Councilors put off decision on stormwater fee
proposals
Two proposals that would effectively institute a townwide stormwater impact
fee for developers of larger projects have been tabled for two months so
that the Town Council can gather more information.
The council on Sept. 10 voted to table to their November meeting a proposal
that would enable to the town to collect a stormwater-impact fee from developers
building in the Trout Brook Watershed, at the northwest border of Cape Elizabeth;
and, a related proposal to extend that same fee to developments throughout
the town.
The first proposal establishes a "Community Fee Utilization Plan", which
provides a mechanism for the town to collect a fee to help remediate impacts
on stormwater runoff created by development in the watershed.
Earlier this year the state's Department of Environmental Protection classified
Trout Brook as an urban-impaired watershed, so that developers of large projects
would need to remediate existing stormwater impacts in some way. Developers
could either find a stormwater-impaired area within the watershed and make
it better; or, pay a fee to the town to be used for approved stormwater
remediation projects.
Projects the fee might fund, as proposed in the plan, include:
-
Collection of actual stormwater pollution data in the Cape Elizabeth portion
of the Trout Brook Watershed;
-
Restoration of buffers between the stream and developed properties;
-
Stormwater outfall erosion control;
-
Restoring the natural curves, or "sinuosity", of the stream;
-
Purchase of an upgraded street sweeper; and,
-
Treatment of road stormwater runoff.
The Community Fee Utilization Plan also needs approval from the DEP, but
comments made by state officials prompted several councilors to hold off
making a decision on Trout Brook Community Fee Utilization Plan.
"I was very concerned about voting on something the DEP said we might want
to vote on 'in concept', said Town Councilor Mary Ann Lynch, referring to
an email from Division of Watershed Management Director Donald Witherill.
The email included comments from several DEP officials indicating that the
possible remediation projects proposed by the town were good, but needed
more work before approval. "I am confident that we can approve a CFUP using
just a few of the ideas with a bit more work on them, Witherill said in his
email.
Lynch and Councilor Sara Lennon said they believed it would be premature
to approve the plan before approving the new Comprehensive Plan that also
went to the council for public hearing Sept. 10.
The comprehensive plan, which serves as a long-term guide for development
in town, targets certain areas of Cape Elizabeth where the town believes
growth should occur. The areas were chosen because they are near existing
infrastructure such as roads and sewers, and are away from various natural
impediments to development such as ponds and wetland.
Part of Cape Elizabeth's targeted growth area is in the Trout Brook Watershed.
While stormwater remediation in the watershed-- either by individual projects
chosen by developers or by payment of a fee -- has been established by the
state, it at the same time creates a disincentive for developers to build
in part of Cape's targeted growth areas, said Town Planner Maureen O'Meara.
For this reason, the town has also proposed a stormwater fee for all larger
developments throughout Cape Elizabeth.
The fees would be based on state criteria and affect projects creating 3
acres of impervious surface such as roads, parking lots or roofs; or 20 acres
of development. A typical development with three acres of roads and parking,
one acre of roofing and two acres of lawn would garner a $19,000 fee.
The same criteria, under the separate town proposal, would apply to development
throughout Cape Elizabeth, not just the Trout Brook Watershed.
The townwide fee proposal would restore equilibrium to town land-use policies,
O'Meara said, but not all councilors agreed.
"I guess I'm not convinced that we have to have a fee to encourage development,"
said Councilor Cynthia Dill. She echoed the feeling of some other councilors
who wanted to be sure the revised comprehensive plan continues to target
parts of the Trout Brook Watershed for growth. "It seems to me we should
be discouraging development in a watershed that is vulnerable," said Dill.
Lynch said she had additional reasons for more study. "It also smells way
too much to me like an impact fee," said Lynch. She was concerned about the
increasing cost of housing in town that prevents even high-median income
families from living in Cape Elizabeth.
"Most of the growth area is outside of the watershed," Lynch said. "I don't
see this really distorting where we want to direct growth."
Joel Fitzpatrick, a Cape Elizabeth developer who soon plans to submit a
condominium project along Eastman Road in the watershed, said he plans to
move ahead with the development whether the town adopts a fee or not. "As
for the timing goes, I'd rather see it going into a fee where it's good for
the town," he said.
If Cape Elizabeth does not adopt a fee utilization plan for Trout Brook,
Fitzpatrick would need to find a remediation project elsewhere in the watershed,
most likely in South Portland where the land is more developed. But he added
that fixing a stormwater problem in South Portland, "doesn't seem to be the
right way to go."
Town Manager Michael McGovern said he hopes the council doesn't table the
storm-water fee proposals for too long, and that decisions could be made
with the adoption of the revised comprehensive plan.
"Stormwater is going to be a major issue in the next 10 years," McGovern
said, foreseeing a time when even individual homeowners may have to make
some kind of remediation for stormwater impacts. "It's going to be done in
an environment where there's very little funding sources for it," McGovern
said. The Town's proposal puts the cost of compliance with stormwater regulations
on the developers, he said.
Previous story:
