My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2019_0506
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2019
>
CC_Minutes_2019_0506
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/22/2019 9:51:30 AM
Creation date
5/22/2019 9:51:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
5/6/2019
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
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
Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday, May 6, 2019 <br /> Page 16 <br /> e. Consider Complete Streets Policy <br /> Civil Engineer Luke Sandstrom briefly highlighted this item as detailed in the <br /> RCA and related attachments dated May 6, 2019. <br /> Mayor Roe stated the feedback from the residents has been very positive on both <br /> sections of Victoria. The two things that come to mind that were not mentioned <br /> were to improve lighting at several of the corners and the reduction of the speed. <br /> He thought a lot of the residents appreciateddthat. <br /> Councilmember Etten asked for a review of the second page of the proposed cor- <br /> ridor characteristics review, the comparison summary of pedestrian/bicycle im- <br /> provements. He asked how that piece functions in the policy. <br /> Mr. Sandstrom explained what the comparison summary is and indicated it is a <br /> nice way to track what has been done throughout the year as well as showing tan- <br /> gibly what is being invested and built out for each corresponding thing. <br /> Councilmember Etten noted one of the things the existing policy talks about is <br /> that it has a check spot for whether it is on the Pathway Master Plan. He did not <br /> know if Mr. Sandstrom had any thoughts on whether that was a useful piece or if <br /> he missed it in the larger more complete piece. <br /> Mr. Sandstrom stated that would carry through and can be clarified better if need- <br /> ed. <br /> Councilmember Etten did not see a spot indicating something should be high- <br /> lighted because, for example, it does not have an existing pathway piece on it, but <br /> it should, according to the City Master Plan. He thought that staff was very at- <br /> tuned to that but the whole point is to alert the Council to it as well. <br /> Mr. Culver stated this is acknowledging it on the Pathway Master Plan and the ex- <br /> isting checklist but on the proposed checklist at the top of page three of four when <br /> talking about on road and off-road bike lanes, staff could actually reformat that to <br /> say what does the Pathway Master Plan call out in here. Because of what the <br /> Pathway Master Plan has called out, this is what staff is proposing. It could high- <br /> light that there is a purpose for why staff is calling this out and where it is coming <br /> from instead of a yes or no. <br /> Councilmember Etten thought that would be a fine way to incorporate his ques- <br /> tion. <br /> Councilmember Laliberte was going to suggest adding a column indicating if it <br /> meets a need or a priority gap that has already been identified. As she was under- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.