The Pufferbelly cometh

**Mike_Walter** · 08-08-2012, 05:57 PM

Originally Posted by ARMYMPVET

Mike
This is at least the third time I have read in your posts making reference to this trail as "an eight foot sidewalk". Federal guidelines for pedestrian / bike trails is eight feet. Following the Federal guidelines for this grant means that the trail MUST be eight feet in width. No less. From the trails inseption, it has always been eight feet. Has ANY city official ever said anything to contradict this? If so; who?

Until early 2009, nobody said anything about the "trail" -- regardless of the width -- going down Van Buren or Jackson Streets.

**ARMYMPVET** · 08-08-2012, 06:25 PM

Did city officials have to change the proposed route of the trail? Is there a reason the Pufferbelly Trail can not or should not run parallel to Jackson or Van Buren street. As I stated in an earlier post, I think this is a wonderful idea. A good trail system is a plus in any community. It draws people to relocate here. A city must grow to survive.

I am just trying to understand why you seem so dead-set against this project. How many complaints from people along the proposed route have you received?

**Mike_Walter** · 08-09-2012, 06:01 PM

Originally Posted by ARMYMPVET

Did city officials have to change the proposed route of the trail? Is there a reason the Pufferbelly Trail can not or should not run parallel to Jackson or Van Buren street. As I stated in an earlier post, I think this is a wonderful idea. A good trail system is a plus in any community. It draws people to relocate here. A city must grow to survive.

I am just trying to understand why you seem so dead-set against this project. How many complaints from people along the proposed route have you received?

This is getting tiresome, Jerry. The so-called "trail" is going to be built whether it's a good idea or not. Just don't expect to hear too many champagne corks popping.

**armyda** · 08-09-2012, 07:35 PM

Originally Posted by Mike_Walter

Until early 2009, nobody said anything about the "trail" -- regardless of the width -- going down Van Buren or Jackson Streets.

I believe that in late 2006 or early 2007 there was a Trails Charrette held at the Victory Museum. The maps there clearly showed a trail going through the Center of Auburn up to Reike Park. Unfortunately I can't find the maps online any more. I'd also be interested in seeing the Auburn Parks master plans prior to 2009. I can't find those online right now either. I do know that it was part of the 2009 Auburn Parks Master plan. The trail is part of the State Visionary trail system approved in 2006. As there is no abandoned rail line going all the way through Auburn the trail had to go someplace. Now were the exact streets named? I doubt it, but realistically it had to require going along existing roads. The City had public meetings to get input on the exact route. That was discussed in the previous thread.

**ARMYMPVET** · 08-09-2012, 09:58 PM

Tiresome or not, you have not answered too many questions being put to you. Are you simply stirring the pot again and actually have no REAL answers? By the way, nice try but may name is not Jerry. Missed the mark again.

**nathandiehl** · 08-10-2012, 09:28 AM

Originally Posted by Mike_Walter

This is getting tiresome, Jerry. The so-called "trail" is going to be built whether it's a good idea or not. Just don't expect to hear too many champagne corks popping.

Mike,
I think one of the things that isn't clear is what exactly qualifies as a trail to you.
You claim a trail as defined by the federal government isn't a trail in your mind. Okay. But what you haven't said is what exactly qualifies as a trail to you?

Does it have to follow a railroad right-of-way? In which case, what do you call the Fort Wayne Rivergreenway? Do you consider this a sidewalk since it doesn't follow an old railroad?

Is it a trail that isn't beside a road? In which case, what happens when a railroad right-of-way is right beside a road? Does this trail then become a sidewalk?

I think one of the big issues here is that people (including myself) don't understand your opinion of what is and what is not a trail. The proposed trail is unquestionably considered a trail by federal guidelines. How does your opinion differ from the federal administration's definition of trail?

**Mike_Walter** · 08-10-2012, 05:37 PM

The issue has always been whether very many people want an eight-foot whatever running in front of their homes, taking out the tree line and requiring even brand-new sections of sidewalk to be ripped out. The project is not in keeping with the character of the neighborhoods it is being foisted on; and besides, bikers will continue to ride in the street, just as they do now. It would have been a better use of our 20% to make a safer east-west route through town.

**armyda** · 08-10-2012, 07:18 PM

Originally Posted by Mike_Walter

The issue has always been whether very many people want an eight-foot whatever running in front of their homes, taking out the tree line and requiring even brand-new sections of sidewalk to be ripped out. The project is not in keeping with the character of the neighborhoods it is being foisted on; and besides, bikers will continue to ride in the street, just as they do now. It would have been a better use of our 20% to make a safer east-west route through town.

Mike,

It appears by your comments that you consider the North/South route and the East/West route to be mutually exclusive. At least that is the impression that I am getting. I don't know why this would be so. I would think that both ways would be important in the long range. While Auburn may not be able to dedicate the resources to both at the same time, I would hope that over time both would be completed.

In looking at maps of Auburn it appears to me that an E/W trail across town would also be likely to affect sidewalks and trees. I'm sure that some of those affected would disagree with the E/W route need and ask why the money wasn't being spent on a N/S section.

I have to ask if perhaps your injury awhile back could be influencing the importance you place on E/W over N/S? If I remember correctly you were on a E/W trip when you were hit from behind.

**ARMYMPVET** · 08-10-2012, 08:16 PM

N/S, E/W; the question is still there. How many people affected by this trail and or sidewalk have complained to city officials? A simple question.

**Mike_Walter** · 08-13-2012, 06:24 PM

Originally Posted by armyda

Mike,

It appears by your comments that you consider the North/South route and the East/West route to be mutually exclusive. At least that is the impression that I am getting. I don't know why this would be so. I would think that both ways would be important in the long range. While Auburn may not be able to dedicate the resources to both at the same time, I would hope that over time both would be completed.

In looking at maps of Auburn it appears to me that an E/W trail across town would also be likely to affect sidewalks and trees. I'm sure that some of those affected would disagree with the E/W route need and ask why the money wasn't being spent on a N/S section.

I have to ask if perhaps your injury awhile back could be influencing the importance you place on E/W over N/S? If I remember correctly you were on a E/W trip when you were hit from behind.

1. While simple sidewalk upgrades would be welcome almost anywhere in town, pedestrian and bicycle access between Rieke Park and the A-C-D Museum doesn't appear to me to be a problem.

2. There's no need to build an east-west "trail" to federal specs, either. I think we could have taken the +/- $100,000 that we're kicking in as our "match" for the Pufferbelly to create safer access along Old Brick Road and East 18th Street from the Griswold apartments to the existing sidewalk system in southwest Auburn...and then build a safer pedestrian/bike lane along West 15th Street from the Port Authority RR to the existing sidewalk that starts at Valley Creek Apartments and connects to Wal-Mart. For much of West 15th Street, all that would really be needed would be upgrades to the berm ("shoulder" if that's the term you prefer).

3. My accident on October 13, 2009 certainly added to my sense of the importance to upgrading West 15th Street...a matter that I had raised at a city council meeting on October 6. I did so because of the steady foot and bike traffic that I had noticed on West 15th...and because I was aware of people living at Griswold who work at the west-side businesses and do have have access to automobile transportation.

Originally Posted by ARMYMPVET

N/S, E/W; the question is still there. How many people affected by this trail and or sidewalk have complained to city officials? A simple question.

One of the advantages of a political campaign is that a candidate has to go out and meet the voters, which is what I did last fall. With one single exception (someone who let me put a sign in her yard anyway), the people I was able to talk to on South Jackson Street thought the trail project is dumb. I can't say what people on North Van Buren think about it.

Originally Posted by ARMYMPVET

Tiresome or not, you have not answered too many questions being put to you. Are you simply stirring the pot again and actually have no REAL answers? By the way, nice try but may name is not Jerry. Missed the mark again.

Gee...wouldn't want no pot-stirrin' here in the Home of the Classics would we? And y' say yer name ain't Jerry? Well, lemme try again: Is it Rumpelstiltskin?

**ARMYMPVET** · 08-13-2012, 08:02 PM

From one educated man to another; huh? I find your poor attempt at humor very offensive and not needed. If you do not have an answer, just say so. And by the way, even if a trail system is put in without federal funding it must still meet federal guidelines if the city wants federal money for any future projects. Or didjint y'all know that?

**evilkumquat** · 08-13-2012, 08:10 PM

Originally Posted by ARMYMPVET

From one educated man to another; huh? I find your poor attempt at humor very offensive and not needed. If you do not have an answer, just say so. And by the way, even if a trail system is put in without federal funding it must still meet federal guidelines if the city wants federal money for any future projects. Or didjint y'all know that?

Oh for crying out loud. Lighten up.

**ARMYMPVET** · 08-13-2012, 09:24 PM

Evilkumquat,
you are correct. My apologies. I know we can engage in a civil debate in a more mature manner than what Mr. Walter and I have fallen to.
Thank you.
Mr. Walter, you and I disagree on many topics but I do respect your position as an elected official of our city. You and I will probably never see eye to eye but I do believe that you feel your positions are for the best of the city. A word of advice however, try working with the council a little more. It is not a you against them government. At least it should not be.