My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2012-04-24_PWETC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Minutes
>
201x
>
2012
>
2012-04-24_PWETC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/28/2012 11:39:28 AM
Creation date
6/28/2012 11:39:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
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.
/
14
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
Ms. Bloom advised that it could be included in the "Definitions Section" by <br /> noting that drainage necessary due to road construction could be addressed <br /> via many options. <br /> 8. Overhead Electric/Underground Policy <br /> Based on previous discussions of the PWETC, Mr. Schwartz reviewed revisions <br /> made in this draft of the Overhead Electric / Underground Policy, including <br /> additional language to Criteria 5 related to emergency first responders; and an <br /> additional Criteria 8 addressing entry corridor aesthetics. Mr. Schwartz noted that <br /> addition of Section a related to funding of projects that would not prohibit <br /> neighborhood-initiated requests if alternate funding was available. <br /> Chair Vanderwall noted a typographical correction in that last sentence from <br /> "..."of' to "for" undergrounding... <br /> Member Gjerdingen spoke in support of the criteria; however, he questioned <br /> whether the policy implied that undergrounding could be undertaken without <br /> being part of an actual construction project. Member Gjerdingen expressed his <br /> concern that there needed to be some guidelines in place of minimum criteria <br /> established for undergrounding that would not become a burden for taxpayers. <br /> Chair Vanderwall concurred that the City certainly didn't want to apply the policy <br /> frivolously; however, he was unsure how to identify criteria establishing a <br /> minimum without compromising a project that may have merit. Chair <br /> Vanderwall noted that the City Council had to approve each project before it <br /> could proceed, and rationalized that this provided some control or priorities in <br /> place. <br /> Member Felice opined that, as currently written, nothing frivolous would rise high <br /> enough in the criteria listed to reach the level of a priority. <br /> Member Gjerdingen questioned if members saw any goal in a requirement that all <br /> lines be undergrounded as part of every street reconstruction project over the next <br /> fifty (50) years. <br /> Chair Vanderwall opined that in the past he may have been agreement with such a <br /> goal; however, based on past experience, and potential levels of discomfort from <br /> that experience, he could no longer support that goal. Chair Vanderwall noted his <br /> preference for undergrounding, using the improved aesthetics along the Rice <br /> Street Corridor, and especially supporting it at corners; he realized it wasn't <br /> always the least expensive option, as well as safety issues to consider as <br /> previously discussed. Chair Vanderwall opined that the criteria were good as <br /> written in this draft. <br /> Page 10 of 14 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.