My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2016_0912
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2016
>
CC_Minutes_2016_0912
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/6/2016 10:34:29 AM
Creation date
10/6/2016 9:31:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
9/12/2016
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
57
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, September 12, 2016 <br />Page 29 <br /> <br />Councilmember Etten stated he has heard the concerns of the neighbors around <br />the historical water issues and agrees with the petition that this is an area the City <br />needs to address, of which staff is acutely aware. He stated he is interested in <br />looking at ways to address those concerns and how to fund it. Councilmember <br />Etten noted the Roseville School District is considering updating its facilities at <br />Fairview School and asked whether the City can work with them as they do other <br />construction to retain and hold water from affecting Gluek Lane. <br /> <br />Councilmember Etten stated he does not think this property owner can be held re- <br />sponsible for water arriving from other sites and noted the proposed BMPs will <br />meet Roseville’s and the Rice Creek Watershed’s standards and carry mainte- <br />nance agreements to hold the water on the subject property. He felt Condition d <br />clearly outlines the requirement to retain and mitigate on site run off caused by <br />the proposed new development, which addresses the concerns both from within <br />that property and future impacts on other properties. <br /> <br />Councilmember Willmus stated when this subdivision came before the Council <br />previously, his concern was with regard to the site exacerbating the situation that <br />currently exists. He stated Condition d goes a long way, in his mind, to getting at <br />that concern with respect to the finding he had put forward previously so he is <br />comfortable with Condition d being in place. Councilmember Willmus stated he <br />had a bit of hesitation knowing that this is going well beyond something that is <br />typically outlined in Code but confident that the applicant has come forward and <br />testified to the fact that he (Mr. Koland) will accept this condition and go forward <br />in good faith and put in place. Councilmember Willmus agreed with Coun- <br />cilmember Etten’s comments relating to existing conditions in this area and those <br />not lying at the feet of the applicant and not being punitive in that regard in the <br />applicant’s ability to subdivide his property. <br /> <br />Councilmember McGehee stated she does not support this as she does not feel <br />comfortable with Condition d, enforcement, and is not happy with sketches and <br />seeing the engineering information she would like to see. Also, she is not of the <br />opinion that the Council has seen the end or limit of the rain events experienced <br />this summer. Councilmember McGehee stated she prefers to err on the side of <br />caution given what the City Engineer said we have the potential of mitigating in <br />that area right now. She preferred a more cautious approach of the petition and <br />majority of residents who think it should be limited now until there is a better <br />handle on what the rain events are going to be, what mitigation can go on around <br />this 120-acre site, which may not include the back fields of Fairview. She is also <br />not sure whether Fairview is that much higher than the high edge of Gluek Lane. <br />Councilmember McGehee continued she is not sure that anything she sees in the <br />foreseeable future or that she heard from the City Engineer is going to ameliorate <br />the problem that already exists. She does not support the argument that other <br />people got to do this in the past because in the past, we had different rain events <br />and conditions. Councilmember McGehee stated she does not think it is the pru- <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.