My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2020_08-25_PWETCpacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
202x
>
2020
>
2020_08-25_PWETCpacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/18/2020 11:52:08 AM
Creation date
9/18/2020 11:49:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
8/25/2020
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
181
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
34 Member Spencer asked when there is a vacant lot, who is responsible for keeping <br />35 down the weeds and mowing. He noted there is a lot down the street on South <br />36 McCarrons where a prof ect to build a house went sideways and the structure had to <br />37 be torn down and now there are just weeds there. <br />38 <br />39 Mr. Culver indicated generally speaking, whoever owns the lot is responsible for <br />40 maintaining the vegetation as if there is a house there. There is an Ordinance for <br />41 this in the city. He explained he was not sure what the current owner status is with <br />42 the lot on South McCarron because it was basically in foreclosure and the city had <br />43 some interest in it but those meetings were behind closed doors so he was not privy <br />44 to the information and what is going on. He noted staff will follow up on this to <br />45 find out who is responsible. <br />46 <br />47 Member Hammer indicated she was interested to learn more about the basin going <br />48 in on Brenner. <br />49 <br />i <br />50 Mr. Culver reviewed the progress and plans with the Commission. He noted a lot <br />51 of trees were removed and the city has a pretty aggressive landscaping plan for the <br />52 lot. <br />53 <br />54 Member Cicha indicated he was curious about the iron enhanced sand and <br />55 wondered if it had a life span to it. <br />56 <br />57 Mr. Culver indicated the sand does need to be recharged but was not sure how often. <br />58 <br />59 Mr. Freihammer explained Roseville installed on Williams Street, by Lake <br />60 McCarrons one of the first enhanced ones about 12 years ago and in 2019 the city <br />61 did its first refresher of the sand where the city re -segregated the sand to break it up <br />62 a little bit but did not have to add any filings yet. That is actually one of the test <br />63 sites to see what the life expectancy is but it is anticipated that at some point <br />64 additional iron will need to be added to the sand. He figured it was roughly atwenty <br />65 year life span. <br />66 <br />67 Member Huiett indicated she just recently visited Langton Lake and the water did <br />68 not appear to be very high quality and thought she could use some more education. <br />69 She noted the interpretive signage was very nice. She thought it would be <br />70 interesting to learn about the evolution and what has been happening at that lake. <br />71 <br />72 Mr. Culver explained Langton Lake is challenging because it is very shallow, <br />73 especially during the hot weather. He noted the lake also gets a lot of runoff and <br />74 does have some substantial algae blooms in it. <br />75 <br />76 Chair Wozniak asked about the Partners in Energy application. <br />77 <br />78 Mr. Culver indicated staff has not heard anything yet. The applications were due <br />79 in July and were submitted prior to the deadline. <br />Page 2 of 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.