Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Detention Jurisdiction Dispute topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer presses board over detention rules for small lots; board says variances required
Summary
Developer Ian Heuer argued that two single‑family projects should not be required to install detention based on a pre‑versus‑post analysis and cited the Construction Stormwater General Permit (CSGP); board and staff countered that county detention standards apply unless a variance is filed. Staff said performance sureties for construction are required and paperwork must be completed before permits proceed.
Ian Heuer, representing two families and speaking for builders, told the board he believes a pre‑versus‑post runoff analysis shows the projects reduce runoff and therefore should not require detention per the county's implementation of the Construction Stormwater General Permit (CSGP). He said one of the sites had an approval letter from the surveyor's office and asked whether the petitioner could pick up the permit that day.
Board members and staff disputed Heuer's interpretation, noting the county stormwater manual (chapter 300) contains release‑rate/detention requirements and that exemptions in chapter 700 do not negate county detention standards. "We've told you that multiple times...you choose not to, so you choose that at your own peril," a committee member said, urging Heuer to file a formal variance if he disagreed with the standard. Staff clarified that construction‑phase bonds must be posted and the office had not received final performance paperwork, so no permit could be picked up that day.
