My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2010_1122
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2010
>
CC_Minutes_2010_1122
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/14/2010 11:58:24 AM
Creation date
12/14/2010 11:58:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
11/22/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
49
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
City Council Meeting <br /> Monday, November 22, 2010 <br /> Page 15 <br /> Councilmember Ihlan questioned staff recommendation for residential storm wa- <br /> ter permits and permit renewals every five years, when no current amounts were <br /> indicated; and sought clarification under what circumstances a permit was re- <br /> quired and staff's rationale for those fees. <br /> Mr. Miller advised that, as detailed in the staff report (line 40), explanation was <br /> provided that the new zoning code, scheduled for adoption in the near future and <br /> by 2011, provided allowances for impervious coverage above the current thirty <br /> percent (30 as long as a property owner implemented localized storm water <br /> practices on a residential level and on -site. In order to ensure ongoing compliance <br /> of the property, Mr. Miller advised that it would require initial and periodic re- <br /> view by City Engineers and Technicians. <br /> Public Works Director Duane Schwartz advised that it was the intention for those <br /> exceeding the current zoning code in terms of 30% lot coverage, whenever a va- <br /> riance for 50% coverage was permitted, that sufficient best management practices <br /> (BMP's) be installed; but that no additional requirements were indicated if imper- <br /> vious coverage was at 30% of less. <br /> Mayor Klausing reminded Councilmembers that the proposed fee schedule for <br /> false alarms was included with this action; and recognizing previously- expressed <br /> concerns about the higher amounts recommended by staff, sought any further dis- <br /> cussion or comment specific to those proposed rates. <br /> Mayor Klausing spoke in support of the proposed false alarm fees as recommend- <br /> ed by staff; opining that the concerns previously addressed were not sufficient to <br /> override the staff recommended rates; and his inclination would be to implement <br /> those rates at this time with a caveat for review in 12 months after practical appli- <br /> cation. Mayor Klausing opined that, whether you were a homeowner or business <br /> owner, if you already had five false alarms, you needed to take steps to alleviate <br /> the problem and become a responsible user of the alarm system. <br /> Councilmember Ihlan requested, and Mayor Klausing declared the question di- <br /> vided to break out the staff- recommended false alarm fees. <br /> Klausing moved, Roe seconded, enactment of Ordinance No 1400 entitled, "An <br /> Ordinance Adopting the 2011 Fee Schedule (Attachment A), effective January 1, <br /> 2011; excluding False Alarm Fees detailed on page 3 of the 2011 Fee Schedule. <br /> Roll Call <br /> Ayes: Johnson; Roe; Ihlan; and Klausing. <br /> Nays: None. <br /> 410 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.