My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2005-08-23_PWETC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Minutes
>
200x
>
2005
>
2005-08-23_PWETC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/22/2010 11:09:07 AM
Creation date
9/8/2006 8:47:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
8/23/2005
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.
/
5
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. Kysylyczyn wanted the Commission to include in their letter that they <br />wanted the maximum number of bidders. <br /> <br /> Member Willenbring said the letter should be as simple as possible. <br />Schwartz said he would draft a letter and have Chair Wilke review it. <br /> <br /> <br />3.Approval of July meeting minutes <br /> <br /> Member Willenbring moved to approve the minutes of July 26, 2005, of <br />the Public Works, Environment and Transportation Commission. Member <br />Fischer seconded. <br /> <br /> Ayes: 5 <br /> Nays: 0 <br /> Motion carried <br /> <br />6. Watershed District Rules Changes/Implementation <br /> <br /> Item out of order: <br /> <br /> Duane Schwartz said he’d like to have a discussion on changes going on <br />in watershed management organizations. <br /> <br /> Deb Bloom gave some background on the three watershed districts within <br />Roseville and on the new requirements for infiltration that are being put on <br />cities. It’s much more difficult for Roseville, as a fully-developed city, to <br />meet these new standards than it is for some other outer ring suburbs. <br />Schwartz asked the Commission for their input on what they think the <br />City’s position should be. <br /> <br /> Member Willenbring asked if these new requirements would be directed <br />towards commercial developments as well. Bloom said it already is. <br /> <br /> Member Shiely said that the cost, which would probably be over $200,000 <br />per mile in five years, is prohibitive. He said it’s onerous, retroactive and <br />economically prohibitive. <br /> <br /> Member Fischer asked what exceptions, if any, are built into the rules. <br />Bloom responded that there may be exemptions if there is soil <br />contamination or a high water table, or also if the road is less than 100 feet <br />long. <br /> <br /> Member Wilke asked if the Met Council was dictating the rules. Bloom <br />responded that each watershed district is an independent governing <br />agency. <br /> <br />Page 2 of 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.