CC_Minutes_2012_0611 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,June 11, 2012 Page 11 Councilmember Pust further noted the most heard comment throughout the community was continued build out of pathways; and asked that the PWETC help get that build out accomplished by providing options and recommendations to the City Council on funding resources to do so. Member Gjerdingen noted that pathways were not considered as a standard part of reconstruction projects over the next twenty (20) years (e.g. Victoria Street south of County Road B); and opined that other pathway projects considered retrofits would create more funding challenges. Member Gjerdingen suggested that the business community be engaged for their participation in getting path- ways in place in commercial areas. Member Stenlund suggested that the business community may be more recep- tive if advertising their business was part of that program, such as "adopt a pathway," similar to that used on highways. Member Stenlund opined that this could be used most effectively for retrofits, where less complicated things were needed to complete a pathway(e.g. striping). Chair Vanderwall noted, from his employment with School District No. 623's Transportation program, their application for funding — both through joint city/school and individual school applications — at least three (3) times through the "Safe Routes to School" grant fundin g program, without success. Chair Vanderwall noted that this would provide a funding resource to help connect some of the network. Past Chair DeBenedet advised that his first opportunity volunteering for the City had been in developing the Non-Motorized Pathway Master Plan in 1983. Mr. DeBenedet opined that, if the level of interest continued to accomplish this, the community needed to step up and make it happen. While outside funding was an option, Mr. DeBenedet further opined that it is the City's pathway system, and the City needed to fund it, whether through part of the annual budget pro- cess, through the Parks and Recreation Master Plan Implementation process, or bonding. Mr. DeBenedet noted that a significant portion of the uncompleted pathway system should be funded and accomplished through the Master Plan Implementation process, with discussions between the PWETC and the Parks and Recreation Commission to prioritize use and funding. Mr. DeBenedet opined that it would be nice to make sure everyone could get anywhere in Ro- seville safely and efficiently, since that is what the pathway system was intend- ed to accomplish; and further opined that a lot of people used the existing path- ways. Mr. DeBenedet opined that it needed to be accomplished, not just thought of as a nice addition to the City. Chair Vanderwall noted that the County Road B-2 pathway was a key missing component in the network, and providing no off-road walking area along it.