My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2013-04-23_PWETC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Minutes
>
201x
>
2013
>
2013-04-23_PWETC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/27/2013 12:02:51 PM
Creation date
6/27/2013 12:02:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
4/23/2013
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.
/
10
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
reduce the City's required portion; but still allow the City to have available funds <br /> to get a project moving forward. Ms. Bloom advised that the intent was to get a <br /> build-out plan and reasonable budget put together for the City Council based on <br /> priorities and PWETC input, then to move toward public input on the proposals. <br /> Chair Vanderwall requested that Ms. Bloom and staff provide spreadsheets <br /> allowing individual PWETC members to work through those drafts. <br /> Member Felice requested the constellations in detail for her research in getting <br /> people to parks, but also connections within the parks themselves; with Chair <br /> Vanderwall noting that the information was available on the Parks & Recreation <br /> website as well. <br /> Chair Vanderwall requested a paper map with a complete listing of pathways that <br /> he could add onto in his own priority order, along with considering funding <br /> sources and how it could be divided into a workable plan. <br /> Discussion included the PWETC's lack of interest in championing specific parks <br /> in their neighborhoods, even though they would be more familiar with those <br /> areas, but not doing the process justice being so close. <br /> Ms. Bloom advised that she would have the information available mid-May, and <br /> the June meeting would then allow for a more informed discussion at which point <br /> the timing for public input in the process could be determined. <br /> Chair Vanderwall concurred, opining that he would like the PWETC to be more <br /> competent with its decision-making and information before inviting the public's <br /> input. <br /> At the request of Ms. Bloom, Member DeBenedet responded that 3-4 meetings <br /> may be needed for this project. <br /> Chair Vanderwall opined that this would depend on how much of the good work <br /> done to-date was viable; and suggested that fewer meetings may be required <br /> unless the PWETC got bogged down in too many details. <br /> Member Stenlund expressed interest in getting work done as funds were available, <br /> whether or not a priority or not. <br /> Chair Vanderwall concurred; however, he expressed his interest in maintaining <br /> Member Stenlund's passion while getting kids off the street and on safer routes. <br /> Ms. Bloom suggested a program similar to that of the Public Works CIP, with an <br /> adjustment every five (5) years and annual review by the PWETC. <br /> Page 7 of 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.