Proposed Revisions to Post
Construction Controls Ordinance
Public Input Meeting
June 23, 2011
Reasons for Change
• Ordinance went in effect July 2008
• Recommendations are based on plan
submittals, customer feedback and staff
observation
Proposed Revisions
• Improvements
– Changes related to revised Tree Ordinance
– Expand mitigation options to encourage
redevelopment projects in Section 18-161
• Housekeeping Changes
– Comply with State buffer rules
– Remove language for County watersheds
Complement Tree Ordinance
• Tree requirements are in the Tree Ordinance
• Remove ‘natural area’ (tree save) requirements
from PCCO
• Intent was conveyed during the Tree Ordinance
stakeholder process
• Simplifies regulation of trees through use of only
one ordinance, eliminates duplication,
redundancy, confusion
• Both ordinances provide similar protection, with
Tree Ordinance being more protective overall –
Trees in stream buffers still protected
Current areas with
mitigation fee option
Expand mitigation
fee option
• Allow all areas of the City a mitigation fee option
for redevelopment projects.
• Redevelopment is stronger in areas with
mitigation fee options
• Redevelopment sites often face substantial
challenges accommodating water quality and
quantity measures on the site
• More flexibility is needed
• Adjust section 18-161 to encourage
redevelopment
Example of why a change
may be needed
SITE
• Site owner wishes to add a
new building
• Ordinance requires
stormwater management
facilities on-site
• Site is just outside of
Arrowood Transit Station Area;
not eligible for mitigation fee
option
• Only place on-site to install
underground stormwater
management facilities is within
the truck delivery court, which
requires critical 24-7 operation
Why paying a fee
works well
• Helps provide a catalyst for more redevelopment
• Provides resolution to hardships in difficult
compliance situations
• Downstream flooding problems must still be
addressed on site (no mitigation fee allowed,
detention basins required)
Why Paying a Fee Works Well
Continues to provide environmental benefits
• Existing pollution and flooding problems are
caused by existing paved surfaces.
• The Ordinance intended to reverse these
problems as sites redevelop.
• No redevelopment = no improvement
• The fee will add flexibility to encourage
redevelopment.
• City will invest mitigation fees in the same
watershed
• Often at lower cost per treated acre
(economically preferred)
Mitigation Fees & Mitigation Sites
• Map of our projects, watersheds, fees
• Evidence of how we collect, track, ensure money
goes to same named watershed and to a project.
Internal process.
Details of Mitigation Fee
for Redevelopment
• Mitigation fee options are temporarily expanded
to remainder of the City and ETJ
• Owners will now have a choice to pay a fee to
meet some requirements
• This approach will provide options, with better
cost predictability that may encourage
redevelopment projects
• Approach is a trial, to be reassessed in two years
Proposed Redevelopment
Options
Current Ordinance option, to remain:
For Transit Station Areas & Distressed Business Districts, Pick
one
– pollutant removal on site
– provide volume/peak control measures on site
– pay a mitigation fee ($60,000 per acre fee)
Proposed ordinance revision, add an option:
For redeveloping areas outside Transit/Distressed Districts,
Pick two
– pollutant removal on site
– provide volume/peak control measures on site
– pay a mitigation fee($60k/ac for 1, $90k/ac for 2, when
allowed)
*You MUST pick volume/peak control measures on-site as
one of the two, if flooding problems exist
General Housekeeping changes
• Address State-required 30-foot stream
buffers
– Current ordinance does not meet the state minimum
requirement regarding stream buffer protection in
certain situations
• Remove references to County watersheds
not within our jurisdiction
Schedule/process Forward
• June 23– Stakeholder sounding board to
discuss proposed changes, Q&A
• July 21 - Storm Water Advisory
Committee Meeting for endorsement
• Staff review of feedback and comments
• July 25 - Public Hearing, possible adoption
Your Questions and Comments on
the proposed changes