Workshop E Unpacking the Black Box: THe Milwaukee Area Green Infrastructure Codes and Ordinances...

7/30/2019 Workshop E Unpacking the Black Box: THe Milwaukee Area Green Infrastructure Codes and Ordinances Review Juli Beth Hinds

1/28

+

Clean Rivers, Clean LakeConference

Thursday, April 25, 2013

Juli Beth Hinds, AICP

Birchline Planning LLC

Unpacking the

Black Box: The

Menomonee

River Watershed

Codes &

Ordinances

Project


2/28

+

Project CollaboratorsTHE FUND FOR LAKE MICHIGAN

1,000 Friends of Wisconsin Kate Morgan, Water Policy Director

MMSD Karen Sands, AICP, Bre MacDonald &

Milwaukee County Stevan Keith, PE

GIS - Will Mobley, UW-Milwaukee/MMSD

WI DNR Bryan Hartsook

The good humored, patient municipal staff from:

City of Brookfield * Village of Butler * Village of Elm Grove *

City of Milwaukee * Village of West Milwaukee * Village of Germantown *

City of Greenfield * Village of Menomonee Falls * City of Wauwatosa


3/28

+Basic Premise of Green Infrastructure:

Land Disturbance &

Development Lead to Water

Quality & Watershed

Impairments

Green Infrastructure ReducesImpacts & Improves

Resilience


4/28

+An Extreme Example:


5/28

+A site-level example:

Landscaped islands shall be

surrounded by a continuouscurb of no less than 3 in

height.

The use of required

landscaped islands for stormwater management is strongly

encouraged.


6/28

+Why isnt zoning requiring Green Infrastructure?

Why doesnt our foxhound point upland birds?

Petey (Foxhound) Kirby (Brittany)


7/28

+We have a furnace (municipal codes), and we

need it to heat the house (protect water quality)

not make snowballs (connected impervious).


8/28

+What is the Codes & Ordinances

Project Intended to Accomplish?Phase 1. Figuring out the plumbing

How do municipal, regional (MMSD) and state codes,

ordinances and policies interact with the staff review and board

approval process to promote, or discourage, GI practices and

to reduce site-based pollutant loads?

Phase 2. Retooling the furnace to heat the house:

What specific code changes, and applicable to what areas ofthe Menomonee River watershed, could yield the greatest

benefit for GI implementation and pollutant reduction?

Phase 3. Checking back on implementation


9/28

+Why the Codes & Ordinances

Project?We have been talking about this for years!

1. Update MMSDs 2005 survey for the Menomonee Watershed hasprogress been made on specific code language that impeded GI?

Examples: outright prohibitions on permeable surfacing, basic SW and

erosion control regs

2. To date, code & ordinance work has not shown WHY the furnace ismaking snowballs: what are the details of whats on paper, andespecially whats not, that encourage or discourage GI?

3.

Checklists and scorecards address dimensional standards, but havenot addressed PROCESS or DISCRETION.

4. Model ordinances and large-scale changes have not been effective what are realistic, adoptable changes, linked & prioritized by WQissue and location?


10/28

+ Who, where, when and what are the

GI lion traps in this process?

Developer securesinterest in site, outlinesPro Forma (SF, building

configuration, parking,uses, leaserequirements)

ConsultingEngineer

integrates ProForma with

zoningDimensional

Standards & SW/other on site

infrastructurerequirements

Municipal staff reviewplan & comment on

consistency with codes,ordinances & municipal

policies

Consultingengineer

responds tofeedback while

working withState, MMSD,

otherauthorities

Municipal staffpresent applicationto review board(s)

Review boards makefindings of fact on

consistency of applicationwith applicable municipal

standards and policies;approve, approve with

conditions, or deny

Finalpermits are

issued byother

authorities

Land developmentwith inspection,maintenance &

reporting

ACTUALCODE

LANGUAGE

Fire Chiefwants

wider

streets

City Planner

recommendsadditional

trees and

berm Boardchair hates

weedy

landscape

Who isensuring

maintenance?

How will

volume

requirement

be met?


11/28

+Phase 1: Figuring out the Plumbing

1. Checklist Development(147 questions vs. 53)

2. Initial Code Review3. In-Depth Discussions4. Detailed Code Review5. Summary & individual

municipal reports


12/28

+Checklist: Updating the 2005 Audit

n Plan Review Processn Rooftop Runoff & Plumbingn Parkingn Streetscapingn Paving Materialsn Native Soils & Vegetationn Stormwater Managementn Maintenance, Inspection &

Enforcement

n Integrated Design & StandardApproval Process

n Buildingsn Reducing Effective Impervious Covern Functional Landscapesn Effective Thresholdsn Inspection & Maintenancen Pollution Prevention (new)

2005 Audit Categories

New/Revised 2013 Audit

Categories


13/28

+Asking More & More Specific

Questions:

nAre preliminary/sketch plansreviewed?

n Is landscaping required withinparking lots?

n Is permeable surfacingallowed for parking lots?

nAre stormwater managementplans required for sites

disturbing >

acre of area?

n Do preliminary/sketch plan applicationrequirements include landscaping andstormwater treatment concepts?

n Do parking lot edge landscapingrequirements (islands & edges)specifically allow/encourage use asstormwater control areas? Is a standardadopted?

n Does the use of permeable materialsreduce the stormwater quantity requiredto be managed? If so is this a written orinformal standard?

n What design storm is used for sizingstormwater control measures?

2005 2013


14/28

+Adding Detail: Whats a Yes or a

No to Green Infrastructure? YES ? NO

2005

2013ENABLED CONDITIONAL AMBIGUOUS DISCOURAGED

Enabledasof

right

Enabled,butsome

ambiguityor

poten6alconflict

Discre6onary

approval,

prac6ce

encouragedor

standardsor

process

adopted

Prac6ces

men6oned,

discre6onary

approval,no

standards

adopted

Nopolicyor

standards,but

notdisallowed

Somelimitsorprohibions,but

potenally

allowable

Prohibited

orac6ve

conflict


15/28

+ Results: The 2005 Audit Update


16/28

+Results: The 2005 Audit Update

n STORMWATER STANDARDS: Adoption of/reference to MMSD Ch. 13n Erosion Control Standards: WI DNRn Downspout/foundation drain disconnection optionsn Use of Shared Parkingn Maintenance agreements requiredn Street Standards & Flexibilityn ** Development Review Flexibilityn City of Milwaukee targeted amendmentsALSO IN PLACE but not in 2005 Audit:

n Native lawnsn Rain barrels

n PERMEABLE SURFACINGn Inspection of Sewer Lateralsn Use of drain restricters/streets as temporary storage (not interested)

Significant Improvement

Lack of Movement

ALL OVER THE MAP:

n SPECIFICITY of erosion controlstandards

n DESIGN STORMS in stormwaterordinances

n Types and degrees ofLANDSCAPE requirements

n STANDARDS for approval indiscretionary process


17/28

+Results: The 2005 Audit Update


18/28

+And now for the 2013 Audit

question results


19/28

+Building & Architectural Codes:

SILENCE.


20/28

+Use of Landscaping for

Stormwater: All over the map

Bermitis

Some veryprescriptive

requirementssome none

Stating

affirmativelythat

bioretentionareas count

as requiredlandscaping


21/28

+Supplemental Standards for Potentially

Polluting Uses: Under-Utilized!


22/28

+The Tyrany of Turfgrass!


23/28

+We are still paving paradisebut

maybe less so and it needs plants.


24/28

+I HEARD IT FAILED: The legend

of permeable pavement


25/28

+ Maintenance = More Consistent BUT! **Concerns aboutmaintaining small, plant-based distributed practices are a

significant and important barrier to GI!


26/28

+Phase 2: Whats Next

n DESIGN STORMS: MMSD sets the release rate, and the nine munis have @ 6different design storms. What design results? Discuss.

n THRESHOLDS: Most development in the Menomonee is going throughwithout any review for stormwater treatment & control. Maybe there needs

to be a different or graduated threshold in some areas or situations.

Discuss.

nSTATE BUILDING CODE for graywater/reclamation

n MAINTENANCE: How can any municipality ensure that distributed LIDpractices are sufficiently maintained to carry out their intended stormwater

functions, especially with increasingly severe storm events? Discuss.

nPERMEABLE MATERIALS: Discussion facilitated by Snake Plissken

Working Group Issues: Technical issues common tomunicipalities & watershed


27/28

+Phase 2: Whats Next (continued)

n Parking: ratios, in communities with older zoning; reducing residential parkingimpacts, in design & operation

nShared parking: how can it be made as easy as possible?

n Standards for LANDSCAPING of parking lot edges & islands!n Wiggle room (or better yet, standards) for GI in landscape features

difficulty varies with the age & nature of the communitys regulations

n Turfgrass, lawns, and native plantings: proactive standards, not complaint-driven as well as regulations

n Supplemental standards for WQ hotspot uses (Kirbys Kennels)n Standards & guidance for discretionary approvals: helping boards say yes,

responsibly

Changes at the MUNICIPAL level, to deal with a pollutant or WQissue of concern


28/28

+STAY TUNED! THERES

MORE TO COME!

Workshop E Unpacking the Black Box: THe Milwaukee Area Green Infrastructure Codes and Ordinances...

Documents

Transcript of Workshop E Unpacking the Black Box: THe Milwaukee Area Green Infrastructure Codes and Ordinances...