Laserfiche WebLink
legislation are to be deposited into the waste water infrastructure fund since this account already <br /> exists for this purpose rather than setting up duplicate accounts for the same purpose, it would <br /> make sense to have a single fund. He stated from a bool&eeping and accounting perspective, it <br /> would perhaps make sense to have a single source from which these funds would be drawn. Ms. <br /> Waygan then stated this would resolve her concern about the density question in town. If there <br /> was to be an area in town with bonus density, she expressed concerned about the nitrogen load <br /> produced by these areas. She stated if there was a developer impact fee on these areas,this <br /> question would be resolved should it be brought up by the public. She said she feels this is a <br /> great area to pursue if there should be a building boom in town. <br /> Attorney Costello stated that the fee is one method but there are other mitigation methods to <br /> address the nitrogen problem. Other methods might be requiring newer or higher technology <br /> nitrogen treatment systems perhaps exceeding the requirements of Title V or imposing <br /> heightened standards upon developers. Mr. Fulone stated that it was interesting to hear the <br /> options with impact fees being one but also other options beyond the impact fee. Attorney <br /> Costello concluded the meeting by adding that mitigation is a growing concept. <br /> The Board began discussion about the presentation and expressed how helpful the information <br /> was. Mr. Lehrer stated that he felt it will be interesting to see how the Board considers the issue <br /> of density and areas where bonuses will occur and what the Town will receive by way of impact <br /> fees and ultimately the costs that would be shifted to the developer especially in consideration of <br /> the DRI mitigation money that they are already paying. He pointed out that he would be cautious <br /> as to the manner in which the Board approaches impact fees so as not to artificially increase the <br /> cost of producing housing in particular. He states that it is a balancing act and the Board needs <br /> to continue to weigh the data as it's made clear but it is a valuable tool. He further stated that <br /> Attorney Costello was able to enumerate to the Board the mechanisms that are within the Town's <br /> means to generate more money for the waste water question. Ms. Waygan said she liked the idea <br /> of rather than asking for more money for waste water,to make the developers take responsibility <br /> for this area themselves. She stated that it would be less expensive for a developer to put in a <br /> nitrogen removing system than for the Town to expand its waste water plant to deal with the <br /> nitrogen that they are putting into the system. Ultimately, it would be more efficient if the <br /> developer dealt with this area themselves. <br /> APPROVAL OF MINUTES—Vice Chair Callahan stated that this would be addressed at the <br /> next meeting. <br /> Mr. Callahan asked if there was anything to be addressed. Mr. Fulone commented that the Board <br /> formerly agreed upon keeping the discussion of form based code on the agenda and perhaps <br /> having a speaker address the Board so that members could become more educated in this area. <br /> Vice Chair Callahan stated that he would keep this on the agenda and that he would like to hear <br /> more about it. He further stated that some members were on one side of the issue and some on <br /> the other side. Mr. Lehrer stated that when Chair Phelan returns he would have a conversation <br /> with him about having a speaker come in to address the Board. Ms. Waygan asked if it could be <br /> a different speaker than the last one who had presented to the Board. <br /> 7 <br />