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 39 <br /> <br />Councilmember McGehee asked whether the $22.50 is a flat fee you would have <br />to pay forever. Mr. Freihammer explained the fee would be set in the City’s fee <br />schedule. Councilmember McGehee stated in that case, there would be an oppor- <br />tunity to consider it every year should the City find it is falling behind with <br />maintenance costs. <br /> <br />Councilmember McGehee stated she would like this consideration tied to more <br />opportunities because Roseville has a lot of parking lots and while there have <br />been past discussions on how to use water within parking lots and making them <br />more attractive by incorporating BMPs of some type, that is not included in the <br />Code or this language. As an example, Councilmember McGehee noted the Wal- <br />Mart parking lot is very large and includes underground tanks but if the Code re- <br />quired a certain number of trees, water features, or on-site mitigation in the park- <br />ing lot, it would be more attractive. She asked if that could be required in this <br />Policy. Mr. Freihammer answered that would not fall in line with the intent of <br />this Policy which addresses properties that cannot accommodate any mitigation <br />practices due to on-site constraints. He provided several examples and explained <br />that for most sites, this Policy will not apply as it will only apply to sites that can- <br />not handle on-site mitigation. Councilmember McGehee stated in that case, this <br />Policy would not be impacted if there were Code changes to encourage more <br />plantings within parking lots. <br /> <br />Councilmember Etten thanked staff for the Policy changes to incorporate feed- <br />back and asked for an estimate on how long that money would cover mainte- <br />nance. Mr. Freihammer answered that is difficult to estimated but it would cover <br />to the point the system would need to be rebuilt. <br /> <br />Councilmember McGehee stated in that case, staff will estimate how much water <br />has to be moved and the property owner will have to pay the fee that will be held <br />by the City to cover on-going maintenance in perpetuity. Mayor Roe noted all of <br />the fees from all of the sites, together, will fund the on-going maintenance pro- <br />cess, similar to CIP funds. Councilmember McGehee stated two years from now, <br />if someone has the same issue, they may or may not pay this same fee because the <br />fee may be higher but it is a one-time charge. Mr. Freihammer stated that is cor- <br />rect. <br /> <br />Mayor Roe asked the Council if they support limiting the exception to low density <br />residential (LDR) and if it should or should not apply to medium density residen- <br />tial (MDR). The Council consensus was to revise the Policy to include an excep- <br />tion for both LDR and MDR properties. <br /> <br />Mayor Roe referenced the last sentence in Item 1a, noting it is difficult to locate <br />the referenced questions. Mr. Freihammer answered there is no need for that last <br />sentence. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.