My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2018_06-26_PWETCpacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
201x
>
2018
>
2018_06-26_PWETCpacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/27/2018 11:33:21 AM
Creation date
6/27/2018 11:30:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
6/26/2018
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.
/
86
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
City of Roseville Pathway Master Plan <br />6. PREFERENCE LIST OF PATHWAY SEGMENTS <br />Previous versions of the Pathway Master Plan included a list of priority projects and <br />ranking based on qualitative evaluation criteria as defined by the Pathway Advisory <br />Committee (a defunct group of citizens that served as a steering committee for the <br />Pathway Master Plan). Committee members identified the list of priority projects and <br />individually scored them based on the evaluation criteria. The scores were then <br />weighted and added up to provide a composite score and rank for each project. While <br />the ranking process was beneficial, there was concern that scoring system provided <br />inconsistent results, and thatfuture updates could result in different ranking results. <br />As part of the 2017 Pathway Master Plan update, the PWETC revised the scoring <br />system and evaluation criteria for use in this plan. The updates were intended to be <br />simplified, quantitative, and easily replicated forfuture use. The PWETC assessed and <br />consolidated the 10 previous evaluation criteria down to 6 criteria. The PWETC then <br />modified the scoring for each criterion and established quantifiable measurement <br />tools using readily available GIS data and City maps. In addition, the PWETC revised <br />the list of projects forevaluation to eliminate previously completed pathwaysegments <br />and divide up longersegments to reduce the potential for over -scoring due to project <br />length. Based on the updated evaluation criteria, City staff utilized GIS data to apply <br />the scoring system to the updated list of preferred projects. <br />The following evaluation criteria were used by the PWETC to rank projects based upon <br />the applied scoring system. <br />Evaluation Criteria <br />1) Connects multiple destinations. <br />Provides safe and convenient access to businesses, schools, churches, work, parks and <br />other community amenities and destinations. <br />Add one point for each type of destination within 1/4 mile of pathway <br />• 1 -Each -Institutional use (school, university) within 1/4 mile <br />• 1-Each-Park/Open Space use within 1/4 mile <br />• 1 -Each -Public facilities within 1/4 mile <br />• 1-Total-Industrial/Office use (employment centers) within 1/4 mile <br />• 1 -Total -Commercial use within 1/4 mile <br />Measurement tool: City's Future Land Use Map <br />2) Volume of usage. <br />The pathway corridor has shown a consistent need for facility development based on <br />its ability to serve the surrounding population and employment base. <br />Total population within 1/4 mile of pathway <br />• 3 -Population is 3,000 or greater <br />Page 29 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.