister Demers comment in question I think there’s value in looking at a bridge crossing someplace and we’ve been talking 30 seconds I’m skeptical whether we can have a low bridge crossing and and this study may indicate whether a low bridge crossing is even right how’s it going and so that part of it may be transferable from from one location to the other because that’s a that’s a larger question that then some of the smaller ones I don’t want to get chopped up in the discussion where that should happen at 30 second or some other but again it’s in it’s in the plan now at 30 second the other one is I would like to I think the discussions I heard I think it’s important to keep prioritizing the Muirfield bridge because you know again in my – bridge is something you have to look out at the next 30 40 50 years we don’t want to be caught ten years from now or 15 years from now and find out that that there’s been enough development or other things happening in the Muirfield area that all of a sudden the Muirfield bridge now becomes a non-starter because of because of a public input and so I again I’m looking at 50 years not you know the shorter term but thank you for listening I’m just gonna throw those little seeds out there to be thinking about and and appreciate the ability to speak up how big is these Cranford is gonna be when they finally did this bridge on the South redeveloping South and you guys developing south currently it’s been to the South so your it’s gonna be like in five to seven years maybe forty sevens is more palatable if you’ve got community there and that’d be an hour longer insurance but I mean what is in 2045 I mean we’re not even full not even within the levy system I mean not even half full I don’t think so I mean it’s you’re talking to twenty twenty one thirty five I mean seriously I mean we’ve heard that at the conferences let’s think 80 years down the road well that’s fine but East Grand Forks isn’t necessary to keep up pace the Grand Forks as you go you’re probably gonna be doing with Crookston or something like that further but I think doesn’t show that’s a line you spline doesn’t show the growth even to the south and ring dike system by 2045 I think Grand Forks has an interest in our flight boundaries Miroslav wrote in the diversion to the West on that 32nd Avenue South area I think those are a little pie though what we can foresee are the limits because to go beyond that requires it would be require significant infrastructure project for to protect those areas so I still think we’re within those boundaries any suggestions on we have you’re gonna have a recommendation are from hearing the discussion to any assistance you could provide an an alternatives that would help solve this issue where we’re at right now other than what’s on the table well the only magical item of August for the board meeting was they wanted to act as quick as possible but from a work program flow etc the decision is not critical that it be made in August to get the work program in motion it is a work program on a calendar year the way it’s set up right now is that they if they were to approve a motion in August we as staff really wouldn’t be doing much on that issue until 2020 the start of 2020 so there is some time that a decision doesn’t have to be made in August to allow some of the discussion to continue on if there’s need to discuss there are about 15 criteria that were in the plan that were used to help select of the four locations we looked at for the Inner City bridge that role is thirty second to the top my could rehab rehash in a more simpler form at what those 15 points were and how the individual bridges sort of ranked against each other to the to those criteria as a reprime er of the discussion that took place for the last two years and there’s still work that has to be done either could probably get it done before August I’m sure they would prefer if there were able my state and federal partners more time to digest the work program amendment and the possible RFP scope of work your staff would probably appreciate a little more review time of draft RFP as well so that that August is from the staffs perspective and our work flow of our fund and our work activities isn’t critical that they make a decision in August on the work program to be changed 20:20 work program does have a big chunk of money reserved to look at the city’s bus route system in relationship to a UND merger that was set up with the assumption that cat would be operating und shuttles come in this end of this month that study is not progressing or und is not able to get that off the ground so that’s delayed a year so there’s that work that we wouldn’t be doing in 2020 already on you know program would help you to engage say we delayed things to further discussing is it best to do through the MCO grow well we have this group we could create another ad hoc group to to keep the conversation going to keep moving forward mayor felt but at the same time in the spirit of cooperation we’d still be moving forward with the inner city neighborhood bridge and just extending the conversation and trying to meet some sort of in before the end of this year so that there could be a work to be done in 2020 how best to keep engaging on the neighborhood version either either them feel bored or this group I don’t know if the sewage guys are interested what would you say the percentage was a Grand Forks versus East Grand Forks and it was heavily Grand Forks right and it was heavily 32nd out of yourself there are a few people from East Grand Forks over there in spoken word positive but the best man and there were a few thing Grand Forks that spoke there were us but the vast majority were Grand Forks now you what if we held another joint council meeting and suggested just for the sake of argument 17th Avenue in Peabody woods and invited people to come in and visit pitting neighborhood after neighborhood isn’t good process it’s not a good way to make policy and that’s what that’s what it could end up being I mean you could organize the folks out on 32nd and I could organize the people and then yourself and we could Duke it out and see if we can get a riot go on a council chambers I just don’t think that’s a good process I’m just trying to come up with ideas of concepts of soliciting public input we all try to be as responsive but every single comment that was brought up was addressed by the ampulla we’ve looked at school so if you defend against school safety we’ve looked at traffic counters look there wasn’t anything that was surprising there it was just a vocal it was just a vocalization of people it was just that’s what it was it was allowed there’s people venting that they didn’t want and that’s we understand that too but you’re gonna to breath bonus if you do the same thing on 17th there are smart individuals we could drive down those scores and see where the issues are we know like the mayor said how many driveways are on the thing we know that we know we can count to schools we understand that we can see the traffic patterns we understand those those are all the issues that were there I understand that you understand that we’re not unintelligent people and that is up to try to skirt away from public input but all of those things were taken into into the decision-making process we didn’t learn anything other than me not one thing I did I forget that’s while whole covenant commissioner switched his will to 47 instead of 30 second because his daughter Lois PTA person had 30 seconds I think it’s not that everybody concurs with it but we have the MPL we have people from both sides on the MPO and i think we tried to make an informed decision based on the votes that came from both councils and that’s why we are where we’re at today with the NPO if you guys decide to move forward because I recognize that you’re trying to make the best decisions that you can knowing full well that both mares who recently both wanting landslides both said take 30 second off the table mayor’s mode but I would imagine that if that was a contingent reply if if the mayor in Grand Forks was to say that’s a do it I would I would gear do you let the mayor he’s Grand Forks will be for 30 second as well if we were to have a public meeting like you suggest at and say it was for 17th are you expecting that people would like that location is that what you’re hoping to get out of it or actually are you expecting that people support that location is there I think more people support 17th Avenue South on the ground-floor side then there will on 32nd Avenue South and how do you measure that that’s a minute [Music] it’s really simple in my opinion you have from Belmont to the river on 32nd Avenue South you have a lot of people and some indeed there’s nothing from Belmont to the river and I believe so I believe that you’re simply I’m looking at is purely in terms of numbers there are fewer people by 17th Avenue South that perhaps would have an argument with the bridge looked at what the impact would be like from a city parks from a public input on what that looks like going through that golf course or I mean there’s the question to be raised that we can’t put words in the public’s mouth if that’s a you know if we need to have that conversation that conversation was probably not fleshed out to that level I’m just saying that I think if you’re gonna do it you need to be prepared for you know people who golf they’re to be opposed to it and that don’t want to know what that impact is to that area because I don’t know the answer to that if it’s just personally against personally that’s I think that’s that’s point isn’t it you know is it 17 people in 17th Avenue versus 30 people on 32nd and then how do you weigh that like that’s where it’s going to come back to a difficult decision where we’ve been stuck for a long time so if if it were to do that what do you hope to gain or how do we measure that to best serve the public I disagree with jr. we do put words in people’s mouths that’s what our job is we represent people we don’t have a direct democracy where people go out and the best organizers that are the most affluent now whatever have a well-connected social thing versus a less affluent group that doesn’t have maybe doesn’t have the ability to get off work and do all that kind of stuff we do it we represent our districts our areas or Wars or cities to the best we can it’s our job to go 80 bucks and green you know the only thing I want to just say one comment what whatever we do we would create a new normal for those who’ve been around you’re a long time you remember the fight they had a building the Columbia Road overpass and how that was going to be devastating it was going to kill the campus you know instead we have an above-ground walkway we have an underground walkway to help address pedestrian safety but that was about as contentious of an issue we had with all the people on North Columbia Road that had driveways and all of that so this is akin to something like that wherever we put this bridge whether it’s undying or it’s on 32nd is going to just create a new normal that over time will be the accepted role the MPO meeting as I’m when and where girl just for the record again one more time it’s always on the third Wednesday of the month that known in this room so it would be August 21st known in the keys Grand Forks City Hall training room or the working session we schedule