16. Res. 2020-080 Consider Resolution Amending Budget for Barriers Related to the addition of pedestrian lanes on the Fourth Street Bridge for the benefit of pedestrian enhancements and physical distancing accommodation improvements in an effort to reduce the spread of COVID-19.
We oppose the resolution for barriers on the 4th St. Bridge. Reducing the bridge span with barriers is unnecessary, an eyesore, and a danger to motorists and pedestrians. Closing off a main artery to the downtown area causes a string of negative effects: reduced flow of traffic, less desire to drive into town, fewer patrons, and potential financial loss to the business owners who support the city with their tax dollars! The 'No fishing from bridge' signs should be enforced; those wanting to fish can use many other, safer areas along the river. It is a sad attempt to use the Covid crisis as an excuse to promote the needless barriers that would narrow the historic bridge.The Covid did Not suddenly cause fewer places for people to roam downtown and leisurely sit; there are plenty of spaces for people to visit, to distance and to wear masks, near or away from the bridge! It is a glaring waste of funds to alter the beauty of the downtown with barriers and changes to the iconic bridge.
Please purchase and install signs to prohibit fishing from all bridges in Northfield. Many a fishhook have been removed from individuals in close proximity to a fishermen. This should have been done long ago (when the bridges where built). Let's put safety first. Thank you.
Covid 19 is a temporary feature in our life. We shouldn't make major changes for temporary situations. There has never been this many anglers using the Bridge before. Why now? Is this tempoary? What benefit does this community receive from the anglers using the Bridge? Narrowing the driving lane makes it scary to use in a motor vehicle, especially if 2 medium or larger size units meet. I know many would like to ban motor vehicles from downtown, but that isn't an option for many people who need their vehicles to maintain their lifestyle. Those vehicles bring much of the money people spend downtown and we need to bring more of that to the downtown area instead of making it more difficult to spend your money here.
If this is only about and effort to reduce the spread of COVID -19, why aren't all the bridge with sidewalks not being consider.
If it's about fishing from the bridge and pedestrian traffic, put up a NO FISHING FROM BRIDGE sign, it would be safer and cost less.
The last attempt at this was a total failure. It actually created a hazard when two cars were attempting to use the bridge at the same time. There is not a problem that needs to be fixed here. Leave it alone. Stop spending monies that could be used for better purposes. Mr Delong took the time to review images from the cameras and noted the issues created, and the lack of need for this project. Projects like this literally are choking off the commerce of the downtown district.
I find it a bit arrogant that the Council would think of spending more money on this issue. Is it really a good time to spend money trying to fix a problem that wasn't broken? This isn't how City government is suppose to work.
I find it a huge inconvenience to have to drive around the block after going to the Post Office, just to allow a few people to fish for carp. Make a fishing landing near the canoe landing and get fishing it out of downtown.
What happened to the "NO Fishing From Bridge" signs that went up a few years ago?
As the traffic flow downtown is disrupted over and over it really makes me think twice about going downtown at all. Being able to drive north from the PO is a vital link to the flow of traffic. Being able to turn left on the 4th St bridge is a vital link to Hwy #3/the west side of town.
I for one will come downtown less if it becomes more inconvenient to access where I need to go.
I strongly oppose this resolution and so do the businesses on Water St and around Bridge Sq. I would argue that the addition of pedestrian lanes on the bridge made it more dangerous to the walkers/bikers than leaving it as is. I saw many people nearly get hit by cars during the trial phase because they (the walkers and bikers) were not adhering to the rules of the road. Many drivers got confused and turned around in the middle of the road, making it dangerous to themselves and others. There are better uses for CARES dollars than this. If preventing the spread of COVID-19 and adhering to physical distancing is truly the goal, limiting fishing to one side of the bridge could solve that problem with a sign and enforcement. I think there are bigger problems that the CARES money could be used for. Thank you.
There is no need to spend any money other than signs which say “Fishing Only on South Side of Bridge” and “Pedestrians Only on North Side of Bridge”.
And then enforce it, regularly...
Any barriers, structures, or more costly measures are simply another example of waste of taxpayers money.
I am against the barriers on the 4th St. Bridge. It was pretty obvious that it negatively affected traffic far more than it positively affected pedestrians. As for fishing, the remark that those fishing have to feed their families was a stretch and if the "real" idea is to prevent covid, then have the fisherman fish elsewhere keeping the foot traffic moving. Those that take pictures of the dam or pics of graduations, etc, aren't there for hours. There's a lot of river front. In fact, I mentioned that a landing area from Ames Park, which is never used, might be a thought. I reread the statement about using CARES funding. There's no guarantee that those dollars could be used for it. I think this is an idea that is being pushed onto the citizens. For those councilors who said they overwhelming heard from their constituents that are for it, I would like to see those emails produced for the public to see. There should be a public record of that, not just a councilors word. Transparency.
The Bridge and Water street are fine just the way they are. Social Distancing is short term. There is plenty of green space on the Bridge for the few short months of good weather we have. I would like to see Ames park fixed up instead. Water street is needed for traffic flow downtown it was terrible when it was closed. thank you
Of the 10 posts before mine, 1 is for and 9 are against barriers on the bridge. I heard the City will use Covid funds from the US Government to purchase the barriers. Even if that is true, I think there are far better uses for those funds. The money could be used to set up a testing station so people don't have to leave town for a Covid test. The funds could be allocated to the hospital and nursing homes that have taken financial hits since Covid started to spread. The funds could be returned so the money could be spent on real issues and not on a solution in search of a problem. Please remember, 9 out of 10 are not in favor of this project. Each of you were elected to represent the best interests of the citizens of Northfield, not to promote your own agenda and pet projects.
Leave the bridge the way it is..there is NO reason to spend any more money on this. Trying to pursue this is a total waste of time/money and puts traffic and pedestrians at unnecessary risk.
This was a bad idea the first time and an even worse idea now after knowing how many people disapprove. How disheartening to see this being considered again. If this passes, those barriers will be a monument that represents how very little the council members care about what this town actually wants or needs.
This is a 'qualified' support. The original temporary barriers were an eyesore, and the additional space on both sides was likely not necessary given the overall usage of the bridge. However, if more attractive barriers are available, and consideration is given to expanding only one side of the sidewalk for additional physical spacing, this would give pedestrians, anglers, and others plenty of choice about where to stand/walk and not impede vehicular traffic. As it is the street is wider than it needs to be and could become an attractive through-fare for pedestrians and promote easier access to the west side businesses.
Absolutely no need to place barriers on the bridge or close Water Street. Drove through there today, no problem. Not a soul fishing, traffic moving just fine. Plenty of room to physical distance. And a picnic table covered in snow isn’t much of an attraction come December. Give it up and find a better way to spend OUR dollars.
Barriers are not needed to improve pedestrian enhancement, the sidewalk that is already in existence is wide enough for folks to walk and stop to enjoy the view. Fishing had already been banned from the bridge a few years ago, which was never enforced, so fishing shouldn’t be the problem, and if that ban is still in effect, they are doing so illegally.
The barriers impose traffic flow, make it difficult to get to and from local downtown businesses, and are an eyesore. Passing past someone on the sidewalk is not a high risk for covid, and I feel these would become permanent even after covid is over. Having these barriers would be additional work for the city during snow plowing. They would get hit by cars and plows, adding more cost to replace them in the future. I oppose having barriers on the forth street bridge, or any of them except for special events which then they would be for a few days.
The old barriers were an eyesore. Physical distancing is not the problem, fishing off the bridge is the problem. Please be fiscally responsible and STOP spending tax dollars on unnecessary items. City revenues will be down due to COVID, that should be considered when spending decisions are being made. It seems we are trying to keep people away from downtown by making it prohibitive to get to any retail businesses.
This makes no sense, and is a project based on fear not on need. There is no need for something like this. Just walking by someone else is not a risk factor. If it is desired to not have people gather on the bridge for some other reason then pass an ordinance that makes it so and enforce it.
We oppose the resolution for barriers on the 4th St. Bridge. Reducing the bridge span with barriers is unnecessary, an eyesore, and a danger to motorists and pedestrians. Closing off a main artery to the downtown area causes a string of negative effects: reduced flow of traffic, less desire to drive into town, fewer patrons, and potential financial loss to the business owners who support the city with their tax dollars! The 'No fishing from bridge' signs should be enforced; those wanting to fish can use many other, safer areas along the river. It is a sad attempt to use the Covid crisis as an excuse to promote the needless barriers that would narrow the historic bridge.The Covid did Not suddenly cause fewer places for people to roam downtown and leisurely sit; there are plenty of spaces for people to visit, to distance and to wear masks, near or away from the bridge! It is a glaring waste of funds to alter the beauty of the downtown with barriers and changes to the iconic bridge.
Please purchase and install signs to prohibit fishing from all bridges in Northfield. Many a fishhook have been removed from individuals in close proximity to a fishermen. This should have been done long ago (when the bridges where built). Let's put safety first. Thank you.
Covid 19 is a temporary feature in our life. We shouldn't make major changes for temporary situations. There has never been this many anglers using the Bridge before. Why now? Is this tempoary? What benefit does this community receive from the anglers using the Bridge? Narrowing the driving lane makes it scary to use in a motor vehicle, especially if 2 medium or larger size units meet. I know many would like to ban motor vehicles from downtown, but that isn't an option for many people who need their vehicles to maintain their lifestyle. Those vehicles bring much of the money people spend downtown and we need to bring more of that to the downtown area instead of making it more difficult to spend your money here.
If this is only about and effort to reduce the spread of COVID -19, why aren't all the bridge with sidewalks not being consider.
If it's about fishing from the bridge and pedestrian traffic, put up a NO FISHING FROM BRIDGE sign, it would be safer and cost less.
This needs to be a full two lane bridge, especially if the short section of water street is closed. I’ve seen near accidents with the barriers.
The last attempt at this was a total failure. It actually created a hazard when two cars were attempting to use the bridge at the same time. There is not a problem that needs to be fixed here. Leave it alone. Stop spending monies that could be used for better purposes. Mr Delong took the time to review images from the cameras and noted the issues created, and the lack of need for this project. Projects like this literally are choking off the commerce of the downtown district.
I find it a bit arrogant that the Council would think of spending more money on this issue. Is it really a good time to spend money trying to fix a problem that wasn't broken? This isn't how City government is suppose to work.
I find it a huge inconvenience to have to drive around the block after going to the Post Office, just to allow a few people to fish for carp. Make a fishing landing near the canoe landing and get fishing it out of downtown.
What happened to the "NO Fishing From Bridge" signs that went up a few years ago?
As the traffic flow downtown is disrupted over and over it really makes me think twice about going downtown at all. Being able to drive north from the PO is a vital link to the flow of traffic. Being able to turn left on the 4th St bridge is a vital link to Hwy #3/the west side of town.
I for one will come downtown less if it becomes more inconvenient to access where I need to go.
I strongly oppose this resolution and so do the businesses on Water St and around Bridge Sq. I would argue that the addition of pedestrian lanes on the bridge made it more dangerous to the walkers/bikers than leaving it as is. I saw many people nearly get hit by cars during the trial phase because they (the walkers and bikers) were not adhering to the rules of the road. Many drivers got confused and turned around in the middle of the road, making it dangerous to themselves and others. There are better uses for CARES dollars than this. If preventing the spread of COVID-19 and adhering to physical distancing is truly the goal, limiting fishing to one side of the bridge could solve that problem with a sign and enforcement. I think there are bigger problems that the CARES money could be used for. Thank you.
There is no need to spend any money other than signs which say “Fishing Only on South Side of Bridge” and “Pedestrians Only on North Side of Bridge”.
And then enforce it, regularly...
Any barriers, structures, or more costly measures are simply another example of waste of taxpayers money.
I am against the barriers on the 4th St. Bridge. It was pretty obvious that it negatively affected traffic far more than it positively affected pedestrians. As for fishing, the remark that those fishing have to feed their families was a stretch and if the "real" idea is to prevent covid, then have the fisherman fish elsewhere keeping the foot traffic moving. Those that take pictures of the dam or pics of graduations, etc, aren't there for hours. There's a lot of river front. In fact, I mentioned that a landing area from Ames Park, which is never used, might be a thought. I reread the statement about using CARES funding. There's no guarantee that those dollars could be used for it. I think this is an idea that is being pushed onto the citizens. For those councilors who said they overwhelming heard from their constituents that are for it, I would like to see those emails produced for the public to see. There should be a public record of that, not just a councilors word. Transparency.
The Bridge and Water street are fine just the way they are. Social Distancing is short term. There is plenty of green space on the Bridge for the few short months of good weather we have. I would like to see Ames park fixed up instead. Water street is needed for traffic flow downtown it was terrible when it was closed. thank you
Of the 10 posts before mine, 1 is for and 9 are against barriers on the bridge. I heard the City will use Covid funds from the US Government to purchase the barriers. Even if that is true, I think there are far better uses for those funds. The money could be used to set up a testing station so people don't have to leave town for a Covid test. The funds could be allocated to the hospital and nursing homes that have taken financial hits since Covid started to spread. The funds could be returned so the money could be spent on real issues and not on a solution in search of a problem. Please remember, 9 out of 10 are not in favor of this project. Each of you were elected to represent the best interests of the citizens of Northfield, not to promote your own agenda and pet projects.
Covid will not be with us forever. Winter is coming.
Ban fishing from the bridge
Leave the bridge the way it is..there is NO reason to spend any more money on this. Trying to pursue this is a total waste of time/money and puts traffic and pedestrians at unnecessary risk.
This was a bad idea the first time and an even worse idea now after knowing how many people disapprove. How disheartening to see this being considered again. If this passes, those barriers will be a monument that represents how very little the council members care about what this town actually wants or needs.
This is a 'qualified' support. The original temporary barriers were an eyesore, and the additional space on both sides was likely not necessary given the overall usage of the bridge. However, if more attractive barriers are available, and consideration is given to expanding only one side of the sidewalk for additional physical spacing, this would give pedestrians, anglers, and others plenty of choice about where to stand/walk and not impede vehicular traffic. As it is the street is wider than it needs to be and could become an attractive through-fare for pedestrians and promote easier access to the west side businesses.
Absolutely no need to place barriers on the bridge or close Water Street. Drove through there today, no problem. Not a soul fishing, traffic moving just fine. Plenty of room to physical distance. And a picnic table covered in snow isn’t much of an attraction come December. Give it up and find a better way to spend OUR dollars.
Barriers are not needed to improve pedestrian enhancement, the sidewalk that is already in existence is wide enough for folks to walk and stop to enjoy the view. Fishing had already been banned from the bridge a few years ago, which was never enforced, so fishing shouldn’t be the problem, and if that ban is still in effect, they are doing so illegally.
The barriers impose traffic flow, make it difficult to get to and from local downtown businesses, and are an eyesore. Passing past someone on the sidewalk is not a high risk for covid, and I feel these would become permanent even after covid is over. Having these barriers would be additional work for the city during snow plowing. They would get hit by cars and plows, adding more cost to replace them in the future. I oppose having barriers on the forth street bridge, or any of them except for special events which then they would be for a few days.
The old barriers were an eyesore. Physical distancing is not the problem, fishing off the bridge is the problem. Please be fiscally responsible and STOP spending tax dollars on unnecessary items. City revenues will be down due to COVID, that should be considered when spending decisions are being made. It seems we are trying to keep people away from downtown by making it prohibitive to get to any retail businesses.
This makes no sense, and is a project based on fear not on need. There is no need for something like this. Just walking by someone else is not a risk factor. If it is desired to not have people gather on the bridge for some other reason then pass an ordinance that makes it so and enforce it.