My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2012-08-27_PWETC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Minutes
>
201x
>
2012
>
2012-08-27_PWETC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/1/2012 9:51:34 AM
Creation date
10/1/2012 9:51:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
8/27/2012
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.
/
15
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
managed by the County, and their typical maintenance process is to overlay their <br /> streets, thus the raising of the pavement elevation, sometimes causing drainage <br /> issues for properties. <br /> City Engineer Debra Bloom advised that the project delays were due to a lack of <br /> Municipal State Aid Funds, but the project was now scheduled for 2014. Ms. <br /> Bloom noted that one of the reasons for the delay was also due to staff being <br /> directed by the City Council to move forward with the County Road C-2 <br /> connection, causing a shift from focus on Victoria Street to County Road C-2 and <br /> use of State Aid funds for that project. Ms. Bloom advised that the City sets the <br /> street capital improvement plan by using a number of factors; the street Pavement <br /> Condition Index; this indicator helps staff determines the life cycle of streets; <br /> working with Capitol Region Watershed District on existing drainage issues; and <br /> any other issues that have come forward. Ms. Bloom advised that it was typically <br /> a one (1)-year long public input process for reconstruction projects, with this <br /> project initiated in June of 2013 to begin discussions of the project. Ms. Bloom <br /> anticipated that the final road elevation would probably be lower to address <br /> drainage concerns in the area. Staff worked with Ms. Gale Pedersen on the <br /> Reservoir Woods trail project to try to address drainage issues. Ms. Bloom <br /> advised Mr. Anderson that the stretch immediately adjacent to his home was <br /> repaved as part of that Reservoir Woods trail project, so it was in better condition <br /> than the other segments areas of Victoria. However, Ms. Bloom reiterated that <br /> the pavement condition drove a project's timing; as well as needed safety <br /> improvements for pedestrian/bicycle access. <br /> Ms. Bloom noted that the City's current Assessment Policy was followed for any <br /> assessable costs from reconstruction projects, as well as other funding as <br /> applicable, such as Municipal State Aid funds. In reviewing the current Policy, <br /> Ms. Bloom noted that affected residential properties were typically assessed 25% <br /> of the total cost, based on frontage served. Ms. Bloom noted that Victoria Street <br /> is a high priority on the Pathway Master Plan for safety concerns, as well as to <br /> connect the existing east/west pathway on Roselawn up to County Road B. Ms. <br /> Bloom noted that the City would also partner with Capitol Region for three (3) <br /> areas for water quality and drainage improvements as part of the McCarron's <br /> system; but clarified that there would be no storm sewer or pathway assessments <br /> to property owners. <br /> Mr. Anderson noted that of the six (6) homes, only three (3) fronted Victoria <br /> Street even though they all had Victoria Street addresses. <br /> Ms. Bloom advised that in the case described, the street frontage of the homes that <br /> abut Victoria would typically be divided by six (6), consistent with the standard <br /> assessment formula for homes served by private drives. In response to Mr. <br /> Anderson's question of one (1) extra lot, Ms. Bloom advised that the actual <br /> frontage and assessment footage assigned to each property would be determined <br /> based on who was served by the private drive. Ms. Bloom indicated that she <br /> Page 2 of 15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.