My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2004-09-28_PWETC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Minutes
>
200x
>
2004
>
2004-09-28_PWETC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/22/2010 11:23:36 AM
Creation date
6/14/2005 8:44:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
9/28/2004
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.
/
5
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
Member Willenbring asked if traffic circles handle more traffic or is it just <br />safer. Deb Bloom said it was a question of efficiency, that it creates less <br />conflicts than with a four-way intersection. She said there would at least <br />be a four-way stop if not a round-about. <br /> <br /> Member Wilke asked about the impact of Prior and C with traffic. Bloom <br />said that in conjunction with the current County C project an access road <br />has been built on the south side. The Prior access will no doubt be <br />signalized. <br /> <br /> Member Willenbring asked if any thought has been given to mass transit <br />being utilized in the area. Bloom said that transit has been talked about <br />quite a bit. There is a master plan for the NE Diagonal Corridor, and other <br />transit opportunities are being explored. Schwartz said that more <br />discussions will be taking place during the process. <br /> <br /> Member Rossini asked if the Twin Lakes Parkway would eventually go all <br />the way to Snelling. Bloom said the initial vision was that it would <br />eventually reach Snelling. They’re looking at making a formal request to <br />Mn/DOT regarding that access. There has also been discussion about the <br />on/off ramp at Cleveland and C but that is farther in the future. <br /> <br /> Joe Samuel went on to explain the plans for watermains, sanitary sewer <br />lines and drainage. <br /> <br /> Member Willenbring said it was admirable that they were keeping the <br />impervious area down to less than what it was before but that it was <br />probably out of balance before. We need to try and get it back to where <br />it’s more manageable. <br /> <br /> Member Wilke asked if there was any information on how the quality of <br />water would improve over this project. Mr. Samuel said that they haven’t <br />looked at making any improvements to Langton Lake but assumptions can <br />be made that since right now water drains from the trucking facility and is <br />untreated, it would improve with the development since water will run <br />through a series of upstream ponds before it gets to Langton Lake. <br /> <br /> Dennis Welsch said that during the Phase I development storm ponds were <br />added to the SE corner of Langton Lake and water quality measurements <br />were taken at that time. In 1999 new measurements were taken, and the <br />water quality had improved to the best readings in 10 years, which is a <br />direct result of adding the storm ponds. Member Willenbring said that it <br />could also have to do with the trucking industry downgrading. Welsh said <br />that even though there are less trucks on the site, there are more trailers <br />than ever before. <br /> <br /> Mr. Noonan explained the next steps in the process. <br /> <br />Page 3 of 5 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.