My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2012-04-24_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
201x
>
2012
>
2012-04-24_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/19/2012 4:16:22 PM
Creation date
4/19/2012 4:08:09 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
4/24/2012
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
57
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
396 <br />Member Vanderwall opined that politics have always ruled why the City didn't <br />397 <br />assess for sidewalks, thus the current policy or lack thereof, as well as the lack of <br />398 <br />pedestrian amenities. <br />399 <br />400 <br />Ms. Bloom suggested that, on road reconstruction projects, a sidewalk installation <br />401 <br />could be a strict policy, also assessable. <br />402 <br />403 <br />Member Vanderwall concurred that this would be applicable when originally <br />404 <br />installed; however, he questioned how to fund when repair, replacement, or <br />405 <br />upgrade of the sidewalk was required. While there was no historical precedent for <br />406 <br />new installations, Member Vanderwall noted that e installed, the value of the <br />407 <br />sidewalk was a given and would be supportive eed for it as part of <br />408 <br />reconstruction in their neighborhood. <br />409 <br />Page 10 of 15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.