Laserfiche WebLink
less than the large lot with the same square footage of impervious surFace, as <br /> illustrated by these examples: <br /> Example 6a:Given a 2-acre vacant lot and a 3-acre vacant lot next to it, in the <br /> 2-acre zone, each having identical new homes being constructed and installing <br /> equal impervious surface, the larger lot with greater potential to infiltrate runoff <br /> will have a SW&DT fee of ($3,780 x 3 acres) _ $11,340 while the smaller lot <br /> with less ability to infiltrate will have a fee of($3,780 x 2 acres) _ $7,560. <br /> Example 6b: A 1/2-acre undeveloped lakeshore lot (in the 1/2-acre zone) that <br /> is maxed out on hardcover will pay a SW&DT fee of ($5,765 x 0.5 acre) _ <br /> $2,883 while a 5-acre lot in the rural 5-acre zone that has a low impervious <br /> surface percentage and greater amount of infiltration potential, will pay ($3,075 <br /> x 5 acres) _ $15,375. <br /> The original basis for acceptance of this inequity was that the 5-acre lot generates <br /> a much greater volume of runoff than the individual 0.5-acre lot under normal <br /> development with a house/garage/driveway and typical amenities (this is because <br /> under frozen or saturated ground conditions, 10 times the area generates 10 times <br /> the volume of runof�. However, this is a difficult sell to large-lot landowners and <br /> developers who view the undeveloped portions of their land as having no negative <br /> stormwater impacts. <br /> • Determine whether charging the SW�DT fee to redevelopment should <br /> commence, and if so, under what circumstances. Consider the table on Page 5 of <br /> this memo: Should the thresholds for Area of Impervious Surface Expansion be <br /> revised? Should the percentage of the base fee be revised? Should the base fee <br /> be established at a different level for redevelopment than for new development? <br /> Should the fee be tied to the percentage of hardcover on a site rather than the <br /> amount of impervious surface expansion? Should the fee for redevelopment not be <br /> imposed as long as hardcover does not exceed the allowed percentage for the <br /> Hardcover Tier? Is it legally acceptable to attach an impa�t fee to a hardcover <br /> variance approval (Soren?)? <br /> • Establish provisions regarding past and/or future payment of SW�DT fees. <br /> For example, establish that once the fee is paid for a lot created by a new <br /> subdivision, it is not charged again when a house is built on that lot, nor when that <br /> house is later expanded. Or for example, if a lot for which the fee was paid under <br /> a past subdivision is then itself subdivided, there should be no additional fee. <br /> Also should establish that under redevelopment (if that fee structure is <br /> commenced) whether the SW&DT fee paid for an expansion is creditable toward <br /> the SW&DT fee for another expansion a few years later. <br /> Page 8 of 9 <br />