Laserfiche WebLink
Member Seigler suggested that should be re -analyzed when a resident remodeled <br />of sought to improve their property. <br />Specific to Items 2 and 3 of Attachment C, Chair Cihacek noted the apparent lack <br />of consensus; with conceptual agreement with lowering the stormwater volume <br />from 10,000 square feet to 5,000 square feet to be consistent with that of <br />watershed districts; and agreement in principle, but not conforming with reality. <br />Specifically, Chair Cihacek noted the need for more details on the permit process <br />and tangible impacts for water quality overall as part of that stormwater <br />management goal. <br />Regarding the fund itself, Chair Cihacek asked that staff flesh out how the fund <br />actually works (e.g. detailed financing, how and if it can be borrowed against, <br />whether it would remain segregated or incorporated in the General Fund, how it <br />could or would work with tax increment financing or other financing tools) to <br />determine what was actually viable. <br />Member Seigler agreed, opining that this comes across as a gimmick for him right <br />now. <br />While not having the actual data available tonight, Mr. Freihammer noted that <br />building permit applications continued to increase annually as residents expand <br />their homes. <br />Member Wozniak noted his difficulty in understanding the design of these <br />attachments: whether as fact sheets or standards; and suggested that for the <br />general public, plainer language was needed to get across their intent. <br />Chair Cihacek suggested a breakdown between residential and commercial <br />properties and applications, since the decision -making could be different and <br />involve a different process for both applications; as well as making it easier to <br />read. <br />9. Possible Items for Next Meeting — May 24, 2016 <br />• Annual MS4 Permit Public Hearing by Environmental Engineer Ryan <br />Johnson <br />• Follow-up on Tonight's Stormwater Discussion/Additional Information <br />• Communication items from Staff <br />• Solar Process Update <br />• Recycling RFP Status Update <br />• Right -of -Way Discussion (Seigler) <br />Member Seigler asked that staff, including Public Works Director Culver, <br />return with something more formal, including input from the Planning <br />Commission on how calculations are done. <br />• Pathway Master Plan Update and its Conformance to other Development <br />Plans (Cihacek) <br />Page 16 of 17 <br />