My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2019-02-26_PWETC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Minutes
>
201x
>
2019
>
2019-02-26_PWETC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/27/2019 2:42:56 PM
Creation date
3/27/2019 2:42:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
2/26/2019
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.
/
11
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
Mr. Culver stated ultimately the goal of this conversation is to talk about rates. He <br />asked if the Commission wanted to hit all of the commercial users with a higher <br />rate or did the Commission want different thresholds for commercial properties. <br />Member Misra stated if the bulk, or some substantial chunk of what is being added <br />as commercial is actually residential but are multi -unit residential, that would affect <br />the data. <br />Chair Cihacek stated an apartment building is considered a commercial building <br />even if people live in it. The use is commercial not residential. <br />Member Misra stated it is classified as commercial, but the use falls under the sort <br />of drivers that drive residential use. <br />Mr. Culver stated for a traditional market rate or affordable housing, apartment <br />complex, the answer is yes. A lot of the senior housing that the City has added <br />recently actually falls outside of anormal residential use because the senior housing <br />has its own cafeteria in the building, and some are assisted living which gives a <br />commercial element to those buildings and outside of pure residential. <br />Member Misra stated if the condos or apartments or residential multi -unit housing <br />were only looked at, that is where she thought the City would see some savings in <br />water usage with what is being discussed and given there is only one landscaping <br />feature around the entire building she thought it would be a more efficient use of <br />that water use as opposed to individual houses. She wondered if staff did look at a <br />different rate for users' staff might want to separate out the multi -housing units. <br />Mr. Freihammer reviewed commercial water rate analysis with the Commission. <br />Chair Cihacek asked if the City mandated irrigation meters. <br />Mr. Freihammer did not think the City mandated them. He stated a lot of times the <br />building wants to track it for themselves but every building site tracks water usage <br />differently. <br />Member Wozniak asked who decides whether or not a meter is required. <br />Mr. Culver stated the City currently does not have any requirements regarding <br />irrigation meters, but the City could make it a requirement if approved through the <br />City Council. <br />Member Trainor thought this would be financially advantageous to companies and <br />kind of depends on the company's own financial choices. <br />Mr. Freihammer stated that was correct. A company could have two smaller meters <br />if irrigating instead of one larger meter because the two smaller meters might be <br />Page 7 of 11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.