The Michigan City Planning Commission on June 24 voted unanimously to send a revised stormwater ordinance and related zoning and subdivision amendments to the Michigan City Common Council with a favorable recommendation and a certification resolution.

The ordinance update, presented by Al Wallace, a stormwater consultant working with the Sanitary District, adopts a Purdue University LTAP model ordinance and updates local code to meet Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) MS4 permit requirements, Wallace said. "The best management practices could be filters and catch basins," Wallace told the Planning Commission as he walked through revisions intended to strengthen enforcement and clarify responsibilities.

The update matters because IDEM revised statewide MS4 and construction stormwater permits in late 2021 and required communities with MS4 programs to modernize ordinances. The Planning Commission's action sends to City Council a package that includes the proposed ordinance text (Exhibit A), zoning and subdivision cross-reference changes (Exhibit B), and a Plan Commission resolution certifying the recommendation.

Commission discussion and staff responses focused on several implementation and enforcement questions raised in a prior meeting and in written comments. Commissioners sought clearer language on the phrase "reasonable protection" for commercial and industrial operators; the ordinance now adds language tying BMP requirements to other ordinance sections and to defined categories of regulated sites, Wallace said. The ordinance also clarifies that property owners or long-term lessees who have assumed management responsibilities must keep watercourses free of trash and obstructions.

Wallace described how the Sanitary District and MS4 program will identify and assist regulated sites. Plan review for new projects is a primary point of contact: "If we see plan review coming in for a new gas station, we would then make it a requirement of that gas station to have these BMPs as part of their design," Wallace said. He also said the Sanitary District will use industrial-business lists, NAICS codes and outreach to targeted constituencies to locate existing "hot spot" uses (for example, fueling stations, vehicle maintenance, salvage yards and recycling facilities).

On enforcement, Wallace said the ordinance provides for written warnings and scheduled remediation before fines, except in cases of severe spills. "Our initial focus is try and work cooperatively with the businesses," he said, adding that written warnings are necessary to document enforcement steps for audits by IDEM.

Commissioners also pressed for precision on timelines for plan review and inspections. Wallace cited state law and permit language requiring preliminary determinations for land-disturbance plans of 1 to 5 acres within 10 working days and 14 working days for sites larger than 5 acres: "Pursuant to the Indiana code, we must make a preliminary determination, before the end of the tenth working day," he said. He noted that IDEM audits MS4 programs every five years and will check review times and inspection records.

The ordinance includes provisions on detention requirements and a narrowly defined exception process when a professional engineer demonstrates that more rapid discharge from a parcel would be beneficial to the watershed. Wallace described the process as requiring a hydrologic study and adoption of the analysis by the Sanitary District Board of Commissioners so there is a public record of any waiver.

Public comment was limited and supportive. Scott Melon, a Michigan City resident, thanked Wallace and staff for their work: "His experience and knowledge, is is evident, and I as a citizen citizen of Michigan City, I thank him for joining the city of Michigan City and helping us out with these things," Melon said. Melon also asked whether the ordinance would affect existing detention ponds; Wallace replied that the code and MS4 program allow the city to require maintenance or remediation where ponds are discharging sediment or no longer providing design storage, and that recorded maintenance agreements will be required for new facilities.

After discussion, Commissioner motioned to forward the ordinance package to City Council with a favorable recommendation; the Planning Commission then passed a separate resolution certifying that recommendation. The roll-call vote on the ordinance referral recorded votes from the commissioners called in order as follows: Mister Bolling: yes; Mister Dabney: aye; Mister Dimettigine: aye; Mister DePalma: aye; Mister Hoffman: aye; Mister Clender: yes; Miss Tejeda: yes; Mister Warner: aye. The commission then voted similarly to adopt Plan Commission Resolution No. 2-205 certifying the recommendation.

Next steps described to the commission were: Planning Commission recommendation is transmitted to the Common Council; staff expects to seek first reading before the council in the second meeting in July, with second and third readings and possible workshop in August, subject to the council's schedule and any additional edits.

The Planning Commission's vote sends the updated ordinance forward; final adoption and any effective dates will be set by the Common Council if and when it enacts the ordinance.