Huntington Woods moves to rewrite stormwater and grading rules; public input and expert presentations planned

City staff and commissioners launched a multi‑step effort to revise Huntington Woods’ stormwater management and grading ordinances, telling the Planning Commission that a draft framework and multiple expert presentations will come before the commission in coming months.

Staff said they have asked the City Commission to authorize resources to develop a combined drainage, grading and stormwater management ordinance that will address both commercial and residential projects. Planning staff circulated a memo and a Nowak & Frowse presentation to commissioners and said the city will invite consultants to present to the Planning Commission at upcoming meetings so commissioners can consider a range of technical approaches.

City staff emphasized that the effort is intended to be comprehensive rather than rushed. “This is gonna be something that's gonna take a little bit more time and a little bit more study,” a staff member told commissioners, adding that the package will include a framework ordinance at a future meeting and that the final draft will be recommended to the City Commission for adoption when complete. Staff said soil types vary across Huntington Woods — from sandy soils near Woodward to blue clay in other areas — and that different parts of the city may require different technical solutions.

Potential approaches discussed during the meeting include conventional catch basins and leaching chambers as well as newer systems (described in the meeting using the trade name JEP/GEFS in the transcript) that have been used by nearby communities for field and park drainage. Staff noted that examples from Berkeley, Birmingham and Oak Park are being reviewed and that consultant presentations will include both municipal and commercial solutions.

Commissioners discussed likely triggers for ordinance requirements — for example, whether additions over a specified square‑foot threshold or changes that increase roofed area should require a stormwater retention plan. Staff said the draft ordinance may specify different thresholds (for example, any addition over a certain square footage or percent increase in lot coverage) and that exemptions would be considered for minimal work such as small interior renovations.

Public comments at the meeting urged an education and outreach campaign, clear rules for measuring rear yard coverage, and consistent enforcement, including how to address historical “leaky” property conditions where one property’s runoff has long drained onto another. One resident suggested using satellite/AI tools to analyze properties for stormwater issues and to incorporate public education into the rollout.

Staff indicated the project will require several presentations and legal review and that the Planning Commission will take public comment as drafts evolve. The city attorney was not available for the meeting; the public hearing on accessory structures was postponed to the October meeting so legal counsel could be present. Staff said they expect to have a well‑developed draft for commission discussion, and estimated a realistic target to have a solid draft by next summer while allowing additional time if needed to get technical details right.

Next steps: staff will coordinate consultant presentations, continue technical review of alternatives (including infiltration and chamber systems), and refine ordinance language and proposed triggers for when stormwater plans are required. The Planning Commission and City Commission will get multiple opportunities for input before any final ordinance adoption.