My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2017_10-24_PWETCpacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
201x
>
2017
>
2017_10-24_PWETCpacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/8/2017 2:12:49 PM
Creation date
12/8/2017 1:47:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
10/24/2017
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.
/
54
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
306 <br />Mr. Hingeveld suggested this be changed to, "When projects are implemented, <br />307 <br />representatives for impacted groups will be notified and provided an opportunity <br />308 <br />for input before plans are finalized." The Commission agreed. <br />309 <br />310 <br />Member Seigler inquired if there was a better term to use than `representatives." <br />311 <br />312 <br />Mr. Culver stated there have been times where it has been difficult to get <br />313 <br />engagement with specific groups. There needs to be an effort to engage them, but <br />314 <br />if they cannot, it does not mean it is a failure. <br />315 <br />316 <br />Mr. Hingeveld commented the word "representative" can be subjective. He <br />317 <br />suggested using "stakeholders" instead. <br />318 <br />319 <br />Member Misra commented it feels redundant because the first policy makes the <br />320 <br />Pathway Master Plan available to different groups and the second policy focuses <br />321 <br />on engaging people. Using the term "stakeholders of impacted groups" starts to get <br />322 <br />difficult. <br />323 <br />324 <br />Chair Cihacek explained issues will present themselves differently and people will <br />325 <br />be impacted differently depending on the project. It is important to include both <br />326 <br />stakeholders and impacted groups. <br />327 <br />328 <br />After the discussion, the Commission agreed to have it changed to, "When projects <br />329 <br />are implemented, stakeholders or impacted groups will be notified and provided an <br />330 <br />opportunity for input before plans are finalized." <br />331 <br />332 <br />Item 12.4. Significant space, or barriers shall be provided between pathways and <br />333 <br />conflicting adjacent uses. <br />334 <br />Mr. Culver explained some Commission members inquired about what the barriers <br />335 <br />are and if it is feasible to provide physical barriers between the pathway and the <br />336 <br />roadway. He stated aphysical barrier does not have to be anything significant. They <br />337 <br />have delineators on County Road B that provide separation. The vagueness of what <br />338 <br />a barrier could be is good because it gives flexibility in options proposed. <br />339 <br />340 <br />Mr. Freihammer stated barrier is not defined. They separate a lot of the trails and <br />341 <br />sidewalks because they are behind a curb, which is a barrier. Defining it is not <br />342 <br />going to make a difference. <br />343 <br />344 <br />Mr. Culver commented instead of barrier, they could say "significant space of <br />345 <br />delineation shall be provided between pathways..." <br />346 <br />347 <br />Chair Cihacek inquired if the space itself is the barrier. <br />348 <br />349 <br />Mr. Freihammer stated the delineators define where the pathway and road are. <br />350 <br />Page 8 of 14 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.