My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2017-02-22_PC_Packet-CompPlan
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
2017 Agendas
>
2017-02-22_PC_Packet-CompPlan
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2017 3:02:21 PM
Creation date
8/16/2017 3:02:17 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
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
Planning Commission –Comprehensive Plan Update <br />Minutes –Wednesday, January 25, 2017 <br /> <br />Page 15 <br />Environmental Health <br />539 <br />Ms. Perdunoted the few comments provided by individual commissioners on <br />540 <br />measurable andsplitting up energy conservation and pollution reduction as <br />541 <br />separate topics with different implementation strategies. Ms. Perdusuggested that <br />542 <br />the “resilience” chapter look at that. <br />543 <br />Chair Boguszewski reiterated the need for easy to measure goals. <br />544 <br />Parks, Open Space and Recreation <br />545 <br />Ms. Perduadvised that there would be more discussion on this area when getting <br />546 <br />to a discussion of objectives. <br />547 <br />Chair Boguszewski noted the success of Roseville’s park system, and his <br />548 <br />numerous notations in the “implemented” categorygiven recent improvements <br />549 <br />and funding of that system. <br />550 <br />Health and Wellness <br />551 <br />With the agreement of Chair Boguszewski, Ms. Perdusuggested the need to look <br />552 <br />at metrics and the city’s role in supporting it and whether “enable” was the correct <br />553 <br />term. <br />554 <br />Lifelong Learning <br />555 <br />Ms. Perdunoted lots of support for the existing status, while many were not <br />556 <br />directly under the city’s control; but involved more partnering and city-support of <br />557 <br />area educational institutions when and if indicated. <br />558 <br />Member Murphy noted that his commentto “sustain cutting-edge technology” be <br />559 <br />deleted, since it wasn’t in the city’s backyard when there were now so many <br />560 <br />commercial alternatives, including the county library and school system reaching <br />561 <br />out. Therefore, Member Murphy opined that it wasn’t his job to know how to rate <br />562 <br />or assign goals; and asked if there was any support among his colleagues as to <br />563 <br />whether or not this should remain as a goal. <br />564 <br />Member Bull suggested it could mean the city supporting high density wi-fi or <br />565 <br />cable television capabilities and providing access through its public utilities. <br />566 <br />Member Murphy opined that he could see support, but continued to be concerned <br />567 <br />with the language “provide.” <br />568 <br />Member Bull agreed that it needed rewording. <br />569 <br />Ms. Perdue duly noted that suggestion. <br />570 <br />Transportation <br />571 <br />Member Bull opined that transportation needs may change dramatically by 2040. <br />572 <br />Mr. Lloyd suggested looking at this from two sides: the network on which people <br />573 <br />moved around and how those same people got around on it. <br />574 <br />Member Murphy questioned the goal for “publicly funded transportation;” <br />575 <br />questioning how the city accomplished that, considering how to write individual <br />576 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.