Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stormwater topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council refers stormwater nitrogen-control text amendment to planning commission after buffer/detention questions
Summary
Council unanimously referred a zoning text amendment that would move four stormwater/nitrogen-control requirements directly into the Unified Development Ordinance to make enforcement easier. Councilmember Behringer pressed staff to ask the Planning Commission to consider requiring 100‑year detention in the Swift Creek watershed.
Garner — The Town Council unanimously voted Feb. 4 to send a proposed text amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) to the Planning Commission for formal consistency review. The amendment would codify four measures from the town’s nitrogen-control stormwater program directly into the UDO so the town can enforce them more easily.
The four measures proposed for insertion into the UDO are: (1) at project closeout or certificate of occupancy, engineered stormwater controls and public storm-drain infrastructure must be submitted to the town for review and acceptance; (2) operations-and-maintenance (O&M) agreements for stormwater control measures must be executed by the property owner and the town and recorded with the Register of Deeds; (3) property owners must submit annual third‑party inspection and maintenance documentation for engineered stormwater control measures; and (4) public access and maintenance agreements must be recorded so the town may access stormwater control devices for inspection and repair while not obligating the town to perform routine maintenance.
Why it matters: The change does not create new technical stormwater requirements; town staff said the items are already required by the town’s stormwater program and state/federal obligations. Repeating them in the UDO would give the town a clearer, enforceable mechanism at the ordinance level to ensure long-term maintenance and documentation of stormwater infrastructure.
Council comments and next steps: Council member Behringer urged that the Planning Commission be asked to consider an additional requirement for the Swift Creek watershed — a mandatory 100‑year detention standard for developments in that watershed — citing the town’s comprehensive-plan language about protecting Lake Benson and the potential for increased intensity and frequency of rainfall events. Town Engineer Leah Harrison replied that the town already requires higher detention where downstream flooding concerns exist and that the town engineer can require 100‑year storm detention at the engineer’s discretion; historically, Swift Creek reviews have emphasized water quality treatment rather than detention. Harrison said staff will present the text amendment to Planning Commission and can include Behringer’s suggested change for consideration.
No vote on technical changes: Council took no technical action on development permits or stormwater designs at the meeting; the motion before council was a referral to Planning Commission for review and recommendation.
Ending: The Planning Commission will hold its review and return a written recommendation and consistency statement to council, which will make the final decision on any ordinance language changes.
