My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2006-04-25_PWETC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Minutes
>
200x
>
2006
>
2006-04-25_PWETC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/22/2010 10:49:44 AM
Creation date
9/8/2006 9:16:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
4/25/2006
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
<br />6.Citywide Traffic Model Discussion <br /> <br /> Member Neprash said that he works for a consulting firm and discussion <br />on this topic may present a conflict of interest. Duane Schwartz said that <br />the discussion tonight was very general, and there shouldn’t be a problem. <br /> <br /> Schwartz gave some background information on this topic and explained <br />what the city is trying to accomplish with creating a traffic model. <br /> <br /> Chair Wilke asked how this would tie into other communities. Schwartz <br />said it would be designed in consideration of other traffic models, such as <br />the Met Council’s model. <br /> <br /> Schwartz said he’d like to take this to the Council in May to get approval <br />to send it out for proposals. <br /> <br /> Member Fischer asked where the funding was coming from. Schwartz <br />said the currently budgeted $25,000 is coming from general tax funding. <br />Where the rest of the money is coming from is still under discussion. <br /> <br /> Chair Wilke moved to recommend proceeding with development of a <br />citywide traffic model concept through request for proposal. Member <br />Neprash seconded. <br /> <br /> Ayes: 4 <br /> Nays: 0 <br /> Motion carried <br /> <br /> <br />7.Neighborhood Traffic Policy <br /> <br /> Deb Bloom presented information on what some other communities are <br />doing and asked the Commission if they feel this is a city policy issue that <br />should be addressed. Member Neprash said it seems to be a parallel <br />discussion to traffic modeling. Chair Wilke said in his job at Mn/DOT he <br />had fielded a lot of resident complaints and his impression was that one or <br />two cars speeding down the road seemed to turn it into a freeway in the <br />minds of the residents. He wondered if there’s a way to filter out those <br />complaints. Bloom said because we don’t currently have an established <br />policy we don’t have any way to define what a traffic problem is. <br /> <br /> Chair Wilke said he looked through the current Blaine policy that was <br />provided as an example and said he thought it was very informative and <br />complete. Duane Schwartz said there are other policies out there that have <br />more information on other aspects of the problem. <br /> <br /> Chair Wilke suggested that staff explore other cities’ policies and plans <br />and report back to the Commission. <br /> <br />Page 3 of 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.