2013_0909_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

At the request of Member Cunningham, Mr. Lloyd addressed rationale for ReSWP mitigation and maintenance 42 requirements. 43 Member Boguszewski opined that the proposed text amendments made it easier for property owners, under 44 certain circumstances, to improve their property. 45 Mr. Lloyd concurred, noting that up until approximately five years ago, the only way for a residential property 46 owner to get more impervious coverage limits was through a formal variance process. Since then, Mr. Lloyd 47 advised that many of those variances were routinely granted through the administrative process; however until 48 this proposed text amendment, exceptions could not be addressed to ensure proper maintenance of storm 49 water features to ensure they continued to function and didn’t become problematic for neighboring properties. 50 Mr. Lloyd advised that this was an attempt to make the process one step simpler through a permitting process 51 versus the formal variance process. 52 At the request of Member Boguszewski, Mr. Lloyd estimated approximately 80% or more of the City’s LDR-1 53 and LDR-2 structures were over twenty (20) years old; and even though that time frame incorporated a lot of 54 development during the 1990’s, it was a good place to start. 55 Chair Gisselquist closed the Public Hearing at approximately 7:38 p.m.; with no one appearing for or against. 56 MOTION 57 Member Boguszewski moved, seconded by Member Gisselquist to recommend to the City Council 58 APPROVAL of the proposed TEXT AMENDMENT, as detailed and based on the comments and findings 59 of Section 4-6, and the recommendation of Section 7 of the staff report dated April 3, 2013. 60 Member Boguszewski opined that he had no interest in changing the twenty year timeframe; and that property 61 owners should be allowed to do as much as possible on their private property as long as it didn’t prove harmful 62 to their neighbors or the overall city. 63 Member Daire concurred with Member Boguszewski; and as a retired professional Planner, expressed his 64 observation in the amount of public concern had been manifested in the permitting process. While not a change 65 he liked to see, Member Daire recognized valid concerns in a fully-developed area. 66 Ayes: 7 67 Nays: 0 68 Motion carried. 69 Anticipated City Council action is scheduled for April 15, 2013. 70