2013-07-23_PWETC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Ms. Bloom noted that this would be an alternative to the railroad crossing, and run parallel to the railroad line. • #28 Judith to Iona Connection • #23 Langton Lake Loop Based on the fact that this was a low-volume road, Ms. Bloom opined that signage on the road could achieve the same thing as a pathway versus the cost as part of the Park Renewal Program plan for access around the lake. • #24 Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area Connections Ms. Bloom recommended deferring this connection, opining that wherever it was built now would end up in the wrong place depending on future development. Ms. Bloom suggested that these connections wait for redevelopment and be made part of those projects. • #32 Eustis to St. Croix Connection Ms. Bloom noted that this was a challenge with 200 homes having a disconnect; and opined that having a full loop would be advantageous. Ms. Bloom noted that the original Pathway Committee had wanted to include the segment for a full walking loop with County Road B, Eustis and Cleveland Avenue. At the request of Chair Vanderwall, Ms. Bloom advised that the area is wooded, including some Buckthorn, but was actually quite attractive. Ms. Bloom sought additional direction from the PWETC. Chair Vanderwall noted that staff did as asked and provided as many options as possible for decision-making. Member DeBenedet noted that, as part of the charge by the City Council to the PVVETC, their task included sifting through the options to make recommendations for the build-out over the next ten (10) years based on value engineering and scoring. Member DeBenedet used Lexington Avenue as a good example and what was the appropriate rationale for building a sidewalk/pathway on another side of the street when one already existed on the other side; or whether it was more vital to complete other connections without any existing pathway or sidewalk at this time. Member DeBenedet requested additional time to review the revised information provided by staff beyond tonight's meeting. Chair Vanderwall suggested that individual members look at each segment and set their personal priorities and available alternatives; and take resulting collective rankings forward as a recommendation to the City Council. Member DeBenedet concurred that would be the next logical step. However, Member DeBenedet questioned how to set a realistic annual dollar amount for build-out; or whether to consider a program similar to the CIP that looked for that build-out over a period of years. Member DeBenedet suggested that individual rankings be brought to the August PWETC meeting, and cost per year; at which time the PWETC could determine the most realistic annual amount to determine the logical build-out plan. Member DeBenedet opined that the City Council was Page 9 of 11