My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2019-06-25_PWETC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Minutes
>
201x
>
2019
>
2019-06-25_PWETC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/23/2019 8:06:54 AM
Creation date
8/23/2019 8:06:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
6/25/2019
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.
/
10
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
both residential and commercial properties. He summarized the discussion to date <br />with the Commission. <br />Chair Cihacek indicated the Commissioners that have been through the residential <br />discussion feel pretty good about the recommendation. <br />Member Spencer indicated he read through the information and felt there was a lot <br />there and that due diligence was done and was comfortable with the <br />recommendation. <br />Mr. Freihammer reviewed the Commercial Water rate structure with the <br />Commission. <br />Chair Cihacek noted if commercial rates are raised the business does not bear the <br />cost of that rate exclusively, it will be shared in the cost of the product, service and <br />is not as clean of a cost increase as a residential rate. To really be impactful rates <br />must be raised dramatically. There is not the same incentivization to conserve <br />water because the costs are passed on. He noted the Commission did talk about <br />meter separation in order to determine how much is irrigation rather than <br />hypothesis. <br />Mr. Freihammer stated staff looked at Richfield and that is the route that city went <br />with. Richfield required commercial accounts to separate the two and is one way <br />to at least have irrigation charged at the highest tiered rate as a way to incentivize <br />the business to use less irrigation and one way to go. There are not a ton of <br />commercial properties that have extensive irrigation in the City, but there are some <br />and could potentially impact them. That would address irrigation. There are some <br />issues. As new buildings are built with redevelopment and new things installed it <br />is pretty easy to accommodate it right then and not much for additional costs up <br />front. If it is mandated within a year of being built there is more expense to retrofit <br />some buildings and will be more difficult to separate the water line, etc. That is an <br />option to look at moving forward. <br />Member Hammer asked if there has been any discussion about incentivizing new <br />toilets or more efficient equipment in redeveloped family housing. <br />Mr. Freihammer indicated that has not been discussed too much. He thought that <br />is one of the reasons why there has been a downward trend. Anytime anyone <br />upgrades anything and certainly with all of the redevelopment going on in <br />Roseville, those items have been put in and kind of where the market has gone. As <br />buildings get upgraded that change occurs. That is certainly something that can be <br />incentivized but was not sure if there was a need on the appliances. <br />Mr. Freihammer noted one thing that has been talked about, especially on the <br />residential side but could be done on the commercial side, is incentivizing people <br />who do have irrigation to do a smart meter. He noted the City is also looking at its <br />Page 6 of 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.