My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2014-09-23_PWETC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Minutes
>
201x
>
2014
>
2014-09-23_PWETC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/4/2014 1:03:06 PM
Creation date
11/4/2014 1:02:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
9/23/2014
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.
/
16
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
would create a problem for that traffic flow, and therefore was not being <br /> encouraged. On Mount Ridge Road, Mr. Schwartz advised that there was on- <br /> street parking proposed on one side of the street on this north/south road <br /> identified as a collector street. <br /> Member Gjerdingen opined that, compared to the higher volumes of downtown <br /> St. Paul and/or Minneapolis arterial streets, the streets in Twin Lakes nor County <br /> Road C had nowhere near those volumes, and questioned what operational issues <br /> staff was trying to avoid. <br /> Mr. Schwartz stated that capacity and safety concerns were an issue since the <br /> streets in Twin Lakes or generally in commercial areas were of a different design <br /> than those in either of the downtowns. <br /> Mr. Bilotta concurred, noting that due to the location of Langton Lake, the <br /> roadways in the Twin Lakes area didn't grid out,which was the typical pattern for <br /> making on-street parking work better, and since allowances were not available to <br /> provide the same traffic calming available in other areas. <br /> Member Cihacek asked if there were incentives in place or intended to encourage <br /> shared parking by developers. <br /> Mr. Bilotta advised that this was one big issue to address with various <br /> components to be considered by the Planning Commission, the PWETC and the <br /> City Council: how is structured parking going to be financed and maintained; and <br /> will it be owned by the City of Roseville or by individual private developers. Mr. <br /> Bilotta noted that there were few current incentives, even though developers are <br /> held to a parking standard that was not necessarily amenable to them. Mr. Bilotta <br /> used the recent concept plan presented for hotels and a grocery store in the Twin <br /> Lakes area, and requirements that were not available unless a structured parking <br /> system was incorporated with adjacent properties and allowing interconnectivity <br /> between parking lots. While the developers have been working together to <br /> address those issues, Mr. Bilotta noted the economics for structured parking <br /> would become an issue over the next twelve months as development picked up <br /> throughout the community, but especially in the Twin Lakes Redevelopment <br /> Area. <br /> At the request of Member Wozniak, Mr. Bilotta clarified that the Twin Lakes area <br /> was not the only area where staff anticipated required parking issues and <br /> enforcement being problematic, and further clarified that staff was not trying to <br /> push parking on anyone not wanting it, attempting to keep it below a reasonable <br /> shortage of parking, with some areas tight right now, but not unreasonable, but <br /> not in an area with stricture standards (e.g. Lexington Avenue strip mall with <br /> multiple restaurant uses) which were not typical in that type of development since <br /> they had higher parking requirements. <br /> Page 4 of 16 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.