My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2005_1121
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2005
>
CC_Minutes_2005_1121
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:28:25 AM
Creation date
11/29/2005 10:04:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
11/21/2005
Meeting Type
Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
50
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
<br />City Council Study Session -11/21/05 <br />Minutes - Page 10 <br /> <br />Staff was directed to return with a formal request for adoption of <br />the 2006 fee schedule as presented, at the November 28, 2005 <br />regular business meeting, as a Consent Agenda item. <br /> <br />5. <br /> <br />Discuss Draft Rules Proposed by the Capitol Region <br />Watershed District <br />City Engineer Deb Bloom and Public Works Director Duane <br />Schwartz provided a detailed analysis or the proposed rules and <br />technical standards to implement goals and policies of the of the <br />Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) Watershed <br />Management Plan. <br /> <br />Ms. Bloom reviewed the background, watershed definition and <br />management issues and boundaries, their authority and the three <br />districts operated and involved with the City of Roseville. <br /> <br />Ms. Bloom noted that the City's Public Works, Environment and <br />Transportation (PWET) Commission had preliminarily reviewed <br />the proposed rules, via a presentation by the CR WD at their <br />October meeting; and she anticipated the PWET would be <br />drafting formal comments at their November 22,2005 meeting to <br />forward to the City Council. These included rate control (peak <br />discharge for new developments); volume controls and <br />pretreatment to remove solids prior to discharge into infiltrating <br />areas; water quality and non-point source pollution reduction; <br />and wetland management related to the Wetland Conservation <br />Act provisions. <br /> <br />Ms. Bloom reviewed the purpose of the proposed rules III <br />preserving and protecting remaining wetlands and impacts to <br />those wetlands. <br /> <br />Ms. Bloom reviewed those areas of the proposed rules that were <br />more restrictive than those of the Wetlands Conservation Act of <br />State Statute. These included flooding stipulations, with a <br />number of Roseville homes on lakes not in compliance; erosion <br />control; and most importantly, city road project stipulations. <br /> <br />Discussion included staffing requirements for enforcement by <br />the CRWD; and current staff practice in addressing problem <br /> <br />Draft Rules <br />Proposed by the <br />Capitol Region <br />Watershed District <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.