My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2026-0428 PWETC Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Minutes
>
202x
>
2026
>
2026-0428 PWETC Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/20/2026 11:01:24 AM
Creation date
5/20/2026 11:01:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
4/28/2026
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.
/
11
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
Chair Ficek clarified that there are no direct assessments to property owners for <br />adding a pathway or sidewalk, but noted that impacts such as placement, trees, <br />and space can lead to pushback, especially on very local streets. He explained <br />that residential streets often have less need for separated pedestrian <br />infrastructure due to lower traffic. In contrast, collector roads like Lydia Avenue <br />and County Road C2 carry higher volumes, making such infrastructure more <br />appropriate. <br />Members Brokaw Palalay and Fergus agreed to maintain consistency, <br />expressing support for not adding the residential connection, given that nearby <br />routes like Hamline Avenue and County Road C2 are expected to provide <br />adequate pathway infrastructure. <br />Mr. Freihammer explained that while some residential segments, like East <br />Snelling Service Drive, were added due to high parking demand and limited <br />walkability, that situation is unique and not comparable to most neighborhood <br />streets. He noted that Arona Street and similar streets have lower traffic and less <br />consistent parking issues, making a pathway harder to justify and more difficult <br />to defend to residents, especially when nearby streets have similar conditions. <br />Based on that, he suggested removing the segment to remain consistent with <br />past practice and avoid unnecessary impacts. <br />Member Luongo asked whether a separate pathway segment for Lydia Avenue <br />was already planned, and whether that connection had been addressed <br />previously. <br />Mr. Freihammer confirmed that Lydia Avenue is already included as a separate <br />pathway segment and noted that it was reviewed and retained in the plan during <br />the previous meeting. <br />Member Brokaw Palalay clarified that her earlier support was based on current <br />conditions, noting that people rely on informal routes because nearby roads, <br />such as County Road C2 and Hamline Avenue, lack safe walking infrastructure. <br />She acknowledged, however, that with planned improvements to those routes, <br />the need for a residential connection may be less critical. <br />Mr. Freihammer noted that while the map shows many planned connections, <br />relatively little has been built so far. However, Hamline Avenue is a good <br />starting point, with future priorities including Lydia Avenue and County <br />Road C2. He indicated the Arona segment would likely rank low and supported <br />its removal, then introduced the next constellation link connecting County <br />Road B2 to Acorn Park via Galtier and Matilda Streets, noting that it runs <br />through a residential area with limited park access and minimal traffic demand. <br />Member Luongo, speaking from personal experience living in the area, <br />explained that she regularly walks along these streets and does not see a need <br />Page 8 of 11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.