My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2016_0418
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2016
>
CC_Minutes_2016_0418
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/26/2016 9:46:58 AM
Creation date
4/26/2016 9:45:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
4/18/2016
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
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, April 18, 2016 <br />Page 15 <br />As part of that process, City Manager Trudgeon referenced referred to a draft pol- <br />icy (page 30) that addressed that review, inventory and maintenance of those as- <br />sets; and regardless of what software was used, could the data be retained, re- <br />trieved and used as available. Mr. Trudgeon also noted the need to have a data- <br />base with easy -to -understand and follow information as it related to asset history, <br />asset standards and allowed for their periodic review. Again, Mr. Trudgeon ad- <br />vised that this initial draft would be presented to advisory commissions for their <br />input and then resubmitted to the City Council. <br />Councilmember Willmus questioned the cost of implementing a citywide asset <br />management program; with City Manager Trudgeon responding that staff already <br />tracked their time sheets per project, so there would only be an incremental cost in <br />addition to any annual software license fees. <br />Councilmember Willmus used the example of considering ag-lime for softball <br />fields, and questioned if more time was being spent tracking than actually recon- <br />ditioning the field. Councilmember Willmus suggested this was something that <br />needed to be taken into consideration, to identify a point where staff time should <br />be spent on various components versus simply maintaining a fixed schedule to <br />address a particular component or asset and determining how and where an asset <br />management program is tailored. <br />Public Works Director Mark Culver <br />Mr. Culver recognized Councilmember Willmus' point, and clarified that, within <br />the draft asset management program policy itself (lines 20-22) that concern was <br />addressed per department. Mr. Culver noted this provided a list of which assets <br />were being tracked: when, how and why; and provided examples of some equip- <br />ment that was simply replaced on a set schedule since it made no sense to evalu- <br />ate it. <br />Along those lines for tracking, Councilmember McGehee stated that what she <br />personally found missing was maintenance history for city facilities (e.g. Public <br />Works building, City Hall, all six new park buildings, the new fire station, and the <br />skating center). While evaluating ag-lime applications may be too much detail, <br />Councilmember McGehee opined that when tracing maintenance histories of <br />buildings, things could be learned about what is actually worth tracking and what <br />wasn't, that might actually change that life span and maintenance history accord- <br />ingly (e.g. LED light bulbs as a new technology that may evolve over time after <br />its initial experimental stage). <br />City Manager Trudgeon stated that the components of each of those components <br />were included, including their HVAC and electrical systems, for each of those <br />buildings mentioned by Councilmember McGehee, including the six new park <br />buildings. Mr. Trudgeon reported that the fire station had still not been fully im- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.