A.
Applicants proposing regulated activities in the Brodhead/McMichaels Creek watershed that do not fall under the exemption criteria shown in § 160-23 shall submit a stormwater management (SWM) site plan consistent with the Brodhead/McMichaels Creek Watershed SWM plan to the municipality for review. The SWM criteria of this chapter shall apply to the total proposed development even if development is to take place in stages. Preparation and implementation of an approved SWM site plan is required. No regulated activities shall commence until the municipality issues written approval of a SWM site plan, which demonstrates compliance with the requirements of this chapter.
B.
SWM site plans approved by the municipality, in accordance with Article IV, shall be on-site throughout the duration of the regulated activity.
C.
The municipality may, after consultation with the DEP, approve measures
for meeting the state water quality requirements other than those
in this chapter, provided that they meet the minimum requirements
of, and do not conflict with, state law, including, but not limited
to, the Clean Streams Law.[1]
[1]
Editor's Note: See 35 P.S. § 691.1 et seq.
D.
For all regulated earth-disturbance activities, erosion and sediment
(E&S) control best management practices (BMPs) shall be designed,
implemented, operated, and maintained during the regulated earth-disturbance
activities (e.g., during construction) to meet the purposes and requirements
of this chapter and to meet all requirements under Title 25 of the
Pennsylvania Code and the Clean Streams Law. Various BMPs and their
design standards are listed in the Erosion and Sediment Pollution
Control Program Manual No. 363-2134-008, as amended and updated.
E.
Impervious areas:
(1)
The measurement of impervious areas shall include all of the impervious
areas in the total proposed development even if development is to
take place in stages.
(2)
For development taking place in stages, the entire development plan
must be used in determining conformance with this chapter.
(3)
For projects that add impervious area to a parcel, the total impervious
area on the parcel is subject to the requirements of this chapter.
F.
Stormwater flows onto adjacent property shall not be created, increased,
decreased, relocated, or otherwise altered without written notification
of the adjacent property owner(s). Such stormwater flows shall be
subject to the requirements of this chapter.
G.
All regulated activities shall include such measures as necessary
to:
(1)
Protect health, safety, and property;
(2)
Meet the water quality goals of this chapter by implementing measures
to:
(a)
Minimize disturbance to floodplains, wetlands, and wooded areas.
(b)
Create, maintain, repair, or extend riparian buffers.
(c)
Avoid erosive flow conditions in natural flow pathways.
(d)
Minimize thermal impacts to waters of this commonwealth.
(e)
Disconnect impervious surfaces (i.e., disconnected impervious
areas/DIAs) by directing runoff to pervious areas, wherever possible.
See Appendix F[2] for detail on DIAs.
[2]
Editor's Note: Appendix F is included as an attachment to this chapter.
(3)
Incorporate the techniques for low-impact development practices (e.g.,
protecting existing trees, reducing area of impervious surface, cluster
development, and protecting open space) described in the Pennsylvania
Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual (PA BMP Manual) No. 363-0300-002(2006),
as amended and updated. See Appendix E[3] for a summary description.
[3]
Editor's Note: Appendix E is included as an attachment to this chapter.
H.
Infiltration BMPs should be spread out, made as shallow as practicable,
and located to maximize the use of natural on-site infiltration features
while still meeting the other requirements of this chapter.
I.
The design of all facilities over karst shall include an evaluation
of measures to minimize the risk of adverse effects.
J.
Storage facilities should completely drain both the volume control
and rate control capacities over a period of time not less than 24
and not more than 72 hours from the end of the design storm.
K.
The design storm volumes to be used in the analysis of peak rates
of discharge should be obtained from the Precipitation-Frequency Atlas
of the United States, Atlas 14, Volume 2, Version 3.0, U.S. Department
of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
National Weather Service Hydrometeorological Design Studies Center,
Silver Spring, Maryland, using data from the Doylestown Station (36-2221),
seen in Table B-1 in Appendix B.[4] The SCS Type II rainfall curve from NOAA is found on Figure
B-1 in Appendix B. NOAA's Atlas 14 can be accessed at http://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/orb/pa_pfds.html.
[4]
Editor's Note: Appendix B is included as an attachment to this chapter.
L.
M.
Various BMPs and their design standards are listed in the Pennsylvania
Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual (PA BMP Manual).
A.
The design of all regulated activities shall include the following
steps in sequence to minimize stormwater impacts.
(1)
The applicant is required to find practicable alternatives to the
surface discharge of stormwater, the creation of impervious surfaces
and the degradation of waters of the commonwealth and must maintain,
as much as possible, the natural hydrologic regime of the site.
(2)
An alternative is practicable if it is available and capable of being
done after taking into consideration cost, existing technology, and
logistics in light of overall project purposes.
(3)
All practicable alternatives to the discharge of stormwater are presumed
to have less adverse impact on quantity and quality of waters of the
commonwealth unless otherwise demonstrated.
B.
The applicant shall demonstrate that he or she designed the regulated
activities in the following sequence to minimize the increases in
stormwater runoff and impacts to water quality:
(1)
Prepare an Existing Resource and Site Analysis Map (ERSAM), showing
environmentally sensitive areas, including, but not limited to, steep
slopes, ponds, lakes, streams, wetlands, hydric soils, vernal ponds,
floodplains, buffer areas, hydrologic soil Groups A and B (areas conducive
to infiltration), any existing recharge areas and any other requirements
outlined in the municipal Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance.[1]
(3)
Prepare a draft project layout avoiding earth disturbance in sensitive areas identified in § 160-14B(1) and minimizing total site earth disturbance as much as possible. The ratio of the disturbed area to the entire site area and measures taken to minimize earth disturbance shall be included on the ERSAM.
(4)
Identify site-specific predevelopment drainage areas, discharge points,
recharge area to be preserved and hydrologic soil Groups A and B to
be utilized for recharge.
(7)
Satisfy groundwater recharge (infiltration) objective (§ 160-16) and provide for stormwater treatment prior to infiltration.
(8)
Determine what management district the site falls into (ordinance
Appendix D)[2] and conduct a predevelopment runoff analysis.
[2]
Editor's Note: Appendix D is included as an attachment to this chapter.
(9)
Prepare final project design to maintain predevelopment drainage
areas and discharge points, to minimize earth disturbance and impervious
surfaces, and to reduce runoff to the maximum extent possible.
(10)
Conduct a post-development runoff analysis based on the final design and to meet the release rate and in turn the overbank flow and extreme event requirements (§ 160-17).
(11)
Manage any remaining runoff through treatment prior to discharge,
as part of detention, bioretention, direct discharge or other structural
control.
In addition to the performance standards and design criteria
requirements of this chapter, the applicant shall comply with the
following water quality requirements of this article:
A.
For water quality and streambank erosion, the objective is to design
low-impact site conditions and water quality BMPs to detain the proposed
conditions two-year, twenty-four-hour design storm to the existing
conditions one-year flow using the SCS Type II distribution. Additionally,
provisions shall be made (such as adding a small orifice at the bottom
of the outlet structure) so that the proposed conditions one-year
storm takes a minimum of 24 hours to drain from the facility from
a point where the maximum volume of water from the one-year storm
is captured (i.e., the maximum water surface elevation is achieved
in the facility). At the same time, the objective is not to attenuate
the larger storms in "no-detention" areas (District C) only. This
can be accomplished by configuration of the outlet structure not to
control the larger storms or by a bypass or channel to divert only
the two-year flood into the basin or divert flows in excess of the
two-year storm away from the basin. Where practicable, wet basins
shall be utilized for water quality control and shall meet the requirements
found in the Pennsylvania Stormwater BMP Manual as revised. Release
of water can begin at the start of the storm (i.e., the invert of
the water quality orifice is at the invert of the facility). The design
of the facility shall consider and minimize the chances of clogging
and sedimentation. Orifices smaller than three inches in diameter
are not recommended. However, if the design professional can provide
proof that the smaller orifices are protected from clogging by use
of trash racks, etc., smaller orifices may be permitted.
B.
In selecting the appropriate BMPs or combinations thereof, the applicant
shall consider the following:
(1)
Total contributing area.
(2)
Permeability and infiltration rate of the site soils.
(3)
Slope and depth to bedrock.
(4)
Seasonal high-water table.
(5)
Proximity to building foundations and wellheads.
(6)
Erodibility of soils.
(7)
Land availability and configuration of the topography.
(8)
Peak discharge and required volume control.
(9)
Streambank erosion.
(10)
Efficiency of the BMPs to mitigate potential water quality problems.
(11)
The volume of runoff that will be effectively treated.
(12)
The nature of the pollutant being removed.
(13)
Maintenance requirements.
(14)
Creation/protection of aquatic and wildlife habitat.
(15)
Recreational value.
C.
For areas within defined special protection subwatersheds, which
include exceptional-value (EV) and high-quality (HQ) waters, the applicant
shall evaluate nondischarge alternatives to the proposed discharge
and use an alternative that is environmentally sound and cost-effective
when compared with the cost of the proposed discharge. If a nondischarge
alternative is not environmentally sound and cost-effective, a new,
additional, or increased discharge shall use the best available combination
of cost-effective treatment, land disposal, pollution prevention and
stormwater reuse technologies. An applicant proposing a new, additional,
or increased discharge to high-quality or exceptional-value waters,
who has demonstrated that no environmentally sound and cost-effective
nondischarge alternative exists, shall demonstrate that the discharge
will maintain and protect the existing quality of receiving surface
waters.
D.
The applicant shall consider the guidelines found in the references
specified in Appendix G[1] for constructed wetlands, where proposed.
[1]
Editor's Note: Appendix G is included as an attachment to this chapter.
E.
Stormwater runoff from hot spot land uses shall be pretreated.
F.
The use of infiltration BMPs is prohibited on hot spot land use areas,
such as vehicle fueling stations, public works storage areas, recycling
facilities, fleet storage areas, facilities that make or store hazardous
materials, etc.
G.
Streambank restoration projects shall include the following:
(1)
No restoration or stabilization projects may be undertaken without
examining the fluvial geomorphology of stable reaches above and below
the unstable reach.
(2)
Restoration project design must then consider maintenance of stability
in the adjacent stable reaches of the stream channel.
(3)
An erosion and sediment control plan approved by the conservation
district must be provided by the applicant.
(4)
All applicable state and federal permits must be obtained.
H.
Biology shall be incorporated into the design of all wet basins in
accordance with the West Nile Virus guidance found in Appendix E.[2]
[2]
Editor's Note: Appendix E is included as an attachment to this chapter.
I.
To accomplish the above, the applicant shall submit original and
innovative designs to the Municipal Engineer for review and approval.
Such designs may achieve the water quality objectives through a combination
of BMPs (best management practices).
J.
Buffers.
(2)
Where resource buffers overlap, the more restrictive requirements
shall apply.
(3)
Preexisting lots or parcels/development in outer buffers. In the
case of legally preexisting lots or parcels (approved prior to the
effective date of this chapter) where the usable area of a lot or
parcel lies within an outer buffer area, rendering the lot or parcel
unable to be developed in accordance with the allowable use per municipal
zoning, the development may only be permitted by variance as approved
at the sole discretion of the municipality.
(4)
Improvements to existing structures in outer buffers. The provisions of this § 160-15J do not require any changes or improvements to be made to lawfully existing structures in buffers. However, when any substantial improvement to a structure is proposed which results in a horizontal expansion of that structure, the improvement may only be permitted by waiver as approved at the sole discretion of the municipality.
(5)
Wetlands and vernal pools.
(a)
Wetland identification. Wetlands shall be identified in accord
with the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Manual for Identifying
and Delineating Wetlands and properly flagged and surveyed on-site
to ensure they are protected.
[1]
Wetlands in an artificial watercourse. Wetlands contained within
the banks of an artificial watercourse shall not to be considered
for buffer delineation purposes.
[2]
Wetlands in a natural watercourse: wetlands contained within
the banks of a natural watercourse, only the stream buffer shall apply.
(b)
Continuous wetland and vernal pool buffer delineation. A twenty-five-foot
inner buffer and twenty-five-foot outer buffer, measured perpendicular
to and horizontally from the edge of the delineated wetland or vernal
pond for a total distance of 50 feet, shall be maintained for all
wetlands and vernal ponds.
[1]
Inner buffer: measured perpendicular to and horizontally from
the edge of the delineated wetland or vernal pond, for a distance
of 25 feet.
[a]
Stormwater conveyance required by the Township,
buffer maintenance and restoration, the correction of hazardous conditions,
stream crossings permitted by DEP and passive unpaved stable trails
shall be permitted. No other earth disturbance, grading, filling,
buildings, structures, new construction, or development shall be permitted.
[b]
The area of the inner buffer altered by activities
permitted in accord with this section shall be minimized to the greatest
extent practicable.
[2]
Outer buffer: measured perpendicular to and horizontally from
the outer edge of the inner buffer for a distance of 25 feet, resulting
in a total buffer of 50 feet.
[a]
Stormwater conveyance required by the municipality, buffer maintenance and restoration, the correction of hazardous conditions, stream crossings permitted by DEP, roads constructed to existing grade, unpaved trails, and limited forestry activities that do not clear-cut the buffer (e.g., selective regeneration harvest) in accord with a forestry management plan shall be permitted, provided no buildings are involved, and those activities permitted under § 160-15J(3) and (4).
[b]
No more than 20% of the cumulative outer buffer
on the subject parcel shall be altered by the activities permitted
in accord with this section.
[c]
Isolated wetland. A twenty-five-foot inner buffer
shall be required on isolated wetlands. Isolated wetlands are wetlands
that are surrounded by uplands and do not have any apparent surface
water inlets or outlets.
(6)
Lakes and ponds.
(a)
There is no outer buffer around lakes and ponds.
(b)
Lake and pond buffer delineation. A fifty-foot buffer measured
perpendicular to and horizontally from the edge of any water body
shall be maintained around any water body.
(c)
Permitted activities/development. Stormwater conveyance required
by the Township/buffer maintenance and restoration, the correction
of hazardous conditions, lakefront views, boat docks and unpaved trails
shall be permitted, provided no buildings are involved.
(d)
The area of the buffer impacted by activities permitted in § 160-15J(6)(c) shall not exceed 35% of the buffer on the subject parcel.
(7)
Streams.
(a)
Stream buffer delineation. A twenty-five-foot inner buffer and
twenty-five-foot outer buffer measured perpendicular to and horizontally
from the top-of-bank on both sides of any stream, for a total distance
of 50 feet, shall be maintained on both sides of any stream.
(b)
Inner buffer: measured perpendicular to and horizontally from
the top-of-bank of the stream for a distance of 25 feet.
[1]
Stormwater conveyance required by the Township, buffer maintenance
and restoration, the correction of hazardous conditions, stream crossings
permitted by DEP, fish hatcheries, wildlife sanctuaries and boat launch
sites constructed so as not to alter the floodplain cross section,
and unpaved trails shall be permitted, providing no buildings are
involved. No other earth disturbance, grading, filling, buildings,
structures, new construction, or development shall be permitted.
[2]
The area of the inner buffer altered by activities permitted
in accord with this section shall be minimized to the greatest extent
practicable.
(c)
Outer buffer: measured perpendicular to and horizontally from
the outer edge of the inner buffer for a distance of 25 feet, resulting
in a total buffer of 50 feet.
[1]
Stormwater conveyance required by the municipality, buffer maintenance
and restoration, the correction of hazardous conditions, agricultural
activities, plant nurseries, parking lots constructed to existing
grade, temporary fairs and carnivals, accessory uses for residential
purposes, private sportsmen's club activities, athletic facilities,
orchards, wildlife sanctuaries, boat launch sites, roads constructed
to existing grade, stream crossings permitted by DEP and unpaved trails
and limited forestry activities that do not clear-cut the buffer (e.g.,
selective regeneration harvest) in accord with a forestry management
plan shall be permitted, provided no buildings are involved.
[2]
In areas of the outer buffer which are not wetlands, vernal
ponds, or slopes of more than 15%, stormwater management facilities
which improve water quality of stormwater discharge shall be permitted
unless prohibited by other Township or state requirements. No other
earth disturbance, grading, filling, buildings, structures, new construction,
or development shall be permitted.
[3]
No more than 20% of the cumulative outer buffer on the subject
parcel shall be altered by the activities permitted in accord with
this section.
(8)
Riparian buffer design. The riparian buffer shall be designed using
native grasses, shrubs, and trees. Stormwater runoff entering the
buffer should first flow through dense native grasses; the runoff
should then flow through dense native shrubs; finally, the runoff
should flow through native trees and into the water body. Runoff flows
should not be concentrated and directed through buffers. Runoff should
be applied to the buffer as sheet flow. It is important to maintain
ground cover throughout the buffer consisting of grasses, shrubs,
leaves, logs, branches, and other natural debris to slow the velocity
of the runoff and allow the filtration and infiltration of runoff.
The design of proposed riparian buffers must be submitted to the Municipal
Engineer for approval.
(9)
Buffer averaging. This section outlines the criteria for buffer averaging
on new and redevelopment sites. Buffer averaging can be utilized to
adjust the required buffer width, allowing some flexibility for site
development. Using buffer averaging, the width of the buffer can be
varied with the criteria stated in this chapter, so long as a minimum
average width of 50 feet is maintained.
(a)
Requirements and policies. The following criteria must be met
in order to utilize buffer averaging on a development site:
[1]
An overall average buffer width of at least 50 feet must be
achieved within the boundaries of the property to be developed. Stream
buffer corridors on adjoining properties cannot be included with buffer
averaging on a separate property, even if owned by the same property
owner.
[2]
The average width must be calculated based upon the entire length
of streambank that is located within the boundaries of the property
to be developed. When calculating the buffer length, the natural stream
channel should be followed.
[3]
Stream buffer averaging shall be applied to each side of a stream
independently. If the property being developed encompasses both sides
of a stream, buffer averaging can be applied to both sides of the
streams but must be applied to both sides of the stream independently.
[4]
The total width of the buffer shall not be less than 35 feet
at any location, except at approved stream crossings. Those areas
of the buffer having a minimum width of 35 feet can comprise no more
than 50% of the buffer length.
[5]
The entire length of the buffer shall consist of an inner zone,
as defined in this chapter, having a minimum width of 25 feet, and
an outer zone that has a variable width along its length to achieve
the minimum average width of at least 50 feet.
(b)
Areas where buffer averaging is prohibited. Buffer width averaging
is prohibited in developments that have, or will have after development,
the land uses listed below:
[1]
Slope protection areas, and areas that have slopes greater than
15% that are located within 50 feet of the stream to be buffered;
[2]
Landfills (demolition landfills, permitted landfills, closed-in
place landfills);
[3]
Junkyards;
[4]
Commercial or industrial facilities that store and/or service
motor vehicles;
[5]
Agricultural facilities, farms, feedlots, and confined animal
feed operations;
[6]
Animal-care facilities, kennels, and commercial/business developments
or facilities that provide short-term or long-term care of animals;
or
[7]
Other land uses deemed by the municipality to have the potential
to generate higher-than-normal pollutant loadings.
(10)
Reduction of buffer width.
(a)
The required buffer width of 50 feet can be reduced to 35 feet
(with an inner buffer of 25 feet and an outer buffer of 10 feet) if
the Board of Supervisors, after consultation with the Municipal Engineer,
determines that the proposed riparian buffer must, as a minimum, meet
the buffer requirements described in § 160-15.1(8) and also
meet the following criteria:
[1]
The riparian buffer should have slopes of less than 5%.
[2]
The immediate land area draining to the buffer should also have
slopes of less than 5%.
[3]
The area contributing to the buffer should be less than 150
feet.
[4]
The stormwater runoff entering the buffer should have a velocity
less than 1.5 feet per second.
[5]
The contact time of the stormwater runoff in the buffer area
should be five minutes or greater.
(b)
Under no circumstances shall the buffer be less than 35 feet,
even if buffer averaging is used. Other factors that may be considered
by the Board of Supervisors and the Municipal Engineer in approving
a reduced buffer width include land use draining to the buffer, soil
type and infiltration characteristics, and water table depth.
A.
The volume control requirements contained in this chapter meet the
control guidelines contained in the Pennsylvania Stormwater Best Management
Practices Manual. A volume control requirement is essential to mitigate
the impacts of increased runoff. To do this, the volume reduction
BMP must 1) protect stream channel morphology, 2) maintain groundwater
recharge, 3) prevent downstream increases in flooding impacts, 4)
replicate the natural hydrology on-site before development to the
greatest extent possible.
(1)
Protect stream channel morphology. Increased volume of runoff results
in an increase in the frequency of bankfull or near-bankfull flow
conditions in stream channels. The increased presence of high-flow
conditions in riparian sections has a detrimental effect on stream
shaping, including stream channel impacts and overall stream morphology.
Streambank erosion is greatly accelerated as banks are eroded and
undercut and as stream channels are gouged and straightened, meanders,
pools, riffles, and other essential elements of habitat are lost or
diminished. Research has demonstrated that bankfull stream flow typically
occurs between the one-year- and the two-year-frequency storm event
(often around the one-and-half-year-frequency storm). Urbanization
can cause bankfull stream flows to occur more often than the one-year-frequency
storm event.
(2)
Maintain groundwater recharge. Over 80% of the annual precipitation
infiltrates into the soil mantle in Pennsylvania watersheds under
natural conditions. More than half of this is taken up by vegetation
and transpired. The rest of this infiltrated water moves down gradient
to emerge as springs and seeps, feeding local wetlands and surface
streams or enters the aquifers that supply drinking water wells. Without
the constant recharge of groundwater aquifers, surface stream flows
and groundwater in wells would diminish or disappear during drought
periods. Certain areas recharge more than others and protecting these
critical recharge areas is important in maintaining the water cycle
balance.
(3)
Prevent downstream increases in runoff volume and flooding impacts.
Although site-based rate-control measures may help protect the area
immediately downstream from a development site, the increased volume
of runoff and the prolonged duration of runoff from multiple development
sites can actually increase peak flow rates and duration of flood
flows from runoff caused by small rain events. Although replicating
predevelopment runoff volumes for small storms does not address flooding
from large storms, it will substantially reduce the problem of frequent
flooding which affects many communities.
(4)
Replicate the surface water hydrology on-site before development.
The objective for stormwater management is to develop a program that
replicates the natural hydrologic conditions of watersheds to the
extent practicable. However, the very process of clearing the existing
vegetation from the site removes the single largest component of the
hydrologic regime, evapotranspiration (ET). Unless we replace the
ET component, the runoff increase will be substantial. Several of
the BMPs described in this manual, such as infiltration, tree planting,
vegetated roof systems and rain gardens, can help replace a portion
of the ET function.
B.
Volume control alternatives.
(1)
While this volume control requirement is quite specific concerning the volume of runoff to be controlled from a development site, it does not limit the methods by which this can be accomplished. The selection of a BMP, or combination of BMPs, is left to the design process. But in all instances, minimizing the volume increase from existing and future development is the goal. The BMPs described in the Pennsylvania Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual place emphasis on infiltration of precipitation as an important solution; however, three methods are provided to reduce the volume of runoff from land development: 1) infiltration, 2) capture and reuse, and 3) vegetation systems that provide ET, returning rainfall to the atmosphere. It is anticipated that many of the stormwater management systems used will include one or more of these methods, depending on specific site conditions that constrain stormwater management opportunities. Water quality control shall be implemented using the methodologies in Subsection B(1)(a) or (b) below:
(a)
Control Option I. Where site conditions offer the opportunity
to reduce the increase in runoff volume, the following Control Option
1 is recommended:
[1]
Do not increase the post-development total runoff volume for
all storms equal to or less than the two-year/twenty-four-hour event.
[2]
Do not increase peak rate of runoff for [one-year, two-year,
ten-year, twenty-five-year, 100-year storms (at minimum)] predevelopment
to post-development; as necessary, provide additional peak rate control
for as required by Act 167 planning.
[3]
Existing (predevelopment) nonforested pervious areas must be
considered meadow or its equivalent.
[4]
Twenty percent of existing impervious area, when present, shall
be considered meadow in the model for existing conditions.
[5]
The scientific basis for this control requirement is as follows:
[a]
The two-year event encompasses 95% or more of the
annual runoff volume across the state.
[b]
Volume reduction BMPs based on this standard will
provide a storage capacity to help reduce the increase in peak flow
rates for larger runoff events.
[c]
In a natural stream system in Mid-Atlantic states,
the bankfull stream flow occurs with a period of approximately 1.5
years. If the runoff volume from storms less than the two-year event
is not increased, the fluvial impacts on streams will be lessened.
[d]
The two-year storm is well defined, and data is
readily accessible for use in stormwater management calculations.
(b)
Control Option 2. Control Option 2 is independent of existing
site constraints and should be employed if Control Option 1 is not
followed. This will be described as Control Option 2 and is as follows:
[1]
Capture the initial two inches of runoff from impervious areas,
with one inch permanently removed, of which at least 0.5 inch is infiltrated.
[2]
Land areas with existing cover consisting of meadow, brush,
wood-grass combination, or woods proposed for conversion to any other
nonequivalent type of pervious cover, capture initial one inch of
runoff from all pervious cover, with 0.5 inch permanently removed,
of which at least 0.25 inch is infiltrated.
[3]
Retention and detention facilities shall be sized to capture
the first two inches of runoff from all impervious surfaces.
[4]
The first one inch of runoff shall be permanently removed and
shall not be released into the surface waters of this commonwealth.
This is the permanently removed volume (PRV). Removal options include
reuse, evaporation, transpiration, and infiltration.
[5]
Infiltration of the first 0.5 inch of the PRV is encouraged.
This portion of the PRV is the groundwater recharge volume (GRV).
[6]
The permanently removed volume (PRV) requirement for land areas
with existing cover consisting of meadow, brush, wood-grass combination,
or woods proposed for conversion to any other nonequivalent type of
pervious cover shall be 1/4 inch of runoff.
[7]
Retention and detention facilities should be designed to drain
both the PRV and EDV completely within 48 hours to 96 hours from the
start of the storm.
[8]
Retention facilities should be designed to accommodate infiltration
of the PRV. Infiltration areas should be spread out and located in
the sections of the site that are most suitable for infiltration.
[9]
Inherent in this standard is the assumption that all soils allow
some infiltration. Where this is not possible, a vegetated roof or
bioretention combined with capture-and-reuse systems or other forms
of runoff volume control will be necessary to achieve the required
capture and removal volumes.
(2)
In all cases, retention and detention facilities should be designed
to completely drain water quality volumes (in the case of the Simplified
Method, this includes both the PRV and EDV) over a period of time
not less than 48 hours and not more than 96 hours from the start of
the design storm.
(3)
Infiltration BMPs.
(a)
Infiltration BMPs are one of the most beneficial approaches
to stormwater management for a variety of reasons, including:
(b)
Quantitatively, infiltration BMPs replicate the natural hydrologic
regime. During periods of rainfall, infiltration BMPs reduce the volume
of runoff and help to mitigate potential flooding events. During periods
of reduced rainfall, this recharged water serves to provide base flow
to streams and maintain in-stream water quality. Qualitatively, infiltration
BMPs remove nonpoint source pollutants from runoff through a complex
mix of physical, chemical, and biological removal processes. Infiltration
promotes maintenance of the natural temperature regimes of stream
systems (cooler in summer, warmer in winter), which can be critical
to the aquatic ecology. Because of the ability of infiltration BMPs
to reduce the volume of runoff, there is also a corresponding reduction
in erosive bankfull conditions and downstream erosion and channel
morphology changes.
(c)
Infiltration BMPs are designed to infiltrate some portion of
runoff during every runoff event. During small storm events, a large
percentage of the runoff may infiltrate, whereas during large storm
events, the volume that infiltrates may only be a small portion of
the total runoff. However, because most of the rainfall in Pennsylvania
occurs in small (less than one-inch) rainfalls, the annual benefits
of an infiltration system may be significant.
(4)
Soils evaluation.
(a)
A detailed soils evaluation of the project site shall be required
where practicable to determine the suitability of infiltration facilities.
Designers are encouraged to conduct the soils evaluation early in
the site planning so that information developed in the testing process
can be incorporated into the design. Adjustments to the design can
be made as necessary. It is recommended that the soils evaluation
be conducted following the development of an early sketch plan. The
designer should possess a preliminary understanding of potential BMP
locations prior to testing. Prescreening testing may be carried out
in advance to site potential BMP locations. The evaluation shall be
performed by a qualified design professional, experienced in observing
and evaluating soils conditions, and shall, at a minimum, address
soil permeability and depth to bedrock.
(b)
The general process of designing infiltration BMPs shall be:
[1]
Background evaluation. Analyze hydrologic soil groups as well
as natural and man-made features within the site based on available
published and site-specific data to determine general areas of suitability
for infiltration practices. Consider proposed development plan to
identify potential BMP locations and testing locations. In areas where
development or fill material is under consideration, conduct geotechnical
investigations of subgrade stability.
[2]
Test pit (deep-hole) observation. Perform test pits at multiple
locations within the anticipated BMP areas to understand subsurface
conditions and identify any limiting conditions. A test pit allows
visual observation of the soil horizons and overall soil conditions
both horizontally and vertically in that portion of the site.
[3]
Infiltration testing.
[a]
Perform on-site field tests, such as double-ring
infiltrometer, at the level of the proposed infiltration surface to
determine the design infiltration conductivity rate. Percolation tests
are not acceptable for design purposes. (Note: Percolation testing
is OK according to the Pennsylvania BMP Manual.)
[b]
At least one test should be conducted at the proposed
bottom elevation of each infiltration BMP, and a minimum of two tests
per test pit is recommended. More tests may be warranted if results
for the first two tests are substantially different.
[4]
Design considerations.
[a]
Determine suitable infiltration rates and design
the infiltration BMPs based on these rates for the required GRV. The
elevation of the proposed BMP should be considered when selecting
the infiltration rate to be used in design calculations.
[b]
Many sites will be constrained and unsuitable for
infiltration BMPs. However, if suitable areas exist, these areas should
be identified early in the design process and should not be subject
to a building program that precludes infiltration BMPs. An exemption
should not be provided for full buildouts where suitable soils otherwise
exist for infiltration.
(c)
Additional detail is provided in the Pennsylvania Stormwater
Best Management Practices Manual.
(5)
Stormwater hot spots.
(a)
A "stormwater hot spot" is defined as a land use activity that
generates higher concentrations of hydrocarbons, trace metals or toxicants
than are found in typical stormwater runoff, based on monitoring studies.
Following is a list of examples of designated hotspots. If a site
is designated as a hotspot, it has important implications for how
stormwater is managed. First and foremost, untreated stormwater runoff
from hotspots shall not be allowed to recharge into groundwater where
it may contaminate water supplies. Therefore, the groundwater recharge
volume (GRV) requirement shall not be applied to development sites
that fit into the hotspot category. The entire permanently removed
volume (PRV), however, must still be treated. Second, a greater level
of stormwater treatment may be needed at hotspot sites to prevent
pollutant wash off after construction. The EPA's NPDES stormwater
program requires some industrial sites to prepare and implement a
stormwater pollution prevention plan. Examples of hotspots:
(b)
Extreme caution shall be exercised where salt or chloride would
be a pollutant since soils do little to filter this pollutant and
it may contaminate the groundwater. The qualified design professional
shall evaluate the possibility of groundwater contamination from the
proposed infiltration/recharge facility and perform a hydrogeologic
justification study if necessary. The infiltration requirement in
high-quality/exceptional-value waters shall be subject to the Department's
Chapter 93 antidegradation regulations. The municipality may require
the installation of an impermeable liner in detention basins where
the possibility of groundwater contamination exists. A detailed hydrogeologic
investigation may be required by the municipality.
(c)
The municipality shall require the applicant to provide safeguards
against groundwater contamination for uses which may cause groundwater
contamination, should there be a mishap or spill.
(6)
Extreme caution shall be exercised where infiltration is proposed
in source water protection areas or that may affect a wellhead or
surface water intake.
(7)
Recharge/infiltration facilities shall be used in conjunction with
other innovative or traditional BMPs, stormwater control facilities,
and nonstructural stormwater management alternatives.
(8)
For areas within defined special protection subwatersheds which include
exceptional-value (EV) and high-quality (HQ) waters, the temperature
and quality of water and streams shall be maintained through the use
of temperature-sensitive BMPs and stormwater conveyance systems.
(9)
In selecting the appropriate BMPs or combinations thereof, the applicant
shall consider the following:
(a)
Total contributing area.
(b)
Permeability and infiltration rate of the site soils.
(c)
Slope and depth to bedrock.
(d)
Seasonal high-water table.
(e)
Proximity to building foundations and wellheads.
(f)
Erodibility of soils.
(g)
Land availability and configuration of the topography.
(h)
Peak discharge and required volume control.
(i)
Streambank erosion.
(j)
Efficiency of the BMPs to mitigate potential water quality problems.
(k)
The volume of runoff that will be effectively treated.
(l)
The nature of the pollutant being removed.
(m)
Maintenance requirements.
(n)
Creation/protection of aquatic and wildlife habitat.
(o)
Recreational value.
(10)
Pretreatment shall be provided prior to infiltration.
(11)
Infiltration systems should always be designed such that failure
of the infiltration component does not completely eliminate the peak
rate attenuation capability of the BMP. Because infiltration BMPs
are designed to infiltrate small, frequent storms, the loss or reduction
of this capability may not significantly impact the storage and peak
rate mitigation of the BMP during extreme events.
(12)
Infiltration BMPs shall meet the following minimum requirements:
(a)
Maximum infiltration requirements:
[1]
Regulated activities will be required to recharge (infiltrate), where practicable, a portion of the runoff created by the development as part of an overall stormwater management plan designed for the site. The volume of runoff to be recharged shall be determined from § 160-11 depending upon demonstrated site conditions.
(b)
Infiltration BMPs intended to receive runoff from developed
areas shall be selected based on suitability of soils and site conditions
and shall be constructed on soils that have the following characteristics:
[1]
A minimum depth of 24 inches between the bottom of the BMP and
the limiting zone.
[2]
An infiltration and/or percolation rate sufficient to accept
the additional stormwater load and drain completely as determined
by field tests conducted by the applicant's design professional.
[3]
The recharge facility shall be capable of completely infiltrating
the recharge volume within four days.
(13)
The Pennsylvania Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual
provides guidance on the selection and application of water quality
control methodologies.
A.
Brodhead/McMichaels Watershed.
(1)
The Brodhead/McMichaels Watershed has been divided into stormwater
management districts as shown on the Watershed Map in Appendix D.[1]
[1]
Editor's Note: Appendix D is included as an attachment to this chapter.
(2)
Standards for managing runoff from each subarea in the Brodhead/McMichaels
Watershed for design storms are shown in Table 160-17. Development
sites located in each of the A, B, or C Districts must control proposed
conditions runoff rates to existing conditions runoff rates for the
design storms in accord with Table 160-17.
(3)
In addition to the requirements specified in Table 160-17 below, the water quality and streambank erosion (§ 160-15), groundwater recharge (§ 160-16), and erosion control (§ 160-20) requirements shall be implemented.
|
Table 160-17 Water Quantity Requirements
| ||
|---|---|---|
|
District
|
Proposed Conditions
|
(Reduce to)
Existing Conditions
|
|
A
|
2-year
5-year
10-year
25-year
50-year
100-year
|
1-year
5-year
10-year
25-year
50-year
100-year
|
|
B-1
|
2-year
5-year
10-year
25-year
50-year
100-year
|
1-year
2-year
5-year
10-year
25-year
100-year
|
|
B-2
|
2-year
5-year
25-year
50-year
100-year
|
1-year
2-year
5-year
10-year
50-year
|
|
B-3
|
50-year
100-year
|
10-year
50-year
|
|
C
|
Provisional Direct Discharge District. Development sites which can discharge directly to the main channel or major tributaries or indirectly to the main channel through an existing stormwater drainage system (i.e., storm sewer or tributary) which meet the downstream hydraulic capacity analysis in § 160-17H and are shown by the design professional to not cause a downstream problem may allow an increase in flow as long as no downstream harm is demonstrated. However, sites in District C shall comply with the criteria for water quality (§ 160-16). If the proposed conditions runoff is intended to be conveyed by an existing stormwater drainage system to the main channel, assurance must be provided that such system has adequate capacity to convey the increased peak flows or will be provided with improvements to furnish the required capacity. When adequate capacity of the downstream system does not exist and will not be provided through improvements, the proposed conditions peak rate of runoff must be controlled to the existing conditions peak rate as required in District A provisions (i.e., ten-year proposed conditions flows to ten-year existing conditions flows) for the specified design storms.
| |
B.
General. Proposed conditions rates of runoff from any regulated activity
shall not exceed the peak release rates of runoff prior to development
for the design storms specified on the Stormwater Management District
Watershed Map (Ordinance Appendix D)[2] § 160-14 of this chapter.
[2]
Editor's Note: Appendix D is included as an attachment to this chapter.
C.
District boundaries. The boundaries of the stormwater management
districts are shown on an official map that is available for inspection
at the municipal office. A copy of the official map at a reduced scale
is included in the Ordinance Appendix D.[3] The exact location of the Stormwater Management District
boundaries as they apply to a given development site shall be determined
by mapping the boundaries using the two-foot topographic contours
(or most accurate data required) provided as part of the drainage
plan.
[3]
Editor's Note: Appendix D is included as an attachment to this chapter.
D.
Sites located in more than one district. For a proposed development site located within two or more stormwater management district category subareas, the peak discharge rate from any subarea shall be the existing conditions peak discharge for that subarea as indicated in § 160-14. The calculated peak discharges shall apply regardless of whether the grading plan changes the drainage area by subarea. An exception to the above may be granted by the municipalities if discharges from multiple subareas recombine in proximity to the site. In this case, peak discharge in any direction may be a release rate of 100%, provided that the overall site discharge meets the weighted average release rate.
E.
Off-site areas. Off-site areas that drain through a proposed development
site are not subject to release rate criteria when determining allowable
peak runoff rates. However, on-site drainage facilities shall be designed
to safely convey off-site flows through the development site.
F.
Site areas. Where the site area to be impacted by a proposed development
activity differs significantly from the total site area, only the
proposed impact area utilizing stormwater management measures shall
be subject to the management district criteria. In other words, unimpacted
areas bypassing the stormwater management facilities would not be
subject to the management district criteria.
G.
No-harm option. For any proposed development site not located in a provisional direct discharge district, the applicant has the option of using a less restrictive runoff control (including no detention) if the applicant can prove that no harm would be caused by discharging at a higher runoff rate than that specified by the stormwater management plan. The no-harm option is used when an applicant can prove that the proposed hydrographs can match existing hydrographs or if it can be proved that the proposed conditions will not cause increases in peaks at all points downstream. Proof of no harm must be shown based upon the following downstream impact evaluation, which shall include a downstream hydraulic capacity analysis consistent with § 160-17H to determine if adequate hydraulic capacity exists. The applicant shall submit to the municipality this evaluation of the impacts due to increased downstream stormwater flows in the watershed.
(1)
The hydrologic regime of the site must be maintained.
(2)
The downstream impact evaluation shall include hydrologic and hydraulic
calculations necessary to determine the impact of hydrograph timing
modifications due to the proposed development upon a dam, highway,
structure, natural point of restricted stream flow or any stream channel
section, established with the concurrence of the municipality.
(3)
The evaluation shall continue downstream until the increase in flow
diminishes due to additional flow from tributaries and/or stream attenuation.
(4)
The peak flow values to be used for downstream areas for the design
return period storms (two-year, five-year, ten-year, twenty-five-year,
fifty-year, and 100-year) shall be the values from the calibrated
model for the Brodhead/McMichaels Watershed. These flow values can
be obtained from the original Act 167 watershed stormwater management
plans.
(5)
Applicant-proposed conditions runoff controls which would generate increased peak flow rates at storm drainage problem areas would, by definition, be precluded from successful attempts to prove no harm except in conjunction with proposed capacity improvements for the problem areas consistent with § 160-17H.
(6)
A financial distress shall not constitute grounds for the municipality
to approve the use of the no-harm option.
(7)
Downstream capacity improvements may be provided as necessary to
achieve the no-harm option.
H.
Downstream hydraulic capacity analysis. Any downstream hydraulic
capacity analysis conducted in accordance with this chapter shall
use the following criteria for determining adequacy for accepting
increased peak flow rates:
(1)
Existing natural or man-made channels or swales must be able to convey
the increased runoff associated with a two-year return period event
within their banks at velocities consistent with protection of the
channels from erosion. Acceptable velocities shall be based upon criteria
included in the DEP Erosion and Sediment Pollution Control Program
Manual.
(2)
Existing natural or man-made channels or swales must be able to convey
increased twenty-five-year return period runoff without creating any
hazard to persons or property.
(3)
Culverts, bridges, storm sewers or any other facilities which must
pass or convey flows from the tributary area must be designed in accordance
with DEP Chapter 105 regulations (if applicable) and, at minimum,
pass the increased twenty-five-year return period runoff.
I.
Hardship option. The stormwater management plan and its standards
and criteria are designed to maintain existing conditions peak flows
and volumes throughout the Brodhead/McMichaels watershed as the watershed
becomes developed. There may be certain instances, however, where
the standards and criteria established are too restrictive for a particular
applicant. The existing drainage network in some areas may be capable
of safely transporting slight increases in flows without causing a
problem or increasing flows elsewhere. If an applicant cannot meet
the stormwater standards due to lot conditions or if conformance would
become a hardship to an applicant, the hardship option may be applied.
A financial distress shall not constitute grounds for the municipality
to approve the use of the hardship option. The applicant would have
to plead his/her case to the governing body, with the final determination
made by the municipality. Any applicant pleading the hardship option
will assume all liabilities that may arise due to exercising this
option. A financial distress shall not constitute grounds for the
municipality to approve the use of the no-harm option.
A.
Stormwater runoff from all development sites with a drainage area
of greater than 200 acres shall be calculated using a generally accepted
calculation technique that is based on the NRCS Soil Cover Complex
Method. Table 160-18 summarizes acceptable computation methods and
the method selected by the design professional shall be based on the
individual limitations and suitability of each method for a particular
site. The municipality may allow the use of the Rational Method to
estimate peak discharges from drainage areas that contain less than
200 acres. The Soil Cover Complex Method shall be used for drainage
areas greater than 200 acres.
|
Table 160-18 Acceptable Computation Methodologies for Stormwater
Management Plans
| ||
|---|---|---|
|
Method
|
Method Developed by
|
Applicability
|
|
TR-20 (or commercial computer package based on TR-20)
|
USDA NRCS
|
Applicable where use of full hydrology computer model is desirable
or necessary
|
|
TR-55 (or commercial computer package based on TR-55)
|
USDA NRCS
|
Applicable for land development plans within limitations described
in TR-55
|
|
HEC-1/HEC-HMS
|
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
|
Applicable where use of full hydrologic computer model is desirable
or necessary
|
|
PSRM
|
Pennsylvania State University
|
Applicable where use of a hydrologic computer model is desirable
or necessary; simpler than TR-20 or HEC-1
|
|
Rational Method (or commercial computer package based on Rational
Method)
|
Emil Kuichling (1889)
|
For sites less than 200 acres or as approved by the municipality
and/or Municipal Engineer
|
|
Other methods
|
Varies
|
Other computation methodologies approved by the municipality
and/or Municipal Engineer
|
B.
All calculations consistent with this chapter using the Soil Cover
Complex Method shall use the appropriate design rainfall depths for
the various return period storms according to the region in which
they are located as presented in Table B-1 in Appendix B[1] of this chapter If a hydrologic computer model such as
PSRM or HEC-1 is used for stormwater runoff calculations, then the
duration of rainfall shall be 24 hours. The SCS S curve shown in Figure
B-1, Appendix B, of this chapter shall be used for the rainfall distribution.
[1]
Editor's Note: Appendix B is included as an attachment to this chapter.
C.
For the purposes of existing conditions flow rate determination,
undeveloped land shall be considered as meadow in good condition,
unless the natural ground cover generates a lower curve number or
Rational C value, as listed in Table B-2 or B-3 in Appendix B of this
chapter.
D.
All calculations using the Rational Method shall use rainfall intensities
consistent with appropriate times of concentration for overland flow
and return periods from the design storm curves from the Pennsylvania
Department of Transportation Design Rainfall Curves (1986) (Figures
B-2 to B-4). Times of concentration for overland flow shall be calculated
using the methodology presented in Chapter 3 of Urban Hydrology for
Small Watersheds, NRCS, TR-55 (as amended or replaced from time to
time by NRCS). Times of concentration (TC) for channel and pipe flow
shall be computed using Manning's equation.
E.
Runoff curve numbers (CNs) for both existing and proposed conditions
to be used in the Soil Cover Complex Method shall be obtained from
Table B-2 in Appendix B of this chapter.
F.
Runoff coefficients(c) for both existing and proposed conditions
for use in the Rational Method shall be obtained from Table B-3 in
Appendix B of this chapter.
G.
The designer shall consider that the runoff from proposed sites graded
to the subsoil will not have the same runoff conditions as the site
under existing conditions, even after topsoiling or seeding. The designer
may increase his proposed condition CN or c to better reflect proposed
soil conditions.
H.
Where uniform flow is anticipated, the Manning equation shall be
used for hydraulic computations and to determine the capacity of open
channels, pipes, and storm sewers. Values for Manning's roughness
coefficient(n) shall be consistent with Table B-4 in Appendix B of
the chapter.
I.
Outlet structures for stormwater management facilities shall be designed
to meet the performance standards of this chapter using any generally
accepted hydraulic analysis technique or method.
J.
The design of any stormwater detention facilities intended to meet
the performance standards of this chapter shall be verified by routing
the design storm hydrograph through these facilities using the Storage-Indication
Method. For drainage areas greater than 200 acres in size, the design
storm hydrograph shall be computed using a calculation method that
produces a full hydrograph. The municipality may approve the use of
any generally accepted full hydrograph approximation technique that
shall use a total runoff volume that is consistent with the volume
from a method that produces a full hydrograph.
A.
Any stormwater facility located on state highway rights-of-way shall
be subject to approval by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation
(PennDOT).
B.
All wet basin designs shall incorporate biologic controls consistent
with the West Nile guidance found in Appendix E.[1]
[1]
Editor's Note: Appendix E is included as an attachment to this chapter.
C.
Any stormwater management facility (i.e., BMP, detention basin) designed
to store runoff and requiring a berm or earthen embankment required
or regulated by this chapter shall be designed to provide an emergency
spillway to handle flow up to and including the 100-year proposed
conditions. The height of embankment must provide a minimum 1.0 foot
of freeboard above the maximum pool elevation computed when the facility
functions for the 100-year proposed conditions inflow. Should any
stormwater management facility require a dam safety permit under PADEP
Chapter 105, the facility shall be designed in accordance with Chapter
105 and meet the regulations of Chapter 105 concerning dam safety
which may be required to pass storms larger than the 100-year event.
D.
Any facilities that constitute water obstructions (e.g., culverts,
bridges, outfalls, or stream enclosures), and any work involving wetlands
governed by PADEP Chapter 105 regulations (as amended or replaced
from time to time by PADEP) shall be designed in accordance with Chapter
105 and will require a permit from PADEP.
E.
Any other drainage conveyance facility that does not fall under Chapter
105 regulations must be able to convey, without damage to the drainage
structure or roadway, runoff from the twenty-five-year design storm
with a minimum 1.0 foot of freeboard measured below the lowest point
along the top of the roadway. Any facility that constitutes a dam
as defined in PADEP Chapter 105 regulations may require a permit under
dam safety regulations. Any facility located within a PennDOT right-of-way
must meet PennDOT minimum design standards and permit submission requirements.
F.
Any drainage conveyance facility and/or channel not governed by Chapter
105 regulations must be able to convey, without damage to the drainage
structure or roadway, runoff from the twenty-five-year design storm.
Conveyance facilities to or exiting from stormwater management facilities
(i.e., detention basins) shall be designed to convey the design flow
to or from that structure. Roadway crossings located within designated
floodplain areas must be able to convey runoff from a 100-year design
storm. Any facility located within a PennDOT right-of-way must meet
PennDOT minimum design standards and permit submission requirements.
G.
Storm sewers must be able to convey proposed conditions runoff from
a twenty-five-year design storm without surcharging inlets, where
appropriate.
H.
Adequate erosion protection shall be provided along all open channels
and at all points of discharge.
I.
The design of all stormwater management facilities shall incorporate
sound engineering principles and practices. The municipality reserves
the right to disapprove any design that would result in the construction
of or continuation of a stormwater problem area.
A.
Any earth disturbance must be conducted in conformance with Pa. Code Title 25, Chapter 102, Erosion and Sediment Control.
B.
Additional erosion and sediment control design standards and criteria
that must be or arC recommended to be applied where infiltration BMPs
are proposed shall include the following:
(1)
Areas proposed for infiltration BMPs shall be protected from sedimentation
and compaction during the construction phase to maintain maximum infiltration
capacity.
(2)
Infiltration BMPs shall not be constructed nor receive runoff until
the entire contributory drainage area to the infiltration BMP has
achieved final stabilization.
A.
Submissions. All regulated activities shall submit a consumptive
use tracking report (CUTR), which shall be developed in accordance
with Appendix F,[1] as follows:
(1)
Residential development or redevelopment. The CUTR shall be submitted
to the Monroe County Conservation District, along with the erosion
and sedimentation control plan.
(2)
Commercial/industrial development — redevelopment. The CUTR
shall be submitted to the municipality during the preliminary plan
approval process. The CUTR shall be forwarded by the municipality
to the Monroe County Conservation District, along with a copy of the
occupancy permit.
[1]
Editor's Note: Appendix F is included as an attachment to this chapter.
