Laserfiche WebLink
262 Member Seigler emphasized the city's initiative to save money through addressing <br />263 non-metered usage. <br />264 <br />265 As the city begins metering that usage, Chair Cihacek suggested staff track the <br />266 usage and savings as a demonstration to residents the improvements being <br />267 undertaken by the city, especially focusing on larger public facilities with larger <br />268 land areas. Chair Cihacek noted this would exemplify a bigger return, and whether <br />269 code or usage issues, provide information on those larger use profiles, as case <br />270 studies to use in rolling out the education process. <br />271 lak <br />272 Member Wozniak suggested, if possible, incorporating stormwater management <br />273 into that educational piece as well (e.g. Upper Villa Park and baseball field <br />274 irrigation system), and then look at Fairview Avenue and stormwater issues in that <br />275 area and if there was a way to capture or redirect that drainage. Member Wozniak <br />276 noted this would allow that stormwater to be used in a positive way if used for <br />277 irrigation purposes in place of usin fresh water. <br />278 <br />279 Mr. Culver noted watershed districts%theg-term <br />uge proponents of re but noted the <br />280 difficulty with those large projects in economic payb r those re- <br />281 use systems. Therefore, Mr. Culver noted the goal is to incorporate ther reasons <br />282 beyond financial to pursue those projects. Mr. Culver reported that discussion was <br />283 underway to consider another re-use system by Fairview at Evergreen Park, that, <br />284 with grant application. Mr. Culver noted code items would need to be addressed <br />285 by the Planning Commission and/or City Council, and perhaps considered for larger <br />286 developments of a certain size, that they be required or encouraged — if doing <br />287 irrigation on site — to build a re-use system into their development. Mr. Culver <br />288 advised that s ff woul 1 ok into that further. <br />289 <br />290 6. Sanitary Sewer Services Discussion <br />291 Mr. Culver noted the ongoing hours of discussion at the PWETC and City Council <br />292 levels in continuing to explore options for maintenance or assistance to residents <br />293 for private sanitary sewer services. Mr. Culver deferred to Mr. Sandstrom for an <br />294 update since last discussed and previous consideration of a service warranty <br />295 program and presentation by Paul Pasko on options for lining private services, <br />296 along with what other municipalities were doing. <br />297 <br />298 Mr. Sandstrom provided a brief review of the general cross section as displayed <br />299 and defining public and private lines; ordinances in other cities and city attorney <br />300 input related to enforcement following inspections and service replacement <br />301 requirements. Mr. Sandstrom referenced the necessary Inflow and Infiltration (I & <br />302 I) mandates related to these efforts. <br />303 <br />304 Mr. Sandstrom reviewed some of the programs for discussion, including point of <br />305 sale; inspections based on street projects (Roseville currently does this); inspections <br />306 based on permit applications; city-wide inspections; and/or blanket replacement. <br />307 Mr. Sandstrom clarified that, at this point, the City of Roseville did not require <br />Page 7 of 17 <br />