My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
25_0930_PWETC_Packet
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
202x
>
2025
>
25_0930_PWETC_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/1/2025 12:59:02 PM
Creation date
10/1/2025 12:56:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
9/30/2025
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.
/
175
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
125 Mr. Freihammer agreed, emphasizing the importance of consistency across various <br />126 city plans. <br />127 <br />128 Member Luongo suggested assigning higher rankings to arterials and considering <br />129 factors such as ADT (Average Daily Traffic) and the number of lanes. <br />130 <br />131 Mr. Freihammer acknowledged the dynamic nature of roadways and the <br />132 importance of factoring these elements into the criteria. <br />133 <br />134 Member Luongo recommended adding a cost -to -benefit ratio to prioritize projects <br />135 by their ease and cost-effectiveness. <br />136 <br />137 Mr. Freihammer recalled a previous discussion about including cost estimates in <br />138 the criteria but noted the challenges of making accurate assumptions. <br />139 <br />140 Chair Ficek proposed a simple ranking system (1, 2, or 3) to indicate project cost. <br />141 <br />142 Mr. Freihammer endorsed that suggestion as a quick and simple solution. He cited <br />143 the Hamline Avenue project example, where combining projects saw*d money and <br />144 boosted efficiency. <br />145 <br />146 Member Luongo suggested considering desired paths as a measure of public need <br />147 and including them in the criteria. <br />148 <br />149 Mr. Freihammer agreed, emphasizing the importance of right-of-way <br />150 considerations and the potential for narrowing roads to reduce costs. He discussed <br />151 the challenges of proper road sizing and how it affects curb lines and right-of-way <br />152 expenses. <br />153 <br />154 Member Luongo suggested using available right-of-way as a criterion, awarding <br />155 more points to projects that need less curb movement. <br />156 <br />157 Chair Ficek recommended updating the map to display all potential segments for <br />158 review and to discuss their priorities. <br />159 <br />160 Mr. Freihammer agreed, noting the need to update the map and review the list to <br />161 generate new ideas and gather feedback. <br />162 <br />163 Member Luongo suggested clearly listing City goals alongside the criteria to better <br />164 promote the plan to Council. <br />165 <br />166 Mr. Freihammer discussed the upcoming strategic plan and its possible effect on <br />167 the pathway master plan. <br />168 <br />169 Chair Ficek recommended including an executive summary and emphasizing maps <br />170 and technical details in the plan. <br />Page 4 of 6 <br />Page 173 of 175 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.