My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC WS PACKET 05262026
StAnthony
>
City Council
>
City Council Work Session
>
2026
>
CC WS PACKET 05262026
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/11/2026 4:00:24 PM
Creation date
6/11/2026 4:00:14 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
May 12th, 2026 St. Anthony Council Work Session - 7 <br /> <br /> <br />Councilmember Doolan reminded the Council that this ordinance will also need to pass the <br />Planning Commission, where additional concerns regarding personal freedoms in home building <br />may be addressed. <br /> <br />Councilmember Jenson questioned how item C5 will be implemented. He expressed concern <br />about additional red tape and costs. Councilmember Doolan highlighted that there is no specific <br />target in this item. <br /> <br />City Planner Grittman noted that he was unsure at the moment what the target should be due to <br />idiosyncrasies between buildings. He stated that the builders would be expected to comply with <br />the plan for diverting waste. <br /> <br />Councilmember Doolan suggested providing a list of resources for waste diversion and reuse to <br />builders. She highlighted that this would also be beneficial and informative for other community <br />members seeking to remodel their homes, even if they were not required to comply with the <br />Sustainable Building Ordinance. <br /> <br />Councilmember Jenson asked who would be responsible for compiling the list of options and <br />resources for waste diversion. City Planner Grittman informed him that there are existing resources <br />that summarize these options, and that this would likely be the responsibility of Sustainability <br />Coordinator Saulog to acquire and distribute. <br /> <br />Councilmember Doolan stated that she believed the County already has lists of resources, given <br />its stated goals and requirements for waste reduction. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elnagdy asked what would be done if an unsatisfactory plan were provided. City <br />Planner Grittman stated that Staff would likely require the builder to rework the plan, or the builder <br />would attempt to appeal to the City Council. <br /> <br />City Manager Yunker noted that permits would likely not be issued until the plan was adequate. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elnagdy expressed concern that the lack of clarification would leave the City <br />vulnerable to complaints upon rejection. She proposed adding a line clarifying that plans may be <br />rejected if found inadequate. <br /> <br />Councilmember Jenson stated that, regarding item C6, he believed the percentage requirement <br />should be removed; otherwise, the language is acceptable as is. He noted that almost all <br />developments now include some ponding. City Planner Grittman confirmed that stormwater <br />management is required for projects that disturb more than an acre of land. The language in this <br />item attempts to require all projects that meet the thresholds of item B to incorporate stormwater <br />management, even if they disturb less than an acre. <br /> <br />Mayor Webster asked if a percentage would be required for item C6. City Planner Grittman stated <br />that he wanted a percentage requirement but would need to consult with the City Engineer first. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elnagdy asked what would happen to builders who failed the compliance and <br />monitoring process. City Planner Grittman stated that he believed that a fine would be imposed. <br /> <br />8
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.