Stormwater Manual
Back to
Engineering
Back to
Special Planning Regulations
CITY
OF GEORGETOWN
ORDINANCE NO. 2002-______
AN ORDINANCE RELATED TO THE
AMENDMENT
OF THE GEORGETOWN/SCOTT COUNTY SUBDIVISION & DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
REGARDING ARTICLE XI – STORM WATER MANAGEMENT
The Storm Water Manual is only one part of the overall storm water plan. The manual, once adopted, will become an integral part of the City of Georgetown’s Phase II permit. The City has contracted with an outside firm for mapping and location of all drainage features within the urbanized area. This work and the required permit must be filed with the Kentucky Division of Water by March 2003.
All new developments, including those that require substantial renovations or expansions, within the urbanized area will be required to adhere to the new manual. Every time that a piece of land is developed, certain and expected changes occur. Changes potentially in the amount of groundwater recharge and even surface run-off can be impacted. The new regulations hope to reduce and offset those issues. Anytime silt and construction debris are allowed to leave a construction site, the effectiveness of constructed drainage systems, including catch basins, drain pipes, swales and easements, is reduced.
The intent of this proposed ordinance is to provide an appropriate means to maintain the integrity and durability of existing and proposed storm water systems within our neighborhoods and the City of Georgetown;
WHEREAS: This proposed amendment to the Georgetown-Scott County Subdivision & Development Regulations has been submitted to the citizens through a properly advertised public hearing before the Georgetown-Scott County Planning and Zoning Commission conducted at their August 8, 2002, and September 12, 2002, public meeting. The Commission voted unanimously to recommend the adoption of this amendment to the City Council of Georgetown;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, KENTUCKY, as follows:
SECTION ONE: NEW PROVISIONS.
[New language is underlined. Language which is unchanged is not
marked. Superseded language is shown as stricken.]
a. unchanged
b.
design hydrographs of inflow and outflow fo the 25-year, 24-hour or 10-year one hour events for the site under existing and developed conditions;c.
demonstration that the floor of the basin will be constructed and compacted to provide at least a 2% minimum slope to the outlet pipe to ensure that detained waters fully drain and do not create a health and safety hazard or visual nuisance.d.
Demonstration that overflow for a storm in excess of the design capacity will be provided and designed to function without specific attention as part of the excess stormwater passage.b. provide anti-seep collars details for storm water impoundment facilities that have dewatering times greater than 48 hours, or permanent pools.
c. dewatering features, such as valve structures and/or underlying drain systems, are to be included for facilities other than standard detention designs, for example, permanent pools, constructed wetlands, infiltration basins, bioretention areas, etc.
d. water budget analyses are to be done for all storm water facilities with permanent pools.
e. outlet pipes for all storm water impoundments are to be reinforced concrete pipes.
f. construction plans are to include all compaction requirements and tolerances for all proposed water impoundments, dams, and channel/stream crossings.
g. provide a means of access to all proposed storm water facilities.8. storm water impoundment facilities are to serve as temporary sediment basins until the contributing drainage area exceeds 90 percent build out. At that time, they shall be converted over to the approved post developed storm water facility.
C. Storm water manual (note all of the following language is new and to be added)
1. Requirements: Developments that occur within Scott County are required to provide the Planning Commission a Storm Water Management Plan that addresses all the elements of the hydrologic cycle. These elements include, and are not limited to, the following:
a) Groundwater recharge
b) Water quality protection
c) Channel protection
d) Water quantity control
The plan is to include construction drawings showing all details on how to construct the proposed improvements and a drainage report providing all necessary calculations to comply with each element. All storm water management plans are to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission Engineer. The Georgetown City Engineer must also approve plans for developments that are within the Georgetown City Limits.
Construction Plans: All Storm Water Management Plans shall provide details related to all aspects of the construction. Developments are to be designed to ensure that controls are in place that would prevent or minimize water quality impacts. Designers are to develop and implement strategies, which include a combination of structural and/or non-structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) appropriate for the community. The plans must also ensure adequate long-term operation and maintenance of BMPs through notes or labels on construction drawings, Final Subdivision Plats, and Final Development Plans.
Drainage Reports: Studies are required to provide calculations supporting the use of the BMPs specified in the plans. These studies are to be submitted in conjunction with the Construction Plans for proposed developments. The following is a list of minimum criteria to be included in all drainage reports:
- Summary tables outlining all hydrologic quantities needed to support the storm water management plans.
- Soil survey maps showing the existing soil conditions for a proposed development.
- Ponding elevations for each of the proposed storm water structures, storm water facilities, and closed contour areas.
- Flow depths for all open channel conditions that are a part of the proposed plans.
- Identification of all the swales, diversion ditches, roadway ditches, 100 year drainage ways, and floodplains.
- Evaluation of storm water systems that receive runoff from proposed developments; systems being defined as any type of structure or open channel that conveys runoff.
- Pre and postdeveloped watershed maps showing all parameters used by designers to produce their storm water plans.
- Maps that show all subcatchments draining to each proposed structure.
- Label the analysis points where the study terminates. All points of analysis are to be set to evaluate the potential of compounding peak flow conditions downstream of developments. Analysis points are to be approved by the Planning Commission Engineer.
Additional Requirements: All developments must also incorporate the following criteria into their designs:
- Finish floor elevations for proposed single family and multifamily residential units are to be at least two feet above the 100-year water surface elevations of all waterways, overflow conditions, overland flow areas, and ponding areas.
- Commercial facilities are to be evaluated for protection from 100 year flooding conditions.
- Designs are not to include any fill to be placed in 100 year drainage ways and floodplains, unless proposed construction complies with Article XII, Section 1200 of the Subdivision and Development Regulations, and any and all permits from the Federal, State, and Local agencies are obtained prior to construction.
- Other than what is described in item #3, any and all permits required by Federal, State, and Local agencies for developments must be obtained prior to the commencement of that process regulated by the permits.
A. Groundwater Recharge: Base flows of local streams and waterways are fed by groundwater sources. Developments can cause changes in the amount of water that would be used to support base flows. As the impervious area of a site increases, so does the volume of runoff. To maintain adequate base flows and stream ecosystems, developments must incorporate practices in their storm water management plan to provide for treated groundwater recharge. The amount of recharge that a site is capable of providing depends on topographic factors such as slope, types of vegetation, hydrological soil groups, and locations of rock layers. The average annual recharge volume for a site can be estimated by taking the average annual recharge rate of the hydrological soil group(s), dividing that by the average annual rainfall (44.05 inches), and then multiplying that result by 90 percent. The following table provides a summary of the recharge requirements:
|
Hydrologic Soil |
Average Annual Recharge
Volume |
Soil Specific |
|
A |
18 |
0.37 |
|
B |
12 |
0.25 |
|
C |
6 |
0.12 |
|
D |
3 |
0.06 |
Scott County Soils
|
Soil Series |
NRCS HSG |
Depth to Bedrock |
Seasonal High Water Table |
Permeability in/hr |
Suitability as Road Fill |
|
Ashton |
B |
>4 |
>5 |
0.6-2.0 |
Fair |
|
Cynthiana |
D |
1-1.5 |
>5 |
0.6-2.0 |
Poor |
|
Dunning(1) |
D |
>3.5 |
0-0.5 |
0.6-2.0 |
Poor |
|
Eden |
C |
1.5-3.5 |
>5 |
0.2-0.6 |
Poor |
|
Faywood |
C |
1.5-3.5 |
>3.5 |
0.6-2.0 |
Poor |
|
Huntington(1) |
B |
>4 |
>3 |
0.6-2.0 |
Fair |
|
Lowell |
C |
>3.5 |
>5 |
0.6-2.0 |
Poor |
|
Maury |
B |
>5 |
>5 |
0.6-6.0 |
Fair, Poor |
|
McAfee |
C |
1.5-3.5 |
>3.5 |
0.6-2.0 |
Poor |
|
Newark(1) |
C,D |
>4 |
0.5-1.5 |
0.6-2.0 |
Fair, Poor |
|
Nicholson |
C |
>5 |
1.5-2.5 |
0.6-2.0 |
Poor |
|
Nolin(1) |
B |
4 |
3 |
0.6-2.0 |
Fair |
|
Disturbed Soil |
D
|
-
|
- |
- |
- |
Note: S(in) = (S)(P).
(1): Subject to common flooding.
References:
2000 Maryland Stormwater Design Manual Volumes I & II.
Soil Survey of Scott County, Kentucky.
Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, TR-55.
LFUCG Stormwater Manual, 1999.
The soil specific recharge is determined by calculating a volume to be treated and infiltrated by a structural practice or by a percent area method involving a non-structural practice. The following formula is to be used for a structural practice:
![]()
GRV = Groundwater recharge volume,
acre-ft.
Sin = Soil specific recharge, in.
I = Percent impervious, %.
A = Total area of site, acre.
Examples of structural practices that can be used for groundwater recharge are bioretention areas, infiltration facilities, terraformed berms, and infiltration swales.
Since Scott County is in a karst region, designers that intend to use structural practices for groundwater recharge must evaluate potential areas to ensure that these proposed facilities would be adequate and not have an adverse impact on surrounding areas, such as increasing the water table. Designers are to ensure that the groundwater recharge volume is to exit proposed facilities through natural infiltration or a designed outlet, and that the volume is treated by BMPs prior to infiltration. Dewatering times for structural practices should not exceed 48 hours. Groundwater recharge requirements may be waived for redevelopments only if approved by the Planning Commission Engineer.
B. Water Quality Protection: The water chemistry of runoff is extremely important to the health of creeks and streams. When enough rainfall occurs, runoff from land areas is transported from these sites to drainage ways. These drainage ways eventually reach the creek systems of Scott County. Depending on the types of sites, pollutants are transported by the force of the runoff or by its physical factors such as temperature and pH level. Water quality BMPs are to be used to the maximum extent practical to minimize these impacts and to treat runoff from all proposed impervious surfaces.
For adequate treatment, 90 percent of the average annual rainfall must be treated by stormwater BMPs. Rainfall records from GMWSS water treatment plant shows that approximately 90 percent of total storm events occurred with 1 inch of rainfall or less.

The following equation is used to determine the water quality volume needed to be treated for a development:
![]()
WQV = Water quality volume, acre-ft.
P = 90 percent of total storm events, 1 inch.
I = Percent impervious, %.
A = Total area of site, acre.
The following table(1) lists the amounts of impervious areas that can expected from different types of development, and the water quality depth in inches per given area:
|
Land Use/Cover Type |
Average Impervious Cover % |
Water Quality Depth Inches |
| Paved parking lots(2) |
100 |
0.95 |
| Roofs |
100 |
0.95 |
| Driveways |
100 |
0.95 |
| Streets and roads(2) |
100 |
0.95 |
| Commercial and business districts |
85 |
0.82 |
| Industrial |
72 |
0.70 |
| Town houses |
65 |
0.64 |
| Residential ⅛ acre lots or less |
65 |
0.64 |
| Residential ¼ acre lots |
38 |
0.39 |
| Residential ⅓ acre lots |
30 |
0.32 |
| Residential ½ acre lots |
25 |
0.28 |
| Residential 1 acre lots |
20 |
0.23 |
| Residential 2 acre lots |
12 |
0.23 |
(1): Based on NRCS TR-55 modeling criteria.
(2): Excluding right-of-way.
Note: Water quality volume must be accounted for by storm water credits and/or
BMPs.
Targeted Pollutants: Designers are to use structural and non-structural BMPs to the maximum extent practical to treat the water quality volume. Individual treatments, or a combination of BMPs, can be used to achieve this goal.
Different land uses can generate different types of runoff pollutants. For instance, a proposed refueling station would produce a higher concentration of hydrocarbons per acre than a proposed residential subdivision. Selection of BMPs should be based on the anticipated pollutants for a site. Some examples of typical pollutants for different applications are:
1. Residential
Additional Storm Water Controls for Specific Commercial Areas: Specific design criteria for the following types of development are to be used:
1. Restaurants/grocery stores3. Repair shops/oil change facilities/car lots
4. Automotive and truck wash facilities
Treated groundwater recharge volumes can count towards the required water quality volumes; however, neither the groundwater recharge or water quality volumes are to be included in the channel protection and the water quantity control portion of the regulations.
C. Channel Protection: Developments that require impervious areas and compacted fills reduce the amount of rainfall that previously infiltrated into the underlying soils. The rainfall is then converted into runoff, which eventually drains into the Scott County creek systems. Frequent rainfall events help to shape stream geometries. Uncontrolled events after development can cause degradation to channel areas. To protect channels from this degradation, developments are to provide extended detention for the 1 year/ 24 hour event, and allow the runoff produced to dewater over a 12 hour period. Storm water facilities designed for this condition will release flow at a rate not to exceed erosive flow rates in downstream channels. Channel protection may be waived but not limited to proposed sites that have less than 2 cfs for the post developed state.
Designers are encouraged to protect channel and stream areas by not designing developments that require fill in headwater stream channels, to within 50 feet of the bankfull conditions (1.5 to 2 year return periods) of minor waterways, and floodplains. Developments that utilize this option may qualify for density credits or other considerations similar to a Planned Urban Development (PUD).
Channel and stream areas that are disturbed due to grading and/or other construction activities must be stabilized and comply with Article XII, Section 1200 of the Subdivision and Development Regulations.
References: 2000 Maryland Stormwater Design Manual Volumes I & II. Center for Watershed Protection.
D. Water Quantity Control: Typically with development, the volume of runoff increases due to the addition of impervious areas, the compaction of soil materials, and removal of vegetative cover. Some rainfall that once percolated into the ground would now travel over the surface. Developments must provide stormwater features that reduce the peak flow rates after development to what the runoff rates were prior to construction. In addition to the 1 year channel protection requirement, storm events that need to be adhered to are the 10, 25, and 100 year/ 24 hour events. Rainfall intensities for those events are to be taken from Division of Water Engineering Memorandum No. 2, current edition or most recent version. In the past, there have been storms that exceeded these design storm events. Designers are encouraged to analyze proposed developments with such rainfall intensities, if they feel that it is necessary for safe guarding any proposed infrastructure.
Storm Sewer Design: Proposed storm sewers systems that have the potential of being maintained by any municipality or government utility in Scott County must adhere to the following guidelines:
Culverts and Bridges: Proposed channel and stream crossings are to include a means to convey the 100-year flow. Culverts are typically used in situations where drainage ways do not have any base flows associated with them. Head conditions occur on the upstream side to force the peak flow through the structure(s). Proposed culverts are to be designed so that the 100-year water surface elevation is one foot below the overtopping elevation of the embankment. Bridge structures are to be used at creek and stream crossings where base flow conditions do exist (base flow being defined as water being present in channel and stream areas during dry weather conditions). These structures are to be designed to convey the 100-year flow rate unimpeded, and allow the 100-year water surface elevation to be one foot below the bottom of the slab. All proposed bridges are to be certified by the designer after construction. Prior to construction all permits are to be obtained from Corps of Engineers and/or Division of Water, if applicable.
Other design considerations that apply to culverts and bridges are listed in the following:
There are areas within Scott County, particularly in the north, where existing roadways are already in place and lying in the floodplain. In situations where roads must be improved due to development, any portion of the roadway that is flooded by the 100 year event or less must be reconstructed to provide a concrete cap with a footer design on the upstream side, to reduce the potential of a roadway being washed out.
Open Channel Design: Developments that use open channels to convey runoff must adhere to the following guidelines:
E. Storm Water Credits: Storm water credits are water quality reductions permitted through specific site design criteria. These credits are established to help reduce the impacts on Scott County’s stream systems. The credits are calculated based on the procedures outlined and subtracted from the water quality requirements for a development. The following is a list of the stormwater credits that are permitted for this community:
Note: Storm water credits are set to encourage "greener" site designs; however, they are not intended to be a substitution for the water quality protection of the regulations. All drainage from proposed impervious areas must be treated by a storm water BMP.
1. Filter Strips: Filter strips are undisturbed grass areas that receive runoff from a development in the form of sheet flow. It is important to note that the filter area must remain undisturbed during construction to allow natural percolation to occur.
Credit definition:
Credit criteria:
2. Vegetated Channels: Vegetated channels can be used for water quality treatment. These types of channels apply to roadway ditches, drainage ways in the rear of lots, conveyance systems for parking lot drainage, etc.
Credit definition:
Credit criteria:
Sizing calculations: In order to satisfy Credit criteria #3, the curve number representing an area that is intended to be treated by a vegetated channel must be modified in order to get an accurate peak flow rate for the 1 inch storm.
WQin = Water quality depth, in.
P = 90 percent of total storm events, 1 inch.
I = Percent impervious, %.
CN = Curve number for water quality storm event.
References: Design of Stormwater Filtering Systems, 1996. Center for Watershed Protection.
3. Riparian Buffers: This credit applies to developments that incorporate riparian buffer practices as a part of its design. The criteria are similar to filter strips except that it is a higher credit for water quality quantity.
Credit definition:
Credit criteria:
Sizing calculations:
Q = Flow rate, cfs.
n = Manning’s roughness (0.24 for grass buffers, 0.35 for forested buffers).
A = Cross sectional area, sf.
R = Hydraulic radius, ft.
S = Channel slope, ft/ft.
T = Parallel length of buffer to bank.
y = Depth of flow (0.5 to 1.0), in.
V = Flow velocity, fps.
W = Riparian buffer width, ft.
t = Resident time (9), min.
Planting list:
Herbaceous Ground Cover
|
Common Name |
Scientific Name |
Recommended Shade/Sun |
| River Oats | Chasmanthium latifolia |
Shade |
| Indian Grass | Sorgastum nutans |
Sun |
| Switch Grass | Panicum virgatum |
Sun |
| Redtop | Agrostis alba |
Sun |
| Deertongue | Panicum clandestinum |
Shade |
| Broomsedge | Andropogon virginicus |
Sun |
| Big Blue Stem | Andropogon gerardii |
Sun |
| Frank’s Sedge | Carex |
Sun |
| Gray’s Sedge | Carex grayii |
Shade |
| Soft Rush | Juncus effusus |
Sun |
| Flat Sedge | Cyperus strigosus |
Sun |
| Lady Fern | Athyrium felix-femina |
Shade |
| Sensitive Fern | Onoclea sensibilis |
Shade |
| Cinnamon Fern | Osmunda cinnamomea |
Shade |
| Common Boneset | Eupatorium perfoliatum |
Sun |
| Golden Ragwort | Senecio aureus |
Shade |
| Wrinkled Goldenrod | Solidago rugosa |
Sun |
| Tall Goldenrod | Solidago gigantea |
Sun |
| Beard Tongue | Penstemon hirsutus |
Shade |
| Monkey Flower | Mimulus ringens |
Shade |
| Cardinal Flower | Lobelia cardinalis |
Shade |
| Great Blue Lobelia | Lobelia silphilitica |
Shade |
Vines and Shrubs
|
Common Name |
Scientific Name |
Shade/Sun |
| Cross Vine | Bigononia carpreolata |
Shade |
| Trumpet Creeper | Campsis radicans |
Sun |
| Climbing Hydrangea | Decumaria barbara |
Shade |
| Giant Cane | Arundinaria gigantea |
Sun |
| Buttonbush | Cephalanthus occidentalis |
Sun |
| Meadowsweet | Spirea alba |
Sun |
| Sweetspire | Itea virginica |
Shade |
| Spicebush | Lindera benzoin |
Shade |
| Paw-paw | Asimina triloba |
Shade |
| Arrowwood | Viburnum dentatum |
Shade |
| Nannyberry | Viburnum lentago |
Sun |
| Swamp Haw | Viburnum nudum |
Shade |
| Ninebark | Physocarpus opolifolius |
Sun |
| Hazelnut | Corylus americana |
Sun |
| Possum Haw | Ilex decidua |
Sun |
| Winterberry | Ilex verticillata |
Shade |
| Chokeberry | Aronia arbutifolia |
Sun |
| Elderberry | Sambucus candensis |
Sun |
| Juneberry | Amelanchier arborea |
Shade |
| Mountain Camelia | Stewartia ovata |
Shade |
| Sweetbells | Leucothe racemosa |
Shade |
| Smooth Azalea | Rhododendron arborescens |
Shade |
| Silky Dogwood | Cornus amomum |
Sun |
| Redosier Dogwood | Cornus stolonifera |
Shade |
| Rough-leaf Dogwood | Cornus drummondii |
Shade |
| Pagoda Dogwood | Cornus alternifolia |
Shade |
| Smooth Alder | Alnus serrulata |
Sun |
| Sandbar Willow | Salix interior |
Sun |
| Silky Willow | Salix sericea |
Sun |
| Dwarf Willow | Salix humilis var. macrophylla |
Sun |
| Pussy Willow | Salix discolor |
Sun |
| Streamco Willow | Salix purpurea |
Sun |
| Bankers Willow | Salix x cotteti |
Sun |
| Heart-leaf Willow | Salix rigida |
Sun |
Trees
|
Common Name |
Scientific Name |
Height Ft |
Spread Ft |
| Black Willow | Salix nigra |
60-100 |
50-85 |
| Boxelder | Acer negundo |
30-60 |
25-50 |
| Red Maple | Acer rubrum |
50-100 |
20-40 |
| Silver Maple | Acer saccharinum |
50-80 |
35-50 |
| Green Ash | Fraxinus pennsylvanica |
50-60 |
30-40 |
| White Ash | Fraxinus americana |
80 |
65 |
| Red Elm | Ulmus rubra |
70 |
55 |
| Silverbell | Halesia carolina |
30-40 |
20-35 |
| Persimmon | Diospryros virginiana |
20-70 |
10-40 |
| River Birch | Betula nigra |
40-70 |
30-60 |
| Black Gum | Nyssa sylvatica |
30-90 |
20-30 |
| Hackberry | Celtis occidentalis |
40-70 |
40-50 |
| Cottonwood | Populus deltoides |
75-100 |
50-75 |
| Sweet Gum | Liquidambar styraciflua |
50-75 |
40-50 |
| Tulip Polar | Liriodendron tulipifera |
60-90 |
30-50 |
| Sycamore | Plantanus occidentalis |
75-100 |
50-75 |
| American Beech | Fagus grandiflora |
50-90 |
40-75 |
| Ironwood | Carpinus caroliniana |
30 |
30 |
| Yellow Buckeye | Aesculus octandra |
70-90 |
40-55 |
| Shellbark Hickory | Carya lacinosa |
70-100 |
50-75 |
| Shaqbark Hickory | Carya ovata |
70-100 |
45-65 |
| Pecan | Carya illinoensis |
100 |
70 |
| Black Walnut | Juglans nigra |
70-90 |
45-60 |
| Bur Oak | Quercus macrocarpa |
70-100 |
75-90 |
| Pin Oak | Quercus palustris |
50-90 |
25-45 |
| Swamp Oak | Quercus bicolor |
60-70 |
30-35 |
| Swamp Chestnut Oak | Quercus michauxii |
60-80 |
40-55 |
References: Riparian Buffers Strategies for
Urban Watersheds, 1995.
LFUCG Stormwater Manual, 1999.
4. Terraformed Areas: Terraformed areas are places within a development that have been graded to promote stormwater infiltration, such as terracing and berming. Runoff is retained within a bermed area and allowed to percolate into the soil. Bermed swales, storage areas, and side-saddle impoundment areas are examples of this stormwater practice.
Credit definition:
Credit criteria:
5. Rooftop Disconnections: Downspouts from homes for single family detached developments including duplexes that do not tie into a storm sewer, or drain directly to impervious areas, will have a credit towards the water quality calculations.
Credit definition:
Credit criteria:
6. Modular/Porous Pavements: Modular/porous pavement designs can be used for developments to promote infiltration of runoff. The performance of these pavements will depend on the application for which they are used, the construction parameters, and the manufacture’s specifications. These designs are permitted in commercial and industrial areas, only upon the review and approval by the Planning Commission.
Credit definition:
Credit criteria:
SECTION TWO: EFFECTIVE DATE: This Ordinance shall take effect upon passage and publication.
The foregoing Ordinance was introduced and read for the first time at the Council’s regular meeting September 19, 2002, and for the second time, adopted and approved, at the Council’s regular meeting October 3, 2002.
APPROVED BY:
_______________________________
EVERETTE VARNEY, MAYOR
ATTESTED BY:
________________________________
GLENWOOD C. WILLIAMS, CLERK