My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2024_0123_PWETC_Packet
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
202x
>
2024
>
2024_0123_PWETC_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2024 10:40:01 AM
Creation date
1/25/2024 10:38:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
1/23/2024
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.
/
82
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, September 25, 2023 <br />Page 3 <br />brought up and others concurred at some level, that the City might consider making <br />this a two-step process. The first step process could be to determine if fifty percent <br />or greater of the residents in the neighborhood agree to change the name and then <br />there could be a separate clear process for changing the name. He explained this <br />does provide some direction for what part of the naming convention can be. He felt <br />similar to what the City did recently with the park renaming is as a community asset <br />so it should be thoughtful in how the street name is created or changed. That may <br />be too much, but he did appreciate the changes to the first page on the public notice <br />specifying who would get the notification about the name change. <br />Mayor Roe remembered that the Council discussed this as being a two-step process, <br />but it did not appear that way in the minutes, so he was not one hundred percent <br />sure where the Council stood. He thought this was a great time to have further <br />discussion about that. <br />Councilmember Groff wondered what the two-step process would be. <br />Mayor Roe indicated it would start out with a petition from the neighborhood <br />wanting to change the name and the second step would be the input process to <br />develop what the changed name would be. <br />Councilmember Etten indicated that was correct. He reviewed what the petition <br />form would look like with possible changes to it. He thought the people who would <br />be affected by a street name change, the people who lived on the street, should be <br />the primary people on the petition. <br />Mayor Roe thought there would be a process as laid out in the information in the <br />packet. <br />Councilmember Strahan requested elaboration on what Process A would mean. <br />Public Works Director Jesse Freihammer explained in the beginning that was just <br />a suggestion, but the PWET Commission did recommend that it be made a <br />requirement. Their thought was to get the emphasis to the next details, A-F. Staff <br />did not think that most roads in Roseville would qualify based on the County's grid <br />system. The only opportunities, he thought, would be former County roads that are <br />still called county roads but most of the system is on a grid and could not be <br />changed. <br />Councilmember Strahan indicated with that in mind, she wondered if it would be <br />possible to add that into part A in the process. Maybe it could be a flow chart that <br />would show the qualification steps. <br />Page 19 of 82 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.