Development
Draft Ordinance for Public Review
Erosion and sediment control
Permit application and review process
Redevelopment
Restoration and protection
Roadways
Stormwater management
These comments relate to : Restoration and protection
| Affiliation | Location of commenter | Comment | Date Posted |
| Consultant | Warrenville | The Ordinance should clearly state when and where BMP and SMA easements and deed restrictions are required for both public and private development sites, and, how they shall be recorded. | 12/08/09 |
| Consultant | Warrenville | Proposals to restore, maintain, or enhance vegetation in SMAs can take considerable review time and consulting fees which often limit a land owners abilities. A provision should be considered that permits specific improvements (such as fill removal, weed control, and native planting) without going through the typical submittal process. Consider allowing County-approved scientists/ecologists oversee the work in accordance with maintenance guidelines. Federal permits (if needed) should be the sole responsibility of the Owner.
Such a process could help land owners correct violations or improve degraded habitats sooner and with less cost. |
12/08/09 |
| Consultant | Glen Ellyn | I am a long time resident DuPage County and wetland/ecological consultant invovled in wetland and stormwater permitting. I attended the Conservation Foundation conference “Beyond the Basics: Green Infrastructure for Clean Water†on February 18, 2010. One of the best conference sessions was “A Data-Driven Approach to Best Management Practice Selection†by two members of the DuPage River Salt Creek Workgroup. The session described a scientific approach to the selection and location of BMP’s that would provide the most benefits to the receiving streams based on the actual documented water quality, physical aquatic habitat, and/or condition of the macroinvertebrate and fisheries communities. Please recommend or acknowledge this methodology in the revised sections of the Ordinance or technical guidance that deal with BMP’s. This methodology could also be used for the existing BMP fee-in-lieu program in the existing Ordinance. | 03/01/10 |
These comments relate to : Stormwater management
| Affiliation | Location of commenter | Comment | Date Posted |
| Consultant | Addison | I have the following recommendations for things to consider:
Ordinance related: - Eliminate the CLOMR requirement for BFE reductions on no impact to the floodway, particularly for acceptable uses. This requirement has made some property owner decide not to do things that would reduce BFE for fear of the CLOMR-LOMR process and associated delay. |
11/06/09 |
| Consultant | Addison | provide volume credits for BMPS. Right now they are purely statutory in nature, there is no incentive | 11/09/09 |
| DuPage Resident | Addison | I would like to see an ordinance that encourages redevelopment within our urban centers. Developments in the less dense "sprawl" areas should be held to a higher standard. An impartial planner could set the boundaries. LEED also provides a system for setting these zones. | 11/09/09 |
| Consultant | Addison | The character limits on the web comments is to small | 11/09/09 |
| Consultant | Addison | The requirements for the redevelopment exemptions listed in 15-111-3 are too difficult to achieve. Some possibilities to consider to encourage redevelopment: i. Expand and simplify exemptions in the ordinance ii. Expand fee in lieu for targeting redevelopment areas iii. Expand grandfathering with NAI conditions for targeted redevelopment areas iv. Simplify waiver process or expand exempted developments which will not require waivers |
11/09/09 |
| Consultant | Addison | Regarding the permeable pavement detention credit, if you read the BMP manual section 2.2.2.4 it indicates (with references) that permeable pavement does not reduce the runoff for high intensity storms. The DuPage County detention design storm is the 100-year high intensity storm. Therefore detention is still required and a curve number or detention credit is not given. This is more of a philosophical/technical issue but some encouragement for permeable pavers should be given or we will get more asphalt and concrete. | 11/09/09 |
| Consultant | Addison | Give wetland type detention systems credit for the higher rate of evapotrasporation. University of Wisconsin has the Recarga model which could be used to model. | 11/09/09 |
| Consultant | Addison | Provide clear guidance on whether soak aways ( Aggregate detention or retention) can be used for detention volume. If allowable provide design standards and allowable design assumptions. | 11/09/09 |
| Consultant | Addison | FEQ modeling is required for all floodway work, however there are more user friendly models available such as HEC-RAS and XP-SWMM. Consider accepting more user friendly models | 11/09/09 |
| Consultant | Addison | Dry detention is the least recommended solution but the most economical solution. A wetland type detention should be given extra credit for being more environmental friendly to make them more economically feasible. Provide additional incentives or disincentives to promote wet detention and wetland detention as compared to dry detention. | 11/09/09 |
| Consultant | Addison | This comment webpage is very unstable and not user friendly. I am only able to post about half my comments. | 11/09/09 |
| DuPage Resident | Addison | Is it possible to have the location default to DuPage County, not Addison? | 11/16/09 |
These comments relate to : Development
| Affiliation | Location of commenter | Comment | Date Posted |
| DuPage Resident | Wheaton | Issues to consider when updating Stormwater Ordinance:
1. Consider volume of release in developed condition and provide minimum release volume threshold. I.E., eliminate small diameter/small volume restrictors that are prone to constant maintenance and failure. 2. Promote wetland banking on County public lands where land component has been purchased by taxpayers. |
11/09/09 |
| Consultant | Lisle | The continued care and upkeep of service facilities should be considered separately. There should be a category for “maintenance†which could be defined as “in kind replacement, restoration or repair of existing infrastructure such as they will perform the same functions for which they were originally designed, constructed and permittedâ€. This language is taken from the proposed Cook County Watershed Management Ordinance. Maintenance should include utility replacements and work to existing roadways that do not increase impervious areas. This definition cuts across a few of the currently proposed classifications and is easy to understand by Ordinance users.
Specific rules for maintenance can be justified. For example, if maintenance disturbs less than one acre, then only soil erosion and sedimentation controls are necessary. If over an acre is disturbed then applicable ILR 10 rules apply. |
12/29/09 |
| Consultant | Other | On the previous page "What if the ordinance looked like this…?, the sentance No. 1 under catagorize the proposed project, which begins "Those not meeting the requirements…." seems confusing. Exactly what is being requested? | 01/04/10 |
These comments relate to : Redevelopment
| Affiliation | Location of commenter | Comment | Date Posted |
These comments relate to : Erosion and sediment control
| Affiliation | Location of commenter | Comment | Date Posted |
| Consultant | Other | I agree with comment by Stormblog9 on Dec 14. | 01/04/10 |
These comments relate to : Permit application and review process
| Affiliation | Location of commenter | Comment | Date Posted |
| Consultant | Addison | Create a formal process where professional engineers can submit white papers for the review and approval of new technologies. | 11/09/09 |
| Consultant | Warrenville | The Ordinance should clearly state when and where BMP and SMA easements and deed restrictions are required for both public and private development sites, and, how they shall be recorded. | 12/08/09 |
| Public Agency located within DuPage County | Currently, Article 13 requires all developers to post performance security for their projects.
Consideration should be given to allowing the Administrators flexibility to waive this requirement for other government agencies such as Park Districts, School Districts and the Forest Preserve District. |
02/04/10 |
These comments relate to : Roadways
| Affiliation | Location of commenter | Comment | Date Posted |
| Public Agency located within DuPage County | DuPage County | Please consider formalizing approach to roadway projects. Currently, I understand there is a procedure / policy utilized by DuDOT that many consultants and municipalities utilize to calculate detention requirements for roadway projects.
If this approach is acceptable, then it should be a part of the Stormwater Ordinance |
11/17/09 |
These comments relate to : Permit application and review process
| Affiliation | Location of commenter | Comment | Date Posted |
| Consultant | Addison | Create a formal process where professional engineers can submit white papers for the review and approval of new technologies. | 11/09/09 |
| Consultant | Warrenville | The Ordinance should clearly state when and where BMP and SMA easements and deed restrictions are required for both public and private development sites, and, how they shall be recorded. | 12/08/09 |
| Public Agency located within DuPage County | Currently, Article 13 requires all developers to post performance security for their projects.
Consideration should be given to allowing the Administrators flexibility to waive this requirement for other government agencies such as Park Districts, School Districts and the Forest Preserve District. |
02/04/10 |
These comments relate to : Draft Ordinance for Public Review
| Affiliation | Location of commenter | Comment | Date Posted |