2013-11-26_PWETC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

opined that some segments with higher rankings on the draft build-out list had other alternatives, including County Road B-2, which would require use of the majority of funds set aside for pathways in the bonding money, when this was the only option available for those along County Road B to address safety and realistic use. Mr. Grefenberg further opined that this segment was a unique situation with a landlocked area, and that should be considered in the PWEC's criteria in ranking. Since this build-out list is so far along, Mr. Grefenberg stated that he wasn't asking that it be redone, and appreciated the time spent on it; however, he asked that the segment not be downgraded or their comments dismissed without validity under the guise of being deemed the "squeaky wheel." Chair Vanderwall opined that, since Mr. Grefenberg was not from this immediate neighborhood, and could be considered an outside agitator speaking for them, he and the PWETC had to consider their duty, right and responsibility as charged by the City Council to look at all projects in the community without stating that they didn't have a priority based on not having come before the body, or having spoken up about their respective issues. Mr. Grefenberg, in his role in working for this neighborhood and SWARM, stated his lack of appreciation as being labeled as an outside agitator. Chair Vanderwall apologized for his comments to that effect, with Mr. Grefenberg asking that the apology be made a part of this record. Member Gjerdingen questioned if the neighborhood used Fulham to Highway 36 Service Road to County Road B and Cleveland as an optional route; with Mr. Grefenberg responding that he didn't believe so as, with no streetlights, it created difficulties by being consistently out-of-the-way and unsafe at night. No one else appeared to speak to this issue, and Chair Vanderwall closed public comment for PWETC discussion. Member DeBenedet moved, Member Gjerdingen seconded, a recommendation to the City Council for the Updated Pathway Master Plan Build-Out (Attachment A) dated October 17, 2013; amended as follows: • Attachment A, dated October 17, is the recommended ranking of the PWETC as a guide to the City Council with the revised scoring incorporated during tonight's discussion for Map #7(County Road B segment). • The City Council to consider accomplish of this build-out plan for those projects with a composite ranking of 3.4 or higher within an approximately twelve (12)year period(on a scale of I to 5, 1 being the highest). • The City Council should give priority to projects on Ramsey County rights-of-way when the County performs reconstruction projects (e.g. County Road Q. Page 12 of 18