My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2015_0112
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2015
>
CC_Minutes_2015_0112
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/26/2015 9:50:43 AM
Creation date
1/28/2015 4:22:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
1/12/2015
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday,January 12, 2015 <br /> Page 9 <br /> At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Goldblatt advised that there <br /> were 127 units in the building, all Section 8, and reviewed the number of units in- <br /> spected(HUD a minimum of 10% and REACT usually 25% of the units). <br /> Councilmember McGehee opined that the building was well maintained, and ex- <br /> pressed her appreciation for the sense of community by the tenants, that she had <br /> personally observed in her site visit. Councilmember McGehee asked if it would <br /> be possible to coordinate the City's inspection of units with those of other agen- <br /> cies simultaneously for less intrusiveness of tenants. Councilmember McGehee <br /> expressed her empathy for tenants and her interest in working something out. <br /> Mr. Goldblatt spoke in favor of that coordinated effort; and Mr. Munson respond- <br /> ed that it could be possible, but given scheduling of limited staff and the number <br /> of other building inspections, he could not guarantee that it would always be fea- <br /> sible,but offered to pursue such an effort. <br /> Councilmember Willmus sought confirmation that the City ordinance calling for <br /> initial inspection of 100% of units to establish a baseline. <br /> Mr. Munson clarified that staff was initially inspecting 25% of units annually over <br /> a three year cycle, at which time it rotated. Mr. Munson noted that the City did <br /> not have sufficient staff to do an inspection of 100%of the units at one time. <br /> At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Mr. Goldblatt confirmed that the fa- <br /> cility had a large community gathering space for use by its tenants. Councilmem- <br /> ber Laliberte suggested that staff arrange with Mr. Goldblatt for a presentation to <br /> tenants on the City's rationale in and the purpose and intent of the inspection pro- <br /> cess and what that inspection involved. <br /> Both Mr. Goldblatt and Mr. Munson expressed interest in pursuing that avenue; <br /> with Mr. Goldblatt noting the annual presentation by the City's Fire Inspector in <br /> that group setting. <br /> When public comment was sought by Mayor Roe, no one come forward to speak <br /> to this issue. <br /> Councilmember Willmus stated that he was not supportive of waiving the City in- <br /> spection; and supported pursuing the strategies suggested by Councilmember <br /> McGehee if and where feasible. <br /> Councilmember Roe concurred, further supporting the suggestions of Coun- <br /> cilmember Laliberte. <br /> Laliberte moved, Willmus seconded, DENIAL of the request of Roseville Senior <br /> Apartments Building, located at 1045 Larpenteur Avenue, for exemption from the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.