My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution 7307 Approving Design Issues for the 2008 2009 Street Utility Project
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Parks, Recreation & Forestry Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2008
>
09-25-2008
>
Sept08P&RMeeting
>
Resolution 7307 Approving Design Issues for the 2008 2009 Street Utility Project
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/30/2023 9:05:48 AM
Creation date
8/21/2024 3:19:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Parks, Recreation & Forestry Commission
Documnet Type
Packet
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Page 4 of 11 <br />The committee discussed several design issues, such as the location and number of chokers, <br />as well as a need for a retaining wall for the yards adjacent to the road that are significantly <br />above the level of the road. The consensus of the committee is that the engineers will look at <br />these details and present a final design to the city for approval. <br />Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. <br />B.3: Mike Nill presented the feedback form question results for Hillview Road parking. All the <br />responses indicated resident wanted either one or two side of street parking on Hillview. <br />B.5: On the feedback form question concerning pedestrian accommodations, most responses <br />wanted on-street shared use. <br />The committee discussed options for Hillview with consensus that most residents wanted <br />Hillview to continue as is without change. The residents at the Neighborhood meeting did not <br />express a concern with traffic volume or speed. <br />Committee member Amundsen questioned if keeping the present width would increase the <br />cost because the city standard is 28 feet. Mr. Nill said that he believed the current project cost <br />accounted for Hillview being the current width. <br />Committee member Glazer lives on Hillview and feels that there is no need to change the <br />configuration of Hillview. <br />MOTION/SECOND: Amundsen / Urbanski. Hillview should be reconstructed at a 40 foot width, <br />curb face to curb face, with an 8 foot shared use on each side. <br />Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. <br />B.6: Mike Nill presented the parking options for Hillview Park. <br />x Option 1: add 15 angled stalls on the north side of Hillview Road adjacent to the park, <br />resulting in 6 additional stalls. <br />x Option 2: add 27 angled stalls on the north side of Hillview Road adjacent to the park, <br />resulting in 12 additional stalls. <br />x Option 3: add a bump out on east side of Greenwood Drive with room for 9 parallel <br />parking stalls, resulting in 2 fewer stalls. <br />The feedback form responses were split between citizens that want parking added and those <br />that want no change to parking. There was some correlation between where the respondent <br />lived and their preference for parking. Residents that lived on Hillview or close to the park <br />wanted off-street parking. Residents that lived elsewhere did not want off street parking. <br />Committee chair Warren, and his wife were the only residents from Greenwood, the street <br />adjacent to the west side of the park, at the Neighborhood meeting last Saturday. Mr. Warren <br />is in favor of 27 angled stalls and the 9-space bump out on Greenwood. <br />Parking on Hillview and Greenwood adjacent to the park is posted “No Parking” on one side.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.