Charlotte City Council
Environment Committee
Meeting Summary for October 23, 2007
COMMITTEE AGENDA TOPICS
I.
Subject:
Post Construction Controls Ordinance
Motion passes unanimously to approve the Post Construction Controls
Ordinance.
II.
Subject:
General Development Policies - Environment
Motion passes unanimously to approve the General Development Policies
- Environment
III.
Subject:
Next Meeting
To be determined. Committee canceled their November 19 meeting.
COMMITTEE INFORMATION
Present:
Time:
Anthony Foxx, Pat Mumford, Susan Burgess, Nancy Carter and
Don Lochman
12:00 noon to 1:20 p.m.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Agenda
2. Presentation: Discussion on Post Construction Controls Ordinance
Environment Committee
Meeting Summary for October 23, 2007
Page 2
DISCUSSION HIGHLIGHTS
Committee Discussion:
Council member Foxx welcomed everyone to the meeting and asked Julie Burch to give
an update on today’s discussion. Ms. Burch advised those in attendance that there would
be a departure from the printed agenda, because the stakeholders group has reached a
new consensus. They have completed their work ahead of schedule. Staff is prepared to
discuss the material in the consensus document and have attached several papers to the
agenda for review as well. Ms. Burch then turned the meeting over to Daryl Hammock.
I.
Post Construction Controls Ordinance
Daryl Hammock began his presentation [copy attached] and noted that Jeff Hieronymus
and Stewart Edwards would also be making part of the presentation today.
[Stakeholder Process Update / Slide]
Mumford:
Is the consensus coming back in a letter format or something more
definitive? We’ve gone through something like this before.
Hammock:
We can. We thought we would have each stakeholder at the Council
meeting on November 12 stand up to show their support. We thought that
in-person attestation would be good.
Mumford:
But, we have consensus now on consensus?
Hammock:
Yes.
Information Attachments – Cost Analysis Results and Review
One thing to note is in the example where the parking spaces were removed; we should
not assume going forward that every development can lose parking spaces. We can’t
come up with a perfect example to explain cost. We can provide a bulleted list that
explains the differences.
Information Attachments – Gap Analysis between Current Impairment and Water
Quality Standards
The environmental gap was determined to be $1 billion. This is due to continued erosion
problems at buildout without detention measures. The number could be higher.
Environment Committee
Meeting Summary for October 23, 2007
Page 3
Information Attachments – Summary of Issues with Charlotte-Mecklenburg
Schools
One change that was made which is a benefit to schools relates to ballfields. The open
space definition used to say that built upon areas excluded ballfields, it has been revised
to say built upon areas include ballfields, thereby reducing the requirement for open
space. You get some credit now for a ballfield.
Jeff Hieronymus began his presentation on Approved Ordinance Modifications –
Stakeholders Modifications.
[Detention / Slide]
Carter:
Does this reduce the current regulations?
Hieronymus: No. In the original ordinance we showed one year of volume for all
developments. We have now eliminated I-1 and I-2. But, they still have
to meet current regulations and the stakeholders’ recommendation.
Carter:
I’m sure this is percentages whichever way they go.
Hieronymus: This was an easy item because industrial zones are a small percentage of
the changed land use. If you compare I-1 and I-2, they probably make up
1% of the zoning changes to build out, so that is too small an impact to
water quality. They still have to meet the requirement of 85% TSS
removal though.
[Open Space / Slide]
Foxx:
To confirm 25% of rights-of-way counts toward the open space
requirement?
Hieronymus: Yes.
[Impacts to Environmental Protection and Costs / Slide]
Carter:
Is this protection from water volume?
Hieronymus: All except industrial.
Carter:
But, it is the same ratio as water quality?
Hieronymus: Yes.
Foxx:
I think it would be helpful to have a side-by-side comparison of what the
Environment Committee
Meeting Summary for October 23, 2007
Page 4
original ordinance said and what the stakeholders have done.
Stewart Edwards began his presentation on Approved Ordinance Modifications – Staff
Modifications.
Foxx:
I’d like to say that it was remarkable for the stakeholders to spend 30
meetings already and then spend more time to come back with consensus.
This process worked really well and I appreciate everyone’s input. The
real estate developers get beat up sometimes.
[Modifications to Redevelopment / Slide]
Carter:
I am concerned about mitigation points near development and transferring
to an area is not appropriate. Is there any indication about where they
transfer points or can it be anywhere?
Hammock:
There are limits and we’d like for mitigation to be placed where it occurs.
The goal is to have the mitigation in the same named watershed. But,
there are challenges and sometimes there might not be opportunities to do
something close and economical. We don’t want to condemn a property
to implement a stormwater control. But, sometimes it is hard to find an
open area in a particular watershed.
Carter:
If possible, I’d like to add that preferred citing be as closely defined as
possible.
[Six Mile Creek / Slide]
Carter:
I thought the eastside had the heelsplitter.
Edwards:
This is in the six mile creek area.
Carter:
But, it should be east and not southeast.
Edwards:
This document only pertains to the area that is shown on this map.
Hammock:
There are State and Federal protections for the Carolina Heelsplitter in
South Carolina beyond the line that are stringent on us in the watershed.
It is a protected mussel. The Yadkin watershed is different. It is further
away from Charlotte. The regulations are more stringent in the area
closest to the heelsplitter. The State added an additional buffer this year
for this watershed alone.
Carter:
The heelsplitter is north as well.
Environment Committee
Meeting Summary for October 23, 2007
Page 5
Hammock:
In Union County, on the other side of the line. It has not been assigned
this level of protection.
Carter:
What about our contiguous ETJ?
Hammock:
This is in our ETJ.
Carter:
What about further north? Doesn’t this affect the Monroe Connector?
Hammock:
That’s in Union County.
Carter:
But, we are right on the edge.
Hammock:
In the draft document we sent to the State, they reviewed the buffer
protection and approved what we sent. This area has additional
protection. We have to do the State minimum in this area.
Mumford:
Could you just check on that and respond to CM Carter?
Hammock:
Yes. (Please see the attached Issue Paper for additional discussion of
stream buffers to protect endangered species)
[Discussion and Adoption Schedule / Slide]
Burch:
This is the schedule if you want this Council to take action. You could
have the public hearing on the same night as adoption.
Carter:
I am ready to move ahead today.
Burch:
You can do that. There is an advantage to having the public hearing on
November 12 and adoption the same night.
Mumford:
I think adoption will be easier because there is consensus. This is a big
body of work though, I don’t think you can drop it at dinner and then have
a vote. What is the impact of this vs. the General Development Policies –
Environment? Did we reconcile the overlap and was this discussed with
the stakeholders?
Hammock:
I am not aware of any conflicts. You’ll be discussing the GDPEnvironment today as well. They are complementary.
Burgess:
I think we should schedule the vote today. If we put this on November 12
and there are any glitches, we still have November 26.
Environment Committee
Meeting Summary for October 23, 2007
Page 6
Carter:
I think the complementary language is a benefit and we should move
today.
Burgess:
I move approval of the Post Construction Controls Ordinance.
Carter:
Second.
Motion passes unanimously (Foxx, Mumford, Burgess, Carter, Lochman – for)
Foxx:
This document is extremely technical. I think it would be proactive to
offer people the opportunity to meet with staff.
Burch:
We’ll definitely send information out early. Once the document is ready,
we’ll get it to Council.
Foxx:
And, include language on the ordinance differences.
Burch:
We’ll aim to have this ready for public inspection by Friday, November 2.
Foxx:
The charge to the stakeholders was to come up with a list of new issues/
concerns. Since there is consensus, the development of that list may be
obsolete; however there may be some interest. Some may feel that every
issue was not raised, so we need to give an opportunity to have all issues
included.
Burch:
As a side note, we’re looking at a proposed effective date of July 1, 2008,
assuming this passes by the end of the November. We’ll need to have
some extensive training.
Foxx:
Thank you and thanks to staff. This process has gone very well and Daryl
Hammock and Rusty Rozzelle have maintained great attitudes!
Burch:
Yes, thanks to Rusty Rozzelle for facilitating this process.
II.
General Development Policies - Environment
Council member Foxx then turned the meeting over to Garet Johnson to begin discussing
the General Development Policies – Environment.
Ms. Johnson reminded the Committee of the review process to date and advised that at
their October 16 meeting, the Planning Committee unanimously recommended adoption.
There were eight changes recommended by staff also included in the final document.
There were 12 citizen comments that resulted in seven changes. Those comments are
included in their entirety in the agenda package [copy attached] as well as results from an
Environment Committee
Meeting Summary for October 23, 2007
Page 7
online survey.
Two issues for follow up from the last meeting were 1) consistency and 2)
implementation.
Regarding consistency, during the development of the cost analysis we also looked at
consistency between the draft Urban Street Design Guidelines (USDG), Post
Construction Controls Ordinance (PCCO) and the General Development Policies (GDP).
In particular, we looked at four concerns expressed by the Chamber’s land use
committee.
1) Streets in environmentally sensitive areas - The USDG is not one size fits all.
Rather, the street designs respond to the land uses. Since the land use in
environmentally sensitive areas is less intense there would not be a conflict.
2) Water Quality and Creek Crossings – the USDG provide flexibility.
3) Post Construction Controls costs – there is flexibility particularly in redevelopment in
the transit station areas and distressed business districts. We can forgo some of the
requirements and do some “payments in lieu”.
4) Balancing Competing Interests – we have a guiding principle that speaks to balancing
competing interests.
Regarding implementation, there is a brief section on “tools” in the document. In the
phase 2 document, we identified the following tools: 1) area planning; 2) research, data
and analysis; 3) information and education; 4) land acquisition and disposal; 5)
interagency communication / cooperation; 6) rezoning and subdivision process; 7)
ordinance changes; and 8) ongoing policy review and alignment. Under each tool, staff
has strategies for implementation. We will be continuing discussions on specific
strategies.
Foxx:
Item number 10 in the staff responses, by reference to the development
process isn’t that at odds with State G.S. 168-371? Has staff evaluated
that? You can evaluate development only to see if it is acceptable to the
ordinance language, and here you are suggesting things external to the
ordinance. I’m looking at an email from Ms. Knotts.
Johnson:
If you’re talking about the subdivision ordinance, it is the law, so we
follow the ordinance. We use the term development proposals very
broadly, so we are not just looking at these during the rezoning process,
we are evaluating all kinds of proposals not just those that are rezoning or
subdivision. We have to follow the ordinance unless we pursue changes
to the ordinance, which would be a difficult process.
Foxx:
So, our view would be to make changes to the development proposals not
Environment Committee
Meeting Summary for October 23, 2007
Page 8
in the process but look at the ordinance when making suggestions?
Campbell:
Absolutely. I’m not certain of Ms. Knott’s concerns, but we would have
to follow the ordinance. We will be looking to you all for direction to us
if you think the rezoning is too narrow in scope vs. a more general look at
environmental issues. But, to those concerns in the email we would be
utilizing the subdivision ordinance.
Foxx:
Maybe on the top of page 15 you could say: “… consistent with adopted
City ordinances and policies.” This would make clear that we do not have
an open license to encumber the process. Without any objections, I’d like
to make that change.
III.
Next Meeting
Foxx:
I’d like to have some discussion of water on November 12. This is a big
issue in the community. I’d like to know what our water supply is. I’ve
sent a letter to Doug Bean asking him how long we have but I think a
Council discussion about where we are is worth having.
Mumford:
Well, I’d like to add that when it starts raining again how do we keep the
changes in place? This would be a good discussion because we want to
sustain our learnings.
Carter:
We have the 5th largest water supply, so I think that is even more relevant
and I would thoroughly endorse a discussion.
Mumford:
One thing I hear a lot is about developments and why do we approve more
development. I am not suggesting a moratorium, but we need to
understand the impact. In ten years, what is the outcome? Do we have
cleaner water? More water? Less trees? Do these regulations work? How
much development can the environment handle? Make sure we
understand and make sure we keep conservation.
Carter:
I would put underlines under that for emphasis. Sustainability is a priority
with NLC and a crucial principle. Council member Mumford, you had
this same vision for our community with housing and with transportation
and I thoroughly endorse this discussion.
Burch:
I would like to ask to go back to the General Development Policies –
Environment for action.
Environment Committee
Meeting Summary for October 23, 2007
Page 9
Foxx:
I make a motion that we forward the General Development Policies –
Environment to Council for approval with the all the changes presented
including the one adding the language about consistency with ordinances
and policies.
Lochman:
Second.
Motion passes unanimously (Foxx, Mumford, Burgess, Carter, Lochman – for)
Burch:
So, this will go on the November 12 agenda for action. You have another
Committee meeting scheduled for November 19; do you want to start the
discussion on brownfields?
Foxx:
I’d like to discuss water on November 19.
Burch:
I will talk to Mr. Walton and Mr. Bean. As information, you’ll recall you
gave us direction to bring the Enterprise Funds to Committee and we had
previous reports from Utilities and Stormwater. It is about time for a
second update, would you like that on November 19?
Foxx:
As a practical matter, I think Utilities would be good especially water
supply.
Burch:
We can work with Doug Bean.
Burgess:
Are we meeting again?
Foxx:
I would like one more meeting.
Burgess:
Aren’t we finished?
Foxx:
This is just for information.
Burgess:
Are we back from the League meeting?
Burch:
Yes. This is scheduled right before the Zoning meeting.
Mumford:
I don’t think this would be a good time to introduce something new, since
you will be getting two new members. I’m not sure there is value in initial
dialogue.
Foxx:
It’s just information. I think getting information on water would be
helpful for the full Council.
Burch:
There will be a report at the next meeting and we are working closely with
Duke.
Environment Committee
Meeting Summary for October 23, 2007
Page 10
Foxx:
I’d like to put the issue on the table to dialogue about water.
Carter:
I would like to encourage quick disclosure of the Committee
appointments.
Burch:
Those are usually not made in the month of November since the Council is
not sworn in until December.
Mumford:
I think we need information sharing; however, we ought to have a City
Manager’s Report with Mr. Bean updating us on water.
Foxx:
We need some forum to ask questions in public.
Burch:
So, you’ll have a discussion on November 12 with the full Council, what
about the Committee meeting on November 19?
Foxx:
I believe I’m hearing from the Committee to cancel that meeting.
Burgess:
It just doesn’t seem essential since we will be hearing it on the 12th.
Lochman:
Since we are canceling the Environment Committee meeting, we moved
Economic Development and Planning to 1:30 on the 19th, can we move it
to 3:30 now?
Burch:
I will ask Ron Kimble to poll the Committee.
Foxx:
I’d like to thank Council members Mumford and Lochman for their
dedication and interest in this committee. Their service will be missed.
Meeting adjourned.
Environment Committee
Tuesday, October 23, 2007 at 12:00 noon
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Government Center
Room CH-14
Committee Members:
Anthony Foxx, Chair
Patrick Mumford, Vice Chair
Susan Burgess
Nancy Carter
Don Lochman
Staff Resources:
Julie Burch
AGENDA
I.
Post Construction Controls Ordinance
Staff Resource: Daryl Hammock, Engineering and Property Management
The final meeting of the reconvened PCCO Stakeholders is Wednesday evening, October
17. Staff will provide an update on the process. The Stakeholders’ Supplemental report
will be submitted to Council no later than November 2.
Attached is additional information prepared by City staff to address questions raised at
previous Committee meetings: Cost Analysis Results and Review; Gap Analysis
between Current Impairment and Water Quality Standards; Summary of Issues with
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools; and Post Construction requirements in counties
surrounding Mecklenburg. Staff will be prepared to review these materials and answer
questions. The draft ordinance language is also attached.
The Committee is asked to provide guidance to staff about any additional information
needed and the desired timetable for development of Committee recommendations to
Council.
II.
General Development Policies – Environment
Staff Resource: Garet Johnson, Planning
The Council received public comments on the Environment Chapter of the GDP on
October 8. Staff will respond to the comments raised, discuss consistency with other
policies under consideration, discuss GDP implementation, and review the Planning
Committee recommendation of October 16. The Committee is asked to develop
recommendations to the Council. Additional information is attached.
III.
Next Meeting: TBD
Distribution:
Mayor/City Council
Mac McCarley
PCCO Stakeholders
Curt Walton, City Manager
Leadership Team
Environmental Cabinet
Brenda Freeze
Environmental GDP Stakeholders
POST CONSTRUCTION CONTROLS ORDINANCE
Cost Analysis Results and Review
City Cost Analysis
• The City's cost analysis focused on the increase in construction costs and change in
site layout/development density resulting from the implementation of the proposed
Post Construction Controls, Urban Street Design Guidelines, and Environmental
Chapter of the General Development Policies.
• The construction costs include site preparation costs (water, sewer, and stormwater
infrastructure, streets, and landscaping) only and do not include structure costs.
• These results were presented to the Environment Committee.
Cost Analysis Review
• On August 22, 2007 the City solicited formal comments from stakeholders involved
with Post Construction Controls, Urban Street Design Guidelines, and the
Environmental Chapter of the General Development Policies, as well as other
development interests within the community.
• The deadline to receive comments was September 7, 2007.
• No comments were received.
Difference between City and developer cost magnitudes
• There appears to be a large discrepancy in the results of the City’s cost analysis and
cost numbers prepared by the development industry.
• The City and industry agree the costs presented are accurate increases in construction
costs as a result of implementing the proposed ordinance for the specific sites
analyzed.
• Opportunity cost, or loss of developable property, was also included in the City
analysis in the form of lot reduction in the single-family tiers analysis.
• However, some would argue the loss of revenue is also an issue to be considered,
which includes not only spreading infrastructure costs among remaining lots, but also
the revenue lost from a lot and house not being able to be sold.
• The City is not familiar with the economics of site development and did not try to
predict how the increase in construction costs translates into the cost of a home. The
City recognizes there are probably factors to consider in this regard.
Summary/Interpretation
• The market adjusts to new costs as was seen with the development examples
presented to the Environment Committee in water supply protection watersheds that
implemented post construction controls. Entry level price points were seen in these
examples reflecting real-world examples of the industry’s ability to adapt to
regulations similar to the Stakeholder’s proposed Post Construction Controls
•
•
•
Ordinance. Water supply protection requirements have obviously been met in both
high end and affordable housing markets.
Rezoning projects, development in Huntersville, and development patterns in water
supply protection areas do not appear to have been affected by the regulations.
City staff and the development industry agree on the increases in construction costs
on the specific case studies from the cost analysis project.
The effect of the construction costs increases to the proforma, or cash flow analysis,
of a development project, as well as the impact to the cost of the final product, was
beyond the scope of the City's project.
POST CONSTRUCTION CONTROLS ORDINANCE
Gap Analysis between Current Impairment and Water Quality Standards
The goal of this analysis was to identify the gap between current water quality conditions
and state water quality standards. Water quality data was analyzed from four urbanized
watersheds (Mallard, McAlpine, Little Sugar, and Sugar) to determine an order-ofmagnitude cost to the Storm Water Utility to remove the excess pounds of sediment to
meet the water quality standard. Costs to implement volume and peak controls through
Post Construction Controls regulations, which would be over and above minimum state
permit requirements were calculated as well. While it is not technically possible to ensure
that either option will obtain the exact same pollutant removal, the following estimates
are based on best available science. An explanation of the process follows:
Process to calculate the gap in water quality conditions
• Calculated actual sediment load in each watershed
• Calculated the sediment load anticipated when streams meet the NC DENR water
quality standard
• Difference between actual load and load while meeting standard is the amount of
sediment that needs to be removed
• Determined the average cost per pound of sediment removed for municipal BMP
retrofit projects
• Order-of-magnitude cost was then determined to be approximately $1 billion
Costs to meet proposed peak and volume regulations
• Peak and volume controls are needed to prevent sedimentation occurring due to
channel erosion
• The additional costs above minimum permit requirements associated with peak and
volume from our single-family case study is $1360/acre
• According to adopted Local Area Plans the Planning Department estimates there will
be approximately 52,000 additional acres of single-family development at build-out
• Using our case study as a model, the cost to the development community is on an
order of magnitude of $70 million for stream channel protection in single-family
development
• While this is a new requirement for single-family development, commercial
development is currently required to install detention measures to reduce downstream
flooding impacts, which in turn helps to protect stream channels from erosion.
Results
• According to data in our most developed watersheds, it could cost on the order of $1
billion to meet water quality standards in streams that are currently impaired.
•
•
If development continued under the same paradigm in the rest of the ETJ, it could
cost on the order of $450 to $820 million additional dollars in BMP retrofit and
stream restoration projects.
The cost to the development community is on the order of $70 million to implement
channel protection measures
Discussion
• The dollar figures presented are not meant to be absolute values but rather provide
information on an order-of-magnitude of costs that can be expected
• Would we rather pay $70 million up-front, or fix the stream erosion problem later for
over $500 million?
• The stakeholder recommended post construction ordinance represents the preferred
balance between costs and environmental protection to mitigate future impacts to
water quality.
POST CONSTRUCTION CONTROLS ORDINANCE
Summary of Issues with Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools
On September 25, 2007 City, County, and Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools (CMS) staff
met to discuss the proposed post-construction controls ordinance and potential
implications of the regulations to school construction. Various issues were identified in
the meeting and staff has clarified some interpretations within the ordinance which, after
discussing with CMS staff, we feel will minimize the negative fiscal impact of the
ordinance to school construction.
At the conclusion of the meeting, and in a follow-up email, Assistant Superintendent Guy
Chamberlain agreed that based on our discussions, the ordinance will have no significant
adverse impact on school construction costs.
A summary of the issues that were identified and discussed follows:
1. Schools staff and Mecklenburg County LUESA staff discussed the possibility of
partnering, sharing of staff, and of CMS relying on LUESA for support in relation
to the ordinance. Those agreements will be between LUESA and CMS. Also,
there was discussion with CMS and City staff about the need for a better plan
review, approval, and inspection process related to new school construction. A
team of CMS and City Engineering staff are currently collaborating to work
through those issues, including the effect the ordinance will have on fees.
2. We understand the concerns CMS has with regards to the proposed ordinance. We
do not take the increase to construction costs and impact to development yield
lightly. However, there are certain environmental goals we wish to achieve in
order to sustain development in Charlotte-Mecklenburg in an eco-friendly way.
3. Federal law requires the city to implement a minimum level of stormwater
controls. The costs associated with minimum federal requirements represent the
majority of construction cost increases to a planned development. Storm Water
Services feels the costs to implement the measures above federal requirements (to
address local goals) are worth the environmental benefit.
4. Costs are expected to vary widely from site to site depending on topography,
number of drainage basins, presence of buffers, watershed district, etc.
5. According to the cost analysis presented to the stakeholders, the costs that can be
expected for school facilities can vary from approximately $20k/acre for a 40%
impervious site to $35k/acre for a 70% impervious site.
6. Some schools have already implemented stormwater controls that meet
requirements of the post construction ordinance. For instance, the recently
completed Mallard Creek High School installed measures that would meet water
quality and detention requirements and has undisturbed open space that meet
requirements per the ordinance.
7. 30% of CMS’ jurisdiction has already implemented post construction ordinances.
Schools built in water supply protection districts within the City of Charlotte ETJ
are also currently required to install stormwater treatments on-site.
8. The City has worked with school officials and agreed that athletic facilities, such
as football, soccer, and baseball fields will fit within the definition of Built Upon
Area. By recognizing these areas as Built Upon Area, there will be a
corresponding reduction in the amount of undisturbed open space required by the
proposed ordinance. Therefore, most school sites will recognize minimal open
space mitigation requirements if the need arises for additional land. Also, there
are mitigation opportunities with regards to open space within the ordinance that
schools could use by-right to offset the potential impacts to a site plan from
undisturbed open space requirements. If schools used County land to mitigate offsite for open space, these costs could be reduced 10-20%.
9. With regards to review and inspection fee increases, the City does review and
inspect school sites for storm water and detention design currently, as well as,
best management practices in the Watershed Overlay Districts. The City fees for
Land Development site plan review could increase between 15 and 20 percent as
a result of added Post Construction Regulation review practices, after the first
year of adoption. Currently, a typical new school construction project would
require $1,160 for Detention/Drainage, $900 for Commercial Plan Review, and
$815 for Tree Ordinance in Land Development User Fees (total fee = $2875). The
projected increases, as a result of the proposed ordinance, would result in an
additional $430 to $575 in City Land Development fees for each new school
construction project.
Post Construction Requirements in Surrounding Counties
The following table is current as of early October and is a snapshot of what adjacent municipalities and counties are requiring with respect to storm water controls.
Buffers
Above State
Minimums
Built-Upon
Area
Threshold
30-Jun-07
x
12%
Davidson
30-Jun-07
x
12% (Cat) &
10% (Yadkin)
Huntersville
30-Jun-07
x
6%
Matthews
30-Jun-07
x
Mint Hill
30-Jun-07
x
Pineville
30-Jun-07
x
24%
x
Meck. Co.
30-Jun-07
x
24%
x
Concord
Current
30’ proposing
40’
Cabarrus
Co.
1-Jan-07
Jurisdiction
Ordinance
Effective
Date
Cornelius
Monroe
Gastonia
Cabarrus Co
Admin
Being
developed
Being
developed
No Ordinance
No Ordinance
Gaston Co.
7/1/2007
Union Co.
No Ordinance
Harrisburg
1/1/2008
Lincoln Co.
Not Required
by State
Kannapolis
Stallings
Indian Trail
State
Minimums
24% (Cat) &
10% (Yadkin)
24% (Cat),
12% (Clear)
10% (Goose)
Increased Storm
Water Treatment
Yes (70%Total
Phosphorus)
Yes (Low-Impact
Development)
Yes (70%Total
Phosphorus)
Undisturbed
Open Space
x
x
x
x
Existing
Detention
Proposed Detention
2 &10 yr
Commercial
2 &10 yr
Commercial
2 &10 yr
Commercial
2 &10 yr
Commercial
Volume: 1yr,24hr Peak:10
& 25 yr, 6hr storm **
Volume: 1yr,24hr Peak:10
& 25 yr, 6hr storm **
Volume: 1yr,24hr Peak:10
& 25 yr, 6hr storm **
Volume: 1yr,24hr Peak:10
& 25 yr, 6hr storm **
2 &10 yr
Commercial
Volume: 1yr,24hr Peak:10
& 25 yr, 6hr storm **
2 &10 yr
Commercial
2 &10 yr
Commercial
10 yr single-family
& commercial
Volume: 1yr,24hr Peak:10
& 25 yr, 6hr storm **
Volume: 1yr,24hr Peak:10
& 25 yr, 6hr storm **
X
X
X*
10,000 ft2
X*
10,000 ft2
2 &10 yr
Commercial
2yr &10yr Single-Family
1yr & 10yr Single-Family
& Commercial
City of
Varies by
2 &10 yr
1 yr volume
Proposed
x
x
District
Commercial
Charlotte
No Ordinance
York Co
No Ordinance
Rock Hill
X* indicates State Minimum with lower built-upon area thresholds
**Applies to both single-family and commercial – Peak control may be waived if a downstream analysis shows no impact from the site
x
Charlotte-Mecklenburg
Post-Construction Storm Water Ordinance
Developed by the Post Construction Ordinance
Stakeholders’ Group
April 2004 through September 2005
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT………………………October 4, 2005
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1:
GENERAL PROVISIONS............................................................................... 1
101
TITLE ................................................................................................................. 1
102
AUTHORITY ..................................................................................................... 1
103
FINDINGS.......................................................................................................... 1
104
PURPOSE ........................................................................................................... 1
(A)
General............................................................................................................................ 1
(B)
Specific ........................................................................................................................... 2
105
APPLICABILITY AND JURISDICTION ......................................................... 3
(A)
General............................................................................................................................ 3
(B)
Exemptions ..................................................................................................................... 4
(C)
No Development or Redevelopment Until Compliance and Permit............................... 4
(D)
Map ................................................................................................................................. 4
106
INTERPRETATION........................................................................................... 5
(A)
Meaning and Intent ......................................................................................................... 5
(B)
Text Controls in Event of Conflict.................................................................................. 5
(C)
Authority for Interpretation............................................................................................. 5
(D)
References to Statutes, Regulations, and Documents..................................................... 5
(E)
Computation of Time...................................................................................................... 5
(F)
Delegation of Authority .................................................................................................. 6
(G)
Usage............................................................................................................................... 6
(1)
Mandatory and Discretionary Terms .................................................................. 6
(2)
Conjunctions ....................................................................................................... 6
(3)
Tense, Plurals, and Gender ................................................................................. 6
(H)
107
Measurement and Computation ...................................................................................... 6
DESIGN MANUAL ........................................................................................... 6
(A)
Reference to Design Manual........................................................................................... 6
(B)
Relationship of Design Manual to Other Laws and Regulations.................................... 7
(C)
Changes to Standards and Specifications ....................................................................... 7
(D)
Amendments to Design Manual...................................................................................... 7
i
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT………………………October 4, 2005
108
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER LAWS, REGULATIONS AND PRIVATE
AGREEMENTS.................................................................................................. 7
(A)
Conflict of Laws ............................................................................................................. 7
(B)
Private Agreements......................................................................................................... 7
109
SEVERABILITY................................................................................................ 8
110
EFFECTIVE DATE AND TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS ........................... 8
(A)
Effective Date ................................................................................................................. 8
(B)
Violations Continue ........................................................................................................ 8
SECTION 2:
ADMINISTRATION AND PROCEDURES.................................................. 8
201
REVIEW AND DECISION MAKING ENTITIES............................................ 8
(A)
Storm Water Administrator............................................................................................. 8
(1)
Designation ......................................................................................................... 8
(2)
Powers and Duties .............................................................................................. 8
202
REVIEW PROCEDURES .................................................................................. 9
(A)
Permit Required; Must Apply for Permit........................................................................ 9
(B)
Effect of Permit............................................................................................................... 9
(C)
Authority to File Applications ...................................................................................... 10
(D)
Establishment of Application Requirements, Schedule, and Fees................................ 10
(1)
Application Contents and Form........................................................................ 10
(2)
Submission Schedule ........................................................................................ 10
(3)
Permit Review Fees .......................................................................................... 10
(4)
Administrative Manual ..................................................................................... 10
(E)
Submittal of Complete Application .............................................................................. 11
(F)
Review .......................................................................................................................... 11
(1)
Approval ........................................................................................................... 11
(2)
Fails to Comply................................................................................................. 11
(3)
Revision and Subsequent Review..................................................................... 11
203
APPLICATIONS FOR APPROVAL ............................................................... 12
(A)
(1)
Concept Plan and Consultation Meeting....................................................................... 12
Existing Conditions / Proposed Site Plans........................................................ 12
ii
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT………………………October 4, 2005
(2)
Natural Resources Inventory ............................................................................ 12
(3)
Storm Water Management System Concept Plan............................................. 13
(B)
Storm Water Management Permit Application............................................................. 13
(C)
As-Built Plans and Final Approval ............................................................................... 13
204
APPROVALS ................................................................................................... 14
(A)
Effect of Approval ........................................................................................................ 14
(1)
Time Limit/Expiration ...................................................................................... 14
205
APPEALS AND VARIANCES....................................................................... 14
(A)
Powers and Duties of the Storm Water Advisory Committee ...................................... 14
(1)
Administrative Review ..................................................................................... 14
(2)
Variances .......................................................................................................... 15
(B)
Petition to SWAC for Appeal or Variance ................................................................... 15
(1)
Filing of Notice of Appeal ................................................................................ 15
(2)
Filing a Variance Petition ................................................................................. 15
(3)
Notice and Hearing ........................................................................................... 16
(4)
Standards for Granting an Appeal .................................................................... 16
(5)
Standards for Granting a Variance.................................................................... 16
(6)
Variance Conditions ......................................................................................... 17
(7)
Action by SWAC .............................................................................................. 17
(8)
Rehearing .......................................................................................................... 17
(C)
Review by Superior Court ............................................................................................ 17
SECTION 3:
STANDARDS .................................................................................................. 17
301
GENERAL STANDARDS............................................................................... 17
302
WATERSHED DISTRICTS............................................................................. 18
(A)
Central Catawba............................................................................................................ 18
(B)
Western Catawba .......................................................................................................... 18
(C)
Yadkin-Southeast Catawba........................................................................................... 18
303
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE CENTRAL CATAWBA
DISTRICT ........................................................................................................ 18
(A)
Development Standards For Low Density Projects ...................................................... 18
iii
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT………………………October 4, 2005
(1)
Vegetated Conveyances.................................................................................... 18
(2)
Stream Buffers .................................................................................................. 18
(B)
Development Standards For High Density Projects ..................................................... 19
(1)
Storm Water Quality Treatment Volume.......................................................... 19
(2)
Storm Water Quality Treatment ....................................................................... 19
(3)
Storm Water Treatment System Design ........................................................... 19
(4)
Stream Buffers .................................................................................................. 20
(5)
Storm Water Volume Control........................................................................... 20
(6)
Storm Water Peak Control................................................................................ 20
304
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE WESTERN CATAWBA
DISTRICT ........................................................................................................ 21
(A)
Development Standards For Low Density Projects ...................................................... 21
(1)
Vegetated Conveyances.................................................................................... 21
(2)
Stream Buffers .................................................................................................. 21
(B)
Development Standards For High Density Projects ..................................................... 22
(1)
Storm Water Quality Treatment Volume.......................................................... 22
(2)
Storm Water Quality Treatment ....................................................................... 22
(3)
Storm Water Treatment System Design ........................................................... 22
(4)
Stream Buffers .................................................................................................. 22
(5)
Storm Water Volume Control........................................................................... 23
(6)
Storm Water Peak Control................................................................................ 23
305
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE YADKIN-SOUTHEAST
CATAWBA DISTRICT ................................................................................... 24
(A)
Development Standards For Low Density Projects ...................................................... 24
(1)
Vegetated Conveyances.................................................................................... 24
(2)
Stream Buffers .................................................................................................. 24
(B)
Development Standards For High Density Projects ..................................................... 24
(1)
Storm Water Quality Treatment Volume.......................................................... 25
(2)
Storm Water Quality Treatment ....................................................................... 25
(3)
Storm Water Treatment System Design ........................................................... 25
(4)
Stream Buffers .................................................................................................. 25
iv
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT………………………October 4, 2005
(5)
Storm Water Volume Control........................................................................... 25
(6)
Storm Water Peak Control................................................................................ 26
306
STANDARDS FOR STORM WATER CONTROL MEASURES.................. 26
(A)
Evaluation According to Contents of Design Manual .................................................. 26
(B)
Determination of Adequacy; Presumptions and Alternatives....................................... 26
(C)
Submittal of Digital Records ........................................................................................ 27
307
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS MITIGATION ......................................................... 27
(A)
Purpose.......................................................................................................................... 27
(B)
General Description ...................................................................................................... 27
(C)
Criteria for Off-Site Mitigation..................................................................................... 28
(D)
Criteria for Total Phosphorus Buy-Down Option......................................................... 29
308
DEED RECORDATION AND INDICATIONS ON PLAT ............................ 29
SECTION 4:
DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT MITIGATION................. 30
401
MITIGATION PAYMENT .............................................................................. 30
(A)
Lots Less than One Acre............................................................................................... 30
(B)
Transit Station Areas and Distressed Business Districts .............................................. 30
402
CRITERIA FOR MITIGATION PAYMENT .................................................. 30
(A)
Notification to Storm Water Administrator .................................................................. 30
(B)
Use of Mitigation Payment ........................................................................................... 31
(C)
Time Frame for Use of Mitigation Payment................................................................. 31
SECTION 5:
OPEN SPACE ................................................................................................. 31
501
PURPOSE ......................................................................................................... 31
502
GENERAL DESCRIPTION............................................................................. 31
503
OPEN SPACE CRITERIA ............................................................................... 32
(A)
Less Than 24% Built-Upon Area.................................................................................. 32
(B)
Greater Than or Equal to 24% and Less Than 50% Built-Upon Area.......................... 32
(C)
Greater Than or Equal to 50% Built-Upon Area .......................................................... 32
504
OPEN SPACE DESIGNATION....................................................................... 32
505
OPEN SPACE MITIGATION.......................................................................... 32
v
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT………………………October 4, 2005
(A)
Purpose.......................................................................................................................... 32
(B)
General Description ...................................................................................................... 32
(C)
Open Space Mitigation Criteria .................................................................................... 32
(1)
On-Site Mitigation ............................................................................................ 32
(2)
Off-Site Mitigation ........................................................................................... 33
(3)
Payment-In-Lieu of Open Space Dedication .................................................... 34
(D)
Approval Criteria for Open Space Mitigation .............................................................. 35
(1)
Application for Open Space Mitigation............................................................ 35
(2)
Pre-Approved Open Space Mitigation.............................................................. 35
(E)
Open Space Designation ............................................................................................... 36
SECTION 6:
MAINTENANCE............................................................................................ 36
601
DEDICATION OF BMPS, FACILITIES & IMPROVEMENTS .................... 36
(A)
Single Family Residential BMPs Accepted for Maintenance....................................... 36
(B)
Maintenance and Operation of BMPs........................................................................... 36
(C)
Damage or Removal of Trees ....................................................................................... 36
(D)
Annual Maintenance Inspection and Report................................................................. 37
602
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT .................................. 37
(A)
General.......................................................................................................................... 37
(B)
Special Requirement for Homeowners’ and Other Associations ................................. 38
603
INSPECTION PROGRAM .............................................................................. 38
604
PERFORMANCE SECURITY FOR INSTALLATION AND
MAINTENANCE ............................................................................................. 38
605
RECORDS OF INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES..... 38
606
MAINTENANCE EASEMENT....................................................................... 39
SECTION 7:
VIOLATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT....................................................... 39
701
GENERAL........................................................................................................ 39
(A)
Authority to Enforce ..................................................................................................... 39
(B)
Violation Unlawful ....................................................................................................... 39
(C)
Each Day a Separate Offense........................................................................................ 39
vi
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT………………………October 4, 2005
(D)
Responsible Persons/Entities ........................................................................................ 39
(1)
Person Maintaining Condition Resulting In or Constituting Violation ............ 40
(2)
Responsibility For Land or Use of Land .......................................................... 40
702
INSPECTIONS AND INVESTIGATIONS ..................................................... 40
(A)
Authority to Inspect ...................................................................................................... 40
(B)
Notice of Violation and Order to Correct ..................................................................... 40
(C)
Extension of Time......................................................................................................... 41
(D)
Penalties Assessed Concurrent with Notice of Violation ............................................. 41
(E)
Authority to Investigate ................................................................................................ 42
(F)
Enforcement After Time to Correct.............................................................................. 42
(G)
Emergency Enforcement............................................................................................... 42
703
REMEDIES AND PENALTIES....................................................................... 42
(A)
Remedies....................................................................................................................... 43
(1)
Withholding of Certificate of Occupancy......................................................... 43
(2)
Disapproval of Subsequent Permits and Development Approvals ................... 43
(3)
Injunction, Abatements, etc. ............................................................................. 43
(4)
Correction as Public Health Nuisance, Costs as Lien, etc. ............................... 43
(5)
Restoration of Areas Affected by Failure to Comply ....................................... 43
(B)
Civil Penalties ............................................................................................................... 44
(1)
Violations of Ordinance.................................................................................... 44
(2)
Amount of Penalty ............................................................................................ 44
(3)
Notice of Assessment of Civil Penalty ............................................................. 44
(4)
Failure to Pay Civil Penalty Assessment .......................................................... 44
(5)
Appeal of Remedy or Penalty........................................................................... 45
(C)
Criminal Penalties......................................................................................................... 45
SECTION 8.
DEFINITIONS ................................................................................................ 45
vii
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
SECTION 1: GENERAL PROVISIONS
101
TITLE
This ordinance shall be officially known as the “Post-Construction Storm Water Ordinance.” It
is referred to herein as “this ordinance.”
102
AUTHORITY
The Jurisdiction is authorized to adopt this ordinance pursuant to North Carolina law, including
but not limited to Article 14, Section 5 of the Constitution of North Carolina; (name of municipal
charter, if relevant); North Carolina General Statutes 143-214.7 and rules promulgated by the
Environmental Management Commission thereunder; Session Law 2004-163; Chapter 160A, §§
174, 185 and (cite any special legislation applicable to the specific local government).
103
FINDINGS
It is hereby determined that:
Development and redevelopment alter the hydrologic response of local watersheds and increase
storm water runoff rates and volumes, flooding, soil erosion, stream channel erosion, non-point
source pollution, and sediment transport and deposition, as well as reduce groundwater recharge;
These changes in storm water runoff contribute to increased quantities of water-borne pollutants
and alterations in hydrology which are harmful to public health and safety as well as to the
natural environment; and
These effects can be managed and minimized by applying proper design and well-planned
controls to manage storm water runoff from development sites.
Further, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (“Clean Water Act”) and federal Phase
II Storm Water Rules promulgated under it, as well as rules of the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission promulgated in response to federal Phase II requirements, compel
certain urbanized areas, including this jurisdiction, to adopt the minimum storm water controls
such as those included in this ordinance.
Therefore, the Jurisdiction establishes this set of water quality and quantity regulations to meet
the requirements of state and federal law regarding control of storm water runoff and discharge.
104
(A)
PURPOSE
General
The purpose of this ordinance is to protect, maintain and enhance the public
health, safety, environment and general welfare by establishing minimum
requirements and procedures to control the adverse effects of increased post-
1
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
construction storm water runoff and non-point source pollution associated with
new development and redevelopment. It has been determined that proper
management of construction-related and post-construction storm water runoff will
minimize damage to public and private property and infrastructure, safeguard the
public health, safety, and general welfare, and protect water and aquatic
resources.
(B)
Specific
This ordinance seeks to meet its general purpose through the following specific
objectives and means:
(1)
Establishing decision-making processes for development that protect the
integrity of watersheds and preserve the health of water resources;
(2)
Minimizing changes to the pre-development hydrologic response for new
development and redevelopment in their post-construction state in
accordance with the requirements of this ordinance for the applicable
design storm in order to reduce flooding, streambank erosion, and nonpoint and point source pollution, as well as to maintain the integrity of
stream channels, aquatic habitats and healthy stream temperatures;
(3)
Establishing minimum post-construction storm water management
standards and design criteria for the regulation and control of storm water
runoff quantity and quality;
(4)
Establishing design and review criteria for the construction, function, and
use of structural storm water control facilities that may be used to meet the
minimum post-construction storm water management standards;
(5)
Establishing criteria for the use of better management and site design
practices, such as the preservation of greenspace and other conservation
areas;
(6)
Establishing provisions for the long-term responsibility for and
maintenance of structural and nonstructural storm water best management
practices (BMPs) to ensure that they continue to function as designed, are
maintained appropriately, and pose minimum risk to public safety; and
(7)
Establishing administrative procedures for the submission, review,
approval and disapproval of storm water management plans, for the
inspection of approved projects, and to assure appropriate long-term
maintenance.
2
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
105
(A)
APPLICABILITY AND JURISDICTION
General
The requirements of this article shall apply to all developments and
redevelopments within the corporate limits or in the extraterritorial jurisdiction,
unless one of the following exceptions applies to the development or
redevelopment as of the effective date [i.e., January 1, 2006?]:
(1)
For residential development, preliminary subdivision plan application or
in the case of minor subdivisions, construction plan for required
improvements, submitted and accepted for review;
(2)
For nonresidential development, preliminary subdivision plan application
submitted and accepted for review, provided that subdivision-wide water
quality and quantity features required at the time of submittal are
contained within the submittal and provided the plan is subsequently
approved and all necessary easements are properly established;
(3)
Zoning use application submitted and accepted for review for uses that do
not require a building permit;
(4)
Certificate of Building Code Compliance issued by the proper
governmental authority;
(5)
Valid building permit issued pursuant to G.S. § 153A-344 or G.S. § 160A385(b)(i), so long as the permit remains valid, unexpired, and unrevoked;
(6)
Common law vested right established (e.g., the substantial expenditure of
resources (time, labor, money) based on a good faith reliance upon having
received a valid governmental approval to proceed with a project); and/or
(7)
A conditional zoning district (including those districts which previously
were described variously as conditional district, conditional use district,
parallel conditional district and parallel conditional use district) approved
prior to the effective date of this article/ordinance, provided formal plan
submission has been made and accepted for review either prior to 5 years
from the effective date of this ordinance in the case of conditional zoning
districts approved on or after November 15, 1999, or prior to 2 years from
the effective date of this ordinance in the case of conditional zoning
districts approved prior to November 15, 1999, and provided such plans
encompass either a minimum of 22.5% of the area of the project, or any
phase of a project so long as such phase is part of a project that includes
project-wide water quality requirements to achieve 85% TSS removal
from developed areas. If no such formal plan submission occurs within
the above-described 5 or 2 year time frames, the requirements of this
3
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
ordinance shall be applied to the project, except for total phosphorus
removal, open space and buffer requirements not in effect at the time of
the approval of the conditional zoning district, all of which do not apply.
Any changes to a conditional zoning district necessary to comply with the
requirements of this ordinance shall be made through administrative
amendment and not through a rezoning.
(B)
Exemptions
The requirements of this article shall not apply within the corporate limits or in
the extraterritorial jurisdiction with respect to the following types of development
or redevelopment activities:
(C)
(1)
Residential development that cumulatively disturbs less than one acre and
cumulatively creates less than 24% built upon area based on lot size or the
lot is less than 20,000 square feet (lot must have been described by metes
and bounds in a recorded deed prior to the effective date of the ordinance
and can not be part of a larger development);
(2)
Commercial and industrial development that cumulatively disturbs less
than one acre and cumulatively creates less than 20,000 square feet of
built upon area (built upon area includes gravel and other partially
impervious materials);
(3)
Redevelopment that disturbs less than 20,000 square feet, does not
decrease existing storm water controls and renovation and/or construction
costs (excluding trade fixtures) do not exceed 100% of the tax value of the
property; and
(4)
Activities exempt from permit requirements of Section 404 of the federal
Clean Water Act, as specified in 40 CFR 232 (primarily, ongoing farming
and forestry activities).
No Development or Redevelopment Until Compliance and Permit
No development or redevelopment shall occur except in compliance with the
provisions of this ordinance or unless exempted. No development for which a
permit is required pursuant to this ordinance shall occur except in compliance
with the provisions, conditions, and limitations of the permit.
(D)
Map
The provisions of this ordinance shall apply within the areas designated on the
map titled “Post-Construction Ordinance Map of the Jurisdiction, North Carolina”
(hereafter referred to as the “Post-Construction Ordinance Map”), which is
adopted simultaneously herewith. The Post-Construction Ordinance Map and all
4
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
explanatory matter contained thereon accompanies and is hereby made a part of
this ordinance. The Post-Construction Ordinance Map shall be kept on file by the
Storm Water Administrator or designee (hereinafter referred to as the “Storm
Water Administrator”) and shall be updated to take into account changes in the
land area covered by this ordinance and the geographic location of all structural
BMPs permitted under this ordinance. In the event of a dispute, the applicability
of this ordinance to a particular area of land or BMP shall be determined by
appeal through the Storm Water Administrator
106
(A)
INTERPRETATION
Meaning and Intent
All provisions, terms, phrases, and expressions contained in this ordinance shall
be construed according to the general and specific purposes set forth in Section
104, Purpose. If a different or more specific meaning is given for a term defined
elsewhere in (name of municipality’s or county’s code of ordinances), the
meaning and application of the term in this ordinance shall control for purposes of
application of this ordinance.
(B)
Text Controls in Event of Conflict
In the event of a conflict or inconsistency between the text of this ordinance and
any heading, caption, figure, illustration, table, or map, the text shall control.
(C)
Authority for Interpretation
The Storm Water Administrator has authority to interpret this ordinance. Any
person may request an interpretation by submitting a written request to the Storm
Water Administrator who shall respond in writing within 30 days. The Storm
Water Administrator shall keep on file a record of all written interpretations of
this ordinance.
(D)
References to Statutes, Regulations, and Documents
Whenever reference is made to a resolution, ordinance, statute, regulation, manual
(including the Design and Administrative Manuals), or document, it shall be
construed as a reference to the most recent edition of such that has been finalized
and published with due provision for notice and comment, unless otherwise
specifically stated.
(E)
Computation of Time
The time in which an act is to be done shall be computed by excluding the first
day and including the last day. If a deadline or required date of action falls on a
Saturday, Sunday, or holiday observed by the Jurisdiction, the deadline or
5
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
required date of action shall be the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday or
holiday observed by the Jurisdiction. References to days are calendar days unless
otherwise stated.
(F)
Delegation of Authority
Any act authorized by this ordinance to be carried out by the Storm Water
Administrator of the Jurisdiction may be carried out by his or her designee.
(G)
Usage
(1)
Mandatory and Discretionary Terms
The words “shall,” “must,” and “will” are mandatory in nature,
establishing an obligation or duty to comply with the particular provision.
The words “may” and “should” are permissive in nature.
(2)
Conjunctions
Unless the context clearly indicates the contrary, conjunctions shall be
interpreted as follows: The word “and” indicates that all connected items,
conditions, provisions or events apply. The word “or” indicates that one or
more of the connected items, conditions, provisions or events apply.
(3)
Tense, Plurals, and Gender
Words used in the present tense include the future tense. Words used in
the singular number include the plural number and the plural number
includes the singular number, unless the context of the particular usage
clearly indicates otherwise. Words used in the masculine gender include
the feminine gender, and vice versa.
(H)
Measurement and Computation
Lot area refers to the amount of horizontal land area contained inside the lot lines
of a lot or site.
107
(A)
DESIGN MANUAL
Reference to Design Manual
The Storm Water Administrator shall use the policy, criteria, and information,
including technical specifications and standards, in the Design Manual as the
basis for decisions about storm water management permits and about the design,
implementation and performance of structural and non-structural storm water
BMPs.
6
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
The Design Manual includes a list of acceptable storm water treatment practices,
including the specific design criteria for each storm water practice. Storm water
treatment practices that are designed and constructed in accordance with these
design and sizing criteria will be presumed to meet the minimum water quality
performance standards of this ordinance and the Phase II laws. Failure to
construct storm water treatment practices in accordance with these criteria may
subject the violator to a civil penalty as described in Section 7 of this ordinance.
(B)
Relationship of Design Manual to Other Laws and Regulations
If the specifications or guidelines of the Design Manual are more restrictive or
apply a higher standard than other laws or regulations, that fact shall not prevent
application of the specifications or guidelines in the Design Manual.
(C)
Changes to Standards and Specifications
Standards, specifications, guidelines, policies, criteria, or other information in the
Design Manual in affect at the time of acceptance of a complete application shall
control and shall be utilized in reviewing the application and in implementing this
ordinance with regard to the application.
(D)
Amendments to Design Manual
The Design Manual may be updated and expanded from time to time, based on
advancements in technology and engineering, improved knowledge of local
conditions, or local monitoring or maintenance experience.
Prior to amending or updating the Design Manual, proposed changes shall be
generally publicized and made available for review, and an opportunity for
comment by interested persons shall be provided.
108
(A)
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER LAWS, REGULATIONS AND PRIVATE
AGREEMENTS
Conflict of Laws
This ordinance is not intended to modify or repeal any other ordinance, rule,
regulation or other provision of law. The requirements of this ordinance are in
addition to the requirements of any other ordinance, rule, regulation or other
provision of law, and where any provision of this ordinance imposes restrictions
different from those imposed by any other ordinance, rule, regulation or other
provision of law, whichever provision is more restrictive or imposes higher
protective standards for human or environmental health, safety, and welfare, shall
control.
(B)
Private Agreements
7
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
This ordinance is not intended to revoke or repeal any easement, covenant, or
other private agreement. However, where the regulations of this ordinance are
more restrictive or impose higher standards or requirements than such easement,
covenant, or other private agreement, then the requirements of this ordinance shall
govern. Nothing in this ordinance shall modify or repeal any private covenant or
deed restriction, but such covenant or restriction shall not legitimize any failure to
comply with this ordinance. In no case shall the Jurisdiction be obligated to
enforce the provisions of any easements, covenants, or agreements between
private parties.
109
SEVERABILITY
If the provisions of any section, subsection, paragraph, subdivision or clause of
this ordinance shall be adjudged invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
judgment shall not affect or invalidate the remainder of any section, subsection,
paragraph, subdivision or clause of this ordinance.
110
(A)
EFFECTIVE DATE AND TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS
Effective Date
This ordinance shall take effect on _______, 200___.
(B)
Violations Continue
Any violation of the provisions of this ordinance existing as of the effective date
of this ordinance shall continue to be a violation under this ordinance and be
subject to penalties and enforcement unless the use, development, construction, or
other activity complies with the provisions of this ordinance.
SECTION 2: ADMINISTRATION AND PROCEDURES
201
(A)
REVIEW AND DECISION MAKING ENTITIES
Storm Water Administrator
(1)
Designation
The (position name such as “City Engineer”) has been designated as the
Storm Water Administrator by the (name of governing board) for the
purpose of administering and enforcing this ordinance.
(2)
Powers and Duties
8
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
In addition to the powers and duties that may be conferred by other
provisions of the (name of local municipal or county code) and other laws,
the Storm Water Administrator shall have the following powers and duties
under this ordinance:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
202
(A)
To review and approve or disapprove applications submitted
pursuant to this ordinance.
To make determinations and render interpretations of this
ordinance.
To establish application requirements and schedules for submittal
and review of applications and appeals.
To enforce this ordinance in accordance with its enforcement
provisions.
To maintain records, maps, and official materials as relate to the
adoption, amendment, enforcement, or administration of this
ordinance.
To provide expertise and technical assistance upon request to the
name of governing board and the Storm Water Advisory
Committee (SWAC).
To designate appropriate other person(s) who shall carry out the
powers and duties of the Storm Water Administrator.
To provide information and recommendations relative to variances
and information as requested by SWAC in response to appeals.
To take any other action necessary to administer the provisions of
this ordinance.
REVIEW PROCEDURES
Permit Required; Must Apply for Permit
A storm water management permit is required for all development and
redevelopment unless exempt pursuant to this ordinance. A permit may only be
issued subsequent to a properly submitted, reviewed and approved permit
application, pursuant to this Section. The content and form of the permit shall be
established by the Storm Water Administrator.
(B)
Effect of Permit
A storm water management permit shall govern the design, installation, and
construction of storm water management and control practices on the site,
including structural BMPs and elements of site design for storm water
management other than structural BMPs.
The permit is intended to provide a mechanism for the review, approval, and
inspection of the approach to be used for the management and control of storm
water for the development or redevelopment site consistent with the requirements
9
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
of this ordinance, whether the approach consists of structural BMPs or other
techniques such as low-impact or low-density design. Compliance after project
construction is assured by the maintenance provision of this ordinance.
(C)
Authority to File Applications
All applications required pursuant to this ordinance shall be submitted to the
Storm Water Administrator by the land owner or the land owner’s duly authorized
agent or anyone having interest in the property by reason of a written contract
with the owner.
(D)
Establishment of Application Requirements, Schedule, and Fees
(1)
Application Contents and Form
The Storm Water Administrator shall establish requirements for the
content and form of all applications and shall amend and update those
requirements from time to time. At a minimum, the storm water
management permit application shall describe in detail how postconstruction storm water runoff will be controlled and managed, the
design of all storm water facilities and practices, and how the proposed
project will meet the requirements of this ordinance.
(2)
Submission Schedule
The Storm Water Administrator shall establish a submission schedule for
applications. The schedule shall establish deadlines by which complete
applications must be submitted for the purpose of ensuring that there is
adequate time to review applications, and that the various stages in the
review process are accommodated.
(3)
Permit Review Fees
The Jurisdiction shall establish permit review fees as well as policies
regarding refund of any fees upon withdrawal of an application, and may
amend and update the fees and policies from time to time.
(4)
Administrative Manual
For applications required under this ordinance, the Storm Water
Administrator shall compile into an Administrative Manual the application
requirements, submittal checklist, submission schedule, fee schedule,
maintenance agreements, a copy of this ordinance, and where to obtain the
Design Manual, as well as other information and materials necessary for
the effective administration of this ordinance. This Administrative
Manual shall be made available to the public.
10
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
(E)
Submittal of Complete Application
Applications shall be submitted to the Storm Water Administrator pursuant to the
application submittal schedule in the form established by the Storm Water
Administrator, along with the appropriate fee established pursuant to this Section.
An application shall be considered as timely submitted only when it contains all
elements of a complete application pursuant to this ordinance, along with the
appropriate fee. If the Storm Water Administrator finds that an application is
incomplete, the applicant shall be notified of the deficient elements and shall be
provided with an opportunity to submit a complete application. However, the
submittal of an incomplete application shall not suffice to meet a deadline
contained in the submission schedule established above.
(F)
Review
Within 30 working days after a complete application is submitted, the Storm
Water Administrator shall review the application and determine whether the
application complies with the standards of this ordinance.
(1)
Approval
If the Storm Water Administrator finds that the application complies with
the standards of this ordinance, the Storm Water Administrator shall
approve the application and issue a storm water management permit to the
applicant. The Storm Water Administrator may impose conditions of
approval as needed to ensure compliance with this ordinance. The
conditions shall be included in the permit as part of the approval.
(2)
Fails to Comply
If the Storm Water Administrator finds that the application fails to comply
with the standards of this ordinance, the Storm Water Administrator shall
notify the applicant and shall indicate how the application fails to comply.
The applicant shall have an opportunity to submit a revised application.
(3)
Revision and Subsequent Review
A complete revised application shall be reviewed by the Storm Water
Administrator within 15 working days after its re-submittal and shall be
approved, approved with conditions or disapproved.
If a revised application is not re-submitted within sixty (60) calendar days
from the date the applicant was notified, the application shall be
considered withdrawn, and a new submittal for the same or substantially
the same project shall be required along with the appropriate fee.
11
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
203
(A)
APPLICATIONS FOR APPROVAL
Concept Plan and Consultation Meeting
Before a storm water management permit application is submitted, the Storm
Water Administrator or land owner or the land owner’s duly authorized agent or
anyone having interest in the property by reason of a written contract with the
owner may request consultation(s) on a concept plan for the post-construction
storm water management system to be utilized in the proposed development
project. This consultation meeting(s) should take place at the time of the
preliminary plan of the subdivision or other early step in the development process.
The purpose of this meeting(s) is to discuss the post-construction storm water
management measures necessary for the proposed project, as well as to discuss
and assess constraints, opportunities and potential approaches to storm water
management designs before formal site design engineering is commenced. Local
watershed plans and other relevant resource protection plans may be consulted in
the discussion of the concept plan.
At the time of concept plan submittal, the following information should be
included in the concept plan, which should be submitted in advance of the
meeting as specified in the Administrative Manual:
(1)
Existing Conditions / Proposed Site Plans
Existing conditions and proposed site layout sketch plans, which illustrate
at a minimum: existing and proposed topography; perennial and
intermittent streams; mapping of predominant soils from soil surveys;
boundaries of existing predominant vegetation and proposed limits of
clearing and grading; proposed Open Space area; and location of existing
and proposed roads, buildings, parking areas and other impervious
surfaces.
(2)
Natural Resources Inventory
A written or graphic inventory of the natural resources at the site and
surrounding area as it exists prior to the commencement of the project.
This description should include a discussion of soil conditions, forest
cover, geologic features, topography, wetlands, and native vegetative areas
on the site, as well as the location and boundaries of other natural feature
protection and conservation areas such as lakes, ponds, floodplains, stream
buffers and other setbacks (e.g., drinking water well setbacks, septic
system setbacks, etc.). Particular attention should be paid to
environmentally sensitive features that provide particular opportunities or
constraints for development.
12
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
(3)
Storm Water Management System Concept Plan
A written or graphic concept plan of the proposed post-construction storm
water management system including: preliminary selection and location of
proposed structural storm water controls; low impact design elements;
location of existing and proposed conveyance systems such as grass
channels, swales, and storm drains; flow paths; location of proposed Open
Space areas; location of all floodplain/floodway limits; relationship of site
to upstream and downstream properties and drainages; and preliminary
location of proposed stream channel modifications, such as bridge or
culvert crossings.
(B)
Storm Water Management Permit Application
The storm water management permit application shall detail how postconstruction storm water runoff will be controlled and managed and how the
proposed project will meet the requirements of this ordinance, including Section
3, Standards. All such plans submitted with the application shall be prepared by a
registered North Carolina professional engineer or landscape architect. The
engineer or landscape architect shall perform services only in their area of
competence, and shall verify that the design of all storm water management
facilities and practices meets the submittal requirements for complete
applications, that the designs and plans are sufficient to comply with applicable
standards and policies found in the Design Manual, and that the designs and plans
ensure compliance with this ordinance.
The submittal shall include all of the information required in the submittal
checklist established by the Storm Water Administrator. Incomplete submittals
shall be treated pursuant to Section 202(E).
(C)
As-Built Plans and Final Approval
The applicant shall certify that the completed project is in accordance with the
approved storm water management plans and designs, and shall submit actual “asbuilt” plans for all storm water management facilities or practices after final
construction is completed. Failure to provide approved as-built plans within the
time frame specified by the Storm Water Administrator may result in assessment
of penalties as specified in Section 7, Violations and Enforcement. At the
discretion of the Storm Water Administrator, performance securities or bonds
may be required for storm water management facilities or practices until as-built
plans are approved.
As-built plans shall show the final design specifications for all storm water
management facilities and practices and the field location, size, depth, and planted
vegetation of all measures, controls, and devices, as installed, and location and
size of all Open Space areas and tree plantings. The designer of the storm water
management measures and plans shall certify, under seal, that the as-built storm
13
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
water measures, controls, and devices are in compliance with the approved storm
water management plans and designs and with the requirements of this ordinance.
Final as-built plans and a final inspection and approval by the Storm Water
Administrator are required before a project is determined to be in compliance with
this ordinance. At the discretion of the Storm Water Administrator, certificates of
occupancy may be withheld pending receipt of as-built plans and the completion
of a final inspection and approval of a project.
204
(A)
APPROVALS
Effect of Approval
Approval authorizes the applicant to go forward with only the specific plans and
activity authorized in the permit. The approval shall not be construed to exempt
the applicant from obtaining other applicable approvals from local, state, and
federal authorities.
(1)
Time Limit/Expiration
A Storm Water Management Permit and accompanying plan approved
under the provisions of this ordinance shall remain valid for a period of
three years from the date of approval. If no work on the site in furtherance
of the plan has commenced within the three-year period, the permit and
plan approval will become null and void and a new application will be
required to develop the site. If work on the site in furtherance of the plan
has commenced that involves any utility installations or street
improvements except grading, the permit and plan shall remain valid and
in force and the project may be completed in accordance with the
approved plan.
205
(A)
APPEALS AND VARIANCES
Powers and Duties of the Storm Water Advisory Committee
The Storm Water Advisory Committee, hereinafter referred to as SWAC, shall
have the following powers and duties:
(1)
Administrative Review
To hear and decide appeals according to the procedures set forth in this
Section, where it is alleged there is an error in any order, decision,
determination, or interpretation made by the Storm Water Administrator in
the enforcement of this ordinance, including assessments of remedies
and/or penalties.
14
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
(2)
Variances
To grant variances in specific cases from the terms of this ordinance
according to the standards and procedures herein.
(B)
Petition to SWAC for Appeal or Variance
An appeal may be initiated by any aggrieved person affected by any decision,
order, requirement, or determination relating to the interpretation or application of
this ordinance. A petition for variance from the requirements of this ordinance
may be initiated by the owner of the affected property, an agent authorized in
writing to act on the owner’s behalf, or a person having written contractual
interest in the affected property.
(1)
Filing of Notice of Appeal
A notice of appeal shall be filed with the Storm Water Administrator
contesting any order, decision, determination or interpretation within 30
working days of the day of the order, decision, determination or
interpretation made or rendered by the Storm Water Administrator in the
enforcement of this ordinance, including assessments of remedies and
penalties. SWAC may waive or extend the 30 day deadline only upon
determining that the person filing the notice of appeal received no actual
or constructive form of notice of the order, decision, determination or
interpretation being appealed. The notice filed with the Storm Water
Administrator shall be accompanied by a nonrefundable filing fee as
established by SWAC as well as a list of adjoining properties including tax
parcel numbers and the name and address of each owner. Failure to timely
file such notice and fee shall constitute a waiver of any rights to appeal
under this ordinance.
Upon receipt of a notice of appeal, the Storm Water Administrator shall
transmit to SWAC copies of all administrative papers, records, and other
information regarding the subject matter of the appeal.
The filing of such notice shall stay any proceedings in furtherance of the
contested action, except the Storm Water Administrator may certify in
writing to SWAC that because of facts stated in the certificate, a stay
imposes an imminent peril to life or property or would seriously interfere
with the enforcement of this ordinance. SWAC shall then review such
certificate and may override the stay of further proceedings.
(2)
Filing a Variance Petition
A petition for variance, in the form prescribed by SWAC, shall be filed
with the Storm Water Administrator accompanied by a nonrefundable
15
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
filing fee as established by SWAC as well as a list of adjoining properties
including tax parcel numbers and the name and address of each owner.
Upon receipt of a variance petition, the Storm Water Administrator shall
transmit to SWAC copies of all information regarding the variance.
(3)
Notice and Hearing
SWAC shall, in accordance with the rules adopted by it for such purposes,
hold public hearings on any appeal or variance petition which comes
before it. SWAC shall, prior to the hearing, mail written notice of the
time, place and subject of the hearing to the person or persons filing the
notice of appeal or variance petition, to the owners of the subject property
and to the owners of property adjacent to the subject property. The
hearing shall be conducted in the nature of a quasi-judicial proceeding
with all findings of fact supported by competent, material evidence.
(4)
Standards for Granting an Appeal
SWAC shall reverse or modify the order, decision, determination or
interpretation under appeal only upon finding an error in the application of
this ordinance on the part of the Storm Water Administrator. In modifying
the order, decision, determination or interpretation, SWAC shall have all
the powers of the Storm Water Administrator from whom the appeal is
taken.
If SWAC finds that a violation of this ordinance has occurred, but that in
setting the amount of the penalty the Storm Water Administrator has not
considered or given appropriate weight to either mitigating or aggravating
factors, SWAC shall either decrease or increase the per day civil penalty
within the range allowed by this ordinance. Any decision of SWAC that
modifies the amount of a civil penalty shall include, as part of the findings
of fact and conclusions of law, findings as to which mitigating or
aggravating factors exist and the appropriate weight that should have been
given to such factors by the Storm Water Administrator in setting the
amount of the civil penalty levied against the Petitioner.
(5)
Standards for Granting a Variance
Before granting a variance, SWAC shall have made all the following
findings:
(a)
Unnecessary hardships would result from the strict application of
this ordinance.
(b)
The hardships result from conditions that are peculiar to the
property, such as the location, size or topography of the property.
16
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
(6)
(c)
The hardships did not result from actions taken by the petitioner.
(d)
The requested variance is consistent with the spirit, purpose, and
intent of this ordinance; will secure public safety and welfare; and
will preserve substantial justice.
Variance Conditions
SWAC may impose reasonable and appropriate conditions and safeguards
upon any variance it grants.
(7)
Action by SWAC
SWAC bylaws will determine the number of concurring votes needed to
grant an appeal or request for variance. SWAC shall grant or deny the
variance or shall reverse, affirm or modify the order, decision,
determination or interpretation under appeal by recording in the minutes of
the meeting the reasons that SWAC used and the findings of fact and
conclusions of law made by SWAC to reach its decision.
(8)
Rehearing
SWAC shall refuse to hear an appeal or variance petition which has been
previously denied unless it finds there have been substantial changes in the
conditions or circumstances relating to the matter.
(C)
Review by Superior Court
Every decision of SWAC shall be subject to Superior Court review by
proceedings in the nature of certiorari. Petition for review by the Superior Court
shall be filed with the Clerk of Superior Court within thirty (30) days after the
later occurring of the following:
(1)
The decision of SWAC is filed; or
(2)
A written copy thereof is delivered to every aggrieved party who has filed
a written request for such copy with SWAC at the time of its hearing of
the case.
SECTION 3: STANDARDS
301
GENERAL STANDARDS
All development and redevelopment to which this ordinance applies shall comply
with the standards of this section.
17
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
302
WATERSHED DISTRICTS
Standards for development and redevelopment vary depending on the watershed
district in which a project is located as described in the “Post-Construction
Ordinance Map of the Jurisdiction, North Carolina,” which is adopted
simultaneously herewith as described in Section 105(C). The Jurisdiction is
divided into the following watershed districts for purposes of this ordinance.
(A)
Central Catawba
That area of land that drains to Sugar, Little Sugar and McAlpine Creeks in the
Jurisdiction, including all tributaries, except Six Mile Creek.
(B)
Western Catawba
That area of land that drains to Lake Norman, Mountain Island Lake and Lake
Wylie in Mecklenburg County including all creeks and tributaries.
(C)
Yadkin-Southeast Catawba
That area of land that drains to the Yadkin River basin in Mecklenburg County,
including all creeks and tributaries and in addition including Six Mile Creek.
303
(A)
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE CENTRAL CATAWBA
DISTRICT
Development Standards For Low Density Projects
Any drainage area within a project in the Central Catawba District is considered
low density when said drainage area has less than or equal to 24% built upon area
as determined by the methodology established in the Design Manual. Such lowdensity projects shall comply with each of the following standards.
(1)
Vegetated Conveyances
Storm water runoff from the development shall be transported from the
development by vegetated conveyances to the maximum extent
practicable.
(2)
Stream Buffers
The S.W.I.M. Stream Buffer requirements apply in the Central Catawba as
described in the Jurisdiction’s Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 12. In addition,
intermittent and perennial streams within the project boundary shall be
delineated by a certified professional using U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
and N.C. Division of Water Quality methodology and shall be shown in
the storm water management permit application along with all buffer
18
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
areas. All perennial and intermittent streams draining less than 50 acres
shall have a minimum 30-foot vegetated buffer including a 10-foot zone
adjacent to the bank. Disturbance of the buffer is allowed; however, any
disturbed area must be revegetated and disturbance of the 10-foot zone
adjacent to the bank shall require stream bank stabilization using
bioengineering techniques as specified in the Design Manual. All
perennial and intermittent streams draining greater than or equal to 50
acres and less than 300 acres shall have a 35-foot buffer with two (2)
zones, including stream side and upland. Streams draining greater than or
equal to 300 acres and less than 640 acres shall have a 50-foot buffer with
three (3) zones, including stream side, managed use and upland. Streams
draining greater than or equal to 640 acres shall have a 100-foot buffer,
plus 50% of the area of the floodfringe beyond 100 feet. This buffer shall
consist of three (3) zones, including stream side, managed use and upland.
All buffers shall be measured from the top of the bank on both sides of the
stream. The uses allowed in the different buffer zones as described in the
S.W.I.M. Stream Buffer requirements in the Jurisdiction’s Zoning
Ordinance, Chapter 12, as well as the other provisions of the S.W.I.M.
ordinance shall apply in the Central Catawba District (except buffer
widths).
(B)
Development Standards For High Density Projects
Any drainage area within a project in the Central Catawba District is considered
high density when said drainage area has greater than 24% built upon area as
determined by the methodology established in the Design Manual. Such highdensity projects shall implement storm water treatment systems that comply with
each of the following standards.
(1)
Storm Water Quality Treatment Volume
Storm water quality treatment systems shall treat the runoff generated
from the first inch of rainfall.
(2)
Storm Water Quality Treatment
All structural storm water treatment systems used to meet these
requirements shall be designed to have a minimum of 85% average annual
removal for Total Suspended Solids. Low Impact Development
techniques as described in the Design Manual can be used to meet this
requirement.
(3)
Storm Water Treatment System Design
General engineering design criteria for all projects shall be in accordance
with 15A NCAC 2H .1008(c), as explained in the Design Manual.
19
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
(4)
Stream Buffers
The S.W.I.M. Stream Buffer requirements apply in the Central Catawba as
described in the Jurisdiction’s Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 12. In
addition, intermittent and perennial streams within the project boundary
shall be delineated by a certified professional using U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and N.C. Division of Water Quality methodology and shall be
shown in the storm water management permit application along with all
buffer areas. All perennial and intermittent streams draining less than 50
acres shall have a minimum 30-foot vegetated buffer including a 10-foot
zone adjacent to the bank. Disturbance of the buffer is allowed; however,
any disturbed area must be revegetated and disturbance of the 10-foot
zone adjacent to the bank shall require stream bank stabilization using
bioengineering techniques as specified in the Design Manual. All
perennial and intermittent streams draining greater than or equal to 50
acres and less than 300 acres shall have a 35-foot buffer with two (2)
zones, including stream side and upland. Streams draining greater than or
equal to 300 acres and less than 640 acres shall have a 50-foot buffer with
three (3) zones, including stream side, managed use and upland. Streams
draining greater than or equal to 640 acres shall have a 100-foot buffer,
plus 50% of the area of the floodfringe beyond 100 feet. This buffer shall
consist of three (3) zones, including stream side, managed use and upland.
All buffers shall be measured from the top of the bank on both sides of the
stream. The uses allowed in the different buffer zones as described in the
S.W.I.M. Stream Buffer requirements in the Jurisdiction’s Zoning
Ordinance, Chapter 12, as well as the other provisions of the S.W.I.M.
ordinance shall apply in the Central Catawba District (except buffer
widths).
(5)
Storm Water Volume Control
Storm water treatment systems shall be installed to control the volume
leaving the project site at post-development for the 1-year, 24-hour storm.
Runoff volume drawdown time shall be a minimum of 24 hours, but not
more than 120 hours.
(6)
Storm Water Peak Control
For residential developments exceeding 24% built-upon area, peak control
shall be installed for the appropriate storm frequency (i.e., 10, 25, 50 or
100-yr, 6-hr) as determined by the Storm Water Administrator based on a
downstream flood analysis provided by the owner or designee using the
criteria specified in the Design Manual or if a downstream analysis is not
performed the peak shall be controlled for the 10-yr and 25-yr, 6-hr
storms. For commercial development exceeding 24% built-upon area,
peak control shall be installed for the 10-yr, 6-hr storm and additional
20
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
peak control provided for the appropriate storm frequency (i.e., 25, 50 or
100-yr, 6-hr) as determined by the Storm Water Administrator based on a
downstream flood analysis provided by the owner or designee using the
criteria specified in the Design Manual or if a downstream analysis is not
performed the peak shall be controlled for the 10-yr and 25-yr, 6-hr
storms. Controlling the 1-year, 24-hour volume achieves peak control for
the 2-year, 6-hour storm. The emergency overflow and outlet works for
any pond or wetland constructed as a storm water BMP shall be capable of
safely passing a discharge with a minimum recurrence frequency as
specified in the Design Manual. For detention basins, the temporary
storage capacity shall be restored within 72 hours. Requirements of the
Dam Safety Act shall be met when applicable.
304
(A)
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE WESTERN CATAWBA
DISTRICT
Development Standards For Low Density Projects
Any drainage area within a project in the Western Catawba District is considered
low density when said drainage area has less than or equal to 12% built upon area
as determined by the methodology established in the Design Manual. Such lowdensity projects shall comply with each of the following standards.
(1)
Vegetated Conveyances
Storm water runoff from the development shall be transported from the
development by vegetated conveyances to the maximum extent
practicable.
(2)
Stream Buffers
The S.W.I.M. Stream Buffer requirements apply in the Western Catawba
as described in the Jurisdiction’s Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 12 as do the
buffers described for the watershed overlays contained in Chapter 10.
When there is a conflict between buffer requirements, the more stringent
always applies. In addition, intermittent and perennial streams within the
project boundary shall be delineated by a certified professional using U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers and N.C. Division of Water Quality
methodology and shall be shown in the storm water management permit
application along with all buffer areas. All perennial and intermittent
streams draining less than 50 acres shall have a minimum 30-foot
vegetated buffer including a 10-foot zone adjacent to the bank.
Disturbance of the buffer is allowed; however, any disturbed area must be
revegetated and disturbance of the 10-foot zone adjacent to the bank shall
require stream bank stabilization using bioengineering techniques as
specified in the Design Manual. All perennial and intermittent streams
21
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
draining greater than or equal to 50 acres and less than 300 acres shall
have a 35-foot buffer with two (2) zones, including stream side and
upland. Streams draining greater than or equal to 300 acres and less than
640 acres shall have a 50-foot buffer with three (3) zones, including
stream side, managed use and upland. Streams draining greater than or
equal to 640 acres shall have a 100-foot buffer, plus 50% of the area of the
floodfringe beyond 100 feet. This buffer shall consist of three (3) zones,
including stream side, managed use and upland. All buffers shall be
measured from the top of the bank on both sides of the stream. The uses
allowed in the different buffer zones as described in the S.W.I.M. Stream
Buffer requirements in the Jurisdiction’s Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 12,
as well as the other provisions of the S.W.I.M. ordinance shall apply in the
Western Catawba District (except buffer widths).
(B)
Development Standards For High Density Projects
Any drainage area within a project in the Western Catawba District is considered
high density when said drainage area has greater than 12% built upon area as
determined by the methodology established in the Design Manual. The built upon
area caps specified in the Water Supply Watershed Protection requirements
contained in the Jurisdiction’s Zoning Ordinance (see Section xxxxx) shall
apply. High-density projects shall implement storm water treatment systems that
comply with each of the following standards.
(1)
Storm Water Quality Treatment Volume
Storm water quality treatment systems shall treat the runoff generated
from the first inch of rainfall.
(2)
Storm Water Quality Treatment
All structural storm water treatment systems used to meet these
requirements shall be designed to have a minimum of 85% average annual
removal for Total Suspended Solids and 70% average annual removal for
Total Phosphorus. Low Impact Development techniques as described in
the Design Manual can be used to meet this requirement.
(3)
Storm Water Treatment System Design
General engineering design criteria for all projects shall be in accordance
with 15A NCAC 2H .1008(c), as explained in the Design Manual.
(4)
Stream Buffers
The S.W.I.M. Stream Buffer requirements apply in the Western Catawba
as described in the Jurisdiction’s Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 12 as do the
22
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
buffers described for the watershed overlays contained in Chapter 10.
When there is a conflict between buffer requirements, the more stringent
always applies. In addition, intermittent and perennial streams within the
project boundary shall be delineated by a certified professional using U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers and N.C. Division of Water Quality
methodology and shall be shown in the storm water management permit
application along with all buffer areas. All perennial and intermittent
streams draining less than 50 acres shall have a minimum 30-foot
vegetated buffer including a 10-foot zone adjacent to the bank.
Disturbance of the buffer is allowed; however, any disturbed area must be
revegetated and disturbance of the 10-foot zone adjacent to the bank shall
require stream bank stabilization using bioengineering techniques as
specified in the Design Manual. All perennial and intermittent streams
draining greater than or equal to 50 acres and less than 300 acres shall
have a 35-foot buffer with two (2) zones, including stream side and
upland. Streams draining greater than or equal to 300 acres and less than
640 acres shall have a 50-foot buffer with three (3) zones, including
stream side, managed use and upland. Streams draining greater than or
equal to 640 acres shall have a 100-foot buffer, plus 50% of the area of the
floodfringe beyond 100 feet. This buffer shall consist of three (3) zones,
including stream side, managed use and upland. All buffers shall be
measured from the top of the bank on both sides of the stream. The uses
allowed in the different buffer zones as described in the S.W.I.M. Stream
Buffer requirements in the Jurisdiction’s Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 12,
as well as the other provisions of the S.W.I.M. ordinance shall apply in the
Western Catawba District (except buffer widths).
(5)
Storm Water Volume Control
Storm water treatment systems shall be installed to control the volume
leaving the project site at post-development for the 1-year, 24-hour storm.
Runoff volume drawdown time shall be a minimum of 24 hours, but not
more than 120 hours.
(6)
Storm Water Peak Control
For residential developments exceeding 12% built-upon area, peak control
shall be installed for the appropriate storm frequency (i.e., 10, 25, 50 or
100-yr, 6-hr) as determined by the Storm Water Administrator based on a
downstream flood analysis provided by the owner or designee using the
criteria specified in the Design Manual or if a downstream analysis is not
performed the peak shall be controlled for the 10-yr and 25-yr, 6-hr
storms. For commercial development exceeding 12% built-upon area,
peak control shall be installed for the 10-yr, 6-hr storm and additional
peak control provided for the appropriate storm frequency (i.e., 25, 50 or
100-yr, 6-hr) as determined by the Storm Water Administrator based on a
23
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
downstream flood analysis provided by the owner or designee using the
criteria specified in the Design Manual or if a downstream analysis is not
performed the peak shall be controlled for the 10-yr and 25-yr, 6-hr
storms. Controlling the 1-year, 24-hour volume achieves peak control for
the 2-year, 6-hour storm. The emergency overflow and outlet works for
any pond or wetland constructed as a storm water BMP shall be capable of
safely passing a discharge with a minimum recurrence frequency as
specified in the Design Manual. For detention basins, the temporary
storage capacity shall be restored within 72 hours. Requirements of the
Dam Safety Act shall be met when applicable.
305
(A)
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE YADKIN-SOUTHEAST
CATAWBA DISTRICT
Development Standards For Low Density Projects
Any drainage area within a project in the Yadkin-Southeast Catawba District is
considered low density when said drainage area has less than or equal to 10%
built upon area as determined by the methodology established in the Design
Manual. Such low-density projects shall comply with each of the following
standards.
(1)
Vegetated Conveyances
Storm water runoff from the development shall be transported from the
development by vegetated conveyances to the maximum extent practicable
(2)
Stream Buffers
In addition, intermittent and perennial streams within the project boundary
shall be delineated by a certified professional using U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and N.C. Division of Water Quality methodology and shall be
shown in the storm water management permit application along with all
buffer areas. All perennial and intermittent streams draining less than 50
acres shall have a minimum 50-foot undisturbed buffer. All perennial and
intermittent streams draining greater than or equal to 50 acres shall have a
100-foot undisturbed buffer, plus the entire floodplain. All buffers shall be
measured from the top of the bank on both sides of the stream. The uses
allowed in the stream side zone described in the S.W.I.M. Stream Buffer
requirements in the Jurisdiction’s Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 12, as well
as the other provisions of the S.W.I.M. ordinance shall apply in the
Yadkin-Southeast Catawba District (except buffer widths).
(B)
Development Standards For High Density Projects
Any drainage area within a project in the Yadkin-Southeast Catawba District is
24
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
considered high density when said drainage area has greater than 10% built upon
area as determined by the methodology established in the Design Manual. Such
high-density projects shall implement storm water treatment systems that comply
with each of the following standards:
(1)
Storm Water Quality Treatment Volume
Storm water quality treatment systems shall treat the runoff generated
from the first inch of rainfall.
(2)
Storm Water Quality Treatment
All structural storm water treatment systems used to meet these
requirements shall be designed to have a minimum of 85% average annual
removal for Total Suspended Solids and 70% average annual removal for
Total Phosphorus. Low Impact Development techniques as described in
the Design Manual can be used to meet this requirement.
(3)
Storm Water Treatment System Design
General engineering design criteria for all projects shall be in accordance
with 15A NCAC 2H .1008(c), as explained in the Design Manual.
(4)
Stream Buffers
In addition, intermittent and perennial streams within the project boundary
shall be delineated by a certified professional using U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and N.C. Division of Water Quality methodology and shall be
shown in the storm water management permit application along with all
buffer areas. All perennial and intermittent streams draining less than 50
acres shall have a minimum 50-foot undisturbed buffer. All perennial and
intermittent streams draining greater than or equal to 50 acres shall have a
100-foot undisturbed buffer, plus the entire floodplain. All buffers shall be
measured from the top of the bank on both sides of the stream. The uses
allowed in the stream side zone described in the S.W.I.M. Stream Buffer
requirements in the Jurisdiction’s Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 12, as well
as the other provisions of the S.W.I.M. ordinance shall apply in the
Yadkin-Southeast Catawba District (except buffer widths).
(5)
Storm Water Volume Control
Storm water treatment systems shall be installed to control the volume
leaving the project site at post-development for the 1-year, 24-hour storm.
Runoff volume drawdown time shall be a minimum of 24 hours, but not
more than 120 hours.
25
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
(6)
Storm Water Peak Control
For residential developments exceeding 10% built-upon area, peak control
shall be installed for the appropriate storm frequency (i.e., 10, 25, 50 or
100-yr, 6-hr) as determined by the Storm Water Administrator based on a
downstream flood analysis provided by the owner or designee using the
criteria specified in the Design Manual or if a downstream analysis is not
performed the peak shall be controlled for the 10-yr and 25-yr, 6-hr
storms. For commercial development exceeding 10% built-upon area,
peak control shall be installed for the 10-yr, 6-hr storm and additional
peak control provided for the appropriate storm frequency (i.e., 25, 50 or
100-yr, 6-hr) as determined by the Storm Water Administrator based on a
downstream flood analysis provided by the owner or designee using the
criteria specified in the Design Manual or if a downstream analysis is not
performed the peak shall be controlled for the 10-yr and 25-yr, 6-hr
storms. Controlling the 1-year, 24-hour volume achieves peak control for
the 2-year, 6-hour storm. The emergency overflow and outlet works for
any pond or wetland constructed as a storm water BMP shall be capable of
safely passing a discharge with a minimum recurrence frequency as
specified in the Design Manual. For detention basins, the temporary
storage capacity shall be restored within 72 hours. Requirements of the
Dam Safety Act shall be met when applicable.
306
(A)
STANDARDS FOR STORM WATER CONTROL MEASURES
Evaluation According to Contents of Design Manual
All storm water control measures and storm water treatment practices (also
referred to as Best Management Practices, or BMPs) required under this
ordinance shall be evaluated by the Storm Water Administrator according to the
policies, criteria, and information, including technical specifications, standards
and the specific design criteria for each storm water best management practice
contained in the Design Manual. The Storm Water Administrator shall determine
whether these measures will be adequate to meet the requirements of this
ordinance.
(B)
Determination of Adequacy; Presumptions and Alternatives
Storm water treatment practices that are designed, constructed, and maintained in
accordance with the criteria and specifications in the Design Manual will be
presumed to meet the minimum water quality and quantity performance standards
of this ordinance. Whenever an applicant proposes to utilize a practice or
practices not designed and constructed in accordance with the criteria and
specifications in the Design Manual, the applicant shall have the burden of
demonstrating that the practice(s) will satisfy the minimum water quality and
quantity performance standards of this ordinance before it can be approved for
use. The Storm Water Administrator may require the applicant to provide such
26
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
documentation, calculations, and examples as necessary for the Storm Water
Administrator to determine whether such an affirmative showing is made.
(C)
Submittal of Digital Records
Upon submittal of as-built plans, the location of storm drainage pipes, inlets and
outlets as well as the location of all BMPs as well as Open Space must be
delivered to the Storm Water Administrator in the digital format specified in the
Design Manual.
307
(A)
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS MITIGATION
Purpose
The purpose of this mitigation is to reduce the cost of complying with the 70%
total phosphorus removal criteria for developments exceeding 50% built-upon
area while ensuring the reduction of pollution loads and achievement of the
ordinance objectives.
(B)
General Description
There are two (2) total phosphorus mitigation options available to developments
greater than or equal to 60% built-upon area, including off-site mitigation and a
buy-down option as described in this Section. For developments with greater than
or equal to 50% and less than 60% built-upon area, off-site mitigation only is
allowed provided it occurs in the same named creek system. Both off-site and
buy-down mitigation will result in the construction of retrofit BMPs in the same
river basin (Catawba or Yadkin) as the mitigated site. In the Western Catawba
District both forms of mitigation must occur in the watershed of the same named
creek system for the purpose of ensuring a balance of total phosphorus loads to
lake cove areas where phosphorus is a limiting pollutant with the exception that
up to 30% of the buy-down money can be spent outside the watershed. In
addition, the buy-down option is available provided the jurisdiction has projects
and/or property available for mitigation. There is no total phosphorus
requirement in the Central Catawba District so the mitigation option is not
necessary. The named creek systems referred to above include:
Western Catawba: Studman Branch, Porter Branch, Neal Branch, Stowe Branch,
Beaverdam Creek, Little Paw Creek, Paw Creek, Long Creek, Gar Creek, and
McDowell Creek
Yadkin-Southeast Catawba: Six Mile Creek, Crooked Creek, Stevens Creek,
Goose Creek, Duck Creek, Long Branch, Clear Creek, Wiley Branch, Caldwell
Creek, McKee Creek, Ready Creek, Fuda Creek, Back Creek, Mallard Creek,
Clarke Creek, Ramah Creek, South Prong Rocky River, and West Prong Rocky
River
27
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
(C)
Criteria for Off-Site Mitigation
(1)
The owner or designee of a proposed construction site that will include
greater than or equal to 50% built upon area shall construct a BMP retrofit
project designed to achieve an equivalent or greater net mass removal of
total phosphorus as would be achieved by removing 70% of the total
phosphorus from the proposed site. Off-site mitigation is allowed only for
total phosphorus removal above 50%. On-site BMPs shall be constructed
to achieve 50% removal of total phosphorus.
(2)
The Storm Water Administrator shall receive, review, approve, disapprove
or approve with conditions an “Application for Off-Site Total Phosphorus
Mitigation.” The Storm Water Administrator shall design this application
to include all pertinent information. This application shall be submitted
with the storm water management permit application and shall at a
minimum contain a description of the BMP(s) to be constructed, including
their type and size as well as the pollutant removal efficiencies to be
achieved. The location of the site where the BMP(s) are to be constructed
shall be described, including the size of the drainage area to be treated and
percentage and type of existing built upon area. The application must also
include the pounds of total phosphorus being mitigated for and the pounds
of total phosphorus reduced with the retrofit BMP(s). A legally valid
instrument shall be submitted with the application to demonstrate that the
applicant has land rights to perform the BMP retrofit on the property.
(3)
The criteria for approval of off-site total phosphorus mitigation by the
Storm Water Administrator are as follows:
(a)
BMP(s) must be constructed in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H
.1008(c), as explained in the Design Manual.
(b)
BMP(s) must be sized for the corresponding watershed area
according to the Design Manual.
(c)
BMP(s) must be inspected by the Storm Water Administrator and
found to be in compliance with all approved plans and
specifications prior to the release of occupancy permits for the
mitigated site.
(d)
Following approval from the Storm Water Administrator, BMP(s)
may be installed and credits obtained for pounds of total
phosphorus removed that can be applied to future projects. These
credits can be accumulated or “banked” for a period of time as
specified by the Storm Water Administrator in the Administrative
Manual.
28
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
(e)
(D)
Criteria for Total Phosphorus Buy-Down Option
(1)
The owner or designee of a proposed construction site that will include
greater than or equal to 60% built upon area may “buy-down” the 70%
phosphorus removal requirement to no less than 50%. On-site BMPs must
be installed to remove the remaining total phosphorus load. The money
shall be used by the Jurisdiction to construct BMP retrofit projects
designed to achieve an equivalent or greater net mass removal of total
phosphorus as would be achieved by removing 70% of the total
phosphorus from the proposed site.
(2)
The Storm Water Administrator shall receive, review, approve, disapprove
or approve with conditions an “Application for Total Phosphorus BuyDown.” The Storm Water Administrator shall design this application to
include all pertinent information. This application shall be submitted with
the storm water management permit application and shall at a minimum
contain calculations showing the total load buy-down and all cost
calculations as described in the Design Manual.
(3)
The criteria for the buy-down option are as follows:
(4)
308
All off-site mitigation BMPs shall be subject to the maintenance
requirements as well as installation and maintenance performance
securities specified in Section 6 of this ordinance.
(a)
The buy-down option shall not be approved by the Storm Water
Administrator unless projects and/or properties are available for
mitigation, including BMP construction, BMP maintenance, BMP
rehabilitation and stream restoration.
(b)
There is no time constraint for the Jurisdiction to spend mitigation
money; however, the Jurisdiction shall strive to spend buy-down
monies in a timely and efficient manner such that a net
improvement in water quality results.
(c)
All BMPs constructed by the jurisdiction as part of this mitigation
option shall be maintained by the jurisdiction into perpetuity.
The criteria for calculating the buy-down cost shall be provided in the
Design Manual.
DEED RECORDATION AND INDICATIONS ON PLAT
The approval of the storm water management permit shall require an enforceable restriction on
property usage that runs with the land, such as plat, recorded deed restrictions or protective
covenants, to ensure that future development and redevelopment maintains the site consistent
29
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
with the approved project plans. The location of all designated Open Space for a site shall be
recorded at the Register of Deeds Office as “Undisturbed Open Space.” Streams and buffer
boundaries including the delineation of each buffer zone must be specified on all surveys and
record plats. The applicable operations and maintenance agreement pertaining to every
structural BMP shall be referenced on the final plat and shall be recorded with the Mecklenburg
County Register of Deeds Office upon final plat approval. If no subdivision plat is recorded for
the site, then the operations and maintenance agreement shall be recorded with the Mecklenburg
County Register of Deeds Office so as to appear in the chain of title of all subsequent purchasers
under generally accepted searching principles. A copy of the recorded maintenance agreement
shall be provided to the Storm Water Administrator within fourteen (14) days following receipt
of the recorded document. A maintenance easement shall be recorded for every structural BMP
to allow sufficient access for adequate maintenance. The specific recordation and deed
restriction requirements as well as notes to be displayed on final plats and deeds shall be
contained in the Administrative Manual.
SECTION 4: DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT MITIGATION
401
(A)
MITIGATION PAYMENT
Lots Less than One Acre
Development and redevelopment on a lot less than one (1) acre in size measured
in accordance with Section 106(H) is allowed by right to forego meeting the
requirements of this ordinance provided the Jurisdiction is paid a mitigation fee
according to rates set forth in the Storm Water Design Manual and provided such
development and redevelopment are not part of a larger common plan of
development or sale, even though multiple, separate or distinct activities take
place at different times on different schedules.
(B)
Transit Station Areas and Distressed Business Districts
Redevelopment of transit station areas designated by the Planning Director based
on Corridor Record of Decisions or distressed business districts designated by the
Economic Development Director that do not increase built upon area and do not
decrease existing storm water controls and are not part of a larger common plan of
development or sale, are allowed by right to forego meeting the requirements of
this ordinance except for peak and volume control provided the Jurisdiction is
paid a mitigation fee according to rates set forth in the Storm Water Design
Manual.
402
(A)
CRITERIA FOR MITIGATION PAYMENT
Notification to Storm Water Administrator
30
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
The buy-right mitigation option does not require approval by the Storm Water
Administrator; however, notification that this right is to be exercised for a
particular lot must be made prior to the issuance of any permits for the project.
This notification is to be made to the Storm Water Administrator on a standard
form provided in the Design Manual.
(B)
Use of Mitigation Payment
The Jurisdiction shall use the mitigation payment to install water quality
enhancement measures, including but not limited to BMPs, stream restoration,
open space preservation, etc. BMP(s) installed using the mitigation payment must
be constructed in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .1008(c), as explained in the
Design Manual. All BMPs constructed by the jurisdiction as part of this
mitigation option shall be maintained by the jurisdiction into perpetuity.
(C)
Time Frame for Use of Mitigation Payment
The Jurisdiction shall use the mitigation payment within a maximum of two (2)
years of the end of the calendar year from the receipt of the payment. As an
option, the Jurisdiction may elect to use up to 10 percent of the fee to purchase
and plant trees within the Jurisdiction.
SECTION 5: OPEN SPACE
501
PURPOSE
Open Space provides for a reduction in the negative impacts from storm water runoff through
non-structural means. The combination of the structural BMPs described in Section 3 with the
non-structural Open Space provisions described in this Section allow the objectives of this
ordinance to be fulfilled.
502
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
Undisturbed Open Space is required for all development unless mitigated. The percentage of
Open Space required depends on a project’s built-upon area as described below. Open Space
requirements can be met in stream or lake buffers, designated common areas or on individual lots
for residential development (e.g., backyards, borders, etc.). Open Space can not be designated
within rights of way, utility easements, etc. where re-disturbance could occur. Grass fields can
also be used to meet Open Space requirements; however, the fields must be replanted in
accordance with the tree planting provisions described in Section 505 (C) below. Open Space is
preferred where it will provide maximum water quality benefit (i.e. around gullies and existing
drainage areas, adjacent to streams and wetlands, around structural BMPs, etc.). Cluster
provisions as well as Tree and S.W.I.M. Buffer Ordinance incentives currently contained in the
Jurisdiction’s ordinances will continue to apply in the area designated to meet this Open Space
requirement.
31
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
503
OPEN SPACE CRITERIA
Open Space requirements apply to projects as described below.
(A)
Less Than 24% Built-Upon Area
A project with less than 24% built-upon area shall include as Open Space within
the boundaries of the project a minimum of 25% of the project area.
(B)
Greater Than or Equal to 24% and Less Than 50% Built-Upon Area
A project with greater than or equal to 24% and less than 50% built-upon area
shall include as Open Space within the boundaries of the project a minimum of
17.5% of the project area.
(C)
Greater Than or Equal to 50% Built-Upon Area
A project with greater than or equal to 50% built-upon area shall include as Open
Space within the boundaries of the project a minimum of 10% of the project area.
504
OPEN SPACE DESIGNATION
The Open Space location shall be recorded at the Register of Deeds Office as “Undisturbed Open
Space” and future disturbance is prohibited except for greenway trails with unlimited public
access, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utility lines and channel work/maintenance activities by
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Storm Water Services. Other utility work may be allowed in the Open
Space area provided it will not result in loss of Open Space as approved by the Jurisdiction.
505
(A)
OPEN SPACE MITIGATION
Purpose
The purpose of this mitigation is to reduce the cost of complying with the Open
Space requirement while ensuring the reduction of pollution loads and
achievement of the ordinance objectives.
(B)
General Description
Approved disturbance to the Open Space area described in Section 503 above
must be off-set by an allowable form of mitigation, including on-site and off-site
mitigation as well as through payment-in-lieu.
(C)
Open Space Mitigation Criteria
(1)
On-Site Mitigation
32
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
On-site mitigation shall allow the disturbance of designated Open Space
area on a project with the fulfillment of the following criteria on the
project site:
(a)
50% increase in total Open Space area designation above the
requirements specified in Section 503 above, except when the
Open Space area qualifies as a “grass field” in which case the size
of the required Open Space area remains unchanged. The portion
of the Open Space area that is a grass field, whether or not
disturbed, must be replanted with trees as specified in subsection
(c) below.
(b)
Establishment of a minimum of six (6) inches of top soil to the
disturbed Open Space area following the completion of
construction activities. This material may be obtained from on-site
when available.
(c)
Planting of a minimum of 36 trees per acre of Open Space area as
follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
(d)
(e)
(f)
(2)
Trees shall have a minimum caliper of 1.5 inches.
Trees shall be of a quality set forth by the American
Standard for Nursery Stock and will be selected from a list
of acceptable native species for planting in Open Spaces
established by the Jurisdiction.
Planted trees shall contain a mix of at least three (3)
different species in roughly equal proportions and be “large
mature shade tree species” as defined by the Jurisdiction.
Trees shall be planted in accordance with specifications
provided by the Jurisdiction.
Trees shall be warranted for a minimum of two (2) years
following planting and any dead or diseased trees must be
replaced.
The area around and between trees must be stabilized using an
approved vegetative ground cover and mulch.
The slope of any graded or disturbed area that is dedicated for
Open Space can not exceed 3 to 1.
The flow of water across the Open Space area must be controlled
to prevent soil erosion or mulch disturbance.
Off-Site Mitigation
On a case by case basis and at the sole discretion of the Storm Water
Administrator, the Jurisdiction may allow Open Space disturbance and
33
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
off-site mitigation through the acceptance for ownership or conservation
easement properties for the protection of Open Space, provided the result
will be an increased protection of water quality over what would be
attained through preservation of Open Space or on site mitigation (see
Design Manual). This off-site mitigation shall be located in the same
delineated watershed as the project site. There are 20 delineated
watershed districts used for mitigation purposes as follows: Sugar/Irwin,
Little Sugar/Briar, McMullen, McAlpine, Four Mile, Six Mile,
Stevens/Goose, Clear, McKee, Reedy, Back, Mallard, Clarks, Rocky
River, McDowell, Gar, Long, Paw, Steele, Beaver Dam, and Stowe
Branch. Other smaller usually unnamed streams draining directly into the
lakes are considered separate delineations. In the event property for
purchase cannot be located within the same watershed district, the
Jurisdiction shall designate an alternate watershed where there will be a
net improvement in water quality protection such as designated impaired
watersheds.
(3)
Payment-In-Lieu of Open Space Dedication
Payment-in-lieu of Open Space dedication is only allowed for industrial
and commercial developments and multi-family projects that are in excess
of 50% built upon area. Payment-in-lieu shall only be allowed to the
extent an approved disturbance cannot be offset by on-site mitigation as
determined by the Storm Water Administrator. The following criteria
shall be fulfilled for the payment-in-lieu option:
(a)
A fee shall be paid to the Jurisdiction where the property is
located or its designee based on the following formula: 1.25 x
(appraised value of subject property including intended use without
improvements). The appraised value of the subject property shall
be determined by a licensed, independent real estate appraiser
retained by the developer or owner. The Jurisdiction may accept
the appraised value or at its discretion obtain its own appraisal. In
the event the parties cannot agree on the appraised value, the two
appraised values shall be averaged together to determine the final
appraised value to be used in the formula above.
(b)
Payment shall be accepted by the Jurisdiction or its designee prior
to land disturbing activities.
(c)
The Jurisdiction shall use the payment-in-lieu to purchase Open
Space in the same delineated watershed as the property to be
disturbed within a maximum of two (2) years of the end of the
calendar year from the receipt of the payment. The 20 delineated
watershed districts used for mitigation purposes are described in
Section 505(C)(2) above. As an option, the Jurisdiction may elect
34
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
to use up to 10 percent of the fee to purchase and plant trees within
the Jurisdiction.
(D)
Approval Criteria for Open Space Mitigation
(1)
Application for Open Space Mitigation
The Storm Water Administrator shall receive, review, approve, disapprove
or approve with conditions an “Application for Open Space Mitigation.”
The Storm Water Administrator shall design this application to include all
pertinent information, including at a minimum a “mitigation plan”
describing the desired mitigation option as discussed in previous sections
and an effective demonstration that all reasonable efforts have been
undertaken to fulfill the Open Space requirement on the particular site.
An application for on-site mitigation shall show the location of the
restored Open Space on the property and the location, type and size of all
trees and ground cover to be planted as well as contain a warranty
statement for the trees. An off-site mitigation application shall show the
location and description including acreage, etc. of the property to be used
for mitigation and contain a legally valid instrument demonstrating that
the applicant has legal title to the property for transfer to the Jurisdiction.
A payment-in-lieu application shall at a minimum contain the location and
description of the site to be mitigated and an approved appraisal by a
licensed, independent real estate appraiser
(2)
Pre-Approved Open Space Mitigation
The following is pre-approved for on-site mitigation and does not require
the submittal of an application to the Storm Water Administrator;
however, these mitigation areas shall be described on the storm water
management permit application.
(a)
Residential, Commercial and Multifamily Uses: 25% of the
required Open Space area as described in Section 503 above is preapproved for on-site mitigation provided the size of mitigation area
is 150% of the disturbed area. Other forms of mitigation as
described above must receive approval from the Storm Water
Administrator.
(b)
Industrial Uses: 100% of the required Open Space area as
described in Section 503 above is pre-approved for on-site
mitigation with no increase in total required Open Space area.
Other forms of mitigation as described above must receive
approval from the Storm Water Administrator.
35
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
(E)
Open Space Designation
All designated Open Space areas included as part of an approved mitigation must
be recorded at the Register of Deeds Office as “Undisturbed Open Space” and any
future disturbance of this area is strictly prohibited except for greenway trails with
unlimited public access, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utility lines and channel
work/maintenance activities by Charlotte-Mecklenburg Storm Water Services.
Other utility work may be allowed in the Open Space area provided it will not
result in loss of Open Space as approved by the Jurisdiction.
SECTION 6: MAINTENANCE
601
(A)
DEDICATION OF BMPS, FACILITIES & IMPROVEMENTS
Single Family Residential BMPs Accepted for Maintenance
The Jurisdiction shall accept maintenance responsibility (as specified in the
Design Manual) of structural BMPs that are installed pursuant to this ordinance
following a warranty period of two (2) years from the date of as-built certification
described in Section 203(C), provided the BMP:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Only serves a single family detached residential development or
townhomes all of which have public street frontage;
Is satisfactorily maintained during the two (2) year warranty period by the
owner or designee;
Meets all the requirements of this ordinance and the Design Manual; and
Includes adequate and perpetual access and sufficient area, by easement or
otherwise, for inspection, maintenance, repair or reconstruction.
The Storm Water Administrator must receive an application for transfer of
maintenance responsibilities for the structural BMP along with the storm water
management permit application. The Storm Water Administrator will develop
and distribute this application as a component of the Administrative Manual (see
Section 202(D)(4)).
(B)
Maintenance and Operation of BMPs
The owner of a structural BMP installed pursuant to this ordinance and not
covered under Subsection 601(A) above shall maintain and operate the BMP so as
to preserve and continue its function in controlling storm water quality and
quantity at the degree or amount of function for which the structural BMP was
designed.
(C)
Damage or Removal of Trees
36
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
The following provisions apply to trees contained in permitted Open Space areas
or in BMPs that are damaged or removed:
(D)
(1)
For trees damaged or removed due to natural disasters, the owner shall be
required to replace the trees in accordance with the open space mitigation
criteria described in Section 505(C)(1)(c) of this ordinance within a
timeframe specified by the Storm Water Administrator.
(2)
For trees damaged or removed due to reasons other than (1) above, the
owner shall be required to replace the trees in accordance with the open
space mitigation criteria described in Section 505(C)(1)(c) of this
ordinance within a timeframe specified by the Storm Water Administrator
with the following exception, the trees shall be replaced at twice the
specified density. In addition, the owner may be subject to fines as
described in Section 7, Violations and Enforcement.
Annual Maintenance Inspection and Report
The person responsible for maintenance of any BMP installed pursuant to this
ordinance and not covered under Section 601(A) above shall submit to the Storm
Water Administrator an inspection report from a qualified registered North
Carolina professional engineer or landscape architect performing services only in
their area of competence. All inspection reports shall be on forms supplied by the
Storm Water Administrator that are contained in the Design Manual. An original
inspection report shall be provided to the Storm Water Administrator beginning
one year from the date of as-built certification and each year thereafter on or
before the anniversary date of the as-built certification.
602
(A)
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
General
At the time that as-built plans are provided to the Storm Water Administrator as
described in Section 203(C) and prior to final approval of a project for
compliance with this ordinance, but in all cases prior to placing the BMPs in
service, the applicant or owner of the site must execute an operation and
maintenance agreement that shall be binding on all current and subsequent owners
of the site, portions of the site, and lots or parcels served by the structural BMP.
Failure to execute an operation and maintenance agreement within the time frame
specified by the Storm Water Administrator may result in assessment of penalties
as specified in Section 7, Violations and Enforcement. Until the transference of
all property, sites, or lots served by the structural BMP, the original owner or
applicant shall have primary responsibility for carrying out the provisions of the
maintenance agreement. At the discretion of the Storm Water Administrator,
certificates of occupancy may be withheld pending receipt of an operation and
maintenance agreement.
37
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
The operation and maintenance agreement shall require the owner or owners to
maintain, repair and, if necessary, reconstruct the structural BMP, and shall state
the terms, conditions, and schedule of maintenance for the structural BMP. In
addition, it shall grant to the Jurisdiction a right of entry in the event that the
Storm Water Administrator has reason to believe it has become necessary to
inspect, monitor, maintain, repair, or reconstruct the structural BMP; however, in
no case shall the right of entry, of itself, confer an obligation on the Jurisdiction
to assume responsibility for the structural BMP.
Standard operation and maintenance agreements for BMPs shall be developed by
the Storm Water Administrator and made available in the Design Manual. The
operation and maintenance agreement must be approved by the Storm Water
Administrator prior to plan approval, and it shall be referenced on the final plat as
described in Section 308.
(B)
Special Requirement for Homeowners’ and Other Associations
For all structural BMPs required pursuant to this ordinance not covered under
Section 601(A) above, and that are to be or are owned and maintained by a
homeowners’ association, property owners’ association, or similar entity, the
required operation and maintenance agreement shall include the provisions
described in the Design Manual.
603
INSPECTION PROGRAM
Inspections and inspection programs by the Jurisdiction may be conducted or established on any
reasonable basis, including but not limited to routine inspections; random inspections;
inspections based upon complaints or other notice of possible violations; and joint inspections
with other agencies inspecting under environmental or safety laws. Inspections may include, but
are not limited to, reviewing maintenance and repair records; sampling discharges, surface water,
groundwater, and material or water in BMPs; and evaluating the condition of BMPs.
If the owner or occupant of any property refuses to permit such inspection, the Storm Water
Administrator shall proceed to obtain an administrative search warrant pursuant to G.S. 15-27.2
or its successor. No person shall obstruct, hamper or interfere with the Storm Water
Administrator while carrying out his or her official duties.
604
PERFORMANCE SECURITY FOR INSTALLATION AND
MAINTENANCE
The Jurisdiction may require the submittal of a performance security or bond with surety, cash
escrow, letter of credit or other acceptable legal arrangement prior to issuance of a permit in
accordance with the provisions contained in the Administrative Manual.
605
RECORDS OF INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES
38
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
The owner of each structural BMP shall keep records of inspections, maintenance, and repairs
for at least five years from the date of creation of the record and shall submit the same upon
reasonable request to the Storm Water Administrator.
606
MAINTENANCE EASEMENT
Every structural BMP installed pursuant to this ordinance shall be made accessible for adequate
inspection, maintenance, reconstruction and repair by a maintenance easement. The easement
shall be recorded as described in Section 308 and its terms shall specify who may make use of
the easement and for what purposes.
SECTION 7: VIOLATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT
701
(A)
GENERAL
Authority to Enforce
The provisions of this ordinance shall be enforced by the Storm Water
Administrator, his or her designee, or any authorized agent of the Jurisdiction.
Whenever this section refers to the Storm Water Administrator, it includes his or
her designee as well as any authorized agent of Jurisdiction.
(B)
Violation Unlawful
Any failure to comply with an applicable requirement, prohibition, standard, or
limitation imposed by this ordinance, or the terms or conditions of any permit or
other development or redevelopment approval or authorization granted pursuant
to this ordinance, is unlawful and shall constitute a violation of this ordinance.
(C)
Each Day a Separate Offense
Each day that a violation continues shall constitute a separate and distinct
violation or offense.
(D)
Responsible Persons/Entities
Any person who erects, constructs, reconstructs, alters (whether actively or
passively), or fails to erect, construct, reconstruct, alter, repair or maintain any
structure, BMP, practice, or condition in violation of this ordinance, as well as
any person who participates in, assists, directs, creates, causes, or maintains a
condition that results in or constitutes a violation of this ordinance, or fails to take
appropriate action, so that a violation of this ordinance results or persists; or an
owner, any tenant or occupant, or any other person, who has control over, or
responsibility for, the use or development of the property on which the violation
occurs shall be subject to the remedies, penalties, and/or enforcement actions in
39
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
accordance with this Section. For the purposes of this article, responsible
person(s) shall include but not be limited to:
(1)
Person Maintaining Condition Resulting In or Constituting Violation
Any person who participates in, assists, directs, creates, causes, or
maintains a condition that constitutes a violation of this ordinance, or fails
to take appropriate action, so that a violation of this ordinance results or
persists.
(2)
Responsibility For Land or Use of Land
The owner of the land on which the violation occurs, any tenant or
occupant of the property, any person who is responsible for storm water
controls or practices pursuant to a private agreement or public document,
or any person, who has control over, or responsibility for, the use,
development or redevelopment of the property.
702
(A)
INSPECTIONS AND INVESTIGATIONS
Authority to Inspect
The Storm Water Administrator shall have the authority, upon presentation of
proper credentials, to enter and inspect any land, building, structure, or premises
to ensure compliance with this ordinance, or rules or orders adopted or issued
pursuant to this ordinance, and to determine whether the activity is being
conducted in accordance with this ordinance and the approved storm water
management plan, Design Manual and Administrative Manual and whether the
measures required in the plan are effective. No person shall willfully resist, delay,
or obstruct the Storm Water Administrator while the Storm Water Administrator
is inspecting or attempting to inspect an activity under this ordinance.
(B)
Notice of Violation and Order to Correct
When the Storm Water Administrator finds that any building, structure, or land is
in violation of this ordinance, the Storm Water Administrator shall notify in
writing the responsible person/entity. The notification shall indicate the nature of
the violation, contain the address or other description of the site upon which the
violation occurred or is occurring, order the necessary action to abate the
violation, and give a deadline for correcting the violation. The notice shall, if
required, specify a date by which the responsible person/entity must comply with
this ordinance, and advise that the responsible person/entity is subject to remedies
and/or penalties or that failure to correct the violation within the time specified
will subject the responsible person/entity to remedies and/or penalties as
described in Section 703 of this ordinance. In determining the measures required
and the time for achieving compliance, the Storm Water Administrator shall take
40
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
into consideration the technology and quantity of work required, and shall set
reasonable and attainable time limits. The Storm Water Administrator may
deliver the notice of violation and correction order personally, by the (name of
law enforcement or code enforcement personnel), by certified or registered mail,
return receipt requested, or by any means authorized for the service of documents
by Rule 4 of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure.
If a violation is not corrected within a reasonable period of time, as provided in
the notification, the Storm Water Administrator may take appropriate action, as
provided in Section 703, Remedies and Penalties, to correct and abate the
violation and to ensure compliance with this ordinance.
(C)
Extension of Time
A responsible person/entity who receives a notice of violation and correction
order, or the owner of the land on which the violation occurs, may submit to the
Storm Water Administrator a written request for an extension of time for
correction of the violation. On determining that the request includes enough
information to show that the violation cannot be corrected within the specified
time limit for reasons beyond the control of the responsible person/entity
requesting the extension, the Storm Water Administrator may extend the time
limit as is reasonably necessary to allow timely correction of the violation, up to,
but not exceeding 60 days. The Storm Water Administrator may grant 30 day
extensions in addition to the foregoing extension if the violation cannot be
corrected within the permitted time due to circumstances beyond the control of
the responsible person/entity violating this ordinance. The Storm Water
Administrator may grant an extension only by written notice of extension. The
notice of extension shall state the date prior to which correction must be made,
after which the violator will be subject to the penalties described in the notice of
violation and correction order.
(D)
Penalties Assessed Concurrent with Notice of Violation
Penalties may be assessed concurrently with a notice of violation for any of the
following in which case the notice of violation shall also contain a statement of
the civil penalties to be assessed, the time of their accrual, and the time within
which they must be paid or be subject to collection as a debt:
(1)
Failure to submit a storm water management plan.
(2)
Performing activities without an approved storm water management plan.
(3)
Obstructing, hampering or interfering with an authorized representative
who is in the process of carrying out official duties.
41
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
(E)
(4)
A repeated violation for which a notice was previously given on the same
project and to the same responsible person/entity responsible for the
violation.
(5)
Willful violation of this ordinance.
(6)
Failure to install or maintain best management practices per the approved
plan.
Authority to Investigate
The Storm Water Administrator shall have the authority to conduct such
investigation as it may reasonably deem necessary to carry out its duties as
prescribed in this ordinance, and for this purpose to enter at reasonable times upon
any property, public or private, for the purpose of investigating and inspecting.
No Person shall refuse entry or access to the Storm Water Administrator who
requests entry for purpose of inspection or investigation, and who presents
appropriate credentials, nor shall any Person obstruct, hamper, or interfere with
the Storm Water Administrator while in the process of carrying out official duties.
The Storm Water Administrator shall also have the power to require written
statements, or the filing of reports under oath as part of an investigation.
(F)
Enforcement After Time to Correct
After the time has expired to correct a violation, including any extension(s) if
authorized by the Storm Water Administrator, the Storm Water Administrator
shall determine if the violation is corrected. If the violation is not corrected, the
Storm Water Administrator may act to impose one or more of the remedies and
penalties authorized by Section 703.
(G)
Emergency Enforcement
If delay in correcting a violation would seriously threaten the effective
enforcement of this ordinance or pose an immediate danger to the public health,
safety, or welfare, then the Storm Water Administrator may order the immediate
cessation of a violation. Any Person so ordered shall cease any violation
immediately. The Storm Water Administrator may seek immediate enforcement,
without prior written notice, through any remedy or penalty specified in Section
703.
703
REMEDIES AND PENALTIES
The remedies and penalties provided for violations of this ordinance, whether civil or criminal,
shall be cumulative and in addition to any other remedy provided by law, and may be exercised
in any order.
42
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
(A)
Remedies
(1)
Withholding of Certificate of Occupancy
The Storm Water Administrator or other authorized agent may refuse to
issue a certificate of occupancy for the building or other improvements
constructed or being constructed on the site and served by the storm water
practices in question until the applicant or other responsible person has
taken the remedial measures set forth in the notice of violation or has
otherwise cured the violations described therein.
(2)
Disapproval of Subsequent Permits and Development Approvals
As long as a violation of this ordinance continues and remains
uncorrected, the Storm Water Administrator or other authorized agent may
withhold, and the Jurisdiction may disapprove, any request for permit or
development approval or authorization provided for by this ordinance or
the zoning, subdivision, and/or building regulations, as appropriate for the
land on which the violation occurs.
(3)
Injunction, Abatements, etc.
The Storm Water Administrator, with the written authorization of the
(municipal or county manager), may institute an action in a court of
competent jurisdiction for a mandatory or prohibitory injunction and order
of abatement to correct a violation of this ordinance. Any person violating
this ordinance shall be subject to the full range of equitable remedies
provided in the General Statutes or at common law.
(4)
Correction as Public Health Nuisance, Costs as Lien, etc.
If the violation is deemed dangerous or prejudicial to the public health or
public safety and is within the geographic limits prescribed by North
Carolina G.S. § 160A-193, the Storm Water Administrator, with the
written authorization of the (municipal or county manager), may cause
the violation to be corrected and the costs to be assessed as a lien against
the property.
(5)
Restoration of Areas Affected by Failure to Comply
By issuance of an order of restoration, the Storm Water Administrator may
require a Person who engaged in a land development activity and failed to
comply with this ordinance to restore the waters and land affected by such
failure so as to minimize the detrimental effects of the resulting pollution.
This authority is in addition to any other civil penalty or injunctive relief
authorized under this ordinance.
43
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
(B)
Civil Penalties
(1)
Violations of Ordinance
A violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance or rules or other
orders adopted or issued pursuant to this ordinance may subject the
violator to a civil penalty. A civil penalty may be assessed from the date
the violation occurs. No penalty shall be assessed until the person alleged
to be in violation has been notified of the violation except as provided in
Section 702(D) of this ordinance in which case the penalty is assessed
concurrently with a notice of violation. Refusal to accept the notice or
failure to notify the Storm Water Administrator of a change of address
shall not relieve the violator’s obligation to comply with the ordinance or
to pay such a penalty.
(2)
Amount of Penalty
The maximum civil penalty for each violation of this ordinance is
$5,000.00. Each day of continuing violation shall constitute a separate
violation. In determining the amount of the civil penalty, the Storm Water
Administrator shall consider any relevant mitigating and aggravating
factors including, but not limited to, the effect, if any, of the violation; the
degree and extent of harm caused by the violation; the cost of rectifying
the damage; whether the violator saved money through noncompliance;
whether the violator took reasonable measures to comply with this
ordinance; whether the violation was committed willfully; whether the
violator reported the violation to the Storm Water Administrator; and the
prior record of the violator in complying or failing to comply with this
ordinance or any other post-construction ordinance or law. The Storm
Water Administrator is authorized to vary the amount of the per diem
penalty based on criteria specified in the Administrative Manual and based
on relevant mitigating factors. Civil penalties collected pursuant to this
ordinance shall be credited to the Jurisdictions general fund as non-tax
revenue.
(3)
Notice of Assessment of Civil Penalty
The Storm Water Administrator shall determine the amount of the civil
penalty and shall notify the violator of the amount of the penalty and the
reason for assessing the penalty. This notice of assessment of civil penalty
shall be served by any means authorized under G.S. 1A-1, Rule 4 and shall
direct the violator to either pay the assessment or file an appeal within 30
days of receipt of the notice as specified in Section 703(C) below.
(4)
Failure to Pay Civil Penalty Assessment
44
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
If a violator does not pay a civil penalty assessed by the Storm Water
Administrator within 30 Days after it is due, or does not request a hearing
as provided in Section 703(C), the Storm Water Administrator shall
request the initiation of a civil action to recover the amount of the
assessment. The civil action shall be brought in Mecklenburg County
Superior Court or in any other court of competent jurisdiction. A civil
action must be filed within three (3) years of the date the assessment was
due. An assessment that is appealed is due at the conclusion of the
administrative and judicial review of the assessment.
(5)
Appeal of Remedy or Penalty
The issuance of an order of restoration and/or notice of assessment of a
civil penalty by the Storm Water Administrator shall entitle the
responsible party or entity to an appeal before the Storm Water Advisory
Committee (SWAC) if such Person submits written demand for an appeal
hearing to the Clerk of SWAC within 30 days of the receipt of an order of
restoration and/or notice of assessment of a civil penalty. The demand for
an appeal shall be accompanied by a filing fee as established by SWAC.
The appeal of an order of restoration and/or notice of assessment of a civil
penalty shall be conducted as described in Section 205 of this ordinance.
(C)
Criminal Penalties
Violation of this ordinance may be enforced as a misdemeanor subject to the
maximum fine permissible under North Carolina law.
SECTION 8. DEFINITIONS
When used in this ordinance, the following words and terms shall have the meaning set forth in
this section, unless other provisions of this ordinance specifically indicate otherwise.
1. Administrative Manual
A manual developed by the Storm Water Administrator and distributed to the public to
provide information for the effective administration of this ordinance, including but not
limited to application requirements, submission schedule, fee schedule, maintenance
agreements, criteria for mitigation approval, criteria for recordation of documents, inspection
report forms, requirements for submittal of bonds, a copy of this ordinance, and where to
obtain the Design Manual.
2. Best Management Practices (BMPs)
A structural management facility used singularly or in combination for storm water quality
and quantity treatment to achieve water quality protection goals.
3. Buffer
45
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
A natural or vegetated area through which storm water runoff flows in a diffuse manner so
that the runoff does not become channelized and which provides for infiltration of the runoff
and filtering of pollutants.
4. Buffer Zones
In the Central and Western Catawba Districts, streams draining greater than or equal to 50
acres but less than 300 acres have a two (2) zone buffer including a stream side and upland
zone. Buffers for streams draining greater than or equal to 300 acres have three (3) zones as
shown below. The amount of disturbance allowed in the buffer differs in each zone. In the
Yadkin-Southeast Catawba there are no zones, the entire buffer is undisturbed.
5. Buffer Widths
Viewed aerially, the stream buffer width is measured horizontally on a line perpendicular to
the surface water, landward from the top of the bank on each side of the stream.
6. Built-Upon Area (BUA)
That portion of a development project that is covered by impervious or partially impervious
surface including, but not limited to, buildings; pavement and gravel areas such as roads,
parking lots, and paths; and recreation facilities such as tennis courts. “Built-upon area” does
not include a wooden slatted deck or the water area of a swimming pool.
7. Commercial Development
Any development that is not residential development as defined herein.
8. Design Manual
The storm water design manual shall be approved for use in the Jurisdiction by the North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources and shall be at least as stringent
as the storm water design manual approved for use in Phase II jurisdictions by the
Department for the proper implementation of the requirements of the federal Phase II storm
water program. All references herein to the Design Manual are to the latest published edition
or revision.
9. Development
New development created by the addition of built upon area to land void of built upon area as
46
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
of the effective date of this ordinance.
10. Disturbance
Any use of the land by any person or entity which results in a change in the natural cover or
topography of the land.
11. Drainage Area
That area of land that drains to a common point on a project site.
12. Floodplain
The low, periodically-flooded lands adjacent to streams. For land use planning purposes, the
regulatory floodplain is usually viewed as all lands that would be inundated by the
Regulatory Flood.
13. Grass Field
Land on which grasses and other herbaceous plants dominate and trees over six feet in height
are sparse or so widely scattered that less than 5% of the land area is covered by a tree
canopy.
14. Industrial Uses
Land used for industrial purposes only. Commercial (or other non-industrial) businesses
operating on industrially-zoned property shall not be considered an industrial use.
15. Larger common plan of development or sale
Any contiguous area where multiple separate and distinct construction or land disturbing
activities will occur under one plan. A plan is any announcement or piece of documentation
(including but not limited to public notice or hearing, drawing, permit application, zoning
request, or site design) or physical demarcation (including but not limited to boundary signs,
lot stakes, or surveyor markings) indicating that construction activities may occur on a
specific plot.
Formatted: No underline
Formatted: Normal + Left:
0.31",Hanging: 0.19", Indent: Left:
18 pt
Formatted: No underline
Formatted: No underline
16. Low Impact Development (LID)
The integration of site ecology and environmental goals and requirements into all phases of
urban planning and design from the individual residential lot level to the entire watershed.
17. Mitigation
Actions taken either on-site or off-site as allowed by this ordinance to offset the impacts of a
certain action.
18. Multifamily
A group of two or more attached, duplex, triplex, quadruplex, or multi-family buildings, or a
single building of more than 12 units constructed on the same lot or parcel of land under
single ownership, and planned and developed with a unified design of buildings and
coordinated common open space and service areas in accordance with the requirements of
Chapter 9 (of the Zoning Ordinance) for the zoning district in which it is located.
47
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
19. Non-Point Source (NPS) Pollution
Forms of pollution caused by sediment, nutrients, organic and toxic substances originating
from land use activities and carried to lakes and streams by surface runoff.
20. Open Space
Land that consists of natural areas containing trees and other natural shrubs consisting of
either undisturbed areas or disturbed areas that have been replanted in accordance with the
criteria established in this ordinance.
21. Owner
The legal or beneficial owner of land, including but not limited to a fee owner, mortgagee or
vendee in possession, receiver, executor, trustee, or long-term or commercial lessee, or any
other person or entity holding proprietary rights in the property or having legal power of
management and control of the property. “Owner” shall include long-term commercial
tenants; management entities, such as those charged with or engaged in the management of
properties for profit; and every person or entity having joint ownership of the property. A
secured lender not in possession of the property does not constitute an owner, unless the
secured lender is included within the meaning of “owner” under another description in this
definition, such as a management entity.
22. Person(s)
Any individual, partnership, firm, association, joint venture, public or private corporation,
trust, estate, commission, board, public or private institution, utility, cooperative, interstate
body, or other legal entity.
23. Redevelopment
Rebuilding activities on land containing built upon area as of the effective date of this
ordinance.
24. Residential Development
A development containing dwelling units with open yards on at least two sides where land is
sold with each dwelling unit.
25. Storm Water Administrator
The position (such as “City Engineer”) that has been designated by the (name of governing
board) to administer and enforce this ordinance.
26. Storm Water Advisory Committee (SWAC)
The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Storm Water Advisory Committee as established by joint
resolutions of the Charlotte City Council, Mecklenburg County Board of Commissioners and
the Towns of Cornelius, Davidson, Huntersville, Matthews, Mint Hill and Pineville, together
with any amendments thereto.
27. Storm Water Management Permit
A permit required for all development and redevelopment unless exempt pursuant to this
ordinance, which demonstrates compliance with this ordinance.
48
Formatted: Font: Times New
Roman, 12 pt, No underline
Formatted: Font: Times New
Roman, 12 pt, No underline
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS’ CONSENSUS DOCUMENT.……………...............October 4, 2005
28. Top Of Bank:
The landward edge of the stream channel during high water or bankfull conditions at the
point where the water begins to overflow onto the floodplain.
29. Topsoil:
Natural, fertile soil capable of sustaining vigorous plant growth that is of uniform
composition throughout with an admixture of subsoil, has an acidity range of pH 5.5 - 7.0.
30. Total Phosphorus (TP)
A nutrient that is essential to the growth of organisms but when it occurs in high enough
concentrations it can negatively impact water quality conditions. Total phosphorus includes
both dissolved and suspended forms of reactive phosphorus, acid hydrolyzable phosphorus
and organic phosphorus as measured by Standard Method 4500-P.
31. Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
Total suspended matter in water which includes particles collected on a filter with a pore size
of 2 microns as measured by Standard Method 2540-D, which is commonly expressed as a
concentration in terms of milligrams per liter (mg/l) or parts per million (ppm).
49
General Development Policies – Draft Environment Chapter (GDP-E) 10/17/07
Recommended Revisions to August 2007 draft document
At their meeting on October 16, 2007, the Planning Committee of the Charlotte
Mecklenburg Planning Commission recommended adoption of the draft GDP-E document
with the following changes recommended by staff:
1. Definition and Purpose Page 1: Replace the first sentence with the following: Charlotte is
the center of one of the fastest growing regions in the country. While growth contributes to
our economic vitality, it also presents challenges for achieving and maintaining a healthy
environment and a sustainable regional economy.
2. Existing Conditions and Trends, page 5: Replace the data from 2003-2004 with the
following excerpt from the 2006 State of the Environment Report: Unfortunately, our
streams are currently degraded to the point where 73.5% of the monitored stream miles are
not meeting their designated use.
3. Policy 1.a., page 7, 2nd paragraph: Change “natural resources” to “natural features” to
be consistent with term used throughout the draft document.
4. Policy 3.a.,page 11: Clarify the wording as follows: Enable site designs and construction
projects that: 1) facilitate the use of alternative modes of transportation; and the reduction of
2) reduce ground level temperatures; 3) minimize impacts to natural environment; 4) reduce
the amount and improve the quality of stormwater run-off; and 5) use water efficiently.
5. Implementation Tools, page 14: Add another a bullet under Research, Data and Analysis
that reads: As part of the City's Connectivity Program, the City will continue to develop and
refine a list of roads/walkways/ pedestrian ways that could be extended to provide additional
connectivity between land uses either by extension of the pavement or by providing
pedestrian or bicycle connections. This is a dynamic list that will continue to be
prioritized and incorporated into the capital needs assessment process to complement the new
connections being provided through the development process.
6. Implementation Tools, page 14, under Information and Education: Change bullet 2 as
follows: Seek opportunities to educate staff and elected/appointed officials on environmental
impacts and benefits related to land development and redevelopment.
7. Implementation Tools, page 15, under Ordinances Changes: Change the 3rd bullet as
follows: Review the zoning ordinance to enable “small-scale” mixed-use development and to
enhance the ability to implement area plan recommendations (particularly recommendations
for mixed use land uses) and to enable mixed / multi-use development on adjacent parcels in
appropriate locations.
8. Throughout the document: Clarify the wording of guiding principle #4 as follows:
Consider the environmental impacts of land use and development comprehensively and strive
to reconcile the various environmental concerns with each other and balance them with the
other land and economic development considerations.
1
Citizen Comments and Staff Responses
1. Definition and Purpose Page 1
Citizen Comment: The first sentence reads “As one of the fastest growing cities in the US,
Charlotte is particularly vulnerable to the impacts that growth and development can have on the
natural environment”. This was not discussed in any stakeholder meeting and no evidence was
presented to prove this to be an accurate statement. The document reads correctly with the
deletion of this editorial comment.
Staff Response: The sentence is intended to provide context for the policies provided in the
draft chapter. However, deleting the sentence does not alter the policy direction. Staff
supports making a change and suggests replacing the sentence with the following sentences
from the City’s adopted Environment Focus Area Plan: “Charlotte is the center of one of the
fastest growing regions in the country. While growth contributes to our economic vitality, it
also presents challenges for achieving and maintaining a healthy environment and a
sustainable regional economy.”
2. Definition and Purpose Page 2
Citizen Comment: Last 2 sentences read “The City of Charlotte is in a position to exercise
leadership in that regard for our community. The environmental policies of the GDP will help
provide a framework for that leadership in terms of land use and development” I find no notes
that the Council has adopted a goal of being a ‘leader’. Rather, I find that the Council has
adopted a Goal that “Charlotte will safeguard the environment, balancing health, sound fiscal
policy, and growth.” The GDP’s are no place for this type of puffing when they exceed the
publicly adopted Goal of the elected officials
Staff Response: Staff suggests that Council’s Environment Committee provide direction on
whether or not it is appropriate for this sentence to remain in the document.
3. Existing Conditions and Trends Water Quality page 5
Citizen Comment: Staff used the State of the Environment Report (SOER) from 2006 for all
references (see page 3) but Water Quality - where they revert to the 2003-04 report. The
reference should be to the 2006 SOER report that says “since 1995 the number of creeks in poor
or poor/fair condition have been cut in half”
Staff Response: The statistic referenced is included on page 72 of 2006 State of the
Environment Report (SOER), and is stated as being data for fiscal year 2003-2004.
However, deleting this statistic does not alter the policy direction. Staff supports making a
change and suggests replacing it with the following statement, also from page 72 of the
SOER: “Unfortunately, our streams are currently degraded to the point where 73.5% of the
monitored stream miles are not meeting their designated use and during fiscal year 20032004, only 33% were suitable for prolonged human contact based on bacteria
concentrations.”
4. Policy 1.a. page 7
Citizen Comment: At one of the last meetings staff changed the phrase ‘natural resources’ to
‘natural features’. The 2nd paragraph missed one of these changes.
Staff Response: Staff supports making the change requested.
2
5. Policy 3.a. Page 11
Citizen Comment: The policy statement needs to read: Enable site designs and construction
projects that: 1) facilitate the use of alternative modes of transportation; and the reduction of
2) reduce ground level temperatures; 3) minimize impacts to natural environment; 4) reduce the
amount and improve the quality of stormwater run-off; and /or 5) use water efficiently.
Staff Response: Staff supports making the change requested with the exception that
“and/or” should remain as “and” since we believe this was the intent of the discussion
during the policy development process.
Comments #6 – 12 are in reference to Appendix 2.b – Implementation Tools. Staff offers the
following general response to these comments:
The information in Appendix 2.b is not intended to become City policy, rather, it is meant to
provide a general guide as to the types of tasks staff will likely be undertaking to implement the
Environment Policies. It is not intended as a comprehensive list of implementation strategies. An
interdepartmental/interagency staff team is continuing to work on more detailed implementation
tasks which will be incorporated into future work programs of various departments.
6. Appendix 2.b Implementation Tools -Environment
Citizen Comment: Research, Data and Analysis: page 14 Bullets 2 & 3 (creating a user-friendly
guide and developing checklist to determine environmental significance) should be deleted these are not necessary to meet the Guiding Principle (Page 6)
Staff Response: The guide and checklist are intended as simple tools for staff to help us more
efficiently and consistently implement the policies. If these tools are not appropriate, this
reference can be deleted in the document without altering the policy direction.
7. Add another bullet to implement policy goals 2 (b) and (e):
Citizen Comment: “Develop a list of roads/walkways/ pedestrian ways that could be extended
to provide additional connectivity between land uses either by extension of the pavement or by
providing pedestrian or bicycle connections. Prioritize and incorporate into the capital needs
assessment process”
Staff Response: Staff supports making a change and can add a reference to the text if
needed without altering the policy direction. The following language is suggested for such a
reference: As part of the City's Connectivity Program, the City will continue to develop and
refine a list of roads/walkways/ pedestrian ways that could be extended to provide additional
connectivity between land uses either by extension of the pavement or by providing
pedestrian or bicycle connections. This is a dynamic list that will continue to be
prioritized and incorporated into the capital needs assessment process to complement
the new connections being provided through the development process.
8. Information and Education: page 14
Citizen Comment: Bullet 2 should be changed to read (additions noted): Seek opportunities to
educate staff and elected/appointed officials on environmental impacts and benefits related to
land development and redevelopment.
Staff Response: Staff supports making this change.
3
9. 3rd bullet: “providing information on costs and benefits….”
Citizen Comment: Can not be directly read from policy 1 (d) and it is worded so broadly that it
does not appear to provide enough direction to be measurable and achievable. It should be
deleted.
Staff Response: An example of the type of information to which staff is referring is the
recently completed cost analysis for the Post Construction Controls Ordinance.
10. Rezoning and Subdivision Process
Citizen Comment: Last bullet top of page 15 should be changed to read: “Fully consider the
environmental impacts when assessing rezoning development proposals. In particular, consider
the existing environmental opportunities and constraints when evaluating the type, intensity and
form of the land uses in a rezoning development proposal.” [NOTE: Development, by State law,
must be evaluated according to the Ordinances in place, not by opportunities and constraints]
Staff Response: Staff provides direction and guidance on various types of development
proposals in addition to those that are part of a rezoning petition.
11. Ordinance Changes page 15
Citizen Comment: 1st bullet should be changed to read: After review, identify add language to
in zoning and subdivision ordinances that conflicts or impedes these goals then to help minimize
impacts to environmentally sensitive area delete, modify or add language to remove or minimize
the negative environmental effects of competing interests in the current regulations
Staff Response: Any zoning or subdivision text amendments would occur after considerable
review, and with Council direction and approval and significant public involvement.
12. 2nd bullet should be changed to read:
Citizen Comment: Review the zoning ordinance to enable “small-scale” mixed-use
development and to enhance the ability to implement area plan recommendations (particularly
recommendations for mixed use land uses) and to enable mixed / multi-use development on
adjacent parcels in appropriate locations [This change reflects policy 2b]
Staff Response: Staff supports making this change.
4
General Development Policies: Draft Environment Chapter
Charlotte City Council Environment Committee Discussion
At the September 17, 2007 Environment Committee meeting, Committee members asked staff
for more information on two concerns: 1) consistency between GDP-Environment, Urban Street
Design Guidelines and Post Construction Controls Ordinance; and 2) how the policies will be
implemented. Information on each of these concerns is provided below:
I. Consistency
In response to concerns raised by the Chamber’s Land Use Committee in late 2005, staff
reviewed the draft GDP-Environment, Post Construction Controls Ordinance (PCCO) and Urban
Street Design Guidelines (USDG) to determine if there were any consistency issues that needed
to be addressed. Staff does not believe that there are inconsistencies between the GDP-E and
these initiatives. Below is the list of potential concerns that were identified and how they are
addressed:
1. Streets in environmentally sensitive areas: The USDG are not “one-size-fits-all.” The
street network density and cross-sections in the USDG provide flexibility in that they
respond to the adjacent land uses and their intensity. Therefore, if the development is
appropriate for an environmentally sensitive area, the streets as per the USDG would be
designed accordingly.
2. Water quality impacts of stream crossings associated with the USDG: The draft
USDG provide flexibility in providing creek crossings so that crossings can be spaced at
greater intervals if needed due to environmental constraints. (See pages 64 and 65 of the
draft USDG) Additionally, staff is working on defining ways to further mitigate stream
crossing such as best design options for culverts and bridges, cross-sections on creek
crossings, etc.
3. Costs associated with PCCO for redevelopment and infill projects: High priority
redevelopment and infill areas (transit station areas and distressed business districts)
that don’t increase impervious area are allowed by right to forego the requirements of
the PCCO except for peak and volume control, provided that a mitigation fee is paid.
Lowering the requirements for these areas, therefore, helps to reduce costs and makes
redevelopment more competitive, complementing the GDP-E. Staff is also recommending
that the PCCO include flexibility options that could further reduce the costs of infill
development.
4. Balancing “competing” interests: The draft GDP-Environment clearly recognize that
protection of the environment must be balanced with other goals and objectives. The
GDP-E provide guidance to ensure that minimizing environmental impacts is part of the
evaluation.
II. Implementation
The draft document includes an appendix that outlines strategies to help guide staff work in
implementing the Environment policies once they are adopted. Some of the strategies will
1
require future City Council direction and approval, particularly those items suggesting changes
to existing ordinances and regulations. Such changes will also require additional public input
and will typically involve stakeholder group review.
Additionally, the interdepartmental/agency staff team that assisted in developing the policies
continues to work to more specifically identify, prioritize and carry out projects and initiatives
that will help to implement each of the policies. Once the policies are adopted, staff will
complete development of a detailed matrix of implementation strategies which assigns lead
agencies and time frames for completion. The intent is for this matrix to be updated periodically
to reflect progress and to make any necessary additions/changes based on changing conditions.
2
General Development Policies – Environment: Final Survey Results
As part of the public review process for the General Development Policies – Environment,
the Planning Department posted a survey on-line to gather citizen input on the draft policies.
In addition to being available on-line for approximately 3 weeks in September, 2007, the
survey was administered at the September 12, 2007 public meeting.
Respondents were asked to what degree they agreed or disagreed with each of the policy
statements. A total of 124 people responded to the survey. The results are summarized in the
table below. Additional tables are also attached with the complete survey responses.
Percent of Responses
Strongly Agree or Agree
Summary of Survey Responses
GUIDING PRINCIPLE 1: Make the protection of our natural
environment a priority in land use and development
decisions.
81.5%
POLICY 1.a: Support local and regional efforts to inventory
natural features to enable identification and protection of
environmentally sensitive areas.
82.3%
POLICY 1.b: Identify environmentally sensitive areas in land
use plans and development proposals and address how they
will be protected or mitigated.*
85.5%
POLICY 1.c: Consider environmental opportunities and
constraints, including watershed conditions, when identifying
appropriate future land uses in area plans.
84.7%
POLICY 1.d: Provide the education, information and outreach
to facilitate the successful implementation of environmental
policies.
78.2%
POLICY 1.e: Target environmentally sensitive areas when
acquiring land for public protection.
86.3%
GUIDING PRINCIPLE 2: Facilitate a land use pattern that
accommodates growth while respecting the natural
environment.
84.7%
POLICY 2.a: Pursue strategies to encourage and facilitate
redevelopment of abandoned/underutilized sites and
development of vacant sites in built up areas (infill).*
85.5%
POLICY 2.b: Facilitate the incremental development of welldesigned and well-connected mixed/multi-use development in
appropriate locations.*
75.8%
POLICY 2.c: Encourage more of our new development to be
located where transportation facilities, public utilities and
services already exist, or are planned, to minimize impacts to
undeveloped areas.
POLICY 2.d: Encourage partnerships (e.g., joint use) to
1
75.0%
72.6%
enable the sharing of both public and private facilities.
POLICY 2.e: Integrate plans for existing and future bus
routes/service improvements and expansions with adopted
future land use plans.
77.4%
POLICY 2.f: Ensure that public facilities (including schools,
parks, libraries, recreation facilities, etc.) are well connected to
the surrounding area and to each other and take advantage of
joint use opportunities. *
85.5%
GUIDING PRINCIPLE 3: Promote and enable
environmentally sensitive site designs.
86.3%
POLICY 3.a: Enable site designs and construction practices
that: 1) facilitate the use of alternative modes of transportation
and the reduction of ground level temperatures; 2) minimize
impacts to natural features; 3) reduce the amount and improve
the quality of stormwater run-off; and 4) use water efficiently.
83.9%
POLICY 3.b: Minimize impacts to the City’s tree canopy to
allow it to flourish and to be a healthy and viable part of our
environment.
84.7%
GUIDING PRINCIPLE 4: Consider the environmental
impacts of land use and development comprehensively
and strive to reconcile the various environmental concerns
with each other and balance them with the other land
development considerations.
80.6%
POLICY 4.a: Raise awareness and understanding of the
environmental costs and benefits of land development and
better incorporate this information into the decision making
process.
81.5%
POLICY 4.b: Ensure that implementation of the City’s various
land development - related policies and regulations minimize
the overall environmental impacts that result from the need to
accommodate future growth.
83.1%
POLICY 4.c: Ensure that public projects are designed and
constructed to minimize environmental impacts.
84.7%
*Note that the wording of a few survey questions was slightly different than the draft policy
statement.
2
Post Construction
Controls Ordinance
Process Update and
Recent Modifications
Information Covered Today
‹Updates
‹Modifications
proposed by
stakeholders, then approved
by stakeholders
‹Modifications proposed by
staff, then approved by
stakeholders
Stakeholder Process Update
‹
Tasked with two deliverables
– Stakeholder Report
– List of ways the ordinance needs to change
and why
Three meetings – One additional meeting
‹ Goal of the proposed changes: lower cost,
keep protection
‹ Proposals deliberated Wednesday night
‹ Consensus on Changes
‹
Information Attachments
‹ Cost
Analysis Results and Review
‹ Gap Analysis
‹ Schools
‹ Other municipalities
Stakeholder Approved
Ordinance Modifications
Stakeholder Modifications
Jeff Hieronymus
Stakeholder Approved Ordinance
Modifications
On October 17, 2007 the reconvened
PCCO stakeholders’ committee reached
consensus on changes to the original
ordinance language
‹ Modifications to Total Phosphorus,
detention, and open space requirements
were made to reduce costs
‹ Briefly describe the changes
‹ Summarize impacts to environmental
protection and costs
‹
Total Phosphorus
‹ Removed
Phosphorus requirement
for I-1 and I-2 zoned development
in order to reduce costs for industrial
development
‹ Lowered the threshold for Total
Phosphorus mitigation opportunities
for all land uses in order to provide
more flexibility and design options
Detention
I-1 and I-2 zoned
development from controlling the
volume for the 1-year storm
‹ Added a requirement that I-1 and I-2
zoned development provide peak
control for the 2-year storm
‹ This modification results in controls
for I-1 and I-2 zoned development
that closely match current detention
regulations
‹ Reduces cost for industrial
development
‹ Exempt
Open Space
Exempt I-1 and I-2 zoned development
from open space
‹ Allow open space to be met in utility
rights-of-way at a 1:4 ratio
‹ Allow open space to be located in tree
planting strips at a 3:4 ratio
‹ Eliminate 50% increase in open space
when mitigated on-site
‹ Increase the amount of pre-approved open
space mitigation
‹ Reduces cost for open space and provides
more flexibility in meeting requirements
‹
Impacts to Environmental
Protection and Costs
‹ Proposed
modifications do not
significantly reduce water quality
protection
‹ Modifications result in less trees than
previous stakeholder proposal
‹ Modifications reduce costs and
provide flexibility by lessening the
opportunity costs, or land required,
for open space dedication
Stakeholder Approved
Ordinance Modifications
Staff Modifications
Stewart Edwards
Modifications
Model Ordinance versus City Ordinances
(Consistent Formatting)
‹ Defining Terms (Clarity of Interpretation)
‹ Legal Modifications (Language, Violations,
Enforcement, and Penalties)
‹ Administration
‹ Modifications to Redevelopment
‹ Six Mile Creek Watershed
‹
Model Ordinance Versus City
Ordinances
‹ General
format of Model Ordinance
written for small Towns and
Municipalities
Defining Terms
‹ Re-define
terms for clarity and
interpretation. (Based on Staff
Review)
Legal Modifications
Remove time constraints on City practices
‹ Modified legal sections to conform with
existing City Ordinances (Violations,
Enforcement, and Penalties)
‹ Removed unnecessary language already
governed by State Law
‹
Administrative Procedures
‹ Review
practices to remain consistent
with current City practices.
Modifications to Redevelopment
‹ Staff
has recommended provisions for
Transit Corridors and Distressed
Business Districts in order to provide
additional flexibility
‹ Pay-in-lieu for water quality measures
for up to 5 acres of new BUA
‹ Detention requirements must be met
for increased impervious area
Six Mile Creek
‹ Added
Requirements Six Mile Creek
Watershed Only (Endangered
Species)
‹ State Mandated Buffers
‹ 10% Threshold BMPs
‹ 100 foot Undisturbed Buffers
Intermittent Streams
‹ 200 foot Undisturbed Buffers
Perennial Streams
Six Mile Basin
Discussion & Adoption Schedule
‹ Committee
Approval (by Nov 2)
‹ Possible Public Hearing Nov 12
‹ Possible Adoption November 26
Daryl Hammock, E&PM
Storm Water Services
dhammock@ci.charlotte.nc.us
704-336-2167
Redevelopment Priorities
Legend
Transit Radius of Influence
Economic Revitalization
^_
Empty Big Boxes
³
^_
^_
^_
^ ^_
_
^_
^_
^ ^_^_
_
^_
0
1
2
4
6
^^_^_
_
^_^_
^_
8
Miles
Redevelopment in TSA or DBD
That Do Not Increase Impervious
Provide 1-year 24-hour volume control
and 10-year 6-hour peak control for whole
site, or
‹ Provide 85% TSS removal from first inch
of rainfall for whole site, or
‹ Pay a fee as outlined in the Administrative
Manual
‹
Post Construction Controls Ordinance
Protection Level Summary