My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2011-06-28_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
201x
>
2011
>
2011-06-28_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/28/2011 9:08:16 AM
Creation date
6/28/2011 8:53:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
6/28/2011
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.
/
110
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
Chair DeBenedet and Commissioners were in agreement with those topics <br />suggested by Mr. Schwartz as a good outline. <br />Discussion included recent City Council approval of a Joint Powers Agreement <br />(JPA) between the Cities of Roseville and Maplewood for engineering staff that <br />would address staffing needs identified in the Public Works Strategic Plan and <br />anticipated infrastructure improvements and reconstruction; implementing an <br />improved asset management program similar to the PMP and other areas <br />thoughtfully managed with in -house personnel; areas addressed by the City <br />Council on their recently- adopted 2011/2012 Work Plan; inclusion in the Public <br />Works Preliminary Budget request for an asset management software program <br />and staffing to input and disseminate data into plain and understandable language; <br />and noting that reserve funds have not kept pace with returns on streets, <br />necessitating a review of the existing Assessment Policy and identifying other <br />funding sources. <br />Member Vanderwall requested discussion with the City Council on their <br />individual and corporate interest in the PWET Commission pursuing organized <br />garbage collection; whether to continue gathering information that may lead the <br />City in a different direction than current collection is done; and whether the City <br />Council was committed to those results and what was best for the City or <br />retaining the status quo based on a vocal minority in the community. Member <br />Vanderwall noted that he had worked on the original Solid Waste Commission <br />established by the City Council in the 1970's, when recycling was initiated, and <br />opined that the remainder of the recommendations for organized collection had <br />yet to be pursued. <br />Chair DeBenedet concurred, noting that the PWET Commission had reviewed the <br />situation for the last two (2) years, and wanted to know if it was still a valid <br />pursuit, or if it should be tabled. <br />Member Felice concurred that the current City Council should be consulted about <br />their interest in continuing toward a PWET Commission recommendation. <br />Member Felice expressed her interest in coordinating efforts for issues and further <br />discussion on impacts to parks and transportation and related to a tree census and <br />their implications for pedestrian and biking to area parks. <br />Chair DeBenedet opined that this would be a good opportunity to hold that <br />discussion as well, given the leaning toward going to the public with a bond <br />referendum for park improvements, when the pathway system never seemed to <br />move ahead effectively. <br />Member Vanderwall noted that he attended the Parks Master Plan meeting on <br />pathways and its related Master Plan, noting that pathways had also received the <br />highest public support in the recently- conducted random survey, not just in parks, <br />but pathways to parks or around the City. Member Vanderwall opined that the <br />Page 5 of 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.