2015-04-28_PWETC_AgendaPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

% 01 =0J 400 Member Cihacek stated that he had no problem in shifting funds to determine if 401 staff s hypothesis is accurate, which should be known within the next three years; 402 however, he further stated that he would not support a forever shift in that 403 funding, and asked that staff make the annual review of the situation a standing 404 communication item on the PWETC agenda as additional information becomes 405 available to staff. KIM 407 Chair Stenlund concurred, asking that staff provide an annual Pavement 408 Condition Report to the PWETC. 409 410 As a frequent bicycler in the community and area, Member Gj erdingen opined 411 that it was really great to not have seal coating on roadways in their first 5 — 8 412 years, but after that roads deteriorated faster, noting that there is a tradeoff in each 413 situation. 414 415 Chair Stenlund noted that, in the PWETC's occasional field trips this would 416 continue to be a topic of interest during such a tour. 417 NLAV 418 8. Sewer and Water Utility Lateral Ownership Discussion 419 Mr. Schwartz provided a presentation on sewer and water laterals, as a follow-up 420 to information provided at the last PWETC meeting In response to questions 421 raised by the PWETC at that meeting, staff provided the following update: 422 • Cleanout const tion cost is estimated at $1,000 per connection, depending 423 on site conditions. 424 • Current plumbing code requires cleanouts every 100' and the City could 425 require a clean out at the roperty line if the City owned the lateral under the 426 right-of-way. 427 There were 45 permits issued for sewer repairs at residential properties in 428 2014, which was average. 429 There was only one per tissued in 2014 for a water lateral repair. 430 431 At e request of Member Cihacek, Mr. Schwartz advised that the City's 432 plumbing code could be changed to make it more relative to setback space, but it 433 relied on thetate's Plumbing Code requirements. 434 435 • Permit inf rmation is retained in City records, but in various formats from 436 database to paper, depending on its age and available technologies or data 437 retention systems in use at that time. 438 • Point of sale requirements could be whatever the City wanted in its code, 439 subject to existing legal restrictions, but it was very controversial, and needed 440 to be considered from a standpoint of what was reasonable from that legal 441 standpoint and in consideration of property owner rights. 442 • While previous homeowners are subject to disclosure laws, responsibility can 443 be difficult to prove. Page 10 of 17