My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2018_11-27_PWETCpacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
201x
>
2018
>
2018_11-27_PWETCpacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/29/2018 10:49:01 AM
Creation date
11/29/2018 10:46:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
11/27/2018
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
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
125 seventy years old and will need to be replaced. He stated Roseville is in the <br />126 replacement phase. <br />127 <br />128 Mr. Freihammer stated the City has had a lot of discussion on establishing a <br />129 different rate structure for the water and that is not included in the report. That is <br />130 something the City Council will consider but as a separate action next year. The <br />131 Commission's recommendation has not been considered yet by Council. <br />132 <br />133 Mr. Freihammer reviewed the City Sanitary Sewer Operations with the <br />134 Commission. <br />135 <br />136 Chair Cihacek asked if the sanitary sewer cha ed on volume or based on the <br />137 type of thing being treated. <br />138 <br />139 Mr. Freihammer stated it was based on volume. <br />140 <br />141 Member Wozniak stated he would like staff to look at other services and charges <br />142 in this report as well and break it out for future reporting. He wondered if the <br />143 costs are increasing by eight percent because the City is using a higher percentage <br />144 of water than other communities did a year ago. <br />145 <br />146 Mr. Freihammer indicated that was correct. He stated the City seen a decrease in <br />147 the peak flows. It is a year after the fact but staff was surprised at the number and <br />148 expected the City to be at average or less because staff thought the City did better <br />149 improvements than other cities but there are still things in the City that need to be <br />150 improved. <br />151 <br />152 Mr. Sandstrom indicated this report is based on 2016 flow data. <br />153 <br />154 Member Wozniak suggested incorporating that information into the discussion <br />155 because it suggests that water conservation efforts might slow cost increases for <br />156 waste water treatment in the future because the sewer charges are based on water <br />157 usage. <br />158 <br />159 Mr. Freihammer stated that was correct. A lot of it too is related to I&I because <br />160 when it peaks, any clear water that goes into the system, the Met Council has <br />161 meters that record when the water comes into Roseville and when it leaves, and <br />162 the City pays the difference between those meters. <br />163 <br />164 Member Joyce asked if this breaks it out between commercial and residential for <br />165 usage. <br />166 <br />167 Mr. Freihammer stated this is the overall, what the proposed budget would be, but <br />168 the City does track that. <br />169 <br />Page 4 of 15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.