My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2007-07-24_PWETC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Minutes
>
200x
>
2007
>
2007-07-24_PWETC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/22/2010 10:46:14 AM
Creation date
1/11/2008 8:12:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
7/24/2007
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 Neprash asked how many city-owned streetlights there were. <br />Ms. Bloom said about 80. Mr. Schwartz said that which lights to use for <br />banners is a question for the commission to discuss. <br /> <br /> Member Vanderwall asked what the life expectancy is of the banners and <br />whether they needed to be cleaned periodically. Ms. Larson said they can <br />last for years. Ms. Larson went on to say that she sees this as a partnership <br />with the City—the Visitor’s Association would purchase them and the <br />City would hang them up. She sees using different banners for seasonal <br />events. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schwartz asked Ms. Larson what the association’s timeline was. Ms. <br />Larson said they didn’t really have one. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schwartz asked the Commission if they wanted the banners to be <br />included with the “Welcome to Roseville” sign item for discussion <br />together. All agreed. <br /> <br /> Member Willenbring suggested having sample banners made up in full <br />size so they could better determine what works best. <br /> <br /> Ms. Larson left the meeting and the discussion continued on the <br />“Welcome to Roseville” signs. Mr. Schwartz presented information staff <br />had developed regarding possible locations for the signs. <br /> <br /> Member Willenbring asked if it was necessary or desirable to have logos <br />of civic organizations on the signs. Member Vanderwall said that as a <br />member of the Rotary Club, he knows that his club is enthusiastic about <br />having their logo on the signs. He said he’s also seen signs with churches <br />listed and that these are important parts of the community. <br /> <br /> Member Neprash said having those logos on the welcome signs would <br />indicate the community has a vibrancy and civic-mindedness. He pointed <br />out that in the sign example, the Fridley sign used similar colors and the <br />same size for all logos, which he liked better than the White Bear Lake <br />sign that used all the regular logo colors and various sizes. <br /> <br /> Member Willenbring liked the style of the Roseville park sign example. <br />He said if they kept the total number of signs down, they could get more <br />elaborate, expensive signs. <br /> <br /> Ms. Bloom said there are limited locations where signs could be placed in <br />right-of-way without getting easements and pointed them out on a map. <br /> <br /> Member Willenbring thought that a great location for a sign would be <br />northbound Snelling at Roselawn, but there isn’t enough room. <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.