1 / 19

Erosion and Sedimentation Control

Erosion and Sedimentation Control. Local Environmental Law April 20,2004 Michelle McCarthy Kelly Coleman. Erosion and Sedimentation Control Laws. Purposes: Protect water quality Reduce hazard risk Natural resource protection (ie. topsoil)

marnina
Download Presentation

Erosion and Sedimentation Control

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Erosion and Sedimentation Control Local Environmental Law April 20,2004 Michelle McCarthy Kelly Coleman

  2. Erosion and Sedimentation Control Laws Purposes: • Protect water quality • Reduce hazard risk • Natural resource protection (ie. topsoil) • Public welfare and safety • Comply with state and federal laws

  3. Categories of Laws • Construction • Agriculture • Other • Streamside overlays • Land clearing ordinances

  4. 1. Construction WHY? • Generally proven to be the largest source of sedimentation and erosion HOW? • Through erosion and sediment control plan requirements • By defining BMPs • By defining acceptable levels of erosion • By tailoring requirements to the scale of development

  5. 2. Agriculture WHY? • Largest unregulated sources of sediment and erosion • Regulates uses not otherwise regulated Agriculture is rarely regulated locally.

  6. Agriculture: Sonoma County Vineyard Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance • Because state protection (via CEQA) of oak woodland habitat was inconsistent. • Because erosion from the rapid development of vineyards was a leading cause of sedimentation. • Because citizens and lawmakers were concerned.

  7. Sonoma, cont. What does it do? • Regulates new vineyards and replacement plantings • Lists specifications for certified erosion and sedimentation control plans • Differentiates requirements for 7 types of erodable soils • Specifies stream side setbacks

  8. Agriculture: Brown County Agricultural Shoreland Management Ordinance • Because state laws requiring streamside conservation measures were being relaxed • Wanted a way to maintain streamside protection on farmland

  9. Brown County, cont. What does it do? • Requires a 20 foot vegetative buffer along waterways • Requires additional buffers of up to 300 feet on perennial and intermittent streams • Limits agricultural practices within buffer (tilling, etc.)

  10. 3. Other laws:Streamside Overlays and Land Clearing Ordinances • Regulates otherwise uncontrolled land use • Regulates land use within buffers • Construction • Impervious surfaces • Agricultural uses • Vegetation removal and may require native vegetation requirements

  11. Sample Law: Single-Family Residential Drainage, Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements, Douglas County, CO • Awarded the International Erosion Control Association (IECA)'s Environmental Achievement Grand Award in 2004 • Developed with community and builder/developer participation • Updated in 2000

  12. The law Requires: • Sediment and erosion control plans for single family units • Development meet pervious and non-pervious final grades • Permanent BMPs before Certificate of Occupancy will be issued Also • Shares responsibility across developers • Applies to idle lots

  13. How come it is unique? • Stricter BMP requirements than other laws • During construction • Post-construction • Ahead of its time (already meets NPDES Phase II requirements) • Has building community’s support

  14. Change Agents • County commissioners were getting complaints: “there is mud in the streets, there are drainage problems, etc.” • Staff knew Phase II was coming down the line – wanted to create an ordinance that could handle “whatever they hit us with”

  15. Very Effective • Upwards of 70-75% reductions of sedimentation and erosion as a result • Streets noticeable cleaner, wetlands in good health etc. • Education • Over 100 classes for builders • Enforcement • 3267 site visits in 2003 • About 2700 site visits already this year

  16. General Observations • Overlaps with other environmental law topics • Stormwater Ordinances • Other natural resources (coastal bluffs, shorelines, sensitive areas) • Many towns follow state model ordinances (ie. CT, RI, GA, VA, NJ)

  17. Change Agents • Erosion and sedimentation problems (Sonoma Co, Douglas Co, Barberton) • Concern about development in environmentally sensitive areas (WA, Colorado Springs, CA) • Change in federal or state regulation (Brown Co, Douglas Co) • Citizen awareness of the environmental issues (Sonoma Co, Douglas Co)

  18. Research Methods • Researched model ordinances (EPA, TWEN, etc.) • Researched via internet • E-mailed erosion and sediment control professionals • Researched leads

  19. Final Thoughts • Enforcement is key to success • Education of stakeholders (developers, farmers, citizens, etc.) • Phase II requirements will act as an agent of change • Laws a response to increased understanding of erosion and sedimentation processes and effects

More Related