CC_Minutes_2016_0822 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, August 22, 2016 Page 39 While packet materials referenced the tenant in this building, Mr. Murphy noted that Attachment P showed another building on the property to the north, and ques- tioned if an additional tenant was also impacted in that ancillary structure by the hazards outlined for this building. As a resident of Roseville, Mr. Murphy requested that the entire property be ad- dressed, including all structures and trailer storage on site; and that it be brought into compliance specifically for life safety issues at a minimum. At the request Mayor Roe, staff returned to the table to respond to public com- ments and address questions of the City Council. Councilmember Etten asked if there was an alternative water system other than the metered line; seeking an explanation of how the sprinkler system was work- ing. Mr. Englund responded that the fire sprinkler line was separate, with no meter to identify it. Specific to Councilmember Etten as to how to test the system, Mr. O'Neill admit- ted part of staff s confusion at their first inspection was that the sprinkler system was found in a closed position, with the Public Works Department showing no movement on the meter in five years. As explained by Mr. Dorso, there was a separate connection from the street that was completely unmetered, with Mr. O'Neill making a assumption that meant there were no check valves either. Councilmember Etten asked if the city had a normal commercial inspection schedule, similar to that currently used for multi-family units. Mr. O'Neill responded that according to past practice, the city had a"reactive" in- spection program, and did not typically inspect commercial properties other than when triggered by a permit. However, starting in 2016, Mr. O'Neill advised that the city had begun a"proactive" inspection program to inspect all buildings in the city over the next five years, including commercial, retail and the current multi- family inspection schedule. Mr. O'Neill advised that the plan was for all build- ings within the city to be inspected within that timeframe. Mr. O'Neill stated that Mr. Dorso was correct that some progress was being made in resolving some of the life safety issues. However, Mr. O'Neill further stated that, based on what staff observed that day, they could have condemned the build- ing on the spot and emptied it of occupants at that time, including all workers, customers and anyone in the building. While the property owner, his representa- tives and tenant seemed to indicate the city should have somehow told them fire code requirements, Mr. O'Neill clarified that was the express responsibility of a building owner; and if they required help, the city was available to assist and ad-