2017-01-24_PWETC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

map; but not directly tied into this project. Since this would affect residents and neighborhood streets in the area, Chair Cihacek sought assurance that city staff would coordinate with MnDOT on work schedules. Mr. Freihammer confirmed that staff would attempt to do so, but also noted other time considerations, including weather, the State Fair and short summer construction season to get the work accomplished. Mr. Freihammer stated that staff didn't anticipate much cut -through traffic on those neighborhood streets beyond local residents; with the city's work fairly quick, and creating no major concerns with any additional neighborhood traffic. 6. Transportation Plan Update RFP Mr. Freihammer reported that, as part of the overall 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update currently underway, the Transportation Plan, and Master Pathway Plan will also be updated. Mr. Freihammer noted that the current Transportation Plan (Attachment B) had last been updated in 2009; and the Pathway Master Plan (Attachment C) in 2007/2008. Mr. Freihammer briefly summarized the process as it related to and impacted the remainder of the comprehensive plan update and process, proposed for completion by year-end 2017 for submission to the Metropolitan Council. Mr. Freihammer reviewed the scope of transportation plan elements, with the Request for Proposals (RFP) for a consultant with that specific expertise selected through the Best Value Procurement process. Mr. Culver expanded on Mr. Freihammer's summary, emphasizing that the city considered this an update to the existing plan, and therefore was not seeking or anticipating any extensive changes from that plan and what it addressed or recommended. Mr. Culver noted that prior to seeking a consultant for the update, staff had been able to check off some projects completed since the last update (e.g. Twin Lakes Parkway and several sidewalk links for the Pathway Master Plan). Mr. Culver advised that the goal was to engage the public in the update process to hear their overall concerns about motorized and non -motorized transit in and around Roseville. Mr. Culver referenced previous comments received from PWETC Member Lenz regarding her ongoing concerns with the level of mass transit operations in Roseville; as well as those voiced by others in and around Roseville, especially with east/west routes and connections. Therefore, Mr. Culver reported that those concerns, as well as potential options, will be well-documented as part of the transportation update. Specific to the Pathway Master Plan, Mr. Culver noted that the previously -seated PWETC went through a process in 2013 attempting to update prioritization of segments initially ranked in 2008. However, Mr. Culver advised that the City Council had expressed concern with their overall process and inconsistency in how they applied criteria for their ranking. Therefore, Mr. Culver noted the preference to seek broader public comment on the ranking, especially given the continued feedback received from and concerns expressed by residents on the apparent "shotgun" approach in completing segments and connections. Mr. Culver reported that the city was in receipt of one petition to -date from a neighborhood group Page 6 of 17