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
Chair Vanderwall opined that the maintenance component was a huge issue, and <br /> the need to have the community understand the required commitment in <br /> volunteers helping keep costs down, and enhance the overall health and wellness <br /> of the community through their participation in maintaining pathways. <br /> Ms. Bloom suggested breaking segments into annual chunks, with Chair <br /> Vanderwall suggesting options including $250,000, $500,000, $750,000, and $1 <br /> million. <br /> Further discussion included where and when MSA-dedicated dollars are used; <br /> projects that move up in the priority level based on coordination with <br /> unanticipated infrastructure projects; competition for federal funding among <br /> jurisdictions and requirements for projects receiving that type of funding; and <br /> additional costs for any outside engineering needed versus in-house engineering. <br /> Member Gjerdingen suggested a short-term focus for pathways, such as five (5) <br /> years. <br /> Chair Vanderwall, while liking a short focus, noted the realities of living with <br /> available dollars; and noted the previous twenty-five (25) year pathway master <br /> plan became too random; and suggested a workable, annual amount to actually <br /> move things forward. <br /> Member Stenlund concurred, even if that process took fifteen (15) years to <br /> accomplish. <br /> Chair Vanderwall thanked members for tonight's initial discussion; and asked <br /> staff to remain cognizant of their existing work load as it prepared these <br /> additional items requested by the PWETC. <br /> 7. County Road B-2 / Victoria Street Sidewalk Project <br /> Ms. Bloom summarized the preliminary layouts for this sidewalk project, as <br /> proposed and detailed in the staff report dated April 23, 2013; and as revised <br /> following comments (Attachments A and B) from public information meetings <br /> held in February. <br /> Ms. Bloom provided recommendations, reviewed drainage and other challenges <br /> of the project; addressed concerns of affected residents in relationship to what was <br /> in the way, what was being connected, the cost and how to make decisions for a <br /> good project; and how to fairly consider each of those elements. <br /> Ms. Bloom provided staff s rationale for their recommendation of a pathway on <br /> the north side based on fewer trees and bushes to manage or remove, fewer <br /> driveways, power poles located on the south side, fewer fire hydrants, and the sun <br /> hitting the north side for melting quicker; as well as location of Central Park <br /> Elementary School on the north side. Ms. Bloom advised that staff continued to <br /> Page 8 of 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.