HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 07/07/2009 - FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 081, 2009, AMENDING ITEM NUMBER: 33
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE: July 7, 2009.
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Ted Shepard
SUBJECT
First Reading of Ordinance No. 081, 2009, Amending the Land Use Code to Reduce the Buffer
Around Wastewater Treatment Plants.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
On May 21, 2009, the Planning and Zoning Board voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the
revision.
The Water Board deemed that the proposed revision does not benefit the Mulberry Water
Reclamation Facility and that the reduced buffer is a land use issue, not a Water Board issue.
The Board, therefore, took no action on this item.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Mulberry Water Reclamation Facility will soon be significantly upgraded with aggressive
odor controls and additional treatment technologies. This includes introducing bio-filters,
covering all basins and adding a carbon filter. Reducing the buffer from 1,600 to 500 feet
acknowledges the effectiveness of these measures. The reduced buffer exceeds the regulations
and policies of the Colorado Water Quality Control Division.
BACKGROUND
The Land Use Code was first adopted in March 1997. Subsequent revisions have been
recommended on a regular basis to make changes, additions, deletions and clarifications that
have been identified since the last update. The proposed change will reduce the buffer around
the Mulberry Water Reclamation Facility from 1,000 feet to 500 feet.
On May 21, 2009, the Planning and Zoning Board considered the proposed change as part of a
set of 15 revisions. The Board then made a motion to approve all 15 of the proposed revisions as
a package and then voted 6 — 0 to forward to City Council a recommendation of approval.
Ordinance No. 066, 2009, adopted on Second Reading earlier this evening as part of the Consent
Calendar, approves the other 14 revisions.
July 7, 2009 -2- Item No. 33
ATTACHMENTS
1. Statement of Land Use Code Issue
2. Planning and Zoning Board minutes, May 21, 2009
3. Water Board minutes, April 23, 2009
4. Memo from the Water Board Chair, June 19, 2009
5. Current Odor Buffer map
6. Proposed Odor Buffer map
7. Poudre River Natural Habitat Buffer map
8. Floodway and Floodplain map
9. Mulberry Water Reclamation Facility (MWRF) Buffer summary map
10. Powerpoint presentation
ATTACHMENT 1
Amend 3.4.2 — Air Quality —to reduce the 1,000 foot buffer for wastewater
treatment plants to 500 feet but only if there are covered basins and
secondary odor control systems such as carbon scrubbers.
Problem Statement
City Staff was requested to review the current validity of the 1,000-foot buffer
zone applicable at wastewater plants comparable to the Mulberry Water
Reclamation facility upon its redevelopment. Findings and recommendations are
stated below.
2001 Setback in Land Use Code
The Land Use Code was modified in 2001 to include setback requirements from
wastewater treatment facilities. The purpose of this setback requirement is to aid
in protecting persons from the health risks (as well as odors) that are presented
by the aerosol drift from wastewater treatment works and prevent incompatible
land uses. At that time, the numerous commercial and residential structures that
existed within the 1,000-foot buffer to the east of MWRF were grandfathered-in
as legal nonconforming uses.
2004 Policy Change for Airborne Transmission of pathogens
In 2004, Colorado Water Quality Control Division's Policy WQSA -7, which
governs site approvals for new and expanded wastewater treatment plants, was
modified specifically in the area of setback requirements related to public health
issues. The policy now indicates that for treatment processes more than 250 feet "
away from habitable structures, the Division will assume that aerosol drift is not
an issue unless the treatment process would create significant aerosols or the
aerosols may create public health concerns. Aerosol drift is the major concern
for the airborne transmission of pathogens in older wastewater treatment
designs. This occurs when a portion of the treatment process that agitates or
sprays the influent is subjected to wind, causing it to become airborne and
allowed to drift offsite.
New Odor control system design
Based on the new treatment plant design at MWRF that will include covering all
basins with the potential of producing aerosol mists, the potential for MWRF to
release pathogens via aerosol or mist is expected to be reduced to a very low
level and odors are expected to be barely detectable near the plant. After
reviewing the reduction in expected impacts from wastewater treatment plants
with the aggressive odor controls and additional treatment technologies that are
planned for MWRF, Staff has is recommending that the setback be reduced to
allow non-residential development in the a portion of the area formerly limited to
development of only non-habitable structures, while otherwise retaining the buffer
as currently written.
The MWRF design will be a two-stage system. A biofilter will provide initial
treatment for foul air from the distribution boxes, headworks and initial aeration
basin stages. This air, plus air off of the aeration basin treatment stage, will then
be treated using a carbon filter.
The City of Fort Collins operates all of its facilities consistent with best practice
operating standards, but cannot guarantee the facilities will have no odors or ,
noise at any time due to the many variables that can occur in normal 24/7
operations. However, given the new system anticipated at MWRF, citizen odor
complaints are expected to be substantially reduced.
Proposed Solution Overview
In order to provide for a reduced setback for habitable structures from domestic
wastewater treatment works with special treatment measures to prevent odors
and aerosols, Staff has proposed that Section 3.4.2 of the Land Use Code
regarding Air Quality be revised.
The proposed language would allow a reduced setback in the case of
wastewater treatment works that:
1. Operate using carbon scrubbers or other comparable odor control
and polishing technology designed and operated to attain a zero
dilution thresholds and covered basins;
2. Cover all odorous or aerosol-producing facilities and processes
through the secondary treatment stage, as follows:
A. Continue to prohibit development of any habitable structures
within 300 feet of the wastewater treatment works (rather
than the entire setback area for the facility);
B. Continue to prohibit development of residential structures
(but allow other types of habitable structures) in the full
setback area; and
C. Require the applicant to record against the title to developed
property within the full setback area an easement
acknowledging the proximity to and potential impacts from
the wastewater treatment works.
2
Code Change
J
3.4.2 Air Quality
'(A) General Standard The project shall conform to all applicable local, state
and federal air quality regulations and standards, including, but not limited
to those regulating odor, dust, fumes or gases which are noxious, toxic or
corrosive, and suspended solid or liquid particles.
(B) Setbacks From Domestic Wastewater Treatment Works to Habitable
Structures.
(1) Unless specifically authorized pursuant to the provisions of
C or D below, the minimum horizontal distances set
paragraph's' ( ) ��_)
forth in subparagraph (2) of this subsection shall be maintained
between the various kinds of wastewater treatment works listed in
said subparagraph and any of the following uses:
(a) any residential use;
(b) any commercial/retail use except frozen food lockers, enclosed
mini-storage facilities and properties used principally as parking
lots or parking garages;
(c) any industrial use except warehouses, properties used for
recreational vehicle, boat or truck storage, composting facilities,
outdoor storage facilities, junkyards, transport terminals,
recycling facilities, and resource extraction;
(d) any institutional/civic/public use except cemeteries, golf
courses, public facilities, parks, recreation and other open lands,
places of worship or assembly; and
(e) any accessory/miscellaneous uses except agricultural activities,
farm animals, satellite dishes (greater than thirty-nine [39]
inches in diameter), wireless telecommunications equipment
and wireless telecommunications facilities.
(2) The following minimum horizontal distances shall apply to the kinds
of wastewater treatment works listed below and the uses specified in
subparagraph (1) above:
(a) Non-aerated lagoons: one thousand three hundred twenty
(1,320) feet ('/4 mile).
(b) Aerated.lagoons containing less than two (2) total surface acres
with no surface aeration: one hundred (100) feet.
3
J
(c) Aerated lagoons containing greater than two (2) total surface
acres and/or with surface aeration: one thousand (1,000) feet, or
with established vegetation barriers, and/or walls, berms or
other topographic features to reduce aerosol drift as approved
pursuant to paragraph (Q) below: five hundred (500) feet.
(d) Small mechanical plants with less than one hundred thousand
(100,000) gp4g 1 ns p capacity and all facilities with
building enclosure: one hundred (100) feet.
(e) Wastewater. treatment plants that are operated using carbon
scrubbers. or other comparable odor control and polishing
technology designed to attain a zero dilution threshold and with
I basins,. and cover all odorous or aerosol-producing
facilities and processes through the secondary treatment stage
five hundred (500)feet.
(efl All other mechanical plants: one thousand (1,000) feet.
(ED) Alternative Compliance. Upon request by an applicant, the decision maker
may approve an alternative setback distance that may be substituted for a
setback distance meeting the standards of this Section.
(1) Procedure. Alternative compliance setback plans shall be prepared
and submitted in accordance with the submittal requirements for plans
as set forth in this Section. The plan shall clearly identify and discuss
the setback modifications proposed and the ways in which the plan
will equally well or better accomplish the purpose of this Section than
would a plan which complies with the standards of this Section.
(2) Review Criteria. To approve an alternative plan, the decision maker
must first find that the proposed alternative plan accomplishes the
purposes of this Section equally well or better than would a plan
which complies with the standards of this Section.
In reviewing the proposed alternative plan, the decision maker shall
consider any mitigating factors that exist to counter the potential for odor
problems and/or aerosol drift, including, without limitation, structural,
chemical or technological mitigation occurring at the subject wastewater
treatment works, established vegetation barriers and/or walls, berms, or
other topographic features sufficient to serve as mitigation for odor
problems and/or aerosol drift. In order to assist the decision maker in
evaluating the proposed mitigation factors the Utilities General Manager
shall submit a written recommendation regarding such mitigation factors,
which recommendation shall include the technical analysis and reasoning
used in support of the Utilities General Manager's recommendation.
4
ATTACHMENT 2
Planning &Zoning Board
May21, 2009
Page 23
3. The Project Development Plan complies with applicable General Development
Standards contained in Article 3 of the Land Use Code,with two (2) exceptI s:
* Section 3.2.2(L) Parking Stall Dimensions.This section requires that o-Way Drive
Aisle Widths for 60 degree angled parking be a minimum of 24 fe . The applicant is
proposing a width of 22 feet.
* Section 3.5.3(B) Relationship of Buildings to Streets, Wal ys and Parking,
Subsections 3.5.3(B)(1) & (2) Orientation to a Connectin alkway and Orientation
to Build-to Lines for Street front Buildings. These se ons require that at least one
(1) main entrance of any commercial or mixed-usifding face and open directly
onto a connecting walkway with pedestrian fro age.Two (2) buildings being
proposed in the sXerer(Building/ d land Building/Shops D)would not
satisfy this requir
The Planning &Zoninpril 1 , 2009' approved modifications of these two
(2) standards.
4. The Project Developies with applicable district standards of Article 4,
Division 4.19 CCN, Cmercial — North College Zoning District of the Land
Use Code.
Schmidt noted the commitmentrking spaces to the north of the roundabout and the
review by city staff of the me ' n design on Willox. Stockover seconded the motion.
/dh
as approved 6:0.
said with reg to the 4 parking spaces, given the statements made by the developer and the
ts made in a motion, when it comes to final plan review the staff will make sure the parking
re rem ed.' gle said he'd like to compliment the developer and the design team for coming up with a
tion architecturally, with urban planning, and with urban hardscape. Many of the other design
we're seeing are exciting. He hopes it's very profitable and meets everyone's expectations,
redevelopment across the street. Chair Schmidt said that she would second that. The gateway
going to be a great feature and she's looking forward to people in the area taking advantage of
the amenities.
Project: 2009 Annual Revisions, Clarifications and Additions to the Land Use Code
,
Project Description: This is a request for a Recommendation to City Council regarding the annual
update to the Land Use Code. There are proposed revisions, clarifications and
additions to the Code that address a variety of subject areas that have arisen
since the last update in 2008.
Recommendation: Approval
Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence
Staff presentation:
Chief Planner Ted Shepard reported that he would be making a very brief presentation (as he'd been
working with the Board over the course of the past several months on the specific recommended
Planning &Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 24
changes). As has been done in the past, Shepard said the Board could vote on the proposed revisions,
clarifications, and additions to the Land Use Code in a package or they could call issues out and
consider them individually. Shepard recommends issue #824(which amends Section 3.4.2—Air
Quality—to reduce the 1,000 foot buffer for wastewater treatment plants to 300 feet but only if there are
covered basins and secondary odor control systems such as carbon scrubbers) be considered
separately.
The Board concurred and Chair Schmidt asked audience members if they wished to pull any issues.
Only issue# 824 was pulled.
Item#824
Shepard said staff recommends a change to LUC Section 3.4.2 based on:
• the Board's comfort at the work session on May W',
input they've received from the Link-n-Greens property owner,
• technical advice they've received from the wastewater treatment plant operator including
■ the upgrades going into the plant
• the secondary odor control
■ The covered basins and scrubbers
Staff is comfortable with increasing the prohibition of any use from 300 to 500 feet and to allow from 500
to 1,000 feet for residential where residential was previously prohibited.
Board Questions:
Member Lingle asked for clarification—he said as it reads now it reduces it from 1,000 feet to 300 feet
but staff would like to change that to read from 1,000 feet to 500 feet—is that correct? Shepard said yes
and between 500 and 1,000 feet where residential was previously prohibited, staff recommend it be
allowed. Lingle noted that's not currently how it's included in the staff report. Shepard said that based
on information on plant technological upgrades information received at the work session on May 15'';
staff will be adding it to the recommended changes.
Member Carpenter asked if we're talking simply about odor control and not taking out the health and
safety controls related to chlorine gas. Chair Schmidt said these buffer regulations apply only to places
that don't have chlorine. Shepard said that's correct-chlorine has its own separate buffer and there
wouldn't be any chlorine at Wastewater Treatment Plant 1.
Public Input:
None
Member Lingle moved to approve the 2009 annual revisions to the Land Use Code as described
in the staff report Member Stockover seconded the motion. The motion was approved 6:0.
Other Business:
None
Meeting adjourne at 10:20 p.m.
Steve Dush, Current Planning Director Brigitte midt, air
DRAFTATTACHMENT3
DRAFT/UNAPPROVED Water Board Minutes of April 23, 2009, Meeting
Excerpt: Odor Buffer
Water Reclamation and Biosolids Manager Steve Comstock presented information on the
odor buffer zones pertaining to the Mulberry Water Reclamation Facility (MWRF). This
is a follow-up to the information shared by Executive Director Brian Janonis with the
Board at the March meeting.
The City was approached by the owner of Lincoln Greens regarding the effects of the
current buffer zone limits on their property and their desire to sell property inside the
buffer zone. Their request raises the issue as to whether the 1000 foot buffer zone should
be moved to a 300 foot buffer zone around the Mulberry facility. The State policy for
buffer zones recommends a zone of 1000 feet, which can be changed with two
conditions: 1) the addition of a biological filter (with carbon) to reduce odor and
minimize pathogens, and 2) residential homes are restricted from the buffer zone. This
applies primarily to new construction.
The goal is to change the land use code and for Planning and Zoning to look at the
current buffer. In the case of the Lincoln Greens request, the new buffer would open
additional acreage. The overall findings from the wastewater point of view are positive,
bearing in mind odors may potentially be detectable.
Assistant City Attorney Carrie Daggett added the structures in the buffer zone will not be
residential; they will be commercial structures. New homes would not be built in this
area.
Questions and comments from the Board:
Should this new policy include the term "habitable"? Has this been looked at by the
State?
The State recommends these guidelines and can look at the plant site only if the plant
were to expand. Utilities are not asking for an expansion of the plant. It is up to the City
to set the limits based on the State guidelines.
Is it possible the landowner and developer could try to change it back?
The City can defend land use code restrictions and the State policy in that event. The
State is not as strict with this as once before, and Utilities has our own rationale for
wanting to move the buffer zone. From a legal point of view, the State has no regulation
to address a request to change the zone back to previous limits, but they do have a policy
for a 250 foot buffer. Utilities are asking for a 300 foot buffer.
Why is there a distinction between residential and commercial?
The building projects in the area are intended to be storage facilities. There would be no
residential homes within the 300 feet buffer of the plant.
What is the difference between the guidelines for 300 feet for commercial buildings and
1000 feet for residential structures?
1
The guideline is based on length of time in the buffer zone and whether it is a short-term
or long- term basis. There are potential health issues, and land use and zoning
considerations.
What is the likelihood Utilities would want more room for a bigger plant in the future?
Land was developed near the wastewater treatment plant at the Drake facility. What is
the Drake buffer at now?
The Drake facility's buffer is 1000 feet. No residential development was allowed up to
the Drake facility buffer. There are no plans to expand either site right now.
Does the City receive complaints currently?
No complaints have been received about the Drake facility. We would not be able to
shrink the buffer at Drake to 250 feet.
What is driving this change, and what is the benefit?
The current owner of the land (Lincoln Greens) would like to develop the land, and we
looked at it as a possible generation of fees and development of commercial property.
Developers appreciate the river corridor, where this land is located. The land was owned
by a farmer before it was sold to the current owner. There is no real benefit to Utilities,
but we have been asked to look at this since we own and operate the facility. There is no
urgency to changing the buffer zone from 1000 feet to 300 feet.
Does the project comply with the 2004 policy change?
It is in compliance with the State policy of 250 feet, and an application amendment has
been filed with the State for this. The State can respond with specific recommendations.
Ms. Daggett added we are suggesting the land use code have a requirement about the
buffer, and the owners receive notice they are within a wastewater plant vicinity.
Is this an issue the Board should even be looking at?
Three choices were identified as available to the Board: 1) Support this change to the
buffer zone; 2) deem this,has no benefit to Utilities and therefore choose not to make a
recommendation; or 3) require a 500 foot buffer for both residential and commercial.
Ms. Daggett would also like to point out this is a procedural item, there is draft code
language for this, and the language can be changed multiple times.
Mr. Comstock requested a motion in support of the proposed changes to the City of Fort
Collins land use code for the purpose of reducing the Mulberry Water Reclamation
Facility odor buffer zone to 300 feet.
The Water Board did not support this motion since it is a land use item, and the Board
feels it is not detrimental to Utilities to change the odor buffer zone. Therefore, the
motion failed.
Taken by: Meagan Peil, Board Secretary
2
ATTACHMENT 4
utilities-Water Board .
City of 700 Wood PO Box 580
F®rt C0[tins FortCollins,2 ax
9T0.221.6702
9gov'Com -tax
522
Icgov.com
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 19, 2009
TO: Mayor Doug Hutchinson and City Council Members
FROM: Gina C. Janett,Water Board Chairperson
CC: Brian Janonis, Utilities Executive Director
RE: Staff Recommendation concerning Odor Buffer at Mulberry Water Reclamation
Facility
A presentation was made to the Water Board by Water Reclamation and Biosolids Manager,
Steve Comstock, at the April 23 meeting about the possibility of changing the odor buffer zone
around the Mulberry Water Reclamation Facility from 1000 feet to 300 feet.
The City was approached by the owner of Lincoln Greens regarding the effects of the current
buffer zone limits on their property and their desire to sell property inside the buffer zone.
The State policy for buffer zones recommends a zone of 1000 feet, which can be changed with
two conditions: 1) the addition of a biological filter(with carbon) to reduce odor and minimize
pathogens, and 2)residential homes are restricted from the buffer zone. This applies primarily to
new construction. Mr. Comstock indicated there is no real benefit to Utilities, but the Water
Board had been asked to look at this since the facility is operated by Utilities. He indicated there
is no urgency to changing the buffer zone from 1000 feet to 300 feet.
The Board asked various questions, including the distinction between buffer zones for residential
versus commercial structures. It was also asked whether the facility will ever need additional
space for expansion and if there might still be noise and odor issues off-site with a smaller 300
foot buffer. Staff indicated there are no expansion plans, but there is also no guarantee there
wouldn't be future noise or odor issues with the smaller buffer.
As a result of the discussion, the Chair identified three possible actions to.consider: 1) support
the proposed reduction in the buffer zone from 1000 feet to 300 feet; 2) deem this has no benefit
to Utilities and therefore choose not to make a recommendation; or 3) require a 500 foot buffer
for both residential and commercial.
Mr. Comstock requested a motion in support of the proposed changes to the City of Fort Collins
land use code for the purpose.of reducing the Mulberry Water Reclamation Facility odor buffer
zone to 300 feet.
No one on the Water Board made a motion to support, change or oppose the proposed change to
the buffer zone and took no action on this item. The Water Board did not support the proposed
change since the Board feels it is a land use issue and the change does not benefit the facility.
I
I ���•.iP� 1 I I .w.�p , r f� . r ---FF�»'��A `I=f I
N
Y T -
y
• � `�.`,`' � ill. —w �f sis
i r 1 k I
Y. • iJ r � A'
2 j
_.k • 2 't
ATTACHMENT 6
CD
LO
t
X� .rL" I Is IL O
YI O
Ir
r0
0
f
- 5r-
0
`.-
.* m
LIM
ATTACHMENT
JKJLIMF
r�Y .. ,� }new � 1�• a '.1 M, c/.
T
t0
7
Y
LL
_ ' • T- MO
:v
ca
06
~--
1 � E X
r � ,
E
7
6.:, 74,
ATTACHMENT 8
ZZ�
�V
U�YYYYYY......,
m
N
1 IL O
1 ; O
m
O
O
1 O
3/�V AV W 31 S
_
� o
I
I� A
■
Q
w O
EL
uW '_ ' tU
cu
,I O
LL-
r1wo
L 55 ■ �
s E■ pp
9e q N • 9$
gg§g el t
0"E
�gaP M:
Rt a.
CR Rya g `y- ;g
,.� w 5Yp 95� tlbLHd w•
_ a!y i•�Y�ls �w'�a� b�
/ - p'L �beyn abbaY6 �r
j r � � ggqe �NM RN M8
PHI
I WWa a
J
ATTACHMENT 9
i
d
d
m
I
i o
0
3AH AV VY31 S _
i
,1
i
J �
J
vJ
W L
SH
SH
S '
a
lug�•' _ F 9Y� S'� CCYr�L 3.y
�i •i /�.F �_ i1 � T � � £a% g^ des ma e3
�•.:• - �i2�� �aa z3 dY9
i F`
Wastewater Treatment Plant
Odor Buffer
��rt.11
i
ATTACHMENT 10
Land Use Code 2009 Update
• Would amend the Odor Buffer around
W.W.T.P.
• Existing — 1 ,000 feet
• Proposed — 500 feet
• P & Z - Recommended Approval
• Water Board — No Action
z
Odor Buffer Impacts
• Existing Buildings
— Odor Buffer does not impact existing buildings-
- Building Additions are allowed without regard to odor
buffer.
• New Buildings
— Odor Buffer will impact future buildings
— Changes of use requiring new C.O. subject to odor
buffer
• Reduced odor buffer removes East Side Neighborhood
� aty of
�r
3
CURRENT BUFFER
PROPOSED BUFFER
i4
s
POUDRE RIVER NATURAL HABITAT
BUFFER
® -
6
5
.�, Floatlway am Floa plain
•
' M
�V 1
,yID, =_—� Buller Summary a - m ;
•
4
Advantages to Reducing
Odor Buffer
• Reducing Odor Buffer acknowledges plant
upgrade
• Removes East Side Neighborhood out of
non-conforming status
• 500 feet odor buffer exceeds 300 feet natural
habitats and features buffer
Gtyof
9
NORTHERLY VIEW
�,,:,,Jallilw
F�rtr ns
10
EASTERLY VIEW
MA
4 f i
Fort
r,
WESTERLY VIEW
AMU"
rt Collins
12
SOUTHERLY VIEW
13
ORDINANCE NO , 081 , 2009
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING THE LAND USE CODE TO REDUCE THE BUFFER
AROUND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS
WHEREAS , the Land Use Code presently establishes a 1 ,000 foot buffer around
wastewater treatment facilities to protect against aerosol pollutants in neighborhoods containing
residential properties ; and
WHEREAS , staff has determined that wastewater plants may, in some instances, be
significantly upgraded with aggressive odor controls and additional treatment technologies,
allowing for the reduction of the protective buffer from 1 ,000 feet to 500 feet; and
WHEREAS , such reduced buffer would still exceed the regulations and policies of the
Colorado Water Quality Division; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City that
the buffer around wastewater plants with a zero-dilution threshold and covered secondary
treatment be reduced from 1 ,000 feet to 500 feet.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS that Section 3 .4 .2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows :
3 .4.2 Air Quality
(A) General Standard. The project shall conform to all applicable local, state and
federal air quality regulations and standards, including, but not limited to those
regulating odor, dust, fumes or gases which are noxious, toxic or corrosive, and
suspended solid or liquid particles.
(B) Setbacks From Domestic Wastewater Treatment Works to Habitable Structures.
( 1 ) Unless specifically authorized pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (C)
below, the minimum horizontal distances set forth in subparagraph (2) of this
subsection shall be maintained between the various kinds of wastewater
treatment works listed in said subparagraph and any of the following uses :
(a) any residential use ;
(b) any commercial/retail use except frozen food lockers, enclosed mini-
storage facilities and properties used principally as parking lots or
parking garages;
(c) any industrial use except warehouses, properties used for recreational
vehicle, boat or truck storage, composting facilities, outdoor storage
facilities, junkyards, transport terminals, recycling facilities, and
resource extraction;
(d) any institutional/civic/public use except cemeteries, golf courses, public
facilities, parks, recreation and other open lands, places of worship or
assembly; and
(e) any accessory/miscellaneous uses except agricultural activities, farm
animals, satellite dishes (greater than thirty-nine [39] inches in
diameter), wireless telecommunications equipment and wireless
telecommunications facilities .
(2) The following minimum horizontal distances shall apply to the kinds of
wastewater treatment works listed below and the uses specified in
subparagraph ( 1 ) above :
(a) Non-aerated lagoons : one thousand three hundred twenty ( 1 ,320) feet
(1/4 mile).
(b) Aerated lagoons containing less than two (2) total surface acres with no
surface aeration: one hundred ( 100) feet.
(c) Aerated lagoons containing greater than two (2) total surface acres
and/or with surface aeration: one thousand ( 1 ,000) feet, or with
established vegetation barriers, and/or walls, berms or other
topographic features to reduce aerosol drift as approved pursuant to
paragraph (C) below: five hundred (500) feet.
(d) Small mechanical plants with less than one hundred thousand ( 100,000)
gpdgallons per day capacity and all facilities with building enclosure :
one hundred ( 100) feet.
(e) Wastewater treatment plants with covered basins, which plants are
operated using carbon scrubbers or other comparable odor control and
polishing technology designed to attain a zero dilution threshold, and
which cover all odorous or aerosol-producing facilities and processes
through the secondary treatment stage : five hundred (500) feet.
(e) All other mechanical plants : one thousand ( 1 ,000) feet.
(C) Alternative Compliance. Upon request by an applicant, the decision maker may
approve an alternative setback distance that may be substituted for a setback
distance meeting the standards of this Section.
( 1 ) Procedure. Alternative compliance setback plans shall be prepared and
submitted in accordance with the submittal requirements for plans as set forth
in this Section. The plan shall clearly identify and discuss the setback
modifications proposed and the ways in which the plan will equally well or
better accomplish the purpose of this Section than would a plan which
complies with the standards of this Section.
2
(2) Review Criteria. To approve an alternative plan, the decision maker must
first find that the proposed alternative plan accomplishes the purposes of this
Section equally well or better than would a plan which complies with the
standards of this Section.
In reviewing the proposed alternative plan, the decision maker shall consider any
mitigating factors that exist to counter the potential for odor problems and/or
aerosol drift, including, without limitation, structural, chemical or technological
mitigation occurring at the subject wastewater treatment works, established
vegetation barriers and/or walls, berms, or other topographic features sufficient to
serve as mitigation for odor problems and/or aerosol drift. In order to assist the
decision maker in evaluating the proposed mitigation factors the Utilities General
Manager shall submit a written recommendation regarding such mitigation factors,
which recommendation shall include the technical analysis and reasoning used in
support of the Utilities General Manager's recommendation.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 7th day of
July, A.D . 2009, and to be presented for final passage on the 21 st day of July, A.D . 2009 ,
Mayor
ATTEST :
Deputy City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 21 st day of July, A . D . 2009 .
Mayor
ATTEST :
City Clerk
3