Jump to content

scook

Authors
  • Content Count

    42
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About scook

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Village
    Ironcrest
  1. The Western Placer Waste Management Authority (WPWMA) held its 8th Annual Odor Workshop at its Fiddyment Road facility, hosted by Environmental Engineering Program Manager Eric Oddo and Environmental Resources Specialist Stephanie Ulmer. Eric gave an overview of the program, from its beginnings in the 1970s through the Joint Powers Authority formed (Rocklin/Roseville/Lincoln), and various expansions of the Materials Recovery and Compost additions since 1995. The increase of expansions has resulted in a reduction of landfill area; capacity to handle current growth is until 2058 at this point; but could be reduced to 2038 with continued growth scenarios. Odor discussions cover the following topics: Various sources of odors from WPWMA—3% active landfill; 0.1% MRF, 28% inactive landfill (gas sources); and 68% compost (20 acres). Various sources of odors generated by surrounding areas—ranching areas, wood manufacturing, etc. Efforts, both positive and not so successful, to help contain odors, including: ‘scents’ that didn’t have much success, electronic ‘noses’ that have helped track odor sources, an online reporting program to help identify when residents detect odors (helps finds odor trends); use of special liners to protect leakage, an ongoing compost pilot project, and biofilters that have reduced 90% of the compost odors recently. Challenges facing WPWMA’s future—state-mandated regulations, growing population to double by 2050. By 2025, everyone will be required to collect/recycle organic materials. Current efforts mix food and green waste with compost materials—4 to 1—and use the biofilters to reduce odors. Challenges to the recycling market—China was the biggest purchaser, but China is now doing their own recycling; WPWMA needs to find new markets. Efforts to increase the efficiency of the WPWMA were mentioned: Reaching out to partner with new technologies and enhance compatibility with core tenants to increase recycling efficiency. Recycling has helped divert 40% of disposal materials—50% of materials received are not going into the landfill now. Current sales contract to provide methane gas to will end in 2020; need to find new markets. Discussions during breakout sessions indicated Placer Ranch/Sunset expansion will reduce the ‘one-mile buffer zone’ to 300 feet, generating a ‘cost share’ for increased costs of ‘odor’ containment. This stated cost share is what our City leaders and residents were concerned with previously during presentations of the Placer Ranch/Sunset project). Report odors or get further info at WPWMA.com.
  2. Placer County Presentation: Sunset Area & Placer Ranch Project Date: 5/1/2018 Presentation hosted by Blue Oaks and Fiddyment Farm NAs at Fiddyment Farm Elementary Before an audience of 40 interested area members, Placer County representatives Crystal Jacobsen (Principal Planner) and Michelle Kingsbury (Principal Management Analyst) gave an introductory overview of the Sunset Area and Placer Ranch Projects currently pending in the early planning stages. Ms. Jacobsen indicated more public presentations will be held with the community as plans proceed with experts in their divisions, such as Traffic and Environmental. She said the Environmental Analysis is still pending, so she couldn’t address it yet. Ms. Jacobsen gave a brief history of the area and scope of the project beginning with early plans in 1968, 1997 and more recently. There was no casino during those earlier plans for the area. Beginning 2014, the County Board of Supervisors began considering plans to promote industrial and economic growth in the area, and incorporated plans for a public university to benefit the community. The current proposed project would draw 15,000 jobs to the Sunset Area Plan (SAP), another 16,000 jobs to the Placer Ranch Specific Plan (PRSP), and would include new dwelling units. Ms. Jacobsen said the Sunset Area is a ‘policy document’, not a ‘specific plan’ proposal like that of the Placer Ranch Specific Plan project (although it wasn’t made clear what that difference really entailed). Plans have been posted on the County website, including timelines and reports rendered up to the current date. Details of the plans include zoning regulations, capital improvements, and specific proposed areas (i.e. the Innovation and Entertainment Centers). The Administrative Draft EIR is expected December of 2018. Issues raised to this date to be addressed throughout the project included: Existing areas and proposed changes to the County’s General Plan. Density increases from 21 units/acre to 30 units/acre (as now allowed) Proposal to reduce the current “one-mile Buffer Restriction Policy” of the Landfill: their research now indicates there is apparently no state restriction policy. Allowance for residential use, allow housing above Placer Ranch area. Transportation issues—incorporate measures to reduce impacts on traffic. The buffer restrictions of the landfill would be reduced as follows: 2,000 feet for residential 1,000 feet for commercial 500 feet for recreational, and on a case-by-case review, could be reduced to 300 feet. County Superintendent Jack Duran indicated the County is looking at 20-years of the landfill and possible relocation in the future. Ms. Jacobsen said they are working on refinements from comments gathered. A map was presented showing the proposed “buffer zones” and is available on the County’s project website. Ms. Jacobsen discussed Placer Parkway as a key element of the plans. Placer Parkway will eventually link Hwy 65 at Whitney Ranch westward to Hwy 99. She stated the County had already contributed $6,000,000 towards the 1st phase planning and the County intends to assist with the 2nd stage construction as funding is available. Michelle Kingsbury said $20,000,000 has been set aside towards construction. Michelle Kingsbury discussed elements of the Placer Ranch Specific Plan and Sunset Plans: University—300-acre satellite campus of Sacramento State, within 20-years to expand to the size of Sacramento’s campus with 12,000 students, plus another 5,000 students from Sierra College. Placer Ranch PKWY—3 miles of Placer Pkwy along its northern development. 5,827 dwelling units in the PRSP, containing low/medium/high density units, including 720 age-restricted units. High density would increase from 21 units/acre to 30 units/acre. One Elementary and one middle school. Campus Park—offices, light industrial, act as buffer between the landfill. Town Center—high density residential along University Drive and the town Center Lane areas. Bike paths and trails for alternate transportation. Over 250 acres of parks and open space; park sites adjacent to schools. Improvements to Fiddyment Road, Foothills Blvd., and Hwy 65. Placer County Water Agency will be the water source, using existing structure, regional water tanks; and connect water treatment through to the plant at Pleasant Grove. Ms. Kingsbury said they’re keeping communication with stakeholders to the projects—Cities of Roseville, Rocklin, and Lincoln; Sacramento State; landowners; WPWMA, and reaching out local neighborhoods through meetings like this one. Next expectations: the release of the EIR and updates to plans based on outreach. The draft EIR is expected in late summer of 2018, with the final EIR due in early 2019. Audience questions were addressed on the following topics: Q: Police & Fire? County Fire Station 77 is the existing station, but they are still considering an additional one in the PRSP. The Sheriff covers the area and provides for its staffing levels. Q: Hospital? Medical facilities could be an “allowable use” of the land areas. Q: Independent City? No, the area will remain unincorporated Placer County. Q: Regional Parks? Residents will pay regional park fees, could be co-op with the college, looking for other opportunities with master plans throughout the county. Q: Waste Water Capacity? Looking at expansion of current plant; current plans to go to Pleasant Grove plant, discussions with Lincoln Plant, working with policy of PRSP--$200,000 study underway. The EIR Must address all issues of potable water sources and waste water issues. Q: Placer PKWY—college funds to pay all the way to 99? No, all development will pay fees through building permits. Q: Housing Development? Probably take several years through usual permitting process after approval; development will depend on the market interest. Q: College Development? Sacramento State is negotiating and very committed to the site; Regional University out west off Baseline—no current active plans. Ms. Jacobsen asked for audience approval to provide her the list of participants from tonight’s sign-in sheets so everyone might be added to their contact update list. Hearing no objections, Mrs. Cook (FFNA) will send the sign-in sheets to Ms. Jacobsen. More information is available on the Placer County Website, and you can contact Ms. Jacobsen at her email address: cjacobsen@placer.ca.gov.
  3. Some basic background of our CFD’s provided for the October 15, 2013 meeting: Using the original land usage plan of the (WRSP) designating the number and types of homes to be built (total of 8,490), the City established the three (3) assessments we see on our tax bills as CFD’s—Community Facilities District –taxes designated as: CFD No.1 - Public Facilities: Increases 2% per year--levied as long as needed to repay bond principal and interest and other costs of the District, but not past the 2050/51 tax year. This is the infrastructure, parks & open space improvements for this project. (We took exception to road improvements at a later meeting when we were told our fees can be applied to road projects anywhere in the city.) CFD No.2 - Public Services: Increases 4% per year--levied in perpetuity as long as the services are provided. These are the services for improvement, management, and maintenance of open spaces, landscape, street-sweeping, pocket, and neighborhood park maintenance; any included planning, legal and city and county administration costs; and 'sinking funds' for future needs and CFD as determined by the Administrator. (That supposedly does not include Regional Parks like Mahany, Maidu and the new one to be built here). CFD No.3 - Municipal Services: Increases each year by the lesser of 4% or the combined percentage increase, if any, in the City of Roseville General Fund Operating Budget for police and fire services; levied in perpetuity as long as the services are provided. These are police, fire, ambulance and paramedic services; recreation program services; library services, maintenance services for elementary and secondary school sites/structures, and operation/maintenance of museums and cultural facilities. Once again we have maintenance of parks, parkways, and open space. Flood/storm protection systems, and hazardous substance action. This assessment is higher in WRSP than in other areas. CFD No.1 reads, “The special tax will be levied and collected for as long as needed to pay the principal and interest on bond debt and other costs incurred in order to construct the authorized facilities and to pay the annual costs. However, in no event shall the special tax be levied on any parcel in the CFD after Fiscal Year 2050-51.” The initial bond authorized for WRSP was $80 Million, but the CFD also includes: Debt service on the Special Tax bonds, Replenishment of the Bond Reserve Fund, Anticipated Tax Delinquencies, Administration of the CFD, and Reimbursement for eligible advanced-funded CFD facilities (including Pay-As-You-Go expenditures). The administrator of the CFD (the person designated by the City to administer the Special Taxes) is supposed to calculate the yearly Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax. There may be issues related to double assessments for city services through regular taxes that we pay through Mello Roos, i.e. recreation program service fees we pay which are the same as other areas that do not pay Mello Roos assessments. The actual amount of the Assessments for the West Roseville Specific Plan (WRSP) were based on lot size and definition (lot sizes and type of usage), generally referred by the following terms: LDR = (low density residential) = 0.5 – 6.9 units per acre (mostly single family homes) MDR = (medium density residential) = 7.0 – 12.9 units per acre (smaller townhome styles) HDR = (high density residential) = 13.0 units per acre or more (apartments and zero-lot-line residences) Using these terms, and the original build-out of 4,260 units for WestPark and 4,170 units for Fiddyment Farm, the assessments were broken down for the initial billing year of 2004-2005 as follows: The following chart shows the projected total fees paid in 10-year increments, based on the initial year of 2004-2005 and projecting out to the full potential extent of CFD No.1. The chart is based on the original 8,430 homes of the WRSP, but may not be completely accurate because of specific plan amendments which have changed the current land usage from the originally projected build-out. So in some instances, we have used the higher assessments for the calculations. The first section gives figures (yearly amount and accumulated amount) per individual home. The second section indicates total figures for the original 8,430 homes (prior to SPA-3 addition and CFD #5 increases to new Fiddyment Farm Homes 2015/2016).
  4. Two meetings were held for park developments for the West Roseville Specific Plan: Tara Gee, Roseville Parks & Recreation Superintendent, and other support staff gave basic 8-step parks development process information at both of the following meetings: 10/16/2017 F-54 and Village Center meeting at Junction Elementary: F-54 Park is a parcel of the Regional Park (aka ‘citywide’ park) for the WRSP; located along Fiddyment Road near Blue Oaks Blvd. It will be built in phases. City is responsible for building and maintaining Regional Parks from the General Fund (same as for Mahany and Maidu Parks). However, she indicated that the City won’t build what it can’t maintain through General Funds (looking towards asking WRSP to vote to self-assess for maintenance as previously mentioned several times recently.) Half the site is a ‘preserve’, and Tara said original plans did not take that into consideration. Phase 1 shows an 18-hole ‘disc’ golf course plus 6-hole beginner course as the key feature; a dog park at the corner of Corin Drive and Hayden Parkway; and steel bridges across the creek (depending on grant funding). Village Center Park has been redesigned as part of the Village Center rezone project. The project budget is estimated at $2.2 Million. Developers and the newly approved Oakmont Senior facility will provide some direct funding towards the park, which may speed to allow groundbreaking in 2018. The park will run the full length of the project--from Pleasant Grove Blvd. between the Oakmont and commercial facilities, and back through new MDR housing to be added to the north parcels; it will still maintain its vista towards St. John’s Church. Parking will be added fronting the park in the MDR sections. Public concerns were expressed about lack of parking in the MDR sections, but the new plan actually provides more parking than originally provided for. Plans include potential pavilion, water-feature, combined playground area, and direct access into the commercial and Oakmont facilities. 10/23/2017 F-52 Park F-52 is located on Old Coach near Angus Road in the North Fiddyment Farm area. Budget is estimated $1.2 Million. It is a pocket park usually built by the developers after 50-75% of the surrounding properties are built to general park funds; and then turned over to the City upon completion. Plans include children’s play area (mostly for ages 5-12 with some tot equipment), area for youth soccer, and group and informal picnic areas. No intent at this time for a restroom (pocket parks are designed for 1-hour play; restrooms cost $100-$150,000 and are provided for larger neighborhood and school parks expecting 2-3-hour stays). All parks are now designed for water saving landscape. A majority of the hands shown were happy with the plan as shown. Plans for all parks will be posted on the City’s Parks & Recreation website along with comment periods—they want to hear all comments-- good and bad-- so they can get true overall opinions from the public.
  5. scook

    City Council - Updates

    Members Loren and Sue Cook of the Fiddyment Farm Neighborhood Association attended two meetings and Sue Cook has prepared this Review for our members: 10/5/2017 City Council Goals Workshop at Maidu City Manager Rob Jensen and various department heads presented various considerations for City Council members: Fiscal Forecast—projecting need to close $2 Million deficit gap, noting reduced local sales taxes because people are buying online and increases in employee retirement benefits (also apparent PERS funds to be repaid from past borrowing). Reaching out to community through CPAC, and other efforts to find out community priorities for cutbacks, and measures to attain fiscal soundness to balance future budgets. City owes the North Central Specific Plan a refund for CFD overpayment of $1.6 Million—they will discuss how to return it. Parks news for the West Roseville Specific Plan was not good—plans are ready for Phase 1 of F-56 and Phase 1 of F-54 Regional Park properties, but stated they need funding for construction and maintenance; basically, they want us to self-assess funding or they will “provide a lower level of services”. The City is supposed to be responsible for Regional Parks, and stated in the beginning of the presentation that they pay for Maidu and Mahany Regional Parks, but compared our regional parks to Harry Crabb neighborhood park which they are also asking to self-assess. Public Works section will do “Sensitivity Analysis” for traffic priorities for the next 5-years and present a report to City Council within the next month or two. Loren Cook mentioned the Blue Oaks Extension as a health and safety need for priority, and Mayor Rohan asked the Public Works Department to take all area concerns into its “sensitivity” consideration. Rob Jensen said he’d have the Chiefs look into it also. Roseville Utilities reviewed their projects—Solar Pilot project, Sierra Vista Specific Plan substation, smart meters (next year), steam turbine replacement. They indicated challenges with new federal regulation commission, regulatory uncertainty, and staffing turnover (facing many vacancies/shortages—lots of retirements). Rob Jensen discussed challenges—golf course debt, land needs for job growth, and future of retail sales in general. He indicated the City should consider sales of some of its 20 properties—Post Office building’s lease will expire in 2020 and City should consider sale of that property (get PosT Office to move to West Roseville area); also a property on Washington Blvd. He also discussed other income sources—1st responder fees, utility user tax, raise general sales tax to 8 ¼, raise parks assessments. They await CPAC comments in March for other suggestions for priorities. John Allard mentioned $1,000,000 increase for stormwater costs, they’re looking into legislation changing the definition of storm system, and potential to move costs to “user costs”. October 18, 2017 State of the City address at City Council Chamber Mayor Susan Rohan and Rob Jensen gave overview of City of Roseville: Measure M funding failed, but they are looking towards more local funding options. Congratulations to the Roseville Coalition of Neighborhood Associations for its 20th anniversary on collaboration with agencies and encouragement towards neighborhoods helping each other to succeed. The City is facing major employee impacts while currently providing 100% of the employee share of retirement plans. Other budget challenges: property taxes revenue is growing steadily, but sales tax revenue is decreasing; the population is growing, but additional staff are needed to meet the growth. “Engage Roseville” (CPAC—panel of volunteers from across the City) is underway to consider services residents value most, set priorities—recommendations due in March 2018. Population will grow 2% to 139,000 this next year; 10% in 5-years. Business investment has grown—i.e. the FBI facility and Top Golf in the west; new headquarters for medical facilities. New SPCA facility to open next year—joint funded by the City. Warwick University research facility to open in old Fire Station #1 facility. Rob Jensen said taxes are not providing sufficient sources to the General Fund for the full range of municipal services needed, citing slowing revenues and increased costs of goods. City also faces unfunded government mandates. They have managed 3 years of balanced budgets by eliminating vacant positions and closing libraries on Fridays, etc. He said Public Safety is their first priority; they have refocused their Social Services unit in the Police Department; medical aid calls are highest number of calls for the Fire Department. He indicated parks development for new parks was “on hold”; they will concentrate to maintain existing parks. Those with dedicated funding may go forward, but they won’t construct what they can’t maintain. Homelessness is a key issue—legal changes have directed that the homeless have a “right to sleep” so police can’t roust them out of parks, but regional discussions are underway to address alternatives and potential grant funding. New developments for water sources are being investigated, potential plan to share reservoir sites at Chico; the City will oppose the current statewide water tax proposal. Roseville is 9th nationally for solar usage; next year they will start a solar lease project. City will launch a new website; and they will look into new, more cost effective online tools for sharing communications with residents. ** Loren Cook, on behalf of the Fiddyment Farm and WestPark Neighborhood Associations, presented the Petition for Extension of Blue Oaks Boulevard during the Public Comments segment of City Council meeting which followed the State of the City presentation.
  6. 10/12/2017 at Pete’s at the Fountains: Westpark Communities Developers Updates: Jeff Jones and John Tallman met with Loren and Sue Cook and shared some updates on local developments: Village Center--application was approved and proceeding; parks meeting was to be held Mon. 10/16. Oakmont application was proceeding; should close in October; will start building next spring. Negotiating offer on the commercial property for owner/developer. WestPark Phase 4—storage facility should be built next spring. Pilot Solar project around the power plant should proceed soon. The soccer fields are on the “back burner” due to the Placer Fairgrounds renovation. CVS/Longs building on the corner of Blue Oaks and Fiddyment has a pending application and lease with Sutter Medical; they will reach out to have a presentation at next NA meeting. 4th Elementary School (Fiddyment Farm) is in the design phase now, applying for state funding. Solaire project—Lennar building 493 Active Adult units (Sierra Vista Specific Plan). The school district will be responsible for building the elementary school next to the active adult center in the Solaire area (not developer built like ours have been). Next year, building will extend south to Federico Drive and connect through to Market. Sierra Vista Specific Plan SPA-2 application before the Planning Commission 11/9, 12/6 before City Council, and 2nd reading 12/20 or later.
  7. October 17, 2017 ‘Odor Workshop’ at West Placer Waste Management Authority (WPWMA) At the 7th Annual ‘Odor Workshop’ at the WPWMA facility on Fiddyment Road, agency staff gave an overview and PowerPoint presentation of the facility in general and measures taken over the recent 7-year since the stepped-up measures to control ‘odors’. We will post the PowerPoint presentation on our website for photos for full info, but briefly, some concerns addressed were: The Landfill began operations in 1979 (long before housing in the area); site life estimate is through 2058. Materials Recovery Facility began in 1995 per AB939. In general, two primary odor sources are ‘composting’ on the north side and ‘landfill gas’ on the south side. Complaints are mostly seasonal—air settles in the cooler weather and tends to generate more complaints. They encourage residents to use their online reporting system to report odors—the system can actually track where those odors could be generating from (real-time demonstration shown)—there are many other potential odor sources in the area, not just the landfill plant. The pilot study using ‘misting’ had minimal results, just wasn’t working well to mask odors. However, they have made changes to the composting system and that pilot study has shown to be effective and speeds up processing for less odor emissions. They will go full scale in the new facility to be located across the street. Methane gas caused by organic materials in the green-waste, is being recaptured now to provide to Bay Area for sales, and looking toward future feed to PG&E lines. However, its release must be carefully controlled (per government regulations)—if too much is taken out too quickly, it’s dangerous and could cause an explosion or flare fires that burn underground. About 40% of their materials are fully recyclable, and they continue to work towards full product recycling. Mr. Oddo said many local areas sell waste to China, to be reused and shipped back as product—he wants to keep it here for reuse into new products. They will continue to partner with local educational sources—William Jessup, and future campuses (Sacramento State campus in the Placer Ranch Plan and Warwick in west Placer County) and create research facilities on site here for this partnership. They offered a ‘tour’ for the local Neighborhood Associations, Loren Cook will coordinate with board members. Download the presentation here: 2017 Odor Workshop Presentation.pdf
  8. Baseline Marketplace Presentation At the regular meeting of the Fiddyment Farm and WestPark Neighborhood Association Boards, guest speaker Nick Alexander presented an overview of the Baseline Marketplace project. Mr. Alexander is the developer of the project in coordination with the Sierra Vista Specific Plan (SVSP) project. Eventually, there will be commercial projects running all along the north side of Baseline Road to Watt Avenue as part of the SVSP. Baseline Market is the first commercial project, 750,000 square feet of retail space, running 5,000 feet from Fiddyment Road to Market Street (once extended). He indicated it has taken 11 years to get through all the regulatory permit procedures, finally obtaining the ‘404 wetland permits this past May for Phases 1 and 2. The property has now been graded and the retention bases are completed. P&E lines run parallel to Baseline through to the west of the SVSP, and the project will connect sewer lines up to the West Roseville Specific Plan lines. Guidelines for the project have been approved (shared at the meeting). Infrastructure of utilities should begin 2018, and above-ground building construction approximately 2019-2020. If the prospective tenant can comply with the guidelines already approved, they can go directly to building and not have to go through the new building permit process. They have already received interest from several commercial vendors to get started after the first of the year. Amenities of the project (large architectural designs displayed at the meeting), included: Traffic signals at San Fernando, Market, Upland and along Baseline to allow for left turns into commercial areas. Widening of Fiddyment Road; and widening of Baseline Road to 5 lanes, to extend as parcels extend. Placer County projects will be responsible for adding the 6th lane. Fees are covered through Baseline Improvement Fees. Placer Vineyard Project has 25 different landowners involved in the project. Whoever builds first is responsible for road improvements. Trees will be added all along the project side of Baseline and Fiddyment Roads. Commercial retail store ‘footprints’ were used to accommodate large stores such as Home Depot and Target (Phase 1) and membership store with gas station such as Costco (Phase 2). No actual commitments can be named yet. 3 gas station sites and a bus transit station (commuter park & ride station—50 parking spaces). The developer has the responsibility to monitor the open wetland spaces for 5-years to the Core of Engineers, and then turn the property over to the City of Roseville. The PG&E pressure reduction station was finally agreed to go at the corner of Baseline and Market near the wetland areas, instead of Upland as PG&E had wanted. Zoning allows for an urgent care and/or medical care facilities. Power lines will go underground when construction begins. Sound mitigation is within EIR requirements. Scott Alvord said attempts will be made to get Sutter County to fix their section of Baseline. Fire Station #10 will be closer to Pleasant Grove than it is to Baseline, not in the commercial areas. The proposed Baseline Marketplace plans can be found on the Roseville city website. SVSP 04 Land Use ver. 2017-07-05.pdf
  9. WORKSHOP #2--F-56 REGIONAL PARK UPDATE: Date: 6/29/2017 at Mahany Meeting Rooms Roseville Parks & Recreation Department personnel and project planners gave updates at the 2nd public workshop for the project, located in Fiddyment Farm. It will be joint use project with the high school for many of the amenities, and include restoration of the historical Fiddyment House. This is a city-wide regional park created to serve a large community area; maintenance is usually provided through City General Funds for Regional Parks, but Tara Gee added “at this time”. She presented the current concept plan created after the 1st public workshop (held May 4th) and indicated public comments should be submitted before July 13, 2017. Then a Master Plan would be created and submitted to the Parks & Recreation Committee for review for approval, and then on to City Council. Planning members took workshop members through the plan purposes and concepts, and showed photos from other park and historical type facilities that might be considered for similar use in our park. Overall, responses from the audience members indicated a desire to keep the historical theme consistent with Fiddyment House throughout the entire park. The number one priority concern raised by Christina Richter and other members from the Roseville Historical Society was the need for prompt attention to keep the Fiddyment House from falling further into disrepair. Tara Gee indicated the Fiddyment House report indicated it would require about $200,000 to stabilize the property, stating “the money was not there [in the budget] yet.” Amenities of the plan (which also showed some of the high school features), included: Estimated 200 parking spaces (plus 900 expected at the high school), not related to parking to be provided for the soccer complex. There was some concerned expressed about impact from car pollution to the historical site (as mentioned as possibly ‘significant’ in the EIR). Extension of Blue Oaks Blvd., stated to be dependent on the Creekview Specific Plan project. Ballfields -- one large, two smaller fields -- given priority to go in first. Expect to break ground in April, and open fall of 2020. 6 Tennis courts to keep grouped. Playground and picnic areas near the historic site, and more near the ballfields. Sue Cook inquired about the site of the public pool that the original West Roseville Specific Plan indicated was to be in the City’s portion of the Regional Park, but was not shown anywhere on the plan. Tara’s response was that the pool would be in the high school property, but they couldn’t explain how the public would access to the pool enclosed in the school property. Nor was maintenance funding addressed. A large barn-type facility for multi-purpose functions (potential use for banquets, education, and other functions which might offset maintenance costs) to be near the Fiddyment House. Trees will try to be maintained in the historical area, although probably not pistachio trees from the original farm -- deemed too messy to maintain. Walking and bike trails will connect with F-54 and other areas. The proposed F-56 Park Site Master Plan can be found on the Roseville website; comments should be submitted to TGee@roseville.ca.us by July 13, 2017.
  10. Date: 6/27/2017 at Roseville Police Department Captain Troy Bergstrom gave updated reports on police staffing (64 patrol officers total + 8 supervisors) and number of calls -- 41,000 calls reported, plus another 40,000 officer generated reports (on site incidents). He reported that daytimes were actually their busiest times of the day. Officer Carlos Cortez went through some recent crime reports -- thefts through garage door entries still high on the list, keep main doors and side entry doors completely closed. Don’t be afraid to report suspect activities -- several reports from residents have resulted in arrests recently. No stats yet, but they expect a rise in DUI’s with new marijuana laws (as Colorado stats are already showing). Mary Helen Ivers (Police Volunteer) discussed how to get Neighborhood Watch groups started (guide on the Police website), and advised to keep NW meetings social events. Community Relations Liaison Rob Baquera advised of the Surveillance Camera Registration program -- sign up on the Police website if you have a system; send information to the police if you find information that might assist in a criminal activity investigation.
  11. Date: 5/18/2017 (RCONA Meeting) and 6/12/2017 Public Workshop at Mahany Meeting Rooms Philip MacAvoy and team members from Roseville Electric presented proposed solar changes that would begin in 2018 to reduce “buy-back rates” in compliance with state regulations. Roseville Electric expects to meet the state’s mandate for clean energy levels in 2018 and will reach its 5% Cap by Oct. 2018. At that point, new meters will have been installed to monitor both input and output of energy -- measure the amount of excess going onto the Roseville grid. Roseville Electric currently compensates for energy received at 11 cents, but says the energy is actually only worth about 6 cents, and that solar homeowners are not paying their fair share of overall costs. Those residents with systems installed before that date will be grandfathered in with their current rates for 20-years from their original connection/contract date. So if your system started 10-years ago, then you have 10 years at the current rate remaining. The new rate will drop to 5.9-cents and will change as rates change subject to state changes. Roseville Electric stated that 6% of Roseville residents have solar for their homes. Solar systems average 22% of the year producing energy, and 78% of the time Roseville Electric provides the electricity. Most home systems generate solar energy from 11:00 AM to peak at 7:00 PM; since the solar energy earned is not stored in most systems, you can take the most advantage of using your solar during the systems producing hours.
  12. Date: 5/4/2017 Junction Elementary School 6:30 PM Tara Gee and members of the City of Roseville Parks, Recreation and Libraries Department, led a public workshop for parcel F-56--part of the proposed Master Plan of the West Roseville Specific Plan’s (WRSP) Regional Park site. The Workshop Agenda is attached with the current Site Context Plan given at the meeting. Also present were about 26 guests, including numerous members of the Fiddyment House Historical Society group, and Ben Woodside and members of Callendar Associates Landscape Architecture firm. Tara explained that F-56 is a City-Wide Park to meet regional needs and extended periods of usage at parks, as opposed to Neighborhood and pocket parks which are meant for shorter usages at the park (1-1 ½ hours of stay and play time). She said that the City-Wide parks are paid for through the General Fund, whereas our neighborhood and pocket parks are paid for by our CFDs. [Since our CFD’s seem to go into the General Fund, this did not clarify if our CFDs will be used for our Regional Park anyway.] A key usage of the City-Wide parks is for revenue generation, organized sports programs being a key component. For further clarification of the properties involved in the whole vicinity park concept, we have attached the original 2004 Conceptual Drawings and information for Parcels F-54, F-55, and F-56 provided in the West Roseville Specific Plan (as provided to homeowners). F-54 is the parcel along Fiddyment Road just south of Blue Oaks Blvd., originally designated as Fiddyment Park; however, the Fiddyment name was later given to a future pocket park in the north end of the Fiddyment Farm development. F-55 is the Regional Sports Park originally designated for soccer fields. Parcel F-56, the main topic for this workshop, is the parcel including the historical Fiddyment House property and slated for joint use with the future high school. Tara said the high school master plan has already been sent to the state architects office for review. Tara indicated that the Callander Associates firm has been contracted to prepare an assessment and understanding of the historical site and park region in preparation of establishing the Master Plan for the site. Tonight’s workshop was to gain the public’s input and understanding of the components which needed to be included to fulfill the joint use requirements. Tara also explained that the features might be done in phases as revenue allows, not all of the features being completed in the first phase. The local residents and guests (including many Fiddyment House Historical Society members) were split into 6 tables, and each group was given a site map and cutout designated ‘joint use features’ to place on their site map. Later each table shared their ‘vision’ map; many looking similar in the overall placement of ‘key’ required features (you can see a description of ‘key’ features in the original WRSP attachments, which might have changed now). One confusing item we should get clarification on was the Swimming Pool, originally designated by the WRSP as a “Regional Sports Park item to be funded by district”. This ‘feature’ was not given to us as a ‘key’ cutout to be placed on the park map area, but was referenced during talks as an item for later phasing with the school. We should get further clarification on that item because it didn’t appear there would be room for it in the park area (but then must be included in the high school site). The next step is the creation of the concept plan within about two months and another public workshop meeting to present it for feedback. The completed Master Plan could be available in August after feedback. F-56 City Workshop Agenda 5-4-2017.pdf WRSP Concepts--Regional Park & Sports Center.pdf
  13. Date: 5/8/2017 at Bayside Cafe This morning, Loren and Sue Cook, along with 9 other Roseville residents, met for an informal opportunity to find out more about our newest Roseville City Council member Scott Alvord. We’ve known Scott for 5 years now, and as many of our RCONA members expected during his campaign, he’s jumped in with his full dedication and promises to be a great asset for the City of Roseville. He started the meeting off with introductions and shared a bit of what it’s like as a new City Council member—the hours of reading each week, learning about not only the direct duties of Roseville itself, but also the many assignments on other boards and agency groups as representatives of Roseville. He said that so far it’s been typical to put in about 20-30 hours a week. When asked about compensation, he said the City Charter allows $7,200 per year, but provides no benefits. The City Charter is up for review and amendment every 10 years. Scott shared his recent experience as part of the CAP to CAP visit to Washington DC. He said the group from Sac Metro Chamber (representing 12 regional counties) was the largest group with 360 representatives attending. He was impressed with the competency of the group, and especially the leadership roles of the Roseville representatives. But he shared the general frustrations with the current disarray at the capital (apparently across all political parties). He said that there are about 1,500 committees for heads to be appointed to, and although there were wholesale firings across the board, only about 10% had been replaced. But Scott said they were still able to make many connections and learned useful information. One item learned was at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce - recent information to speed up the process of obtaining federal permits (‘wetland clearance’, etc.). It can help certain future developments if they meet the criteria specified, but they’re not sure of the details yet. He also said California is the 6th largest economy in the world, and largest job market in the country. In addition, it leads the nation in manufacturing, agriculture and innovation. They are hoping to be able to do something with improving communications technology for the agriculture business. Everyone attending this morning had an opportunity to ask questions and share concerns on a variety of topics, including: Highway 65 - doesn’t look like there will be any help coming from federal sources; it will have to be local sales tax proposal that would stay strictly within the district. Water - our Roseville representatives are highly recognized as leaders in ongoing water conservation matters and very involved with federal regulations and enforcement. Roseville Budget - the two largest tax revenue sources for Roseville are the Auto Mall, and the City receives 1% of their sales tax. Unfortunately, many people go looking locally, the purchase online, so sales tax revenue is down. Scott passed out flyers for the City’s Community Priorities Advisory Committee and explained the process that invites Roseville residents to help review current budget issues and help plan for the City’s financial future—where to make revisions to help reduce expenditures and increase revenues to sustain the future (more info available on the City’s website). He said Roseville’s sales tax is currently 7.5%, the lowest in the region and even with a small sales tax increase it would still be lower than other cities (i.e. Sacramento at 10%). He also mentioned the City will look at adopting new revenue sources, such as First Response fees or alternatives to much more costly outside sources (which may actually be a cost-savings for residents). Increased hotel taxes - Placer Valley Tourism might increase their taxes; they are assessing plans for the County Fairgrounds now for a sports complex, and apparently have changed their planned contributions to the West Roseville Sports Complex (temporarily on hold now). Public Services - concerns about level of service for the expanding and increasing population of Roseville was mentioned, particularly concerns for the West Roseville area. Concerns were mentioned for delayed response times because roads that should have been built several years ago are still not started and the safety of residents and property is at risk (Blue Oaks Blvd. and North Hayden Parkway). Special assessments are going into the General Fund but not being applied out. Scott invited those inquiring to submit details for a review into the subject. Those attending the meeting commented on the success of the discussions, and remained in discussions at least a half-hour after the official end time. We thank Scott Alvord and the City Council for offering these ‘coffee’ meetings with the Roseville community. Councilman Scott Alvord (far right)
  14. At the 4/11/2017 Combined Board Meeting of the WestPark and Fiddyment Farm Neighborhood Associations, Wayne Wiley, Roseville Project Planner, and Kurt Wagenknecht, architect for the project, gave about a one-hour presentation of the proposed gas station and convenience store project application currently pending before the Roseville Planning Department. (photo above is an example not the actual design) Wayne Wiley, City of Roseville Project Planner: Mr.Wiley gave a brief introduction of the overall application which includes retail office space, restaurant and gas station. Wayne said the 1.23-acre site was reconfigured and rezoned from Low Density Residential (LDR) to ‘commercial’ in the 2014 approval of the Fiddyment Farm Specific Plan Amendment 3 (SPA-3) proposal. As such, the applicant has the legal right to build anything that will fit on the site and fall within the “principally permitted uses” under the zoning requirement. The City basically cannot deny an application if it otherwise meets all the criteria required of the zoning. He said the Planning Department has started review of the application and has already presented a couple of items that they’d like revised and resubmitted for review. In response to several inquiries, Mr. Wiley also explained the City’s notification process. When an application is received, the City of Roseville’s Planning Department is required to provide notification to property owners within 300 feet of the proposed project. As an added courtesy, they also provide notice to the Neighborhood Association(s) of the project which also then forward on the info to their neighborhood membership through their local media sources. City staff also coordinates with the applicant to hold a neighborhood meeting. The next step for this project will be about 3 months to submit to the City’s Design Review Committee, the approving authority for this project. If denied, there is an appeal process to the City Council.. The whole application process is about 1 to 1 ½ years. Tonight’s meeting was only a neighborhood meeting to get information out to the public but more public meetings and comment periods will be set. Kurt Wagenknecht, architect: Mr. Wagenknecht went through the architectural concept drawings for the proposed project, what facilities it would contain, and how it would fit onto the parcel. He also discussed the old sidewalk area and wall to the rear of the lot, the 60’ of space between the back residents and the new facility, and future landscaping that would be applied. He mentioned the county’s future sewer improvements for the Placer Ranch project that would run through behind the property to Angus Road. Facilities for the project would include the gas pumps and overhead canopy, 20-25 seat restaurant, convenience store and other retail store spaces. As Mr. Wagenknecht discussed the architect views and elements, Wayne indicated the City would be asking for a modification to reduce the proposed height of the facility (noted as a concern by neighbors). Kurt also spoke of several features of the facility: LED lighting-- down-facing, reducible to 30% of brightness, and then goes brighter by motion detectors; Manned facility will be open 5AM until 12:30 AM, but gas station will remain open for self-use 24 hours/day. Parking sites will comply with minimum City requirements for the restaurant and retail facilities (however, concerns were raised about everything proposed fitting on the small site). Mr. Surgit Singh, property owner/developer, was present with his wife. He indicated that this project will be a family business; he intends to open a pizza parlor and yogurt shop on site. He said he has an agreement with Chevron for the gas station. Numerous comments and concerns were expressed throughout by audience members: Crime activity in and around gas stations and convenience stores, especially drawing in traffic coming and going to the casino (already a stepped-up concern by police). Hours of operation—would on-site security be provided after hours. Potential property devaluation of the currently quiet residential community. The types of retail businesses that might be included, especially concerns about smoke shops, cigarettes and liquor stores that might bring loitering and be inappropriate in a strictly residential neighborhood. When asked about including deed/lease restrictions against these types of businesses, Mr. Singh was not receptive to including restrictions. Overall, several residents said they did not want the gas station; were opposed to alcohol/cigarettes/smoke shops (although they might be OK if sales were limited to beer and wine). Wayne Wiley said he would note the following specific concerns for design requirements and work with the applicant: Height Parking Lighting Fuel canopy to match building design. Mr. Wiley advised that there would be more opportunities for comment, and he could be contacted at wwiley@roseville.ca.us. Also project information can be found on the City’s website at: http://roseville.ca.us/gov/development_services/_planning/current_projects/wrsp_fiddyment_plaza.asp
  15. Date: 2-21-2017 Public Meeting at St. John’s Episcopal Church 7:00 PM Date: 2-22-2017 Tour of Oakmont Senior Residence Facility At a public presentation for approximately 110 residents of the West Roseville Specific Plan (including WestPark and Fiddyment Farm Neighborhood Associations), Jeff Jones of Westpark Communities introduced their proposal for the 17-acre Village Center property recently repurchased from Pulte Homes. Also attending and addressing public questions afterward were: John Tallman (Westpark Communities), Ron Enz (MacKay & Somps designers), Ken Kidd (Oakmont Senior Living), Kathy Pease (City of Roseville Planning), and Tara Gee (City of Roseville Parks & Recreation). Jeff Jones gave a slide-show presentation and overview of the various concepts of their proposed plan for the Village Center, and brought the public up to date on questions and concerns that had been discussed in recent meetings with sub-committee members of the WestPark and Fiddyment Farm Neighborhood Associations on the neighborhood behalf. The presentation included the original concept from 2004 and various updates, the current proposed ‘overview’ concept plan to be presented to the City, and a future ‘designer concept’ rendering just for a potential of what a future vision of the Village Center might look like. It was made quite clear that the concept drawings were just that—potential possibilities only, and not representative of any final plans. Mr. Jones advised of the many steps involved in submitting proposed plans through the City Planning Department process, required public outreach steps, and subsequent submission to the City Council for final approval. As mentioned above, the presentation included the recent discussions held with sub-committee members of the WestPark and Fiddyment Farm Neighborhood Associations—see Village Center Update dated 2/7/2017 on the FiddymentFarmNA.org website for details): Overall Concept: breakdown of the proposed 17-acre site. Commercial Facilities: one quadrant of the property for neighborhood-oriented businesses. Oakmont Senior Residential: facility on one quadrant similar to Secret Ravine facility. Medium Density Residential: two quadrants of single-family residential units (less density than original WRSP plans), similar to existing surrounding area. Public Park Site: same acreage, but reconfigured for better access from all points. Following Jeff Jones’ presentation, attendees disbursed to smaller groups around multiple display boards where the guest presenters and displays of the proposed concept plans were available for further individual and group discussions until almost 9:00 PM. The next day, NA Board members Loren Cook, Sue Hallahan-Cook, and Pratap Tarvadi (Dan Gergis had a late conflict), attended a tour of the Oakmont Senior Residential facility (located at Secret Ravine and East Roseville Parkway) arranged by Jeff Jones and John Tallman (also present). Leading the tour were two facility directors and Ken Kidd. The facility reflected the well-maintained and beautifully displayed amenities of the facility, including: Spacious living quarters—including studio, one- and two-bedroom unfurnished apartments (furnished by the residents themselves); Utilities, cable, laundry and housekeeping all provided; Outdoor amenities—including dedicated and guest parking, center patio and atrium, lawns and raised garden beds, walking paths, and pet accommodations; All meals provided at communal and special dining facilities; plus in-room kitchenettes provided in the apartments for personal use if desired; Wide and very tastefully decorated hallways and gathering areas—including fireplaces, entertainment rooms (one with grand piano) and movie theatre; Personal services available—including health care station and exercise room, and beauty salon. Separate memory care section with their own assistants and accommodations (added touches of special display cases and door displays to help them identify their rooms as might be needed). We observed and met residents travelling throughout the facility and they all seemed very pleased with their surroundings. We could see why the Oakmont facilities refer to themselves as the Mercedes Benz of senior residential facilities. They said they have a 1 ½ to 2-year waiting list at their facilities, and are quite anxious and hopeful to be able to locate a new facility at the Village Center site.

About Us

The Fiddyment Farm Neighborhood Association is NOT an HOA and there are no fees or dues. We are here to:
•    To provide an open forum through which all members of the neighborhoods can participate in the identity, social culture, growth, development, and activities of the neighborhoods.
•    To identify and communicate the issues and concerns of the Association members to the Roseville Coalition of Neighborhood Associations, the City of Roseville, and other appropriate entities.
•    To keep all members of the neighborhoods informed regarding issues vital, or of interest, to the well-being of the neighborhoods.
•    To encourage and facilitate communication and cohesiveness among all the people of the neighborhoods. To act in cooperation with government and non-government agencies to preserve and improve peace, safety and property values in the neighborhoods.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.