My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2010-10-26_PWETC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Minutes
>
201x
>
2010
>
2010-10-26_PWETC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/24/2010 12:51:07 PM
Creation date
11/24/2010 12:50:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
10/26/2010
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.
/
14
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
review of traffic counts or a traffic studies. While this would fall under <br />the realm of the PWET Commission, Planning staff already relies on the <br />expertise of Public Works Director Duane Schwartz and City Engineer <br />Debra Bloom (in their representation on the DRC) as they review each <br />land use application, seek additional information, or make <br />recommendations during the review process. <br />What additional role would the PWET Commission have other than to <br />rubber stamp staff s analysis? <br />o Suggestions for PWET Commission involvement in the process from the <br />perspective of the Planning Department <br />As the City periodically updates its codes, or special circumstances <br />indicate such a change is evident, and in direct relationship to the PWET <br />Commission's charge from the City Council, their input is invaluable. In <br />retrospect, now that the zoning code rewrite is pretty far advanced, having <br />had input from the PWET Commission on their areas of interest would <br />have been prudent. <br />o Does the City Council need to revise the charge of the PWET <br />Commission <br />Given the recent proposed asphalt plant as an example, and the PWET <br />Commission's role in making recommendations to advance the discussion, <br />and anticipating additional future issues to come forward, if the PWET <br />Commission had been tasked to review the application initially, would the <br />controversy have been diminished or the outcome more clearly determined <br />earlier in the review process? Mr. Trudgeon noted that, while typical land <br />use applications are straightforward and non controversial, they each <br />represent change, and can be divisive when those with specific interests <br />(drainage, traffic, tree preservation) feel they haven't been sufficiently <br />represented. <br />o How would the PWET Commission handle additional workloads on their <br />monthly agenda <br />o Environmental Review by the PWET Commission <br />Mr. Trudgeon noted the occasional Environmental Assessment Worksheet <br />(EAW) through the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and <br />questioned how the PWET Commission could facilitate the City's role in <br />that process. <br />o Public Easements and /or Right -of -Way Vacations <br />Mr. Trudgeon advised that he and Mr. Schwartz had discussed the PWET <br />Commission's role in public easements and /or vacations; and if the PWET <br />Commission should make recommendations related to whether this area <br />appeared to have a future use for the City or if it was deemed surplus. Mr. <br />Trudgeon noted that, even though now such action required a public <br />hearing at the Planning Commission level, was that required by statute, or <br />could that review and recommendation to the City Council be transferred <br />to the PWET Commission, who would in turn hold the public hearing and <br />make formal recommendation to the City Council? Mr. Trudgeon advised <br />that the City had a request for only 3 5 vacations or easements annually. <br />Page 4 of 14 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.