My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2016_0725
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2016
>
CC_Minutes_2016_0725
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/26/2016 2:31:57 PM
Creation date
8/17/2016 1:47:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
7/25/2016
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
38
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 25, 2016 <br />Page 19 <br />start before 8:00 a.m. and if this project started earlier, it would be of major con- <br />cern for him as an area resident. <br />Council Deliberation <br />Provided the applicant didn't request and receive a waiver from city code, Mayor <br />Roe advised that hours of operation applied with no crushing activity allowed <br />other than during those specific hours. <br />Etten moved, Willmus seconded, adoption of Resolution No._ (Attachment E) <br />entitled, "A Resolution Approving an INTERIM USE for Crushing and Stockpil- <br />ing of Aggregate Material on the PIK Terminal Property, 2690 Prior Avenue;" Et- <br />ten; amended as follows: <br />• Add Condition #7: "Prior to removal, concrete will be tested for asbestos <br />As part of his second to the motion, Councilmember Willmus asked that the pro- <br />posed Condition #7 be revised to include testing of the foundation poured prior to <br />1970, with concurrence by Councilmember Etten and language further finessed as <br />follows: <br />• "Prior to crushing operations, concrete will be tested for asbestos; [and the <br />portion of the foundation poured prior to 1970 will also be tested prior to <br />any crushing and/or removal;J and if any asbestos is found, work will be <br />halted to create an appropriate change to the crushing and/or removal of <br />stockpiled materials. " <br />Councilmember Etten expressed appreciation for the prior conditions recom- <br />mended by staff and the Planning Commission, noting they were necessary to <br />prepare the site as shove-ready for redevelopment. <br />Councilmember Willmus reiterated that Councilmember McGehee had a valid <br />point; and with the additional condition it would address his concerns. <br />Councilmember Laliberte asked why the IU allowed up to two years to stockpile <br />the material; with Mayor Roe clarifying that was the maximum period allowed <br />under the IU. Councilmember Laliberte stated it was not her preference that the <br />stockpile should remain for that full two year period. <br />Councilmember McGehee stated she would not support this motion, even as <br />amended, opining the city was failing in its duty to protect citizens, especially <br />those using the pathway constructed by the city for their enjoyment. Without any <br />oversight other than the word of the contractor present at tonight's meeting; and <br />with no reasonable condition related to an air monitoring system set up and con- <br />tinually running to monitor the amount of dust in the area, she was even more <br />concerned. Councilmember McGehee noted the fact this was most likely heavily <br />contaminated soil, only identified by the contractor but not by a municipal or state <br />official; and with that material to be crushed on site with the potential to leach in- <br />to the ground water and then Langton Lake, she could not condone this request. <br />Councilmember McGehee noted the city was supposed to be responsible far <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.