|
Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, June 25, 2013 at 6:30 p.m.
1. Introduction / Call Roll
Chair Jan Vanderwall called the meeting to order at approximately 6:30 p.m.
Members Present: Chair Jan Vanderwall; and Members Steve Gjerdingen; Jim DeBenedet; and Joan Felice
Members Excused: Member Dwayne Stenlund
Staff Present: Public Works Director Duane Schwartz and City Engineer Debra Bloom
2. Public Comments
None.
3. Approval of April 23, 2013 and May 28, 2013 Meeting Minutes
Member DeBenedet moved, Member Gjerdingen seconded, approval of the April 23, 2013, meeting as amended.
Corrections:
· Page 3, line 127 (DeBenedet)
Correct preparation of preliminary cost estimates by Public Works Staff (Attachment A) rather than Member DeBenedet
· Page 8, line 331 (Felice)
Typographical correction from “to” to “too”
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
Motion carried.
Member Gjerdingen moved, Member DeBenedet seconded, approval of the May 28, 2013, meeting as amended.
Corrections:
· Page 8, lines 313 - 318 (DeBenedet)
Correct tonnage amount per axle; and strike/correct final line to read “…suggesting that a load of 9 tons per axle is typical.”
Ayes: 2
Nays: 0
Abstentions: (2) Felice and Vanderwall
Motion carried.
4. Communication Items
At the request of Chair Vanderwall, Public Works Director Schwartz provided an update for the PWETC and public on the two (2) recent major rain/wind storm events on Friday, June 21, 2013 and clean-up efforts. Mr. Schwartz noted that many roads were blocked with downed trees, power lines, power poles and debris, some requiring coordination with Xcel Energy where downed electrical lines and power poles were concerned. Mr. Schwartz advised that a number of areas throughout the City of Roseville experienced significant damage, localized flooding on streets and private property, loss of power to a good share of Roseville, including seven (7) of the City’s sanitary sewer lift stations. Mr. Schwartz noted that the City’s Public Works staff rotated portable generators among those lift stations and worked overnight to avoid any damage from sanitary sewer backups to private properties; as well as monitoring one of the water booster stations that tripped over to emergency generators. Mr. Schwartz advised that the City’s Public Works, Police and Fire Departments were working throughout the weekend to respond to the various emergencies; with power finally regained to the last lift station mid-day on Sunday. Mr. Schwartz advised that to-date, staff had received no reports of any sewer back-ups to private property.
Mr. Schwartz noted that most of Saturday was spent opening streets in areas where power lines were not involved; a preliminary assessment was provided to Interim City Manager Patrick Trudgeon and Mayor Dan Roe, and a subsequent emergency meeting of the City Council was called on Saturday morning,. Mr. Schwartz advised that the City Council had declared an emergency under their statutory powers and provisions; and authorized staff to provide curbside debris clean-up for Roseville property owners. Based on initial assessments for staff, overtime costs, and equipment, Mr. Schwartz advised estimated costs for city-wide clean-up could be as high as $500,000, with a more refined cost estimate hopefully available at the City Council’s next Special City Council meeting on Monday, July 1, 2013. Mr. Schwartz noted that crews have been out since Monday chipping and widening streets still covered somewhat, and a contractor would begin tomorrow to assist City crews with curbside pick-up. The City is authorized to use the Ramsey County site on Kent Street for hauling trees and grinding it. Mr. Schwartz alerted the public that the final day to bring material curbside is Monday, July 8, 2013; at which time crews will start their final pass through the City to collect that debris.
Chair Vanderwall expressed his favorable impression with how quickly people could get around the community to some degree, given how substantial the storm was and the strong winds experienced. Chair Vanderwall expressed appreciation to the Public Works Department; and questioned if they also handled clean-up in parks and on trails.
Mr. Schwartz advised that the Public Works crews worked in conjunction with Parks & Recreation staff for parks and trails; advising that he had personally walked several areas before tonight’s meeting. Mr. Schwartz recognized that residents were getting concerned about getting items on the boulevard and off grass; and noted staff’s intent to try to address everyone’s priorities. Mr. Schwartz expressed kudos to Xcel Energy in addressing issues, such as power poles snapped off around the community; and arrival by Sunday of crews from other states to assist local Xcel Energy crews. Mr. Schwartz noted that an emergency such as this stressed the importance of mutual aid agreements in a disaster situation, with equipment and staff available from other jurisdictions and agencies.
City Engineer Debra Bloom provided updates on various construction projects, as included and detailed in tonight’s meeting packet and available on-line at the City’s website at www.cityofroseville.com/projects.
Discussion included an explanation of the Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area public improvements scheduled to begin the week of July 8, 2013; status of the County Road B-2 Pathway Project and recent open house meetings with residents to address drainage and preliminary plans, with the next step to present revised plans based on those discussions at the July PWETC meeting, followed by presentation to the Parks & Recreation Commission in August and the City Council in September for this projected 2014 project, and including Victoria Street as well; and approaching Ramsey County for submission of a request for their cost participation based on recent discussions held by County Commissioners and their interest in enhancing pedestrian efforts throughout the area. Ms. Bloom expressed hope that the county may be interested in sharing in 50% of the sidewalk costs; and seeking an amendment to their transportation plan over the winter months to include their participation. Ms. Bloom advised that the second meeting with affected residents along County Road B-2 held less opposition than the first meeting; with main concerns drainage and the route; estimating that approximately 60% of those residents were supportive, with the remaining 40% in opposition, based unscientifically on her conversations with residents at those informational meetings. Ms. Bloom advised that staff was attempting to focus on individual issues, and anticipated receiving good feedback from the PWETC at their July meeting.
Mr. Schwartz advised that the PWETC, at their June meeting, had requested a map of the catch basins in the city that had been stenciled during the stormwater presentation and discussion; and advised that it is in the process of being revised, and staff would provide the updated map to the Commission at a later meeting.
Additional discussion included the 2013 Pavement Management Program (PMP) mill and overlay project scheduled for this summer; action by the City Council to transfer the Recycling Utility from the Administration to the Public Works Department; and recent news reports on the problems encountered from sanitary wipes going into the sanitary sewer system and plugging up pumps; and another news story on sewer lining applications, as currently being done in Roseville.
5. Pathway Master Plan
Ms. Bloom briefly reviewed the updates by staff for priority segments as previously discussed for the PWETC’s Pathway Master Plan Build-out Plan from the initial 2008 Plan; as detailed in the Attachments to the June 25, 2013 staff report, and seeking feedback from the PWETC on those segments and what additional fine-tuning was indicated. Ms. Bloom clarified that this was a very preliminary list with numerous assumptions; and was only intended as a platform for PWEC brainstorming and revision. Attachments are as follows:
· Attachment A Pathway Master Plan Priority Table
· Attachment B Parks Renewal Program Potential Pathway Project Map
· Attachment C Pathway Master Plan Priority Project Map
· Attachment D 2013 Pathway Map
At the request of Member Felice, Mr. Schwartz advised that the pathway into the parking lot south of Har Mar Mall currently without curb cuts were on the 2013 work plan.
At the request of Member Felice, Ms. Bloom confirmed that the County Road B-2 pathway funding could be carried over to 2014.
Ms. Bloom briefly reviewed how staff had currently and very preliminarily identified funding sources for various segments, and whether or not reconstruction projects were involved that may provide financial assistance or other sources (e.g. Municipal State Aid funds from gas tax monies).
Member DeBenedet expressed appreciation for the considerable amount of work Ms. Bloom had put into this Build-out Plan, opining that it would be very helpful. Member DeBenedet suggested the first step would be for the PWETC to agree on scoring or ranking, even though those scores may need future re-evaluation; and those amenable for on-road versus off-road facilities, based on other components and/or financial considerations.
Members discussed how those major corridors already having a sidewalk on one side, but not both sides, should be prioritized (e.g. Lexington Avenue; Fairview Avenue; County Road C, etc.) based on safety, utility and traffic considerations. Comparisons were made between current priority rationale and that of the 1980’s Non-Motorized Pathway Committee for busy streets, having concluded that off-road facilities were needed on both sides.
In his personal tour of the majority of segments under discussion, Member DeBenedet opined that, independent of their score, small gaps between segments should be a higher priority and addressed immediately, since they would provide visible evidence to the community that some action was being taken; as well as being smaller and requiring fewer financial resources. The general consensus was in agreement with Member DeBenedet.
General discussion included use of any available funding left from a major project to complete smaller segments.
Ms. Bloom referenced Rank #20 (Dale Street S of Reservoir Woods), noting there were grave sites adjacent to the road on the east side, as well as a significant slope, creating real challenges, even though this segment was recommended for completion by the NRATS. Ms. Bloom advised that the NRATS suggested using Dale Court and Alta Vista for an on-road alternative with appropriate signage. Ms. Bloom advised that she had not yet estimated that, but would add it on the next iteration, assuming a pathway along the west side. Members supported this as an alternative, based on the location of the grave sites.
Ms. Bloom advised that she would add an additional line to that segment similar to the one done for the NRATS group.
Further discussion included the gap along Victoria Street, recognizing the challenges of grades north of West Owasso Boulevard; on-road versus off-road segments, as well as the bigger picture in that neighborhood and in relationship to the constellation concept of the Parks & Recreation Renewal program. Ms. Bloom offered to break out costs for various segments, for on-road and off-road options as appropriate. Ms. Bloom addressed original plans for a link associated with Rank #31 (Millwood to County Road C-2) and providing a connection to the neighborhood through using other routes to get people off Victoria due to safety concerns. Ms. Bloom reviewed options, existing signals and 4-way stops that would get pedestrians and bicyclers to Emmet D. Williams School and connect with City of Shoreview pathways (e.g. County Road C-2; Chatsworth north and south; and County Road D) and potential use of a flasher/pedestrian signal. Further south on Victoria, Ms. Bloom suggested discussions with Ramsey County for on-road options on the east side; however, she noted that the options were few due to the challenge of the bridge location. If the west side was used, Ms. Bloom noted that a challenge would be the cost to install retaining walls. Ms. Bloom advised that she would provide one option at the July PWETC meeting as part of the Victoria Street preliminary plan presentation, with an option on Victoria for locating a pathway on the east side to the park and crossing at a pedestrian-activated signal to connect to the trail on the west side; all part of attempting to value-engineer that overall project.
Discussions ensued regarding various options and rationale for including or excluding those options, including the pathway on the northwest/east side from Roselawn into the park. Ms. Bloom noted that one concern was the blind side of the curve with trees impacting visibility; which would make the overall safety better on the east side. Discussions continued defining the various maps and their origination and/or intent (e.g., Natural Resources and Trails Subcommittee, (NRATS) as part of the Parks Renewal Program, or initially with the Parks Master Plan); map discrepancies and scoring over or under 90; upcoming value engineering discussions with Ramsey County as to whether four (4) lanes are necessary from County Road B crossing over Highway 36 as part of an overall planned pathway discussion; and challenges in slopes for sidewalks, existing fences, trees and drainage issues.
Rice Street; County Roads B and C; Victoria Street
Discussion included the challenges along County Road C due to lane restrictions; potential for a 3-lane and/or widening; areas with significant crossings to access ball fields or disc golf facilities; bus commuters and retail options in those heavily-trafficked areas; reality versus ideal locations and restrictions.
Further discussions included; safety concerns with the County Road C bridge between Victoria Street and Lexington Avenue due to vehicle speeds, weather conditions, and poor sight lines; complications on the narrow pathway adjacent to the railroad in Central Park for pedestrian and bicycle sharing; and added challenges when users ignore directional signage to facilitate all user groups.
Further discussion included the current width of the Central Park trail between 8 ft and 10 ft and whether it would be more cost feasible to add an additional 2 ft to segments to facilitate more off-road traffic. Ms. Bloom noted that the possibility of a lane reduction on the County Road C bridge to allow an on-road bicycle facility would require further discussion with the County. Duane highlighted frequent concerns received by staff about pedestrian safety in accessing Acorn Park from County Road C due to crossing four (4) lanes of vehicle traffic and rationale for providing a sidewalk option on the north side in that vicinity while also addressing some type of refuge in the middle of those four (4) lanes of traffic, with the current crosswalk signs insufficient to protect those crossings. Since the traffic counts are not that high in that area, Mr. Schwartz suggested additional discussion with Ramsey County to determine if County Road C could function as a three (3) lane roadway at that point; while recognizing that the intersections were the main issues, and options for widening the roads to four (4) lanes at intersections.
At the request of Chair Vanderwall, Ms. Bloom estimated that the cost for striping a roadway was $.08 per linear foot or approximately $5,000 per mile, depending on the roadway and other amenities; with Chair Vanderwall suggesting that the City pay for that striping if it was reasonable and Ramsey County was in agreement.
Ms. Bloom reviewed the grinding and re-striping recently done on Fairview Avenue south of Roselawn, to reallocate the lanes and shoulders, which Ramsey County supported.
Further discussion ensued regarding the current access issues at Acorn Park, including the location of the parking lot; with staff directed to further consult with the Parks & Recreation Commission; with Ms. Bloom offering to further refine costs for restriping or pedestrian bump-outs or refuges along County Road C from Rice Street to Lexington Avenue. The value of pedestrian signals at these crossing locations were discussed, including the value they would provide on a four (4) lane versus a three (3) lane configuration and the challenges with the numerous cross streets. Staff was also directed to have further discussion with Ramsey County on options to address safety concerns, and Ms. Bloom clarified that reconstruction was not a realistic option.
Victoria Street
Ms. Bloom opined that a logical connection on Victoria Street north of County Road C would be a Millwood or West Owasso connection through the neighborhood and incorporate that cost and breakout on-road from Victoria to County Road C.
Chair Vanderwall opined that further discussion was needed on how best to educate the public seeking some ways for non-motorized traffic to get around Roseville; since the connections needed to be obvious or people made aware of them in order to make use of them.
Ms. Bloom concurred, noting that part of the Parks & Recreation Constellation concepts incorporated those way finding efforts.
Lexington Avenue
Ms. Bloom advised that she continued to hear the need for pathways on both sides of Lexington Avenue.
Ms. Bloom questioned if the PWETC thought a pathway all the way on Lexington to County Road B was a priority regardless of its current priority ranking if money was available.
Member DeBenedet opined that it depended on whether it should be a higher priority than what could be accomplished for less money and fill-in those segments missing to connect the community across Roseville. If a pathway all the way across Roseville was provided on County Road B-2 east and west; and Victoria Street north and south; the biggest gap remaining was on Snelling and Hamline Avenues. If those gaps could be completed, Member DeBenedet opined that this would be a significant and visible accomplishment. Regarding the area west of I-35W, Member DeBenedet opined that there was little that could be accomplished, since there were not many roads there. Member DeBenedet spoke in support of piggybacking on any planned Ramsey Construction on County Road C west of Cleveland Avenue and west to connect eventually to the NE Diagonal. At that point, Member DeBenedet suggested further needs could then be addressed.
Member DeBenedet opined that his priority was to finish out the smaller segments, especially those areas without any off-road facilities.
Chair Vanderwall advised that he had a different perspective. Based on comparisons for County Road C and Lexington Avenue, Chair Vanderwall opined that those were both big, high-volume roads and couldn’t be compared to Hamline Avenue with much less happening. Chair Vanderwall opined that he would install something on the other side of Lexington Avenue before Hamline Avenue. While understanding the logic of completing the routes from a mapping perspective, Chair Vanderwall opined that there was more of a need to address the higher density areas first; and realistically consider the volume of people benefitting.
Members Felice and Gjerdingen concurred with Chair Vanderwall.
Mr. Schwartz opined that that approach also made more sense in major arteries; noting current challenges on Lexington Avenue south of County Road B without a safe intersection for crossing other than mid-block crosswalks, which Ramsey County continues to turn down. Given the number of arterial roadways coming into and crossing Lexington Avenue (Burke, Shryer, etc.), Mr. Schwartz opined that it made sense to get east side connections for those neighborhoods.
Ms. Bloom advised that residents on Parker and Shryer Avenues having safety issues in accessing the park were thrilled with plans for Victoria Avenue; and also wanted something on Lexington from County Road B to Roselawn Avenue.
Further discussion included Lexington Avenue from County Road C to County Road D consisting of mainly Ramsey County Open Space; stoplights at Woodhill but not at County Road C-2, the need to re-evaluate a good crossing on County Road C-2 with traffic changes in opening up that street; and criteria used for scoring.
Ms. Bloom advised that, in the Pathway Master Plan, criteria weighting was detailed on pages 24-25; and suggested a more extensive review by the PWETC before their next meeting to be aware of the rationale for that ranking, since everyone had actually walked the areas.
Member Felice noted that the bus stop at Lexington and Larpenteur Avenues currently required crossing from one side to another.
Ms. Bloom advised that Mr. Schwartz had been working with Ramsey County on the neighborhood served east of Victoria and how to get them safely to their destinations.
Member DeBenedet noted that there were a number of people biking to work on Victoria Avenue, and their reluctance to use Rice Street due to even worse traffic and safety concerns. Member DeBenedet concurred with Chair Vanderwall’s comments about serving the greatest volume of people. Member DeBenedet advised that his previously-stated rationale was based on prior discussions about Hamline Avenue north of County Road C, with limited sidewalk at Hamline Center to County Road C-2 and to the City limits that could require partnership with the City of Arden Hills and/or MnDOT.
Further discussion ensued on priority scoring, recognizing that staff had included traffic volumes where available (both directions, not broken into directions); and how to fashion the build-out plan to rank projects and spending recommendations on an annual basis to initiate the plan.
Ms. Bloom offered that tonight’s discussion focus on what was proposed to be built. Ms. Bloom opined that once it was determined what was being built; then the focus could shift to when it could/should be built. Ms. Bloom suggested that further refinement at the July PWETC meeting, once the priority list had had been further refined.
Mr. Schwartz concurred with Ms. Bloom, noting that this would then allow for a more accurate picture of different costs to establish a 5-10 or 20 year plan, similar to the CIP.
#11 Fairview Avenue (north of County Road C)
Ms. Bloom noted that there was no plan by Ramsey County to rebuild Fairview Avenue in the near future.
#5 County Road C Sidewalk
Chair Vanderwall noted the previous discussion identifying the Acorn Park segment; with Member Gjerdingen noting the need for a pedestrian refuge or median treatments east of Lexington Avenue.
Ms. Bloom advised that she would include that discussion with other on-road and sidewalk needs with Ramsey County.
#26 Rosedale to Har Mar Connection
Given the significant cost estimates on the table, Ms. Bloom opined that a larger discussion for the PWETC should be if there were any other areas in the Highway 36 area that would provide another crossing option; since this was currently the only remaining crossing of Highway 36 identified in the master plan.
Discussion included the possibility of constructing a tunnel similar to that at Dale Street; volume of people walking along Snelling Avenue and significant safety issues; potential of accessing a portion of the MnDOT parcel to get up to County Road B-2; Bus Rapid Transit’s identification of this as a challenge north of County Road B and due to the density of the area and lack of pedestrian-friendly access on Snelling Avenue; and additional challenges on the west side of Snelling Avenue with the number of fast food driveways crossing any available pedestrian amenities.
With concurrence by the PWETC, Ms. Bloom advised that in order to include this project in a build out plan she would need assistance from a consultant to further refine the location the most feasible options for this area.
With Member Felice noting the number of bus riders currently needing to make a mad dash across Snelling Avenue, Ms. Bloom advised that this was an ongoing discussion as part of the BRT meetings.
With Member Gjerdingen observing that it was ironic that given the density of the south side, they could not access transit, Ms. Bloom advised that pedestrian access was not part of the BRT discussions or planning, and would be delegated to MnDOT and affected communities, but not Metro Transit.
Based on the reality that Snelling Avenue and other major corridors, while located in and bisecting the City of Roseville, provided an artery for the entire region. Chair Vanderwall suggested that a more regional mindset needed to be considered; with MnDOT providing more oversight looking at the big picture.
#8 Roselawn Avenue
Ms. Bloom noted that the City of Falcon Heights already provided off-road facilities; and that on-road facilities would be difficult to construct without their cooperation, and advised that staff would need to continue to work with them on options.
#20 Dale Street South of Reservoir Woods
Ms. Bloom referenced previous discussions from tonight’s discussion for future consideration.
#13 T.H. 51 Pathway Connection to Old Snelling (Arden Hills)
Ms. Bloom noted that residents now had access to an informal, pedestrian-mowed grass trail, but they wished for something more permanent, in conjunction with the City of Arden Hills.
With concurrence by Ms. Bloom, Chair Vanderwall opined that this was an example of a busy street but not a busy path.
Discussion included current and/or future use of a pathway by university students ad alternate routes used now; and recognizing that Snelling Avenue was the only connection available to many residents in this area.
#14 Hamline Avenue
Ms. Bloom reviewed the proposed bituminous trail south of County Road B-2 to County Road C in three (3) different sections.
Discussion included on-road options for this Hamline segment; higher priorities south of County Road C based on children safety in that area; and constraints with narrow sidewalks south of County Road C to the Ramsey County Library-Roseville branch.
#34 Alta Vista Drive
With concurrence of the PWETC, Ms. Bloom suggested combining this with the previous Dale Street/Reservoir Woods discussion.
1 County Road D
Ms. Bloom noted Ramsey County had this roadway reconstruction project in their 5 year plan however it had been pushed out a number of times.
Segments with Scores Less than 90
In reviewing these segments, Ms. Bloom questioned if there were any needing more refining or adjustments; and whether the PWETC wanted her to estimate costs or other components at this time.
Member Gjerdingen noted that, from the perspective of narrowing focus, disregarding these ten (10) projects would allow more focus on the higher ranked priorities.
With concurrence of members, Chair Vanderwall suggested disregarding them for now, if the Parks Master Plan didn’t have them included on one of their constellations.
In reviewing #38 (Judith to Iona Connection), Member DeBenedet advised that it was included in Constellation L; with Chair Vanderwall noting that this was very good for that neighborhood, as they currently had no outlet other than Western Avenue.
After further discussion, it was the consensus that Ms. Bloom provide some information on all of them if time allowed.
Next Step
Based on tonight’s direction and discussions, Ms. Bloom advised that she would further refine the segments, get more accurate numbers, and correct map errors; and sought further direction from the PWETC.
Member DeBenedet advised that he had sufficient information to proceed.
Chair Vanderwall asked that Ms. Bloom get the corrections out to the PWETC at her earliest convenience before the next meeting.
Ms. Bloom advised that she would try to get the information out to the PWETC by early July.
At the request of Member Gjerdingen, it was suggested that staff provide limited information on how other cities have tackled this issue and how they handled funding and timing.
Chair Vanderwall suggested only those having a funding process in place for some time, not researching all cities.
Member DeBenedet noted a recent and related newspaper article about the City of St. Louis Park, MN for reference.
6. Review Joint Meeting with City Council
Chair Vanderwall apologized for being unavailable for the joint meeting due to a family funeral out-of-state.
Member DeBenedet advised that the City Council committed to reviewing the resolution previously prepared by the PWETC on organized collection and provide further direction and additional questions to the PWETC for follow-up. Mr. DeBenedet opined that one issue may have been already resolved with the transfer of solid waste from the Administration to the Public Works Departments.
Member Gjerdingen expressed appreciation for the apparent interest and involvement of Councilmember Laliberte with the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) group; and noted his forwarding to staff of a list of upcoming open houses by Metro Transit on the BRT, and affects to Roseville.
7. Select Recycling RFP Evaluation Team Member
Member DeBenedet volunteered to serve again on the Recycling RFP Evaluation Team, having also served on the previous contract evaluation.
Mr. Schwartz provided a brief update on the Draft RFP and incorporation of PWETC recommendations from their May meeting; and City Council action and revisions at their June 17, 2013 meeting; narrowing the RFP to a single-sort option; and bidding cart ownership with both City and Vendor options. Mr. Schwartz anticipated final City Council approval of the RFP at their upcoming City Council meeting; and recommendations for vendors available to the City Council in late August or early September.
At the request of Chair Vanderwall, Mr. Schwartz advised that Mr. Pratt continued to assist him as the point person in the Public Works Department for recycling and solid waste issues. Mr. Schwartz advised that discussions with the City Council were currently underway and drafting of a job description for an addition to the Public Works Department for a position that would focus on strategic planning, engineering, and natural resources issues that would incorporate recycling and solid waste concerns.
At the request of Chair Vanderwall, Mr. Schwartz advised that the City’s proposed solar energy project had been submitted to Xcel Energy, and if and when their response was received, the PWETC would receive an update.
8. Possible Items for Next Meeting – July 23, 2013
· Intersections and Interim Pathway Signage
· Natural Resources Aspect of the NRATS Committee
· Potential tour of pathways, intersections, and projects
Mr. Schwartz suggested a tour of streets and different pavement conditions for August 2013.
Chair Vanderwall expressed interest in visually reviewing various construction materials that were impacted significantly with the recent storms, and possible areas in the City that needed further evaluation, from a standpoint of erosion and stormwater management.
Ms. Bloom advised that staff had begun a list of problem areas, but had not yet completed it.
· Way finding Update
Ms. Bloom advised that she was prepared to provide an update, based on the ongoing work with Mike Stack and his previous presentation to the PWETC.
With the interest expressed by Member Felice on the quality and quantity of Roseville area lakes, Chair Vanderwall suggested that the local Watershed Districts address those issues at an upcoming PWETC meeting.
Ms. Bloom spoke in support of that, noting that the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District is seeking ways to connect with the City.
Chair Vanderwall cautioned that the agenda be kept at a minimum until the Pathway Master Plan update was completed and recommendations made to the City Council.
Mr. Schwartz advised that another future agenda item should include a follow-up on the City’s Undergrounding Policy, based on this recent storm and infrastructure issues at various areas where existing power poles were deteriorating.
9. Adjourn
Member Felice moved, Member DeBenedet seconded, adjournment of the meeting at approximately 8:35 p.m.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
Motion carried.
|