My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2015-02-24_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
201x
>
2015
>
2015-02-24_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/19/2015 4:15:18 PM
Creation date
2/19/2015 4:11:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
2/24/2015
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.
/
58
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
535 prefer a posted speed of 30 mph, and from a geometric perspective costs could be <br />536 kept down, but questioned if that may create more speed management issues, and <br />537 sought PWETC input. <br />538 <br />539 Member Cihacek spoke in support of 30 mph as recommended by staff, providing <br />540 sufficient educational efforts were involved to alert people. <br />541 <br />542 Discussion included education dictating speed management; design of bank <br />543 elements on the roadway to reduce speed; variety of areas of the roadway and <br />544 higher traffic volumes from Larpenteur Avenue up to County Road B, with the <br />545 roadway north of County Road B under Ramsey County jurisdiction and posted at <br />546 40 mph; and additional costs to build up the roadway and driveways, with <br />547 regrading front yards if that was the recommended option. <br />548 <br />549 Member Gjerdingen spoke in support of a more usable and friendly roadway if <br />550 posted at 30 mph. <br />551 <br />552 Chair Stenlund supported a 30 mph speed from a safety point of view given the <br />553 number of residential pro rties along Victoria Street. <br />554 <br />555 Member Seigler spoke in support of a 30 mph. <br />556 <br />557 Further discussion ensued regarding observed traffic patterns along this corridor; <br />558 consultations with the Police Department to address current and future complaints <br />559 and enforcement issues with use of temporary speed boards as part of the <br />560 education process; and proposed striping for parking on the east side restricted <br />561 within a certain distance approaching stop signs and/or curves; and more formal <br />562 designation for on-street parking in other areas. <br />563 "q�Ift <br />564 fbriember Gjerdingen asked that sta k with MnDOT in addressing heights of <br />565 dge railings to create morsafety for pedestrians and/or bikers. <br />566 <br />567 Mr. Culver duly noted that request; however, qualified that MnDOT may not be <br />568 amenable to that request, given the multiple considerations under which the <br />569 project was developed. <br />570 <br />571 Chair Stenlun opined that this was one of the more complicated projects <br />572 undertaken by the City in some time; and clarified that references on page 17 and <br />573 19 of the Feasibility Report needed correcting as to in which watershed district <br />574 the project was located. Chair Stenlund further opined that this should be a good <br />575 improvement for this roadway for livability of its residents as well as reducing <br />576 speeds. <br />577 <br />578 Other than for the assessment to benefitting properties, Mr. Culver opined that the <br />579 neighborhood seemed to be excited about the project. <br />580 <br />Page 13 of 14 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.