2013-10-22_PWETC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

In response to Mr. Grefenberg's comment that it was in transition, Mr. Schwartz clarified that Ramsey County and City staff are in discussions, but at this point, nothing had been brought to the City Council's attention for a formal agreement to transfer that jurisdiction. In response to Mr. Grefenberg's comment that a portion of County Road B (east side) was under City jurisdiction, Mr. Schwartz clarified that the entire road was under Ramsey County jurisdiction. At the request of Mr. Grefenberg as to how a sidewalk had been installed on one segment, which he understood the City Council had authorized several months ago, Mr. Schwartz clarified that they had authorized a sidewalk was authorized on County Road B-2. Mr. Schwartz advised that the City could work with Ramsey County to request that the City be allowed to install a pedestrian facility on- or off-road on any County roadway; and sometimes they participated in those costs if approved. At Mr. Grefenberg's request for display of the map used by the PWETC and his confusion with some of the numbers shown indicating priorities, Member DeBenedet clarified that those were map numbers for various segments, and did not represent priority rankings. Member Gjerdingen identified the various map keys (e.g. 2008 Pathway Master Plan scores; rankings over or under"90"). Mr. Grefenberg noted that County Road B had apparently been ranked as a high priority in the 2008 scores; to which Member DeBenedet concurred that, at that time, it made sense as it connected to Highway 280, until the collapse of the I- 35W bridge and part of the new bridge's realignment cut off that connection. As part of the 2008 study as well, Member DeBenedet advised that his rationale had therefore changed due to that realignment. Mr. Grefenberg stated that his major point is that for a series of neighbors (e.g. St. Croix, Acorn), the only route they had was on County Road B, not south, not west due to Highway 280, nor north due to Highway 36. Mr. Grefenberg opined that this road is used often, probably more since the closing of Highway 280; and suggested comparisons of traffic counts before and after. Mr. Grefenberg noted that it provided the only link to schools, parks, and broader community amenities, and from his perspective, it currently created a risk to the safety of people walking, since there was no shoulder there. Mr. Grefenberg opined that those risks alone should surely rank it higher than a"40." In response to Mr. Grefenberg noting that Fairview Avenue (map #11) had only received a score of 2.9, yet it was considered a priority; Chair Vanderwall Page 14 of 22