My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2016_0711
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2016
>
CC_Minutes_2016_0711
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/29/2016 3:26:01 PM
Creation date
7/26/2016 10:35:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
7/11/2016
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
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, July 11, 2016 <br />Page 13 <br />in violation, a variable timeframe would be established depending on each situa- <br />tion and whether the resolution would be easy or more extensive. If the property <br />owner still didn't respond to the city's initial notice, at that point the city would <br />apply the surcharge and allow them to explain why they continued to be noncom- <br />pliant. Mr. Culver advised that the intent was to enforce action far those proper- <br />ties appearing to ignore the notice of noncompliance and resolve the issue. <br />Councilmember McGehee thanked Mr. Culver for that explanation to clarify the <br />fees. <br />Regarding the temporary waiver, Councilmember McGehee asked if the city had <br />a definite timeline for those situations where property owners were required to run <br />water due to lack of depth of water lines. Councilmember McGehee stated her <br />concern was that temporary fixes don't serve as a permanent solution. <br />Mr. Culver advised that staff would continue to monitor those properties with <br />freeze problems depending on the frost depths annually since they varied from <br />year to year. Mr. Culver noted timeframes would not be that date-specific that it <br />would impact those properties. <br />At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Freihammer advised the intent was that those <br />properties apply annually for a waiver since staff was unaware of their ground <br />water situations that could change and may only be temporary. At the further re- <br />quest of Mayor Roe, Mr. Freihammer confirmed that if a property owner paid a <br />waiver they would not be paying a surcharge. <br />Mr. Culver further clarified that the first time a waiver was applied for if a proper- <br />ty owner was discharging to the front of their home, the waiver may apply this <br />year, but once other options were identified to redirect that sump pump flow, <br />waivers would no longer be granted in most cases. <br />Councilmember McGehee opined that seemed to be institutionalizing something <br />that should be corrected; further opining she couldn't imagine any situations that <br />could not be corrected and water routed accordingly, whether underground or via <br />another option. Councilmember McGehee stated her preference would be to use <br />the waiver to assist residents with an appropriate amount of time to get the prob- <br />lem permanently fixed, but not to seek an annual waiver. <br />Mr. Culver advised that if staff determines a situation is not correctable, which <br />may be possible in limited cases where the back yard grading isn't conducive to <br />correct it, it may be necessary to direct the sump pump flow to the front yard. <br />However, in the majority of situations where a solution can be found, Mr. Culver <br />advised that if the property owner continues to seek an annual waiver, the city <br />could deny those waivers and require the situation be resolved or the property be <br />subject to the ongoing surcharge. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.