Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />jurisdictions. <br /> 3. The applicant has submitted a method and schedule for <br />monitoring the effectiveness of the proposed design once <br />constructed, and a schedule for its maintenance. <br /> 4. The applicant has submitted a signed statement that the <br />applicant will replace the alternative pollution reduction <br />facility if the facility does not function as proposed. <br /> (c) The requirement in EC 9.6793(3)(a) and EC 9.6793(3)(b) may be <br />adjusted upon a finding that the flow control facility will control flow <br />rates as much as possible and one of the following applies: <br /> 1. The area at issue generating runoff is less than 500 square <br />feet of impervious surface and is isolated from the flow <br />control facility; <br /> 2. The area at issue generating runoff is less than 500 square <br />feet of impervious surface and it is not technically feasible to <br />drain the untreated runoff to the flow control facility; <br /> 3. Constructing facilities to control the flow of runoff from the <br />area at issue would require removal of trees or damage to <br />other natural resources; <br /> 4. The area at issue generating runoff is less than 500 square <br />feet of impervious surface and limited access to the area <br />would prevent regular maintenance of the flow control <br />facility. <br /> (d) The requirements in EC 9.6793(3)(d) that all flow control facilities <br />be selected from and sited, designed, and constructed according <br />to the flow control provisions and the facility design requirements <br />set forth in the Stormwater Management Manual may be adjusted <br />upon finding that all of the following requirements are met: <br /> 1. The proposed alternative design will achieve equal, or <br />superior, results for function (maintaining flow or restricting <br />flow or both), maintainability and safety, and the proposed <br />siting does not adversely affect structures or other <br />properties; <br /> 2. The applicant’s written description of the proposed <br />alternative design has been reviewed and approved by the <br />City Engineer. The description of the proposed design <br />submitted for review must include all of the following <br />information for each component of the proposed alternative <br />design: <br />a. Size, technical description, capacity, capital cost, <br />design life, construction process and costs, <br />consequences of improper construction, operation <br />and maintenance requirements and costs; <br />b. Data on the effectiveness of proposed alternative <br /> <br />Ordinance - <br />16 <br />L:\CMO\2006 Council Agendas\M060410\S0604104-attA.doc <br />4/3/06 - Ordinance includes changes made pursuant to the 1/9/06, 1/10/06 and 2/13/06 PC meetings and the 3/13/06 <br />City Council Work Session. <br />