[image from Google Maps]
On Nov. 1, when the Armstrong-Alpine poll was posted before the election, county board candidates Look and Steffen both responded in terms of the thinking each would take to the County if elected.
Their responses and background on the poll is presented; this link.
The poll was left open for a two-week period into mid-November, and is now closed.
Issue: Should Anoka County install a four-way stop at Armstrong-Alpine intersection?
Results: twenty responses
Good Idea - ten votes, 50%
Bad Idea - four votes, 20%
Yes, if a bike path is added - six votes, 30%
No, even if a bike path - (no votes in this category).
Analysis. It appears the split is between Armstrong traffic not wanting interruption and Alpine cross traffic wanting, by 50 to 80%, to have a more protective intersection (i.e., if there's an extension of bike and foot pathway west of the intersection, the desire for a more protective intersection reaches 80%). I infer nothing about the extent of support for or against extending a pathway as part of the trail system, at this time, or ever. I did not ask about that.
It appears that possible private school development west of Armstrong and south of the Alpine intersection, in the vacinity of Armstrong-Hwy 116, might result in Ramsey seeking an alteration of traffic control at that intersection.
Look [now elected to the County Board District 1 seat] mentioned another possible four way stop installation, on Armstrong at Central Park, as another consideration.
Note: The Google satellite image, with roads noted, has an added "1" highlighting the Armstrong-Alpine intersection, and an added "2" for the 161st St.-Armstrong intersection at Central Park [with Game Fair held annually, at Armstrong Kennels to the west].
Alpine, as the city's main East-West through street north of Hwy. 116, has frequent traffic stops at key intersections, (as does Hwy 116 with lights instead of four-ways). Alpine is a Ramsey city street. Armstrong and 116 are county highways.
Future. My hope is that the city at its year-end or first 2011 council meeting, will add and publicize an agenda item on whether the council should instruct staff to push county authorities for a change at the Alpine-Armstrong intersection.
The response to the sidebar poll suggests that twenty people over a two week period thought it a worthwhile question for attention; and from that I expect far more people in Ramsey have opinions but do not read the blog.
It seems residents calling city hall should not be dismissed too readily because of Ramsey not having jurisdiction on Armstrong changes. The city should take an official position, and make it publicly known to county officials and traffic planners.
Once again, the earlier Crabgrass Nov. 1 post at the start of the poll is here.
Bottom line. I think the Ramsey council should go on record on the traffic safety - traffic flow question for that intersection; and if my guess at citizen opinion proves true, then officials should lobby accordingly; i.e., if a public hearing results in the same predominant degree of support for a change that the informal Crabgrass sidebar poll suggests, then the council and administration in Ramsey should heed that result.