My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2006-04-25_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
200x
>
2006
>
2006-04-25_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/22/2010 4:09:27 PM
Creation date
9/11/2006 10:33:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
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.
/
107
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 />Member Neprash asked what the timeframe was for completion of the <br />plan. Duane Schwartz said the schedule would be for the Commission to <br />focus on various sections of the plan throughout the year. <br /> <br />8. County Road C Streetscape Process Discussion <br /> <br />Deb Bloom updated the Commission on the public hearing held the <br />previous night at the City Council Meeting and on different aspects of the <br />project and then requested input from Commission members. <br /> <br />Chair Wilke suggested talking with White Bear Township about <br />maintenance issues on their streetscape project so that we can learn from <br />their mistakes. <br /> <br />Duane Schwartz suggested that the Commission could take a driving tour <br />of the streetscape project, as well as tour streetscapes in other cities. <br /> <br />Member Neprash said the section of Rosegate that goes under Highway 35 <br />would be a nice section to add to the streetscape. Bloom said that area had <br />been considered as part of the B-2 Pathway Project. <br /> <br />9. Traffic Safety Committee Ordinance <br /> <br />Duane Schwartz went through the history of this ordinance. The City <br />Council has referred the ordinance to the Commission for their input. <br />Schwartz said his lUlderstanding from the Council meeting was that <br />Councilmembers were mostly concerned with regulatory signage, such as <br />parking. <br /> <br />Member Neprash said that even if the Council designated this authority, <br />they still could step in whenever they saw fit. Bloom said that the <br />majority of the parking requests have gone before the Council because of <br />the citywide impact. Schwartz said signage to direct traffic flow generally <br />ends up before the Council as well. <br /> <br />Schwartz showed Commission members the Minnesota Department of <br />Transportation manual that lists guidelines for all sign placement in the <br />state. Chair Wilke questioned whether that was the only source for <br />determining whether a sign is place or not. Schwartz said they would also <br />do an engineering study to determine if the sign was warranted. Schwartz <br />said that at the Council meeting the City Attorney stated it was better to <br />have signage placed based on the professional opinions of engineers, the <br />state manual, etc., rather than on a citizen body reacting and making a <br />political decision. <br /> <br />Member Neprash said he would think the Council designates a number of <br />authorities to staff. Chair Wilke said if the Council has designated <br /> <br />Page 3 of 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.