My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2011-02-22_PWETC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Minutes
>
201x
>
2011
>
2011-02-22_PWETC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/27/2011 11:12:06 AM
Creation date
5/27/2011 11:11:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
2/22/2011
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.
/
9
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
and the City to provide an understanding of their vital role in stormwater <br />maintenance, even after their purchase of the property to understand specific <br />restraints. <br />Additional discussion included traffic control measures and concerns based on <br />grading; retaining the County Road C -2 easement while not recommending <br />connecting it as a through- street at this time or as part of this proposed <br />development; standard residential streets at 32' for MSA roads and parking on <br />only one side based on MSA classified road requirements for the new streets <br />Fernwood Street and Fernwood Circle); and delineation of the actual 50' setback <br />requirements for wetland protection. <br />Ms. Bloom suggested that additional comments be provided by individual <br />Members to staff prior to the Planning Commission meeting. <br />Chair DeBenedet noted that this stormwater eventually made its way to Lake <br />Josephine where there was a public swimming beach; and the need to protect that <br />water body, and improve its water quality, not further diminish it; thus making it <br />vital for new homeowners to be fully aware of the buffer zoned and their role in <br />protecting water quality. <br />Ms. Bloom advised that the drainage swale and easement were not consistent at <br />this time, and she needed to further address that with the developer's engineer. <br />Further discussion included location of retaining walls and protection of existing <br />mature trees and grades. <br />Member Vanderwall noted his concern in ensuring construction activities not <br />impact Oak tree roots; and overall, spoke in support for the development in <br />increasing the City's tax base and brining new residents into the community. <br />Member Vanderwall opined that it was a great advantage to have existing mature <br />trees already available for property owners, but that the City and developer <br />needed to ensure their protection. <br />Additional discussion included future maintenance of and access to public private <br />areas and easements; location and width of pathways based on the Pathway <br />Master Plan and location of private property; potential for any future widening of <br />Lexington Avenue by Ramsey County and changes to sidewalk locations and <br />widths; easements applied to specific uses, not multiple uses to avoid trespassing <br />on private property; the need for the developer to change references on their <br />documents to the appropriate City and project; and Steve Gjerdingen mentioned <br />the need for a fence along Lexington Ave. <br />Ms. Bloom reviewed the traffic study performed by the City's selected traffic <br />engineering consultant (SRF) with Pulte paying for the study; and addressed <br />current and projected conditions and impacts at five (5') intersections during <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.