My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2005-06-28_PWETC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Minutes
>
200x
>
2005
>
2005-06-28_PWETC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/22/2010 11:09:59 AM
Creation date
9/7/2006 4:17:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
6/28/2005
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.
/
6
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 that area could have a special classification <br />since it’s an older area and many things about current properties may not <br />conform to current city codes. Schwartz said that residents can always <br />request a variance for special situations. <br /> <br /> Member Willenbring said that he spoke with several residents in that area <br />and there is concern about people who are fishing in the lake and park for <br />long periods of time on the street and leave lots of garbage behind. <br /> <br /> Member Shiely pointed out that the numbers do not tie out. Duane <br />Schwartz and other Commission members explained what the figures <br />meant. Member Shiely said he thought the work done on the park side of <br />the street should be assessed to the Parks Department and paid for by the <br />whole city, not just these residents. Schwartz said to keep in mind that the <br />neighborhood itself requested the realignment of the road. <br /> <br /> Member Shiely said that the project should be bid in different segments <br />depending on the width of the road. Chair Wilke said that wouldn’t be <br />very cost effective. Member Willenbring said that as a former contractor <br />he didn’t think the cost would vary any more than a few cents either way <br />and they wouldn’t have time to separate a few cents here or there. Chair <br />Wilke said that in dealing with contractors at his job with Mn/DOT he <br />agrees with Member Willenbring that it would only be a difference of a <br />few cents and contractors don’t have time to make such minute <br />calculations. <br /> <br /> Member Shiely said he thought there should be concrete sidewalks <br />throughout the whole area instead of partly bituminous as is in the plans. <br />Schwartz said the reason there is bituminous pathway planned for the park <br />is that there is bad soil there that will settle over time. A concrete <br />sidewalk would have to be replaced, but bituminous would settle with the <br />soil. <br /> <br /> Member Shiely talked about seniors being able to defer assessments until <br />the sale or refinance of their property. Chair Wilke said he should bring <br />that information to the public hearing on assessments. <br /> <br /> John Kysylyczyn, 3083 Victoria Street, spoke on the assessment policy <br />recently being simplified by the City Council and as such means it’s not <br />going to be fair to every person. He said he considers the numbers in a <br />feasibility report to be rough estimates. Chair Wilke agreed that they were <br />engineering estimates. <br /> <br /> <br />5.Commission Rules of Procedure <br /> <br /> Chair Wilke proposed to hold this until the next meeting since two <br />members of the Commission were absent. <br /> <br />Page 2 of 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.