&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air
Land and Water Use
Washington DC 20460
EPA 600/5-79-006
March 1979
Research and Development
The Use of Existing
and Modified Land Use
Instruments to Achieve
Environmental Quality
-------
EPA 600/5-79-006
March 1979
IMPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY THROUGH
THE USE OF LOCAL ORDINANCES AND REGULATIONS
by
Michael R. Alford
James F. Hudson
Urban Systems Research & Engineering, Inc.
1218 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138
Contract No. 68-01-3231
Project Officer
Charles Ehler
Office of Research & Development (RD-682)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
OFFICE OF AIR, LAND, AND WATER USE
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Office of Research and Development,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publication. Approval
does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies
of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names
or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
FOREWORD
The Environmental Management Research program in the Office of Air Land
and Water Use, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, is unique in its emphasis on intermedia effects, on the integration of
institutional and technological environmental management strategies, and on a
complete range of implementation measures, including economic incentives, land
use management, public education and traditional regulatory mechanisms.
This report reviews the interactions of various municipal regulations and
ordinances affecting the environment, and examines the potential of conventional
and locally available legal tools to improve the effectiveness of their environ-
mental programs. The local approaches to residuals management presented here
are designed to complement broader comprehensive regional programs for the
achievement of ambient environmental quality standards.
Courtney Riordan
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator
Office of Air, Land, and Water Use
11
-------
ABSTRACT
This report reviews the application and potential of the police
power at the local level of government as it is used to achieve
environmental planning objectives. The first section presents an
overview of the interactions of various municipal reulations and
ordinances as they affect the environment. Subsequent sections
examine the potential of conventional, locally available, legal
tools to affect residuals production—these include transportation
and parking ordinances, building codes, on-site wastewater management
and maintenance permits, stormwater management ordinances, noise
control ordinances, solid waste ordinances, and subdivision permit
procedures. In each sections, examples of successful or model
ordinances are supplied, preceeded by a discussion of the technical
issues involved in associated environmental programs. The last
section of the report is a two-part appendix that elaborates on the
impacts of various commpnly used ordinances on individual 'factors
of environmental quality; it serves as an extension of the overview
presented in the first section.
ill
-------
CONTENTS
Disclaimer Notice
Foreword
Abstract
List of Figures vl
List of Tables vii
0. Introduction 1
I. An Overview of Local Use of the Police Power to Improve
Environmental Quality 4
The Role of the Police Power 4
The Matrix of Interactions Between Environmental
Quality Factors and Local Regulations and Ordinances 7
II. Transportation and Parking Management 18
Environmental Impacts 18
Types of Parking 'Controls 20
Impacts and Costs of Controls 23
Ordinances and Technical Data 26
Appendix II-l: An Ordinance for Parking Facility
Review by Local Governmental Entities 28
Appendix II-2: Rules and Regulations - Residential
Permit Parking Program 33
Appendix II-3: A Resolution Adopting an Interim
Parking Policy for the Central Business District 35
III. Space Heating and Home Energy Consumption 42
Environmental Impacts of Space Heating 42
Standards and Incentives for Improved Insulation 53
Air Pollution Effects of Zoning and Land
Use Changes 64
Appendix III-1: Building Standards and Technical Data 66
IV. On-Site Wastewatcr Disposal 86
Environmental Impacts of On-Sitc Disposal 86
Improvements in On-Site Waste Management Systems :.. 95
Costs of On-Site Disposal 113
Technical Data 116
iv
-------
CONTENTS (continued)
V. Stormwater Management , 127
Stormwater Management and Environmental Quality 127
Stormwater Management Controls 135
Implementation and Costs 149
Ordinances. 151
VI. Noise Control Ordinances 166
Environmental Impacts of Noise . . . 166
Types of Noise Control 169
Effectiveness and Cost of Noise Controls 175
Ordinances 178
Appendix VI-1: Model Community Noise Control Ordinance 180
VII. Solid Waste Control 216
The Solid Waste Problem 218
Options for Improvement 223
Rating the Options 231
Ordinances and Equipment 236
Appendix VII-1: An .Ordinance .. . ... 239
Appendix VI1-2: Suggested Solid Waste Management
Ordinance for Local Government 247
VIII. Subdivision Ordinances for Local Environmental Review 267
Environmental Impact Reviews on the Local Level 267
Natural Resource Inventories and Performance Standards 272
Costs of Implementation 297
Sample Ordinances 299
APPENDIX 1-1 316
Appendix 1-2 339
-------
FIGURES
NUMBER PAGE
1 Effect of Parking on Curb Sweeping 26
2 Normal Number of Degree Days Per Year 45
3 Septic Tank Schematic 90
4 Typical On-Site System 91
5 • Layout and Specifications of Typical Trench System 92
6 Daily Household Water Use 100
7 COD Profile 101
8a Layout of a Field with an Even Number of Trenches 106
8b A Flow Diversion Valve with an External Regulatory Key 106
9 Mound Over Creviced Bedrock . . . . . Ill
10 Typical Pressure Sewer Installation 112
11 Percent Increase in Number of Floods at Various
Levels of Urbanization 129
12 Graphic Representation of Stormwater Runoff Pollution 131
13 Annoyance From Noise • 169
14 Fixed Source Noise Levels Allowable at Residential
District Boundaries 171
/
15 Increases in Citizen Participation in Recycling
Over Time 227
16 Computer Map of Bucks County, Pennsylvania 274
17 Composite Computer Map of Bucks County, Pennsylvania 275
18 Enlarged Computer Map, Showing Loss of Usefulness
on Local Level Site Reviews 276
19 Matrix I 286
20 Matrix II 287
21 Matrix III 288-289
22 Matrix IV 290-291
23 Matrix V 292
vi
-------
TABLES
NUMBER PAG1.:
1 Applications of the Police Power to Improve Environmental Quality 8-y
2 Air Pollution Vehicle Controls and Air Quality 18
3 Street Runoff Compared to Treatment Plant Effluent ly
4 Typical Parkiny Requirements 20
5 Resident Permit Parking Program—Washington, D.C 22
6 Effectiveness of Parking Controls • 24
7 Feasibility of Parking Controls 25
8 Percentage Heating and Cooling Energy Consumption
Savings for New Construction Measures in Residential
and Commercial Buildings 43
9 Approximate Hoating Requirements for the Characteristic
Single Family House Under Different Climatic Conditions.... 46
10 Approximate Air Pollution Emission Reductions Due to
Improved Insulation of Single Family Houses 48
11 Net Air Pollution Emission Reductions for a Block of
Characteristic Town houses (6 dwelling units) V7ith
Improved Insulation 49
12 Net Air Pollution Emission Reductions for a Characteristic
Low-Rise Apartment Building (24 dwelling units) With
Improved Insulation 50
13 Approximate Water Pollution Emission and Solid Waste
Reduction Due to Improved Insulation of Electrically
Heated Single Family Houses 52
14 Approximate Fuel Savings Accruing to Improved Insulation
of a Characteristic Single-Family House 56
15 The Net Value of Insulation Improvements in Various
Climates , 53
16 Present Value of Improved Insulation to a Homeowner
Who Plans to Sell in Four Years 60
17 Savings 52
18 Housing Units and Population Served by Sewers and On-
lot Sewage Disposal Systems in the United States 87
19' Housing Units and Population Served by Sev/ers and
On-lot Sewage Disposal Systems in Rural and Urban
Areas
vii
-------
TABLES (continued)
NUMBER PAGE
20 Housing Units and Population Served by Sewers and
On-lot Sewage Disposal Systems Inside and Outside
a")
SMSAs* [[[ °'f
21 Septic Tank Design and Water Depth Requirements in
Various States ............................................ 96
22 Absorption Field Design Requirements in Various States ..... 97
23 Replicate Percolation Tests Performed for Three
QQ
Soil Firms .................................. ...... ........ yy
33 Continuous Sound Levels Which Pose an immediate
Threat to Health and Welfare
24 Conventional Septic Tank System ................. . ......... H4
25 Aerobic System Costs ...................................... 115
26 Calculated Quantities of Pollutants Which Would Enter
Receiving Waters in a Hypothetical City ........... ; ....... 133
27 1973 Costs of Deicing ..................................... 141
28 Comparison of Quality Characteristics from First Flushes
• and Extended Overflows of a Combined Sewer (7)
Hawley Road Sewer , Milwaukee , Wisconsin ................... 144
29 Estimated Costs of Sewer Separation in Various Cities ...... 146
30 Estimated Flushing Costs for Demonstration Project
Detroit , Michigan .......................................... 148
31 Costs of Erosion and Sedimentation Control Measures ....... 152
32 Yearly Average Equivalent Sound Levels Identified As
Requisite to Protect the Public Health and Welfare
With an Adequate Margin of Safety ........................ .
34 1975 Review of Community Noise Control Ordinances .........
35 Caltrans Measurements of Automobile Noise ................. I"33
36 Problem Noise Sources .....................................
37 Responsibility for Noise Control ..........................
38 The Wide Range of Pollutant Levels in Leachate
Composition ......................... ....... ..... . .......... 220
39 The Impact of Visual Environmental Quality on Littering.... 228
40 Common Litter Norms ........................... . ......... •>• 22^
41 Measurements of Litter Accumulation in Clean Community
System Communities ........................................ 230
-------
TABLES (continued)
NUMBER PAGE
43 Runoff Management Chart 279
44 Guidelines for Municipal Resource Inventory 281-282
45 Natural Factors 283-284
46 Selected Performance Standards 295-296
A-l Applications of the Police Power to Improve Environmental
Quality 340-341
ix
-------
SECTION 0
INTRODUCTION
Environmental management has always been one of the prime concerns
of local government, though the term itself is relatively new. Since the pub-
lication of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring in 1962, awareness of the environment
as a target for government action at all levels has grown by leaps and bounds.
At the same time, the definition of environment has expanded until now it
can be read to include education, economic development, employment, and
other "quality of life" criteria. Local governments have responded in many
positive ways to this new perception of their responsibilities, but there is
no concensus about what their role should be, either in relation to their cit-
izens and their physical surroundings, or in relation to higher levels of
government and national land use and natural resource priorities.
A survey for the Environmental Protection Agency conducted in 1974* asked
local governments to define the word "environment." The first definition sug-
gested restricted the meaning to the natural environment, and included categories
of pollution such as air, noise, sewage, solid'waste, and toxic substances—
in short, most of the traditional environmental concerns of local sanitation
departments., planning boards, and police forces. The second definition widened
the interpretation somewhat to include energy, historical preservation, land
use, open space, radiation, population, and wildlife preservation. The third
added aesthetics, health, housing, mass transportation, recreation, streets,
and highways; the fourth included the "quality of life" categories alluded to
above (education, economic development, employment, public safety and wel-
fare). Interestingly, more than half the respondents picked one of the two
broader interpretations of environment, even though it also became clear that
environmental problems rank below other local government concerns in priority,
and that local resources for effective environmental management are perceived
to be inadequate.
This report uses the more restrictive definition of environmental manage-
ment. It surveys what local governments can do to improve the effectiveness
of their more conventional and traditional environmental programs, especially
through the adoption of improved ordinances in such basic areas as stormwater
management, wastewater control, and solid waste collection. If there is one
over-riding problem in this area, it is a shortage of resources with which to
find new approaches to old problems, shape them to local needs, and use them
effectively. The objective here is to acquaint local officials with some of
the more effective approaches developed in various communities—approaches
that can be implemented with a minimum of resources and degree of difficulty
through municipal ordinances or established municipal programs.
*S. Carter; M. Frost; C. Rubin; L. Sumek, Environmental Management and
Local'Government, Office of Research fi Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., February 1974.
-------
There were two steps involved in identifying these approaches to improving
environmental quality on the local level. First, a survey of municipal uses
of the police power was conducted. This identified the range of ordinances
used on the local level for control of land use and maintenance of environmental
quality. These ordinances were then compared to areas of concern in the natural
environment, with attention paid to where ordinances could be used for more than
one purpose. Next, a few topics were selected for further development: these
correspond to EPA1s general areas of concern nationwide, and include air pollu-
tion (both from mobile and stationary sources), water pollution (from point and
non-point sources), solid waste management, noise, and environmental impact
review.
Section I presents the results of the survey of municipal uses of the police
power. The links between individual ordinances and the environmental factors
they affect are shown on a matrix, individual cells represent interactions
described in the text.
Sections II through VIII cover the selected topics. They are:
II Parking and Automobile Use Restraints; Reduction
in auto use is often called for as a way to reduce
air pollution. This chapter discusses parking con-
trols in pursuit of this objective, and notes their
important role in relation to water pollution control.
Ill Space Heating and Home Energy Consumption: Insula-
tion improvements can cut down on the burning of
heating fuels, with consequent reductions in air
pollution emissions and local energy use. This
chapter stresses programs for implementation of
insulation improvements.
IV On-Site Wastewater Disposal; There is a revival
of interest in on-site disposal as an alternative
to municipal sewer sites. This chapter discusses
ways to improve the performance of on-site systems
and prolong their useful lives.
V Stormwater Management; Localities are not often
aware enough of the pollutant content of stormwater.
This chapter discusses this problem and outlines
a number of avenues of improvement.
VI Noise Control; Many municipalities have initiated
noise control programs; the issues are discussed in
relation to EPA1s development of a model noise
ordinance.
VII Solid Waste Storage and Collection; Solid waste
management is one of the most important concerns
of local government; the problems of improving
performance are discussed, and EPA's model ordinance
is presented.
-------
VIII Subdivision Ordinances for Local Environmental Reviews:
Environmental impact review at the local level is an
underutilized process of great potential; this chapter
presents methods by which an effective review process
can be set up relatively cheaply, and gain public
acceptance.
The topics selected in the later chapters are basically concerned with
the management of residuals discharge and maintenance of the integrity of
natural systems. The broader issues of land use controls are avoided quite
deliberately, as are comprehensive programs for the analysis and management
of ambient environmental quality in the areas of air and water pollution. Local
land use controls, especially zoning, have been studied extensively elsewhere;
innovative approaches in this area, especially such concepts as emission
density zoning and transferable development rights, were considered beyond the
resources of this project to treat in sufficient depth. Comprehensive programs
for the achievement of ambient environmental quality standards are more
appropriately the concern of regional planning agencies; Air Quality Control
Regions, Air Quality Maintenance Areas, and 208 Areawide Planning Regions have
been set up under the Clean Air Act and the Water Pollution Control Act to deal
with ambient quality problems on the appropriate regional level. The local
approaches to residuals management presented here are designed to complement
such regional approaches.
-------
SECTION I
AN OVERVIEW OF LOCAL USE OF THE POLICE POWER TO
IMPROVE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
THE ROLE OF THE POLICE POWER
Under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, various sovereign powers,
collectively referred to as the police power, are reserved for the states.
These include the power to regulate private activities in the interest of
public health, safety and general welfare; the power to tax and spend both
for public welfare and for the maintenance of government; and the power to
acquire, manage, and dispose of property for public purposes. All of the
approaches to the improvement of environmental quality brought forth in this
report use the police power as their ultimate source of authority.
The use of the police power is limited at all levels by a number of
constitutional constraints. First and foremost, this power must be applied in
the public interest, and any governmental intervention in private affairs
must be necessary to accomplish a public purpose. Due process must also be
observed, and no class of persons may be unreasonably discriminated against
in the pursuit of public objectives. Most important for many of the land use
controls commonly used by local governments, no property may be taken for
public use without just "compensation.
Many of the states' constitutional police powers are delegated to local
governments (counties or municipalities) under the "home rule" provisions of
state consistutions by enabling statutes. Local governments have no inherent
authority of their own under the federal constitution; in all their powers
they are creatures of the states. In practice, however, their powers are
fairly broad. "Home rule" attempts to define a separate sphere of legislative
jurisdiction within which local governments may operate independently of the
state; other state enactments delegating the police power may be almost as
wide in effect. In general, localities may enact restrictions on private
activities that are more stringent that state restrictions except where there
is a direct conflict of objectives, in which case state enactments auto-
matically prevail. States may also preempt certain fields of regulation where
they deem that state needs transcend local concerns; in such cases, localities
have no room at all to enact their own regulations. In the field of environ-
mental law, however, the powers of local governments are largely unimpeded by
state priorities—local governments generally have more power than they are
willing to assume.
-------
Whenever local governments enact restrictions that may diminish the value
of land for private development, the issue of "taking" is raised.! There
has always been a fine line between what constitutes valid regulation of
private activity in the interest of the public health, safety, and general
welfare, and what can be interpreted as an "unreasonable" restriction of
property for public purposes. Under numerous court decisions, property
does not need actually to be acquired by government for a taking to exist.
A "virtual taking" (or "inverse condemnation") may be declared where the
value of property is diminished by public actions for insufficient, cause;
the community must then compensate the owner. Just what constitutes
"sufficient cause" is the crux of the issue.
While there is no simple answer to this, a general rule of thumb is emerg-
ing as courts find themselves in the midst of numerous debates over the proper
use of land for maintaining environmental quality, where restrictions on the
use of land are enacted in order to avoid a public harm, broadly defined, these
restrictions are increasingly being upheld. Where they are enacted to further
a public good, compensation of owners is almost always required. Thus', restric-
tions on development in aquifer recharge areas may be upheld without compensa-
tion to owners if they are enacted to protect a safe and adequate water supply
for the town, but not if they are justified in the name of preserving open
space and scenic values.
Many local governments still are timid in their enactment of environmental
statutes and land use controls, fearing to intrude in any way on the traditional
ethic that what an owner does with his own land is .his own concern, especially
where he wishes to profit from it financially. This ethic is not confirmed by
constitutional law, but-it dies hard. Over the past few years, many commun-
ities have broken new ground in regulating private activity for environmental
ends: a program restricting the number of building permits a town may issue
in a given year has been upheld in Petaluma, California; the regulation of growth
by capital facilities planning has been used successfully in Ramapo, New York;
and the restriction of development on wetlands and other sensitive lands has
been successful in many localities. Even so, controversy in this area of the
law has reduced the initiative many communities might otherwise have shown.
Regulation of Residuals Generation and Discharge
Environmental quality problems begin with residuals generation and
discharge—the introduction of substances into the natural environment: air,
land, or water. Tracing the origins of general environmental modification back
to remote individual sources of pollution is an extremely difficult task.
For instance, recently it has been shown that flurocarbon propellants from
aerosol spray cans are reducing the planet's ozone layer, a remarkable
example of the distance between cause and effect in environmental management.
Many legislative programs, the most notable being the 1972 Water Pollution
Control Act Amendments (P.L. 92-500}, no longer base their entire approach
on such analysis, but instead concentrate in principle on the control of
pollution sources.
-------
The term "residual" is often used interchangeably with "pollutant," but
it carries a slightly different meaning in an environmental context. A pol-
lutant is a substance or energy form that tends to interfere with natural
environmental processes; a residual is taken to be a pollutant, discharged
in connection with human activities, that has a cost of recovery exceeding itP
market value. A hierarchy of tools exist to manage the production of
residuals: on the lowest level are those physical or technological methods that
change the quantity, type, timing, or spatial location of residuals that are
discharged, or that improve the assimilative capacity of the environment; on
the next level are the regulatory, economic, administrative, and educational
tools that induce the implementation of desirable physical methods or residuals
abatement; on the third level are the institutional arrangements whereby environ-
mental goals are established and implemented measures selected and enforced.
It is on the institutional level that governmental actions come into play.
Various levels of government have different potentials and opportunities
for residuals management, and encounter different problems. One of the dif-
ficulties in managing residuals on the local level is that, some of the most
powerful tools available to control pollution are also the broadest in scope.
The obvious example is zoning. The use of zoning can do much to control where
residuals are generated (by controlling the intensity of land use), and what
types of residuals are generated (by controlling permissible activities on the
land). But zoning has so many other economic, social, and political effects
that it cannot be wielded with only environmental purposes in mind. As a
consequence, it has proven ineffective in managing environmental quality. While
any number of variations on zoning have been developed, many of them potentially
effective in managing residuals productions and improving many other aspects
of environmental quality, few have been implemented.
The focus of this report is, therefore, on the more narrow instruments of
residuals management available to local governments. Until the comprehensive
instruments are more fully developed and more widely adopted, a great deal
can be accomplished by improving local sanitation ordinances, parking ordinances,
and the like. These tools are for the most part familiar instruments whose
application is not•controversial, and they often have impacts beyond their
immediate targets of concern that can be exploited for extra environmental bene-
fits. Implementing some of the improvements as suggested in the later chapters
of this report will, inevitably, impose costs on the private and public sector;
however, the environmental benefits conferred by these controls are so clearly
linked to the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare, and the
restraints they impose on local prerogatives for land use controls are so
limited, that they can be widely adopted.
-------
MATRIX OF INTERACTIONS BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY FACTORS
AND LOCAL REGULATIONS AND ORDINANCES
Any comprehensive environmental policy implemented on the local level of
government should be based on an understanding of the interactions between
environmental quality factors and commonly enacted ordinances and regulations.
Since ordinances are likely to have an effect on more than one aspect of environ-
mental quality, it is useful to trace out the major interactions on a matrix
such as Table 1. Along one axis are listed various local ordinances, regula-
tions t and other uses of the police power; along the other are the environmental
parameters which they affect.
This matrix is not exhaustive on either side. It emphasizes areas of con-
cern to local governments, and is biased toward the programmatic interests of
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The basic uses of the police power
are selected with a view toward their impacts on areas where the EPA has
an explicit legislative mandate; aesthetic and similar environmental subjects
are included only insofar as they interact with other areas. Also de-emphasized
are areas such as toxic substances control, where EPA has a major interest
but where the actions of local governments play only a marginal role. Certain
innovative ordinances, such as growth controls and transferable development
rights, are not presented at all: these tools have been the subject of other
in-depth studies, and are also only now being tested; there is a large body
of analysis and little practical experience.
The major problem in any review of local government actions is providing
a single framework on which to hang the almost endless variations of practice
that are found. One method of land use control may occur in a number of guises—
as a zoning ordinance, a subdivision regulation, or even a construction code
specification. To avoid redundancies in the presentation, a breakdown has been
adopted that seeks to unify and simplify this variety without losing its
content. Twenty-one generic instruments have been defined.
In some instances, inconsistencies are inevitable. For example, cluster
subdivisions and planned unit development form a logical pair—both seek to
increase a developer's siting flexibility under otherwise rigidly prescriptive
siting regulations, and both achieve basically the same environmental benefits.
Yet the first is implemented by subdivision regulations (and does not even
require a valid zoning ordinance), and the second is an explicit exception to an
existing zoning ordinance. Groupings were made on the basis of similar environ-
mental impacts, preferred mode of implementation, or simply by arbitrary assign-
ment.
The first section below defines, very briefly, the environmental factors
presented in the matrix. Each entry is described in a paragraph or two, and
its local government context is reviewed. The reader's familiarity with basic
environmental issues is assumed.
The second section below briefly defines the ordinances and regulations
on the matrix axes, and appraises their potential for improving local
environmental quality. References are made to discussions in Sections II-VIII
as appropriate. A more detailed exposition, of these categories of ordinances
is provided in Appendix 1-1.
-------
TABLE 1
APPLICATIONS OF THE POLICE POWER TO
IMPROVE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
-------
Table I continued
, Diri-ct and explicit relationship exists between the
\''/.'///!>.//iA tnvironnx.'ntal Ouality Factor f. Ordinance or Ftcqulacion
Indiiort or coi.djtion.il relationship exists between (l.o
tnvironmontal Quality factor (, the Ordinjnce or Regulation
-------
Interactions between the ordinances and the environmental quality factors
are represented by shadings in the matrix (Table 1), but are presented as
separate entries in Appendix 1-2, along with a numbered key. Recommended
references are provided along with the discussions of each interaction; readers
may obtain these studies to pursue the technical or legal ramifications that
interest them.
Descriptions of Environmental Parameters
Air Pollution: Non-Point Sources
Residential activities are a major contributor to non-point source air
pollution. The term "non-point sources" comes from mathematical modeling
studies, which cannot treat buildings individually: instead, pollutants are
assumed to be generated on an areawide basis by a particular land use. The
main cause of air pollution from residential buildings is the burning of fuels
for space heating; this can be reduced through stricter insulation requirements
on new construction, inspection of boilers and incinerators, or provisions for
shifts to cleaner fuels. Note that a shift to electric heating will reduce
non-point source air pollution, but only at the cost of increased pollution
and total energy use at central power plants (point sources).
Another source of air pollution from residential activities is the burn-
•ing of leaves and other solid waste on individual lots.
Air Pollution: Mobile Sources
As the experience of Los Angeles and other cities show, air pollution from
automobiles and other mobile sources can be extremely important, particularly
for the production of photochemical smog. Local governments generally cannot
set standards for vehicle emissions, but they do have control over subdivision
plans, street layouts, and parking. As people drive fewer miles, pollution
emissions are reduced: clustering to reduce street length and allow some mixed
uses may reduce the amount of local auto travel; layouts may also be set up
to aid mass transit, so that some auto trips can be completely eliminated;
parking controls can be used to give people an incentive for carpooling, with
a reduction in miles traveled (though not a total reduction: the car left home
will be used for other trips).
Air Pollution: Point Sources
Point sources of air pollution include factories, mines, power plants,
and other major fixed land uses. The main pollutants from such sources are sul-
fur oxides, particulates, and some toxic materials. While the main control en
point sources comes from the Clean Air Act and is enforced by the states, local
governments do have a role in controlling such pollution. Traditionally, this
role involves smoke control ordinances, and limits on the composition of the
fuels used locally. Odor control remains a local government responsibility.
Zoning methods (e.g., omission density zoning) can be used to keep point source
emissions within a zone at desired levels.
10
-------
Water Quality: Non-point Sources
Runoff from developed and undeveloped lands is a major cause of poor
water quality in rivers, streams, and lakes. Agricultural and urban runoff
are sources of nutrients which cause eutrophication. Urban runoff also carries
wastes of all sorts, in concentrations often worse than in sewage: biological
wastes from animal feces and food; toxic metals from auto exhausts and from
air pollution settling on the ground or carried by rains; acids; and so forth.
The runoff from urban areas is heated (at least in summer) and can lead to
large temperature changes in the streams and fish kills. Sedimentation and
erosion, particularly from construction sites, is responsible for damming of
streams, increased turbidity, fish kills, and poor drainage.
Water Quality; Point Sources
As with air pollution, the control of major point sources of water poll-
ution is increasingly being regulated by the federal government. Local govern-
ments may include industry in treatment programs, but they do not have a major
influence through the police power on the amounts or types of pollutants
generated. Their only real concern comes through approving or denying zoning
changes to polluting industries, and this is generally a minor role, particularly
when compared to either federal programs, or local taxes and charges.
Water Quality: Groundwater
Groundwater is water contained beneath the surface. In many areas, ground-
water is used for drinking directly; in others, it feeds ponds or rivers from
which drinking water is drawn. Urbanization both reduces groundwater recharge
and may pollute what recharge there is. Septic tanks are one source of ground-
water pollution; sanitary landfills pollute ground and surface waters through
leachate and runoff. Paving or building over land, which increases runoff at
the expense of infiltration, reduces the amount of water entering the ground
and may lower the water table. The materials picked up in urban areas, such
as heavy metals or pesticides, may also pollute the groundwater: biological
decomposition and cleaning occurs in the soils, but toxic wastes may not be
removed. Another potential source of groundwater pollution is the use of dis-
posal wells, particularly shallow ones.
Water Quantity: Flooding
Flooding is a natural phenomenon which has become an environmental problem
becuase of the aggravating effects of development on the frequency and extent
of floods. The economic damage of floods is well known—despite the construction
since the 1930's of flood control reservoirs, dams, levees, and the like, flood
damage has continuously risen. Damage to the environment has similarly risen,
mostly due to the destruction of natural systems and erosion of soil associated
with wider floodplains, but partly because of the impacts of inappropriately
planned flood control engineering on natural water sources, and secondarily
their tendency to encourage development in protected areas.
11
-------
Water Quantity: Supply
The quality and quantity of drinking water supplies is generally a concern:
whether the ground or surface water is clean, whether there is enough of it,
and whether it will stay clean and sufficient for its intended uses. Local
development activities can have an important impact on the level of the ground-
water table, by obstruction of aquifer recharge areas; pollutants from developed
land can contaminate the groundwater,- and land activities on watersheds can
affect surface water drinking sources.
Solid Waste
Solid waste disposal is predominantly a local environmental problem. Local
governments control waste storage in the interests of public health: collection
should be sanitary, quiet and odor free; disposal should not pollute the air or
groundwater. Littering can introduce pollutants into the surface and ground-
waters as well as be a health hazard and an esthetic nuisance.
Noise
Noise is more than a nuisance: it can be psychologically damaging, through
the impairment of concentration and work effectiveness in everyday situations;
it can impair hearing over the long term if ambient levels are excessive; it
-can be destructive of physical health in extreme cases, affecting many body
functions. Noise is also destructive of wildlife habitat for certain species.
Since elevated noise levels are generally an urban phenomenon, they are usually
managed by local levels of government. (Exceptions include the regulation of
noise of interstate carriers which is a federal function).
Esthetics/Wildlife
The effects of pollutants extend beyond public health and welfare issues
and become involved in the "quality of life" issues of esthetics and wildlife
preservation. Local governments have traditionally been concerned with such
issues, primarily because of their impact on local economies, especially through
property values. In this analysis, however, esthetics and wildlife is pre-
sented as a category of environmental impacts only to identify the ancillary
impacts of controls aimed more specifically at residuals management. Sign
ordinances and other controls aimed specifically at esthetic problem areas
are not considered here, since they have no significant effect on residuals
management. Where an ordinance (such as a tree preservation ordinance) has
ancillary esthetic benefits, these are noted for reference.
Toxic Materials
In some states, toxic materials are under control of state regulatory
bodies. The use of such materials also falls under EPA and OSHA standards.
Local communities may have a say in the disposal of toxic materials, parti-
cularly in the choice of routes for shipment and in the choice of disposal
sites. Toxic material disposal sites require careful management and design,
and municipalities have a clear interest in their regulation.
12
-------
Energy
Energy conservation is a national priority under the 1975 Energy Policy and
jnservation Act; states and local government are formulating plans to con-
srve energy in a variety of areas, the most important being buildings and
ransportation. While EPA has no legislative mandate in energy conservation,
t has a strong interest in the pollution emissions reductions that accompany
onservation measures. Local governments should be aware of the beneficial
nteractions between energy conservation and local environmental quality.
Soil Loss
Erosion of soil represents an environmental problem, not only because it
:auses water quality problems, but because it may reduce agricultural production
md diminish property values for many classes of land use. It has been estimated
:hat it takes natural processes 600 years to generate one inch of soil, so
.arge scale community soil loss is essentially irretrievable. Extreme forms of
soil loss, such as landslides and the destruction of beach dunes, can be a
zhreat to public safety as well as to property values. Local governments play
;he major role in controlling this problem.
3escriptions of Types of Ordinances
Zoning
General Districting of land into separate use zones may have limited
positive environmental impacts if carefully done, but more-often it has
negative impacts due to its numerous side effects. The most common form of
general districting for "environmental" purposes is large lot zoning, in which
the rural character of land is expected to be preserved by one acre or larger
lot sizes; health issues are also cited, such as the necessity for adequate lots
for septic tank use or for continued reliance on wells for water supply. In
fact, such zoning tends to destroy the natural appearance of land--as the dis-
trict fills in, all but the very largest lots are fully landscaped and wildlife
habitat is destroyed. Ultimately, development within the zone may have to be
serviced with municipal utilities—at increased costs due to the dispersed
layout.
The only form of conventional districting that can work effectively is
the zoning of prime agricultural land into agricultural districts. This
practice usually requires a number of supporting economic measures to be
successful, however.
Sensitive Area Protection is a useful technique for local environmental
planning. It generally involves the creation of overlay districts that fur-
ther restrict permissible activities in existing use zones. The types of
areas most commonly protected are wetlands, hillsides, aquifer recharge areas,
streambanks, and woodlands. From the perspective of EPA legislative mandates,
sensitive area protection is most useful in water resource protection. Other
benefits are numerous, however, and include preservation of wildlife habitat,
maintenance of ecological communities, flood protection, landslide protection.
13
-------
sedimentation and erosion control, recreation and esthetic benefits, and the
use of vegetation as air pollution "sinks," or buffers. The major imple-
mentation problem of this established practice remains the taking issue: al-
though courts increasingly recognize that sensitive area zoning protects the
public health, welfare, and safety over the long term, individual landowners
will context any unreasonable reduction on their potential return on their
property.
Performance Zoning as defined here means the direct regulation of resi-
duals discharge within specific zones. On the local level, the only practical
performance zone seems to be set up by effluent allotment .ordinances, in
which the discharge of water pollution from sources such as "package plants"
is controlled. Other performance zones are potentially useful for regulating
major stationary sources of air pollution, such as in industrial areas; in the
case of air pollution, however, regional planning for emissions allocations
is desirable, as is done under the State Implementation Plans mandated by
the Clean Air Act.
Flexible Zoning is a term that includes approaches such as Planned Unit
Development, Cluster Subdivisions, Conditional Zoning, Floating Zones, and
others. Common to all of them is the intention of getting away from rigid
zoning patterns, allowing developers more flexibility in siting and design,
and protecting environmental values through more sensitive adjustment
of development to individual site conditions and the context of surrounding
development. The immediate environmental benefits of these options lie in
open space protection; indirect benefits are also gained in more efficient
utility provision, and in air pollution and energy use reductions due to more
compact designs. Flexible zoning approaches remain controversial since they
depart from conventional marketing standards and can threaten values in
adjoining properties. Of the several options, cluster subdivisions appear
to have the greatest public acceptance; Planned Unit Developments, with their
mix of land uses in pre'viously single-purpose zones, are the most controversial,
Subdivision Regulations
Sanitary Sewage Requirements: Subdivision regulations always include
requirements for sanitary sewage disposal, though primarily these serve to
enforce the regulations of the local or state health department. The three
basic options for subdivision developers—on-lot disposal (septic tanks),
"package plants," and municipal sewage systems—are regulated by these re-
quirements. From an environmental point of view, these requirements have both
direct and indirect effects: the direct effects are on public health and on
protection of groundwater resources from malfunctioning.! on-site disposal
systems; the indirect effects are due to the implications of on-site disposal
for lot layout and sizing. Sanitary sewage requirements are, therefore, of
use as a measure both for improving wastewater disposal practices and for
affecting community layout and infrastructure design. A major area for
improvement in these regulations is their extension beyond immediate public
health concerns into areas such as long range infrastructure and transporta-
tion planning, and long term programs for maintenance of on-site and package
systems. See Section IV.
14
-------
Stormwater Management: Stormwater management is often handled through
the subdivision review process. Structural measures, conventionally limited
to. the the construction of stormsewers, are increasingly being extended in
sophistication by the addition of requirements for on-site detention of runoff,
and are simultaneously being complemented by more elaborate performance standards
for disposal of runoff on site through structural (e.g., detention ponds), and
non-structural measures (e.g., site design). See Chapter V.
Street Design: Subdivision regulations spell out requirements for the lay-
out and design of streets. Environmental benefits due to improved street
design are small, but potentially include reductions in vehicle trip length,
coordination with municipal mass transit systems, and the use of streets as
overflow channels for Stormwater during intense storms.
Environmental Assessment Requirements: Some communities are attaching
requirements for environmental assessments tc their subdivision regulations or
zoning ordinances. This process has great potential for insuring compatibility
between site plans and the suitability of the land for development. It can
consider a wide variety of environmental and other issues deemed to be important
by the local community (as expressed by the zoning commission or planning
board). See Chapter VIII.
Acquisition
Less-than-Fee Land Acquisition: Local powers of eminent domain can also be
used, if necessary, to effect the purchase of limited rights to property.
This approach is commonly used by conservation commissions, who acquire ease-
ments to protect scenic views and wildlife habitat, and by local governments
that need to acquire rights-of-way across property for utility lines or
roads. Easements generally expire after twenty-five to thirty years.
Land Banking: Eminent domain powers can be used to acquire permanent
and complete rights to land to reserve it for public purposes. Alternatives
to direct purchase exist that reduce the financial burden of this device
on local communities. Land banking is generally used to reserve sites for
buildings and landfills, and (less frequently) to protect sensitive areas
(especially wetlands) from development. Land banking is an alterantive
where either communities or courts decide that restrictive zoning measures
on sensitive lands amount to an unreasonable taking of private property.
Codes
Construction, Building, and Health Codes: These three categories of
locally enforced codes have direct or indirect effects on environmental quality
factors. Construction codes can control the potentially severe impacts of
construction activiries (noise, sanitation, erosion); building codes control
performance of completed structures in areas such as thermal efficiency, and
can permit the use of innovative technologies such as waterless toilets,
solar energy collectors, etc.; health codes govern the continued fitness of
the completed structure, and can be modified to take account of changes in
environmental priorities (such as revoking permits for small apartment incin-
erators) . At present, building codes seem to offer the most immediate oppor-
tunity for environmental improvements. See Sections III and IV.
15
-------
Regulations/Ordinances
Flood Control Ordinances; The importance of local flood control ordinances
is being eclipsed by the impact of the flood insurance provisions of the 1974
Housing and Urban Development Act, which require communities to undertake
comprehensive floodplain management programs in exchange for continued federal
insurance of loans on buildings constructed in floodplains. Previously,
local restrictions of activities on floodplains were impeded by the taking
issue. Opportunities for improving local flood control ordinances are
essentially pre-empted by the HUD flood insurance program.
Sanitation Ordinances: These ordinances regulate the storage, collection,
and disposal of solid wastes. They can also affect local materials recycling
programs (glass, aluminum, ferrous metals). Solid waste management touches
many environmental quality factors, including air pollution, water pollution,
esthetics, public health, noise, energy use, and others. Opportunities for
improvements in sanitation ordinances are numerous. See Section VII.
Tree Ordinances: Tree ordinances may affect the planting and preservation
of trees throughout a community, but more generally they are aimed at the
preservation of mature trees of native species along public and private rights-
of way. Although tree ordinances theoretically'have an impact on groundwater
recharge, noise, and air pollution, their predominant effect is esthetic. In
principle they are vulnerable to legal challenge, but in fact they never are
contested because their effect on property values is positive and costs of
compliance are usually negligible.
Burning Ordinances: Control of household burning of wastes by special
ordinances is commonplace. Benefits accrue in air pollution abatement, odor
control, and public safety. Opportunities for improvements to conventional
burning restrictions are-minimal.
Parking Ordinances: Parking ordinances have potential value for environ-
mental management in two areas—air pollution abatement and stormwater manage-
ment. Bans on parking can be implemented to reduce vehicle travel and thus
air pollution emission; they can also be used to clear streets for more effective
street sweeping, which can significantly reduce pollutant loadings in storm-
water. Parking bans for air pollution control are more appropriately implemented
in central urban areas, but for street sweeping purposes they are effective
anywhere. See Section II.
Noise Control Ordinances: Noise control on the local level can involve
controls both on production and reception of noise. Noise ordinances are gen-
erally enforced by the police, and have traditionally involved only nuisance
noises. Current trends in noise control are toward comprehensive programs to
abate chronic noise levels as well as occasional nuisances; control options
may, therefore, appropriately be dispersed under zoning, building codes, and
state laws {regulating vehicle noise levels, for example). Improvements in
local noise control programs can yield significant environmental benefits.
See Chapter VI.
16
-------
Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinances: These ordinances are gen-
erally enacted to control construction activities. They can specify exact
construction practices that minimize soil losses while sites are stripped, or
they can set performance goals and allow earth movers to select from a "catalog"
of acceptable measures in order to meet them. Usually adopted as a separate
ordinance, erosion and sedimentation controls are most effective when they
involve a permit process, administered by a variety of personnel or departments.
There is considerable room for improvements in the design and application of
these ordinances in most communities, especially those outside of states
which have state-level erosion and sedimentation control programs. See
Chapter V.
Runoff Control Ordinances: Runoff Control Ordinances are a counterpart
to erosion and sedimentation controls, and are concerned with limiting the rate
of runoff from completed projects. Methods to limit runoff over the long term
are generally left to developers discretion, although the net result must be
compliance with a stated standard. Increasingly common are performance stan-
dards which limit the rate of runoff after project completion to that character-
istic of the same site in its natural state. These ordinances are also appro-
priately implemented as part of a zoning or subdivision ordinance.' See Chapter V.
17
-------
SECTION II
TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING MANAGEMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Automobiles are the source of large quantities of pollutants, which enter
both the air and the water. In many Air Quality Control Regions, vehicle emis-
sions of oxidants or carbon monoxide will continue to exceed national primary
standards for many years to come. Since the primary standards are necessary
for health reasons, this is an important problem affecting many urban areas.
Similarly, the pollution caused by urban storm runoff adds metals and toxic
materials to the streams, and many of these pollutants result from auto use.
Auto emission controls and increases in miles per gallon can help a great
deal. However, automobiles cannot be made completely clean, and in some areas
the only way to meet standards may be to reduce auto use. Under any foreseeable
set of emission controls, standards will still be violated and the health and
welfare of the people affected. (see Table 2) There are several approaches
for this reduction, and they generally require providing some acceptable alter-
native, such as improved mass transit, car pooling incentives, high tolls,
priority lanes for buses, and similar approaches. All of these can be provided,
and they will induce some people to shift from auto commuting to other modes,
with a resulting reduction in total emissions, related to the reduced vehicle
miles travelled (VMT).
Air
Pollutant
Carbon Monoxide
Oxidants
Nitrogen Dioxide
Table 2
Pollution Vehicle Controls
Light Duty Vehicle %
Emission Standard
grams/mile
15.0
9.0
3.4
1.5
0.9
0.4
3.1
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.4
and Air Quality
Improvement
Base Year
to 1990
76
80
83
36
40
42
-29
-17
-12
- 7
0
1
% of Areas With
1990 Air Quality
Violation
11
0
0
86
86
81
43
38
38
38
29
18
-------
In general, the commuter only pays a portion of the real costs of auto
commuting. He does not have to pay the social costs of air pollution, noise
or other external effects, and many of the streets and highways are funded by
property owners rather than auto users. Besides providing incentives toward
other modes, then, it is also reasonable to attempt to make the commuter pay
for the true costs of commuting.
One way to cfo this is through parking management, and it is one of the few
options available to local governments. Most other solutions, like carpool
programs, mass transit, or auto-free zones, are planned at the regional level
and may be implemented there. A few, such as increased gas taxes or reduced
speed limits, are options for the state and federal governments. Local options
are, therefore, reduced to various forms of parking control as a method for
capturing the true costs to their residents of excessive auto use.
Parking management methods which reduce VMT will have a direct impact on
air pollution, by reducing the emissions proportionally. The impact of parking
on water pollution is a bit more complex. First, automobiles emit lead and
other toxic materials into the air, and some of these materials settle onto
the ground as fine particules. Others are washed out of the air when it rains.
These fine particles combine with other street waste (litter, animal wastes,
etc.) and enter the storm drainage system and, eventually, the waters. Table 3
shows that they are often much stronger than the equivalent effluent from a
secondary treatment plant, particularly for metals such as lead and zinc. A
reduction in auto use will mean reduced pollution entering the waters, just as
it also reduces pollution entering the air. Equally important, though, is that
cars interfere with one of the best methods for cleaning up the street waste—
street cleaning. Parking controls combined with an effective street cleaning
program can greatly reduce the amount of pollution entering the water. In one
EPA study, it was estimated that broom sweepers remove 56% of the dirt and
dust, 44% of heavy metals, and 37% of the BOD on the streets, when used ef-
ficiently. Vacuum sweepers potentially have higher removal efficiencies, and
are being studied.4 While sweepers are less effective on the fine particles
from autos than they are on larger dirt, leaves, and litter, they are important
in this phase of reducing water pollution.5
Table 3
2
Street Runoff Compared to Treatment Plant Effluent
Suspended Solids
BOD
COD
Kjeldahl-N
Phosphate
Lead
Zinc
Copper
Nickel
Chromium
Impact Ratio
104.00*
0.41
6.70
0.13
0.22
1015.00
47.00
9.80
45.00
18.00
*This ratio means there are over one-hundred times as
much suspended solids in an
secondary treatment effluent
serving the same area.
average stdrm than in
in the same period, and
19
-------
Thus, parking management by local communities can reduce both air and water
pollution, through two general approaches. The first is to reduce total VMT,
which will reduce the emissions which cause much of the air pollution, and as-
sociated water pollution. The second is to make the job of street cleaning easier,
which will further reduce the important water pollution from urban runoff.
The sections below describe the types of parking management, their costs and
effectiveness, and the ways they have been implemented.
TYPES OF PARKING CONTROLS
Zoning Controls and Facility Review
Most zoning and subdivision controls provide for minimum levels of parking
for each type of development, just as they provide for street sizes, sidewalks,
and frontages. As long as people travel by car, it has generally been assumed
that there should be enough parking' to minimize congestion, insure the free flow
of traffic, and avoid disrupting the neighborhood with cars trying to park.
These objectives encourage total dependence on auto use. Table 4 shows a set
of typical requirements for levels of off-street parking for various uses.
Table 4
Typical Parking Requirements
Land Use
Commercial
Office Buildings
Retail Service
Restaurants
Hotels, Motels
Medical-Dental
Hospitals
Industrial
Manufacturing
Industrial Park
Wholesale and warehouse
Educational
High School
Public Buildings
Auditorium
Museums, Libraries
Churches
Public Utilities
Residential
Single Family, Apartments
Dormitories
Parking Requirements
1 space per 300 sq. ft.
1 space per 200 sq. ft.
1 space per four seats
1 space per guest room; 1 space
per employee
1 space per 200 sq. ft. (3
spaces per doctor)
1.3 space per bed
1 space per 2 employees
1 space per 2 employees
1 space per 3000 sq. ft.
5 spaces per classroom
1 space per 4 seats
1 space per 300 sq. ft.
1 space per 5 seats
1 space per 300 sq. ft.
1 space per dwelling unit
1 space per 2 occupants
20
-------
However, many cities have seen increasing congestion and have encouraged
a shift to mass transit to reduce air pollution and improve pedestrian access
to the city. Therefore, where transit is available, it may be reasonable to set
maximum levels for parking, and to require review of all major parking facilities.7
Zoning controls would set minimum and maximum standards on parking for new con-
struction, and could be fairly simple. Facility reviews would be more complex,
since they would have to consider the full impact of the new parking facilities
on traffic, air pollution, and land use. Still, both are methods for local gov-
ernment to use to manage new parking, and both allow careful balancing of en-
vironmental, economic and social considerations. Facility review adds easy
control of parking garages, but this can also be done through zoning.
Resident Permit Districts
A recent innovation in parking management has been the resident permit
district.8 In this system, on-street parking in residential areas is restricted
to the people who live there, and outsiders are not allowed to park. In some
cases, only long term parking is restricted, to allow shopping and other short
trips. Provisions can also be made for visitors. Consider a central community
which receives large numbers of commuters daily, many of whom park in resi-
dential areas near their jobs. A permit program can reduce such parking,
giving commuters an incentive to leave their cars home. It also gives the
residents enough parking, reducing congestion and making their problems easier.
The result is a benefit to the local neighborhood and a reduction in air pol-
lution. Table 5 gives information about the workings of the program set up in
Washington, D.C.
Provision of Fringe Parking
While facility review and resident permit programs can be implemented in
urban areas, suburban communities can also aid in air pollution reductions.
Most procedures that make transit use easier will reduce auto use somewhat
(though often only slightly), and the provision of fringe commuter parking is
one approach. A fringe parking area with express bus service downtown is an
effective means of mass transit: the community will be aiding its residents if
it provides parking for park-and-ride use, and supports the use of express
buses.1 Conversion of lands next to freeway interchanges is especially
attractive.
Conventional Controls
None of the methods listed above will work unless parking violations are
enforced. Zoning limitations will be useless if on-street parking is not
expensive to the violator. Resident permit districts can only work when the
non-resident user must pay a high fine.*1
Conventional parking controls involve metering, no parking zones, tow
zones, and special day or hour limits on parking.12 if effectively enforced
with sufficient fines, they will clear most cars from the streets during the
control periods.
21
-------
Table 5
9
Resident Permit Parking Program—Washington, D.C.
1. Hours of Enforcement: 7:00 am to 6:30 pm, Weekdays,
except Holidays.
2. Areas Affected: The program is city-wide and will be
implemented on a petition basis. All impacted areas
will be served. A zone system will be established
throughout the city and each impacted area within the
zone will be signed to indicate the two-hour limit.
3. Availability of Stickers: Stickers can be obtained
from the Department of Motor Vehicles. The cost is
expected to be between five and ten dollars, and will
cover the program's administrative costs. A sticker
is only valid in the zone in which it has been issued
and is not transferable.
4. Coverage of Out of Town Guests, Household Employees
and Visitors: They will be subject to the two-
hour restriction. However, the Director of the
Department of Highways and Traffic -is authorized to
make provisions for the issuance of temporary parking
permits. We are also considering exemption stickers
•for the handicapped and other hardship cases.
5. Enforcement: The 'restriction will be enforced by the
Metropolitan Police Department using the standard
method of marking tires and re-checking the tires at
certain intervals during the day.
6. Students and Other Temporary Residents: They are
elibible only if they can prove that they are actual
zone residents and meet the District's requirements for
vehicle registration.
7. Renewal: The stickers have to be renewed annually.
8. Alternatives for Non-resident Vehicles: We believe
that the majority of these vehicles will be able to
utilize our fringe parking program, the area-wide car
pool program, and the improving bus system.
9. Joining the Program: Each area must submit a block by
block petition containing signatures of the majority
of households in each block.
22
-------
The goal in controlling parking for street sweeping is to get all cars
off the block-face to be swept before the sweeper arrives. This is done best
when there is a regular schedule for sweeping (e.g., Tow Zone-No Parking Friday
9-11 AM) and where the sweeping follows that schedule every week. The goal is
to remove illegally parked cars, while minimizing the burden on residents.
This means that, where possible, street sweeping should take place during
periods when few people would want to park on-street, and when traffic is
light. If quiet equipment is available, and an overnight parking ban is ac-
cepted by the community, sweeping in the early morning hours may be the best
choice. It is usually the best choice in commercial districts.
It is very important to inform the people of when areas are to be swept.
With well-designed, regular routes, each block will be swept at about the same
time each week. Thus, a two or three hour period will be sufficient to insure
the sweeping gets done, and parking can be allowed for the rest of the day.
Routes and no-parking-zones should cover only one side of the street on a
particular day, to allow people to park on the other side. The goal is simply
to get the cars out of the way when the sweeper arrives, and this is most likely
when parkers are told when the streets will actually be swept. Strict enforce-
ment of violations is also necessary, and towing is the only solution that gets
the cars out of the way. Tow trucks can precede sweepers over the route, far
enough ahead so they do not slow things down. Good routes, frequent signs,
and towing will make efficient sweeping possible.
There are options even if a regular sweeping schedule is not met. Cambridge,
Massachusetts, has printed temporary signs which are hung in areas to be swept
two days before sweeping, saying "Tow Away Zone; No Parking (day of week) (time)
This Side; for Street Sweeping." These signs are hung by one man, and are
placed early enough so that people know the area will be swept and can make
other plans. While Cambridge does not have a regular sweeping schedule cover-
ing the whole city, the carefully placed temporary signs have much the same
effect, and allow for variations in areas swept because of holidays and other
factors.*3
IMPACTS AND COSTS OF CONTROLS
Air Pollution-Related Controls
The controls identified for reducing air pollution are facility reviews,
zoning changes, resident parking permit systems, and increased enforcement.
Added to these should be rate increases in public or private garages and at
meters, since these are under local control.
Parking controls and other management methods have been studied in an
analysis of the Washington, D.C. area. Three alternatives were analyzed, and
two of them are significant here. The first was a "no control" case—what
would happen to VMT and air pollution without parking management programs and
other attempts to reduce auto use. The second included parking facility review,
resident parking permits, limits on new spaces and price increases. In the
most comprehensive alternative, zoning changes were made to guide development
to areas where mass transit would be most effective, and park-and-ride systems
23
-------
included. The reductions related to the parking controls along (option 2
above) are shown in Table 6. Note that these reductions are applied aqainst
a base which already includes vehicle emission controls, a mass transit system,
and several bus priority operations; the change in ambient pollution levels
could easily be larger in other areas.
Table 6
Effectiveness of Parking Controls
15
Trip Reduction
(Journey to Work)
Pollutant Reduction
CO
Qxidants
NO,,
1980
1.7%
0.8%
1.5
.3%
1993
1.2%
0.9%
1.8%
0.2%
A fee increase of twenty-five percent on almost all garage parking spaces
was implemented in San Francisco in 1970. The largest effect was seen in
increased parking garage revenues, but the number of cars parked was reduced
somewhat. Commuters were more sensitive to increases than shoppers, probably
because transit is a better alternative in the peak hours. The total effect,
though, was slight: a twenty-'five percent increase in fees led to only about a
six percent reduction in commuter vehicles parked, and a four percent reduction
in shoppers' vehicles. There is also no assurance that on-street parking did
not increase, so these figures are the maximum likely reduction in travel.
The quality of public transit will be of critical importance to this type of
strategy.
One report on control strategies done at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology1' identified an important side effect. Parking management increases
carpooling and transit use, reducing the numbers of cars used for commuting,
but the pool cars tend to be used for shopping and social trips; they will not,
in general, stay in the garage all the time. Thus, the real VMT reduction is
smaller than the direct change in commuting use.
The costs and feasibility of the various controls are acceptable. Table 7
gives the feasibility of parking controls as rated by a study for EPA. Permit
programs and increased enforcement are generally self-supporting, with tickets
paying for the people required to write them. A nominal permit fee to cover
administrative costs is common—five dollars seems to be the average level.*&
Since resident permit fees benefit the local voters, they are usually easy to
implement, though they may be subject to court conflicts. (See next section,
Ordinances and Technical Data).
24
-------
Figure 1
Effect of Parking on Curb Sweeping21
Cleaning
Efficiency
(% of curb
swept)
100 -i
90 -
80 -
70 -
60 -
50 -
40 -
30 -
20 -
10 -
20 30 40 50 60
% of Parking Spaces Full
70
80
90
100
SOURCE: A.H. Levis, Urban Stroet Cleaning, Report No. EPA 670-2-
75-030, February 1975.
25
-------
Table 7
19
Feasibility of Parking Controls
Cost to Cost to Legal Political
Commuters Government Power Feasibility
Resident Permit moderate moderate yes easy
Parking Facility
Review low moderate questionable easy
Facility reviews, zoning changes, and rate increases are subject to larger-
implementation problems. All three give people and businesses an incentive
to go elsewhere. A business district without sufficient parking or with extra-
ordinarily high rates will see its customers disappear to other shopping sites,
unless excellent transit or amenities are offered. A community limiting parking
without providing good alternatives may not get new businesses. Therefore, such
changes should be implemented throughout the region (or, at least, in major
centers) if possible. The cost of the facility review may also be high, but it
can be included in a general environmental review process for the area (see
Section VIII).
Water Pollution-Related Controls
As mentioned above, most parking controls can pay their own way through
tickets, fees, etc. Thus, the cost of enforcement measures is small. Similarly,
there are few implementation problems (beyond the first few weeks) in setting
up parking controls for street sweeping. Public education is necessary for
the affected areas, but this is simple and fairly inexpensive.
Therefore, the only major question is how much parking can affect street
sweeping and lead to water quality improvements. In urban areas, most.particles
gather at the curb, so the fraction of the curb swept is most important. 0
Figure 1 shows the relationship between this measure and the parked cars, for
an average block. As can easily be seen, a few cars will drop the sweeping ef-
fectiveness on a block considerably, so enforcement and parking controls are critica]
ORDINANCES AND TECHNICAL DATA
Facility Review and Zoning Controls
Two example facility review ordinances are contained in Appendices II-l
and II-2.22 The first was developed as a draft by EPA for California cities and
has not been implemented.
At this point, most parking management methods are voluntary. Thus, it is
up to the local community to set what standards it desires for approving a
facility, which may depend on the extent of the local automotive air pollution
26
-------
problem and other factors. Consistency with the Area Transportation Plans,
however, would be desirable since it would insure that the regional context of
parking limits is considered. The Seattle ordinance (Appendix II-2) was
proposed as a good model for the type of ordinance which local governments
could implement.
Resident Parking Permits
Appendix II-3 contains the Washington, D.C., permit ordinance, which is
simply a small addition to existing parking procedures.23 Other local govern-
ments, such as Cambridge, Massachusetts, Richmond, Virginia, Wilmington, Dela-
ware, and Arlington County, Virginia, have implemented permit programs.24 Local
opposition has been slight. In Arlington, though, the ordinance was challenged
in court, and the "classification based on address [was] struck down." The
opposition came mostly from the federal employees who parked in the area, and
the issue is still in litigation.25 Special enabling legislation may be re-
quired for permit programs, so a good legal opinion would be useful.
Street Sweeping
The effectiveness of street sweepers is an important issue, particularly
their effectiveness in removing fine particles which cause air pollution,
particularly.in the form of dust. Three major studies have been done of street
runoff and how to control it and all are listed in the references.26 The cur-
rent APWA study analyzes the effectiveness of different types of sweepers and
other controls. Previous sweeper evaluations.27, are outdated, particularly
with respect to vacuum sweepers.
27
-------
Appendix II-l
An Ordinance Providing for Parking Facility Review by Local
Governmental Entities
Section 1 - DEFINITIONS
(1) "Parking Facility" (also called "facility") means any off-
street area or space, lot, garage, building or structure, or combination
or portion thereof, in or on which motor vehicles are parked.
(2) "Vehicle Trip" means a single movement by a motor vehicle
that originates or terminates at a parking facility.
(3) "The phrase "Construction" means any physical alteration of the
land upon which a new or modified parking facility is to be located
including, but not limited to, site clearance, grading, dredging or
land filling.
(4) The phrase "to commence construction" means to engage in a con-
tinuous program of physical alteration of the land upon which a new
parking facility is to be located including, but not limited to, site
clearance, grading, dredging, or land filling. For the purpose of this
section, interruptions resulting from acts of God, strikes, litigation,
or other matters beyond the control of the owner shall be disregarded in
determining whether a construction or modification program is continuous.
(5) The phrase "to commence modification" means to engage in a con-
tinuous program of physical alteration of the land upon which a modifica-
tion of an existing parking facility is to be located including, but not
limited to site clearance, grading, dredging, or land filling.
Section 2 - APPLICABILITY
The requirements of this section are applicable to the following
parking facilities within the , the construction of which
Degan after June 30, 1975.
(1) Any new parking facility with parking capacity for 250 or more
vehicles;
(2) Any parking facility that will be modified to increase parking
:apacity by 250 or more motor vehicles; and
(3) Any parking facility constructed or modified in increments
'hich individually are not subject to review under this section but
rhich, when all such increments occurring on or after June 30, 1975
re added together, as a total, would subject the facility to review.
28
-------
Section 3 - EXCEPTIONS
No person shall begin construction of any facility subject to
this section without first obtaining written approval from the
(Agency), provided that, this section shall not apply to (1) any
parking facility where the owner or operator of such facility has
"commenced construction" or has "commenced modification" of such
facility on or before June 30, 1975, (2) to any parking facility
constructed or operated together with a residential building or build-
ings for the primary use of residents of such building(s) (except
that an apartment or condominium development with 1,000 or more
spaces or an apartment or condominium to increase parking capacity
by 500 or more vehicle spaces shall be required to obtain approval),
(3) any parking facility to be constructed by a religious organiza-
tion, and to be used, solely for religious purposes (not including
high schools and college level education).
Section 4 - APPROVAL
Approval to construct or modify a facility shall be granted if
the governing body determines that:
(1) The design or operation of the facility will not cause, a
violation of any regulations which are a part of the federally ap-
proved California Implementation. Plan, and
(2) all requirements provided in Appendices to the EPA Parking
Management Regulations promulgated for California have been met, and
(3) the facility is consistent with the provision of the 3-c
agency transportation plan for the applicable area and with the
regional parking management plan where one has been approved by the
Administrator of EPA.
Section 5 - APPLICATIONS
Except to the extent that the (Agency) waives any such require-
ments in writing, all applications for approval under this section
shall include the following information:
(1) Name and address of the applicant.
(2) Location and description of the parking facility.
(3) A proposed construction schedule.
(4) The normal hours of operation of the facility and the
enterprises and activities that it serves.
(5) The total motor vehicle capacity before and after
the construction or modification of the • facility.
29
-------
(6) The number of people using or engaging in any enter-
prises or activities that the facility will serve
on a daily basis and a peak hour basis.
(7) A projection of the geographic areas in the community
from which people and motor vehicles will be drawn
to the facility. Such projection shall include data
concerning the availability of mass transit from such
areas.
(8) An estimate of the average and peak hour vehicle trip
generation rates, before and after construction or
modification of the facility.
(9) An estimate of the effect of the facility on traffic
pattern and flow.
(10) An estimate of the net change in VMT resulting from
the operation of the proposed facility.
(11) Additional information, plans, specifications or
documents as required by the (Agency).
(12) For any parking facility having capacity for 1000 or
more vehicles, additional information may be required
by the (Agency).
(13) If the (Agency) specifically so requests, the application
shall also include an analysis of the effect of the
facility on site and regional air quality, including,
where applicable, a showing that the facility will be
consistent with the federally approved California
Implementation Plan, and that the facility will not
cause any national air quality standards to be exceeded
within 10 years from date of application. The EPA
Administrator may prescribe standardized screening
techniques to be used in analyzing the effect of the
facility on ambient air quality.
(14) Each application shall be signed by the owner or operator
of the facility whose signature shall constitute an agree-
ment that the facility shall be constructed in accordance
with the information submitted in the application. In
addition, the (Agency) may prescribe reasonable construc-
tion and operating conditions to any approval granted.
30
-------
Section 6 - REVIEW PROCEDURES
(1) Within days after receipt of an application or addi-
tion thereto, the (Agency) shall advise the owner or operator of
any deficiency in the information submitted in support of the
application. In the event of such a deficiency, the date of
receipt of the application for the purpose of subparagraph (2)
of this paragraph shall be the date on which the required informa-
tion is received by the (Agency).
(2) within days after re-eipt of a complete application,
the (Agency) will:
i. Consult with air pollution control agency which
will determine the air quality impact of the proposed facility.
ii. Make a preliminary determination whether the parking
facility should be approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved.
iii. Notify the public, by prominent advertisement in a newspaper
of general circulation, of the opportunity for inspection and written
public comment on the information submitted by the owner or operator
and the (Agency's) preliminary determination of the approvability
of the facility.
(3) A copy of the notice shall be sent to the applicant and to
officials and agencies including Region IX, EPA, having cognizance
over the location where the parking facility will be situated, as
follows: State/Regio'n/and/or local air pollution control agencies,
the chief executive of the city and county; and any comprehensive
regional land use or transportaton planning agency and to any person
requesting such notification.
(4) Comments submitted in writing by the public and the applicant
or postmarked within 30 days after the date such information is made
available shall be considered by the (Agency) in making its final
decision on the application and the (Agency) shall take final action
on an application within days after the close of the public
comment period. Any of the time periods specified in this Section
may be extended by no more than days., or such other period as
agreed to by the applicant and the (Agency).
(5) Approval to construct or modify shall become invalid if
construction or modification is not commenced within 24 months after
receipt of such approval. The (Agency) may extend such time period
upon a satisfactory showing that an extension is justified. The
applicant may apply for such an extension at the time of initial
application or any time thereafter.
31
-------
Section 7 - TRANSFERABILITY
Approvals are transferable between successive owners of property
for which an approval is granted so long as the facility is con-
structed and/or modified in full accordance with the approved applica-
tion and its conditions.
Section 8 - PENALTIES
Any owner or operator who fails to construct a parking facility
in accordance with the application as approved by the (Agency); any
owner or operator who fails to" construct and operate a parking facility
in accordance with conditions imposed by the (Agency); any owner or
operator who modifies a parking facility in violation of conditions
imposed by (Agency); any owner or operator of a parking facility sub-
ject to this section who begins construction thereof on or after
July 1, 1975, without applying for and receiving approval hereunder,
shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine of
not less than dollars ' or by imprisonment in the
City jail for not more than and may be restrained and
enjoined from further violation of this ordinance.
Section 9 - EFFECTIVE DATE AND INCONSISTENCIES
This ordinance shall take effect and be enforced from and after
its passage and publication according to law. Existing ordinances
or parts thereof inconsistent with this ordinance are hereby repealed.
Passed by the ._ (governing body) of
the of on
19 .
(authorized signature)
(attest)
32
-------
Appendix II-2
Rules and Regulations - Residential Permit Parking Program
By virtue of the authority vested in me as Mayor of the District
of Columbia, the following objective criteria is hereby established
to be used in evaluating need for restricted parking in a residential
area in accordance with Section 82 (c) of Regulation 74-25:
For an area, however big or small, to be eligible for residential
permit parking, that area must meet the following criteria:
(1) During any period between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and
6:30 p.m. weekdays, except holidays, the number of
vehicles parking (or standing), legally or illegally,
on the streets in the area is equal to 70% or more of
the legal on-street parking capacity of the area. For
purposes of this criterion, a legal parking space shal.l
be 20 linear feet.
(2) During the same period as in Item 1 above, 10% or more
of the vehicles parking (or standing) on the streets in
the area are not registered in the name of a person
residing in this area. For purposes of this criterion,
the latest available information from the Department of
Motor Vehicles regarding registration of motor vehicles
shall be used.
(3) Prior to an area being recommended as a residential
permit parking area, the following facotrs must be
considered:
(a) The clean air requirements of Federal and District
air quality plans.
(b) The possibility of a reduction in vehicle miles traveled.
(c) The likelihood of alleviating traffic congestion, illegal
parking, and related health and safety hazards.
(d) The proximity of public transportation.
(e) The desire and need of the area residents for
residential permit parking and their willingness
to bear the associated administrative costs.
33
-------
(f) The need for parking for periods in excess of
two hours for business establishments and the
general public for religious, health, or educa-
tion purposes; and
(g) The need for parking regulation to maintain the
stability of neighborhoods.
Interested persons residing in impacted areas may submit written
petitions reflecting the majority viewpoint on the program to Mr.
Martin K. Schaller, Executive Secretary, Executive Office of the
Mayor, Room 528, District Building, 14th and E Streets, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20004.
Walter E. Washington
Mayor
34
-------
Appendix II-3
A Resolution Adopting an Interim Parking Policy for the
Central Business District
Whereas A goal is that people of all income levels in the city must
be able to move swiftly, safely, and economically from
place of residence to place of work and together important
destinations downtown and elsewhere, and to do so with min-
imum damage to the environment for living. This means that
movement of people and goods must not severely damage the
quality of areas for residential and other uses, and have
minimum adverse impact on the quality of air and level of
noise in the city; and
Whereas A second goal is that Seattle's downtown parking must support
a useful, interesting, attractive,'and healthy core for the
metropolitan area, providing a strong employment and tax
base for Seattle's citizens particularly; and
Whereas From these broad goals stem certain related objectives:
1. Pedestrians should be able i_o move about with ease and
comfort in the core of the CBD, particularly with maxi-
mum freedom of conflict with vehicles.
2. The percentage of people coming to downtown by public
transit, car pools and bicycles, especially for the daily
work trip should be greatly increased.
3. More of the street right-of-way in many parts of the
CBD should be devoted to pedestrians (wider sidewalks)
and to transit operations (bus stops and preferential
travel lanes).
4. Congestion resulting from undue searching for parking
places should be reduced; the movement of automobiles
from their arrival route to their destination in or near
the CBD should be as direct as possible.
5. Service vehicles and goods-handling vehicle should be
accommodated as needed to serve appropriate CBD land
uses.
35
-------
6. Air polluting emissions in the CBD should be positively
influenced through City parking policy.
7. The CBD should maintain its dominant metropolitan center
position. This implies an increase in CBD employment
commensurate' with regional growth, a significant increase
in the number of people living in the CBD or within
one-half mile of it, and maintenance of strong retail
activity in the area.
Be It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Seattle, the Mayor
Concurring.
That the following policies shall guide city action concerning
parking and transportation in the CBD.
1. No changes will be made in current parking practices in the
CBD prior to the development of workable alternatives, and
implementation of these policies will take place gradually
and in full consultation with interested citizens, downtown
property owners, businesses, investors and dwellers to
assure the adoption of workable policies.
2. No action to alter existing mobility or parking patterns
will be ta\ken without the specific provision of new alter-
natives to accommodate present and expected levels of
travel.
3. The City of Seattle will work with individual CBD businesses
to promote car pools and transit usage as reasonable and
low-cost alternatives to driving and parking private autos.
4. A substantial portion of future CBD-oriented long-term park-
ing spaces should be located at a number of outlying mass
transit nodes (both inside and outside the city limits) to
intercept people destined for downtown. Each park-ride
lot should be connected to the CBD by express transit at
peak travel hours and by very high quality service at other
hours.
This policy is exemplified in the present Blue Streak
type operation which is scheduled to be expanded to
include approximately 50 new park-ride lots with a
combined capacity to park 16,000 vehicles, all to be
constructed under Metro through 1980. Carrying out
such a policy (expanded in scope to meet demand) will:
36
-------
(1) assist in keeping travel on arterials leading to
the CBD at an acceptable level; (2) serve to free-up
parking currently devoted to long-term use for greater
short-term use; and (3) generally absorb the increased
demand for provision of additional long-term parking
spaces for downtown resulting from increasing CBD
employment.
5. Outlying parking facilities should be developed with a "low
profile;" that is, each area should be kept reasonably
small, with substantial boundary screening and internal
planting to minimize adverse impacts on the surrounding
areas.
This policy is intended to keep the scattered, out-
lying parking facilities compatible with their surround-
ings. It is assumed that land values and zoning height
limits will dictate open lots or, at most, a double
deck lot.
6. The periphery or "CBD frame," as shown on the attached maps,
should gradually evolve to provide nearly all of the remaining
CBD-oriented .long-term parking not able to utilize the
outlying park-ride lots referred to in Policy 4. The imple-
mentation of this policy should be keyed to the availability
of rapid and convenient access between the CBD frame and
principal core destinations.
The intent here is to establish a "sieve" which will
retain at the edge, of the CBD as many of the cars as
possible which somehow cannot fit into the park-ride
scheme described in Policy 4 above, and that access
from the periphery shall be provided to ultimate prin-
cipal CBD destinations.
7. The CBD peripheral parking facilities should be related as
closely as possible to the arterial ways used by the vehicles
in approaching and leaving the CBD. These parking facilities,
for example, should be closely related to the on- and off-
ramps of Highway 1-5 and Alaskan Way Viaduct and to other
principal access routes.
This policy seeks to ease the travel load on downtown
streets.
8. The CBD peripheral parking facilities should be tied to the
principal CBD people-destinations by the easiest, most direct
37
-------
routes. Weather protection and pedestrian assist systems,
such as moving sidewalks or escalators, should be used when
feasible.
This policy recognizes the need for speedy and comfort-
able people-movement in order to induce people to leave
their automobiles in peripheral locations.
9. Parking located within the CBD core should be. limited appro-
ximately to the number of spaces that now exist. The loca-
tion of these might be reordered considerably within the
area. The character of core parking should also gradually
change from long-term to short-term use where walking dis-
tance is not excessive or where rapid and convenient access
becomes available from parking on the periphery.
This policy means that replacement parking facilities,
either as principal or accessory uses, could be provided
as presently existing parking is displaced by new
buildings. It also recognizes that a certain amount of
interspersed parking is necessary for the healthy func-
tioning of some core uses, e.g., parking for hotel
guests, for the physically handicapped, for some types
of customers and building tenants, etc. It also re-
cognizes that, if the CBD core is to be a predominantly
pedestrian precinct, the amount of parking, the number
of driveways, the number of moving vehicles, etc., should
be minimized. It is assumed that all off-street parking
in the core will ultimately be in multi-level structures
and that most of it will be closely tied to other specific
uses and available only because of that tie, e.g.,
accessory to an office building.
10. To the greatest extent possible, parking in and near the CBD
core should incorporate joint development. At least at
street level there should be emphasis on human scale and
character such as is manifested through retail sales and
service and displays. Housing, hotels, offices, etc.
should utilize air rights over parking facilities. Loca-
tions should be selected to serve both daytime and nighttime
activities during both work week and weekend periods.
This policy is responsive to the popular demand to keep
people-use dominant over vehicle-use in the CBD. It
does this in part by increasing the efficiency with
which a limited amount of parking can serve the need,
and in part by integrating the parking with pedestrian-
type uses.
38
-------
11. To improve the aesthetics of downtown, minimum standards for
parking lot improvement should be established and vigorously
enforced in the CBD. The period for conformance should be
reasonably short, and some of the requirements should apply
,to upgrading existing lots.
This recognizes that there may be open-lot parking in
the CBD . It does this in part by increasing the
efficiency with which a limited amount of parking can
serve the need, and in part by integrating the parking
with pedestrian-type uses.
12. No new long-term parking should be established in over-the-
water locations along the Central Waterfront, and such exist-
ing parking should be phased out from these locations over
a reasonable period of time where possible.
This policy would tend to minimize conflict between auto-
mobiles and the growing pedes-rian activity along the
recreation-oriented waterfront. It is also in general
support of the Shoreline Protection Act.
13. Incentives, economic and otherwise, shall be explored to achieve
the above mentioned goals, objectives, and policies.
Conclusion
The intent of this policy is to provide a basis for a program which, im-
plemented over a period of years, will bring parking into its proper
role as a part of the transportation system. Private parking facilities,
particularly open lots, tend to be impermanent, and firm guidance at
this-time can result in accomplishment of goals and objectives. The
carrying out of policies, over a period of years, should render little
harm to private owners or business managers.
39
-------
FOOTNOTES
1. Environmental Protection Agency and Federal Energy Administration.
Summary Paper on Fuel Economy; Impact of Alternative Auto Emission
Standards. February 1976.
2. D.G. Shaheen. Contributions of Urban Roadway Usage to Water Pollution.
EPA 600/2-75-004, April 1975.
3. J.D. Sartor and G.B. Boyd. Water Pollution Aspects of Street Surface
Contaminants. EPA-R2-72-081, November 1972.
4. Richard Sullivan, American Public Works Association, personal communi-
cation, March 1976.
5. Sartor and Boyd. op.cit.
6. C.T. McGavin. Municipal Codes and Parking Management. Applied Parking
Techniques, Inc., for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1975.
D.K. Witheford and G.E. Kanaan. Zoning, Parking and Traffic. Naugatuck,
Connecticut: Eno Foundation for Transportation, 1972,
7. E. Twomey. "Preliminary Report: Relationship B.etween Parking Manage-
ment and Vehicle Miles Traveled." U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 1975 (DRAFT).
8. Cities having such programs include, at a minimum, Cambridge, Massachu-
setts; Wilmington, Delaware; Richmond, Virginia; and Washington, D.C.;
Arlington County, Virginia, is in litigation.
9. See Appendix II-l.
10. H.S. Levinson; C.L. Adams; and W.F. Hoey. Bus Use of Highways, Planning
and Design Guidelines. National Cooperative Highway Research Program,
Report 155, Washington: Transportation Research Board, 1975.
11. In Cambridge, for example, illegal on-street parking outside tow zones
carries a minimum fine of $15 in residential areas, and $5 elsewhere.
12. McGavin. op.cit., and Witheford & Kanaan. op.cit.
13. Department of Traffic and Parking, and Department of Sanitation,
Cambridge, Massachusetts.
14. • Energy and Environmental Analysis. Parking Management Study of the
Washington, D.C. Region. Draft final report for U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1975.
15. ibid.
40
-------
16. D. Kulash. "Parking Taxes as Roadway Prices: A Case Study of the San
Francisco Experience." Transportation Research Record #494. Washington:
Transportation Research Board, 1974.~~~''
17. T. Adler. A Joint Choice Disaggregate Model of Non-Work Urban Passenger
Travel Demand. Unpublished M.S. Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering,
MIT, 1975.
18. $5 is used by Cambridge and Washington, at least.
19. Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc. op.cit.
20. L.T. Destefano and A.H. Levis. "A Model for the Effect of Illegally
Parked Cars on Street Cleaning." Journal of Environmental Systems,
2(2) .-109-129 (June 1972).
21. ibid.
22. See Appendix for ordinances
23. See Appendix for ordinances
24. E. Twomey, EPA, personal communication.
25. C. Flynn/ County Attorney, Arlington, Virginia, personal communication.
26. Shaheen, op.cit.; Sartor and Boyd, op.cit.; Sullivan, op.cit.
27. W. Laird and K. Scott. "How Street Sweepers Perform Today." The American
•City 86(3): 58-62 (March 1971).
41
-------
SECTION III
SPACE HEATING AND HOME ENERGY CONSUMPTION
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF SPACE HEATING
Space heating in residential and commercial buildings accounts for appro-
ximately eighteen percent of the nation's energy use overall, and about seventy
percent of homes in the United States contain either central heating, or
built-in devices that deliver heat to each room,1 Except for the limited energy
produced by hydroelectric, geothermal, and nuclear plants, all energy used by
space heating equipment comes, directly or indirectly, from the burning of
fossil fuels; the combustion of these fuels results in air pollution, and, to
a much lesser extent, water pollution and solid waste generation.
Energy Conservation
In order to reduce pollution caused by the burning of fossil fuels, one
can either attempt to clean up the emissions from the burning or reduce the
amount of fuel burned. The first solution is impractical where many homes
or commercial furnaces are concerned, but it is effective at central power
plants. A more efficient and cheaper solution is to reduce the consumption of
energy for space hearing by promoting more energy efficient building practices.
Because of the rising costs of fossil fuels world-wide, programs to increase
energy conservation already have high priority; reduction in environmental
pollution is but one of several beneficial effects of such programs.
To arrive at some estimation of how much pollution emissions can be re-
duced by various local regulations of building practices, a number of assump-
tions must be made about the impact of revised standards on energy consumption.
Although a variety of programs are possible, improving insulation standards
in new and old buildings is the most effective single approach. Turning down
thermostats and improving the efficiency of furnaces (through adjustments and
maintenance), while cheaper to implement, do not achieve comparable levels of
conservation.
Table 8 shows the percentage of energy savings possible by implementa-
tion of basic improvements in insulation and heating plants.2 These are general
figures, but they are sufficiently accurate for estimating average savings for
characteristic dwellings. From the table it is clear that the total savings
available from improving insulation (the first three construction measures)
are significantly greater than those from improving equipment performance
standards—42.5 percent versus 13 percent, or more than three times as great.
Furthermore, requiring improved insulation of new buildings is a strategy
that local governments can implement through.their own building codes; raising
42
-------
Table 8
Percentage Heating and Cooling
Energy Consumption Savings for New Construction
Measures in Residential and Commercial Buildings
New Construction
Measures
Increased Wall,
ceiling, floor
insulation
Double glazing,
storm windows and
doors
Improved caulking
and weatherstripping
Minimum equipment
performance
standards
Percent Annual
Heating Energy Saved
Residential
20
17
11*
13
Commercial
15
20
11*
6
Percent Annual
Cooling Energy Saved
Residential
4
—
8*
10
Commercial
—
—
8*
10
Sources: Hittman Associates, Inc., and
(1) "The Potential for Energy Conservation in the Residential and
Commercial Sectors," A.D. Little, Inc., for the Council on
Environmental Quality, July 1974.
(2) "Residential Energy Consumption - Multifamily Housing," Hittman
Associates, Inc., for the Department of Housing and Urban
Development, January 1974.
(3) "Impact of Improved Thermal Performance in Conserving Energy,
National Mineral Wool Insulation Associations, Inc., April 1972.
*Where storm windows and doors are installed, the value
of improved caulking and weatherstripping is reduced by
50%.
43
-------
equipment performance standards is a strategy more appropriate on the state
or federal level, due to the necessity to implement it on a large scale basis
in order to allow manufacturers to comply.
Assuming, then, that the stated percentage savings available from im-
proved insulation are attainable, it is necessary to apply these savings
to characteristic dwelling units in various climates to arrive at actual
fuel saved. -In various reports to the Environmental Protection Agency and
the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Hittman Associates has used
the energy consumption parameters of statistically typical residences in
the Baltimore, Maryland, area.3 Within limits, it is possible to assume that
the heating requirements of these units in climates elsewhere in the country
are proportional to changes in the total annual number of heating degree-days.4
(A heating degree-day is calculated by subtracting the mean daily temperature
during the heating season from 65°F or some other base; total annual degree
days are the sum of the individual heating degree-days over a year.)
Figure 2 shows the distribution of heating degree-days across the United
States. Other factors besides degree-days, such as humidity, wind velocity,
building orientation, and consumer habits are also important in determining
heating requirements, but until further data is developed, the most useful
estimations are found by assuming direct proportionality between heating
degree-days and energy consumption of a given design of house.
Table 9 shows the approximate heating requirements for the character-
istic single family house (1695 square feet; three bedrooms, one bath: see
Appendix Ili-l for full description) in various climates. These heating
requirements are translated into fuel and electricity consumption using
heating efficiencies for gas of seventy-five percent; oil, sixty-three per-
cent; and electricity, ninety-five percent;-* and heating contents of fuels
from the Federal Energy Administration, "Monthly Energy Review."6 (For
a discussion of what these savings mean in dollars see "Retrofitting Existing
Construction" in this chapter.) It should be stressed that the apparent
high_rate of efficiency of electrical energy conversion applies only within a
building; it deals only with the conversion of electricity to heat, not the
conversion of fuel to electricity. Conversion of fuels to electric energy
is discussed below.
Air Pollution
Natural gas and distillate fuel oil are the primary fuels burned in
furnaces in homes and commercial buildings. Propane, butane and other liquified
petroleum gases are also used, comprising about ten percent of gas burning
systems.7 (Some coal and wood burning furnaces continue in use in some sec-
tions of the country, but their impact overafl is negligible.) The primary
waste products of this fuel combustion are particulate matter, oxides of nitro-
gen (NOx), and oxides of sulfur (SOx), though other pollutants are contributed
as well.
But fuel burned in furnaces is not the only source of air pollution related
to space heating. In 1970, about 4.9 million homes were heated by electricity,8
the majority using electrical resistance heating and about ten percent relying
on (much more efficient) heat pumps. Electrical resistance heating is highly
44
-------
Figure 2
NORMAL NUMBER OF DEGREE-DAYS PER YEAR
n
I
Source: C. Strock, and R.L. Koval, Handbook of Air Conditioning, Heating, and Ventilating,
Industrial Press, Inc., New York, New York.
-------
Table 9
Approximate Heating .Requirements for the Characteristic Single Family House
Under Different Climatic Conditions
Degree Days
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
Basic Heating
Load of
Characteristic
House (THERMS)*
685
915
1140
1370
1600
1825
GAS (xlOOO ft3)
Characteristic
House
89
118
148
177
207
236
With
Improved
Insulation
61
82
86
103
120
137
OIL (gallons)
Characteristic
House
784
1046
1305
1568
1831
2089
With
Improved
Insulation
541
723
757
909
1062
1211
ELECTRICITY (kwhr)
Characteristic
House
21133
28229
35170
42266
49361
56303
With
Improved
Insulation
14577
19472
20399
24514
28360
32656
**
*1 THERM = 10 BTU.
**1000-4500 — Increased insulation, improved caulking and weatherstripping.
4500-10,000 — increased insulation, improved caulking and weatherstripping,
and storm doors/windows or double glazing.
REFERENCE: Hittman Associates, Title X EIS, p. 5,7.
-------
inefficient systemwide compared to burning oil or gas in' the home: electricity
requires about twice as much fuel per BTU of heat delivered. This fuel is
burned at central power plants, so all associated air pollution emissions are
emitted at a concentrated point. And, power plants tend to use dirty fuels
(such as residual fuel oil and coal) compared to home heating plants, so their
emissions tend to have a high environmental impact.
Table 10 shows the potential emissions reductions attributable
to improved insulation in homes in various parts of the country. The savings
in fuel and energy use are converted to savings in air pollution emissions by
the use of constants derived by Hittman Associates.9 The conversion efficiency
of power plants is taken from FEA figures.10 To provide a realistic scale
for improved insulation practices community-wide, figures are expressed in
tons of pollutants per year per thousand houses. The table clearly shows
the substantial emission reductions attributable to improved insulation for
dirtier fuels, and colder climates. While these are annual figures, the
largest fraction of these emissions occur over the peak of the heating
season in January and February, with consequently greater impacts on local
air quality during these months.
Similar calculations may be performed for other popular small-scale
housing, such as attached townhouses and garden apartments. In the case of
large scale dwelling complexes, such as high-rise apartment houses, insula-
tion standards are already likely to be higher than for single-family
dwellings, since potential buyers in this sector tend to be more conscious
of life-cycle operations and maintenance expenses when they invest. The
figures in Tables 11 and 12 are based on characteristic performance
standards developed for townhouses and low-rise apartment structures by
Hittman Associates,11 and are related to typical blocks of units—six town-
houses, twenty-four low-rise apartments. Potential savings were estimated
to be roughly the same for townhouses as for single-family dwellings on a
percentage basis, and to be about two-thirds as great for low-rise apart-
men1;s. As both of these configurations are fundamentally more efficient to
heat in the first place than single-family dwellings, so their savings
available per unit are also lower.
Relating these emissions of pollutants to actual ambient air quality is
a complex problem. It depends on many factors, such as the distribution of
sources (the density of development), meteorological factors, and local topo-
graphy. All other sources of air pollution must be considered in any
modeling effort. The air quality improvement accruing to more efficient
space heating of homes may be a minor factor in many heavily developed areas,
where heavy air pollution emissions come from automobiles and industry. The
air pollution reductions attributable to improved insulation are, however,
such a substantial proportion (about forty percent) of the total contributed
by the housing sector that the improvements described here could have a sub-
stantial effect on air quality if conscientiously implemented throughout
a local community. Since implementation of this program will result in
substantial savings to homeowners within a relatively short time (see
"Retrofitting Existing Construction" below), there is no net cost to the
community associated with it.
47
-------
Table 10
Approximate Air Pollution Emission Reductions Due to Improved
Insulation of Single Family Houses
UNITS: tons/year/1000 houses
Degree
Days
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
t
Particulates
Gas Oil Elec.
.3 1.2 2.4
.4 1.6 3.2
.6 2.7 5.4
.7 3.3 6.5
.8 4.0 7.7
.9 4.6 8.6
Nitrogen Oxides
Gas Oil Elec.
.7 1.5 25
.9 2.0 33
1.5 3.3 56
1.8 4.0 67
2.2 4.6 79
2.5 5.3 89
Sulfur Oxides
Gas Oil Elec.
.8 3,8 44
1.1 5.1 ' 59
1.8 8.6 99
2.2 10.3 119
2.5 12.1 140 -
2.9 13.9 158
Hydrocarbons
Gas Oil Elec.
.1 .4 .4
.2 .5 .6
.3 .8 .9
.3 1.0 1.1
.4 1.2 1.3
.4 1.3 1.5
Carbon Monoxide
Gas Oil Elec.
.3 .6 1.4
.4 .8 1.8
.6 1.4 3."l
.7 1.6 3.7
.9 1.9 4.4
1.0 2.2 4.9
Aldehydes
Gas Oil Elec.
.1 .2 .007
.2 .3 .009
.3 .6 .015
.4 .7 .018
.4 .8 .022
.5 .9 .025
*>•
00
-------
Table 11
Net Air Pollution Emission Reductions for a Block of Characteristic Townhouses
(6 dwelling units) With Improved Insulation (tons x 10 /year)
GAS HEAT
Degree
Days
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
Nitrogen Sulfur Hydro- Carbon
Particulates Oxides Oxides Carbon Monoxide Aldehydes
1.14
1.71
2.33
2.90
3.47
4.04
4.61
2.97
4.45
6.08
7.56
9.05
10.50
12.00
.035
.053
.072
.089
.011
.012
.142
.48
.72
.99
1.23
1.47
1.71
1.95
1.2
1.8
2.5
. 3.1
3.7-
4.3
4.9
.59
.89
1.22
1.51
1.81
2.11
2.40
OIL HEAT
Degree
Days
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
Nitrogen Sulfur Hydro- Carbon
Particulates Oxides Oxides Carbon Monoxide Aldehydes
4.88
7.31
9.80
12.20
14.60
17.10
19.50
5.86
8.77
11.80
14.70
17.60
20.50
23.40
.15.3
22.9
30.7
38.4
46.0
53.7
61.3
1.46
2.19
2.94
3.67
4.39
5.13
5.86
2.44
3.65
4.90
6.11
7.32
8.55
9.77
.977
1.460
1.960
2.440
2.930
3.420
3.910
49
-------
Table 12
Net Air Pollution Emission Reductions for a Characteristic Low-Rise Apartment
Building (24 dwelling units) With improved Insulation (tons x 10~ /year)
GAS HEAT
Degree
Days
2000
3000
4000
5OOO
6000
7000
8000
Nitrogen Sulfur Hydro Carbon
Particulates Oxides Oxides Carbon Monoxide Aldehydes
2.0
2.9
3.9
4.9
5.8
6.8
7.7
5.1
7.5
10.3
12.7
15.0
17.8
20.2
.06
.09
.12
.15
.18
.21
.24
0.8
1.2
1.7
2.1
2.4
2.9
3.3
2.1
3.0
4.2
5.1
6.1
7.2
8.1
1.0
1.5
2.1
2.5
3.0
3.6
4.0
OIL HEAT
Degree
Days .
200Q
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
Nitrogen Sulfur Hydro Carbon
Particulates Oxides Oxides Carbon Monoxide Aldehydes
8.2
12.3
16.4
20.5
24.6
28.7
32.8
9.9
14.7
19,7
24.7
29.5
34.5
39.4
25.8
38.6
51.4
64.5
77.3
90.0
103.3
2.5
3.7
4.9
6.2
7.4
B.6
9.9
4.1
6.2
8.2
10.3
12.3
.4.4
16.4
1.6
2.5
3.3
4.1
4.9
5.8
6.6
50
-------
Water Pollution-and Solid Waste
Surprisingly, reductions in water pollution emissions and solid waste
generation can also be attributed to more efficient space heating of buildings,
wherever electricity is used as an energy source. Power plants burning oil or
coal contribute water pollution to the environment from their cooling water,
and the ash from the burning of coal is a source of solid waste. Scrubber tech-
nologies for power plant air pollution control may result in large quantities
of solid waste. Since coal is expected to play a larger role in the future
in the nation's energy picture, water pollution and solid waste production
figures are presented in Table 13 to give some idea of the potential
environmental impacts of reducing power demand in the home.-1-^
Interior Air Quality Considerations
A conventional older house, loosely caulked and weatherstripped, experi-
ences a high infiltration of outside air, and consequent loss of heating
efficiency. However, this outside air does provide valuable ventilation,
amounting to one-half to one-and-one-half air changes per hour on average,
throughout a house. Caulking and weatherstripping, while they decrease
heat loss, may also decrease ventilation down to undesirable levels. The
effect is most pronounced in new construction,'where all building components
fit tightly, but even retrofitting older construction can seriously decrease
ventilation.
Many houses today are being built without full foundations—they have
only a.concrete slab on grade. Furnaces may then be located adjacent to
living spaces. In a well-sealed house, provision of air for fuel combustion
may be constrained: although infiltration does occur through door and win-
dow seals, it may not match the air demand of the furnace. The result is
that the furnace chimney loses efficiency, and a part of the flue gases
may be emitted into the house. Provision o.f an outside air source for the
fuel burner should be provided, expecially where furnaces are located in
or near living spaces.
In forced hot air systems for commercial buildings, standard design
calls for seventy-five percent of the returned air to be reheated and
recirculated, with the rest supplied from fresh outside air; outside vents
are usually provided for this purpose. This level of ventilation is not
commonly required for residential hot air systems, but, except in very old
systems, the circulated air and the air in the combustion system are
segregated. Housing using forced hot air will receive considerable ventila-
tion despite the sealing of walls, windows and doors, though there is an
energy penalty paid for heating the colder outside air.
All systems that do not circulate air, such as circulated hot water,
steam, or electric baseboard, yield lower fresh air ventilation. In this
case, interior air quality may suffer badly, even if there is no contribu-
tion of pollution from the furnace.. Other sources of indoor air contaminants
include cooking (especially from unvented natural gas combustion), auto-use
related air pollution from attached garages, interior dust (elevated by
51
-------
Table 13
Approximate Water Pollution Emission and Solid Waste Reduction
Due to Improved Insulation of Electrically Heated Single Family Houses
UNITS: tons/year/1000 houses
(Assumes Coal-fired Power Plant)
Degree Days
3000
4000
5000
6000
. 7000
8000
WATER POLLUTION
Acids
.43
.57
.96
1.16
1.37
1.55
Dissolved
Solids
1.90
2.50
4.10
5.00
5.90
6.70
Suspended
Solids
.11
.15
.26
.31
.37
.41
Organics
(tons x 10~3)
.05
.06
.10
.12
.15
.16
Thermal
Pollution
(BTUs x 109)
8.80
11.80
19.80
23.80
28.20
31.80
SOLID
WASTE
.81
1.09
1.83
2.20
2.61
2.94
Ul
N3
-------
walking and cleaning), tobacco particles and smoking-related contamination,
and solvent evaporation from cleaning chemicals.13
Thus, while a tightly-sealed house does cut down on energy use, it is
not an unmitigated benefit. An optimum balance between weather-sealing and
ventilation requirements has not yet been worked out, but at a minimum,
adequate supplies of outside air should be provided for fuel combustion in
furnaces? in a well-designed system this should have no effect on fuel
conservation.
STANDARDS AND INCENTIVES FOR IMPROVED INSULATION
This section of the chapter presents the basic strategies available
for a local community to maximize the energy efficiency of its housing stock,
both new and old. First, improvements in the standards of new construction
are proposed, following the Department of Housing and Urban Development's
new additions to the Minimum Property Standards and certain construction
practices proposed by private research as applicable to multi-family build-
ings. Next, a discussion of retrofitting older houses with energy conserva-
tion improvements is presented, bringing out the financial barriers to in-
vestments in energy conservation, and presenting ways around them currently
available on the local level. Other supports and incentives to energy con-
servation in housing are presented in the next section: these are related
both to new and old housing. The use of land use controls for energy con-
servation in the housing sector is discussed in relation to certain recent
studies relating energy consumption to land use patterns. The final section
is devoted to an overview of the costs and implementation problems associated
with each of these strategies.
New Construction Standards
The most direct and effective way to promote energy conservation is
thr6ugh the use of revised building code standards for new construction
Application of thicker insulation, better weatherstripping and caulking,
and the installation of storm doors and windows are more easily and cheaply
done when a building is designed and built. Upgrading elder structures is
a more expensive practice. Insulation must be injected into closed wall
spaces, attic ceilings or floors removed and replaced, and often it is not
worth the trouble and expense involved to upgrade, for instance, four inches
of attic insulation to the desired six inches. Application of storm doors and
windows can become exceptionally expensive, since older windows and door
frames may not conform to present standard sizes. It is both inequitable
and impractical to focus the retrofitting of local buildings to conform to
the same insulation standards as new construction. Retrofitting should be
approached through the use of incentives for voluntary programs, as
discussed in the following section.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development has revised its Minimum
Property Standards for one and two family dwellings to include better thermal
insulation standards.14 These revisions are presented in "Building Standards"
below, they require weatherstripping and insulation, and limit total heat
transmission through walls, floors, ceilings, doors, and windows. They can
53
-------
easily be included as part of a local building code, either in whole or in
substantial part. Different amounts of insulation are called for accord-
ing to climate, with the major breaking point at 4,500 degree-days. This
corresponds to the climate of cities like Baltimore, Maryland; St. Louis,
Missouri; or Eugene, Oregon.
Vacation and other seasonal buildings are potentially exempt from the
revised building standards, since additional expense involved in insulat-
ing them to winter standards may be irrelevant to their use. Local commun-
ities must use their own judgment on requiring more expensive building
standards for such homes: often the seasonal home market in' a community
may involve winter users almost exclusively—towns in the vicinity of
ski resorts are the obvious example. If the size of the seasonal community
within a town is small, application of improved insulation standards to
these homes may not be an issue, but where it is extensive, local govern-
ments may find it advisable to require uniform building standards here too.
Where seasonal homes are on the outskirts of a major metropolitan area,
spreading suburbanization often leads to the eventual conversion of such homes
for year round use.15
Standards for the improvement of insulation of multi-family structures
have not yet been promulgated by HUD. In general, investors in larger
scale multi-family housing are more sensitive to the long range operations
and maintenance expense of their buildings, though in some markets developers
do seek to minimize the length of time they are financially committed to a
project and thus do not care about the long range heating and cooling costs
involved—their incentive is to minimize first cost. The standards for
multi-family dwellings presented in "Building Standards" below are brief,
and consist simply of the structural modifications proposed by a HUD
research project for application to townhouses, low-rise apartments, and
high-rise apartments.
Retrofitting Existing Construction
Financing Retrofit Installations —
Retrofitting existing structures with better insulation, more efficient
furnaces, and other conservation improvements will yield significant private
savings; indeed, most homeowners can be almost guaranteed of recouping their
investments, perhaps with substantial profit, over the long term. While
forcing retrofit through the use of some sort of retroactive building code
standard is inequitable as well as virtually impossible politically, the
benefits of energy conservation are such that adequately informing owners
of the long term savings involved can yield widespread improvements in local
housing stock.
In the previous section we calculated the approximate fuel savings
to be expected in different areas of the country for different fuels, on the
basis of a single standard home.l? we can use these figures again to demon-
strate the process of calculating the cost and benefit streams of various
methods of financing insulation in homes.
54
-------
Table 14 shows the savings, in fuel (by appropriate measure) and in
dollars accruing to the insulation of the typical single family house accord-
ing to the standards set forth for new construction. This includes insulation
of walls and attics, provision of glass storm windows and doors, and a
thorough weatherstripping and caulking of doors and windows. The cost of
doing this is estimated at $1500 1976 dollars.18 Conversion of fuel savings
to dollars was done using the national average cost for each fuel at $1.52 per
thousand cubic feet of gas, $.35 per gallon of distillate fuel oil, and
$.035 per kilowatt hour of electricity.19 These national average figures
are useful in most instances except in the case of natural gas, in which
there is wide variation nationwide in the price per unit. While oil prices
appear to vary (in 1975) from a low of about $.30 per gallon in South Carolina
to about $.40 per gallon in West Virginia, with the average price being
between $.34 and $.37,2° gas prices fluctuate widely from a low of about $.53
per thousand cubic feet in Kansas to a high of about $3.80 in Maine. Cost
recovery periods were calculated by assuming that these fuel prices remain
constant, and that the costs of the capital improvements necessary can be
treated as a loan at ten percent against which the savings are payments.
It is clear that under the present relatively cheap price of natural gas,
retrofit of housing is not cost-effective. Where gas prices are higher,
however, effectively matching or exceeding the per BTU cost of oil, figures
in the next column over are more appropriate. And for electricity, it ap-
pears on the chart that in areas of from 4000 degree-days and colder, payback
periods on insulation investments are ten years or less, This does not take
into account the rising price of fuel and the tax deduction available on
interest paid on home improvement or other financing to install the insulation.
Table 14 does not go far enough in presenting all the relevant facts
a homeowner must interpret to decide whether insulation is a wide investment
for him. The most accurate way to estimate the value of fuel savings is to
assess their discounted present value, taking expected rises in fuel costs,
the condition of the local housing market, the availability of home improve-
ment financing and other factors into account.
Retrofitting older homes can be financed in several ways. The buyer of
a used home can usually persuade a local bank to include the price of upgrading
the energy efficiency of his home in the sum'of the mortgage. The incremental
monthly payment attributable to the added insulation is small, and spread over
the life of the mortgage; the homeowner will see significant net cash savings
immediately, for his fuel savings should be greater than the additional payment
if he has made a careful evaluation of his requirements. But if a current
owner of a home seeks to retrofit, he usually must finance the costs with
short term financing—either through a home improvement loan (currently at
about ten percent interest over one to four years) or through consumer financ-
ing such as Master Charge (at up to eighteen percent per year interest). In
this case the large monthly payments over the short term of the loan usually
are much larger than the average monthly fuel savings. The owner has to wait
perhaps several years beyond the loan term to come out ahead over all, and
by then he may have sold the house.
Most homeowners now stay in their present homes a little less than ten
years,2* so the average homeowner is likely to expect to live in the same
55
-------
Table 14
Approximate Fuel Savings Accruing to Improved Insulation of a Characteristic
Single-Family House
DEGREE
DAYS
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
GAS SAVINGS
1000 ft.2
28
36
62
74
87
99
$
43
55
94
112
132
150
Payback
Period
(years)
GO
CO
OO
00
00
00
OIL SAVINGS
gallons
243
323
548
659
769
878
$
85
113
192
231
i!69
307
Payback
Period
(years)
00
00
15.9
11.0
8.6
7.0
ELECTRICAL SAVINGS
KwH
6556
8757
14771
17752
21001
23647
$
229
306
517
621
735
828
Payback
Period
(years)
11.2
7.1
3.6
2.9
2.4
2.1
Ul
-------
place another five years or so. Trying to convince a typical homeowner to
install expensive storm windows and doors, wall insulation, and attic insula-
tion may be difficult, since he may not plan to stay where he is long enough
to realize net savings on the investment. His only hope to get his money
out of the investment may be to tack on the price of it to the sales price
of the building. His decision to invest will then depend on his own assess-
ment of the chance of success in doing so.
Table 15 presents sample present value calculations for insulation
improvements to the characteristic house discussed above. Different financ-
ing strategies are compared against the savings expected in' different climates
around the country. A number of assumptions must be made clear. First, the
fuel savings used were those for oil heat: natural gas prices exhibit too
much variation nationwide for the" average figure to be generally meaningful,
and it can be expected that the price of gas will tend to rise in the future
to something comparable to the price of equivalent amounts of oil. It was
also assumed that the price of fuel oil would double, in constant dollars,
by the year 2000,24 and that inflation would add another three percent per
year to the market price.2^ Mortgage rates were estimated at nine percent
for a twenty-five year mortgage at eighty percent of the home's value. The
discount rate a homeowner might apply to the stream of benefits and costs
was placed at five percent, on the assumption that the most likely alter-
native investment available to a middle income homeowner would be a savings
account. Finally, an income tax bracket of twenty-eight percent was selected
for calculating the tax benefits available on interest charges. T.his is
typical for families filing a joint return and making $16,000 to $20,000
annually.26
Finally, two different estimates of construction costs were used. In
the previous section it was assumed that the total cost of adding extra insula-
tion to the new home wouJLd be $1500. For the retrofit installation, a
figure of $1750 was used, since fitting storm windows and doors to an older
building is usually more costly than fitting them to new construction, and
the cost of insulating finished walls and ceilings will be greater than for
original construction.
While the theoretical value usually ascribed to investments in energy
saving technology is the full discounted value of the fuel savings over time,
less the costs of the investment, at present the housing market does not
recognize this to be true. This is because homes change hands before the
long term benefits can accure to a single owner. Any prospective buyer,
given the choice between two identical properties—one insulated and one not—
would be foolish to pay the full value of the future fuel savings to the
seller of the insulated house. Instead, he would buy the uninsulated property
and get all the savings for himself for the cost of insulating, still retrainig
all the cash flow advantages of long term financing on the mortgage. Only
when most properties in a community market become insulated does it become
possible to capitalize fuel savings into the value of housing stock.
Most homeowners are conservative, and often prefer not to take much of a
risk in having to add the price of insulation to the selling price of their
home. Invisible improvements such as insulation are generally worth less
57
-------
in
CD
Table 15
The Net Value of Insulation Improvements in Various Climates
PRESENT VALUE
OF BENEFITS**
^PRESENT VALUE
NET PRESENT
VALUE
BALTIMORE
4600 degree days
BOSTON
6000 degree days
MINNEAPOLIS
8000 degree days
loan @ 10%
on $1750
mortgage @ 9.5%
on $1200 plus
deposit = $300
mortgage @ 9.5%
on $1400 plus
deposit = $350
loan @ 10%
on $1750
mortgage @ 9.5%
on $1200 plus
deposit = $300
mortgage @ 9.5%
on $1400 plus
deposit = $350
loan @ 10%
on $1750
mortgage @ 10%
on $1750
mortgage @ 10%
on $1350 plus
deposit = $350
1884.16
1995.57
2327.41
1884.16
1995.57
2327.41
1884.16
1884.16
2327.41
2748.41
2963.14
3011.12
4804.62
5019.35
5067.33
6376.96
6376.96
6639.67
864.25
967.57
683.71
2920.46
3023.78
2739.92
4492.80
4492.80
4312.26
/U..L calculations assume a home owner discounts all future payments and benefits at 5%,
the interest rate he might otherwise realize on his most likely alternate investments-
e.g., a savings account.
-includes present value of loan payments, plus mortgage down payments where applicable.
"includes fuel savings and income tax deductions on loan interest paid.
-------
in the marketplace than a fresh paint job or an extra bathroom when it comes
time to sell. Homeowners may be acting logically when they decide that an
expensive retrofit job, which seems on paper to be worth the money, it not the
best home improvement investment they could make. Communities can take a
number of approaches in encouraging energy conservation investments, as discussed
below.
Community Incentives for Retrofit —
A number of strategies are available through which local governments
may encourage the insulation of homes to reduce energy consumption. The
most direct is the use of modified building codes, presented above. If,
however, such code modifications are not made, the strategies below will still
be applicable. Some communities may elect not to revise building codes for
fear of rises in construction costs that would make them less competitive for
growth in the region. The approach outlined under "Property Tax Adjustments"
may make revised building codes more attractive to them.
Public Education Programs—Public education programs can be inexpensively
set up on the local level to help homeowners make rational decisions regard-
ing the insulation of new or existing housing, and explain town policy to new
homeowners building structures that might be covered by revised insulation
standards. By the use of the figures presented in this report and similar
ones, localities may present homeowners with benefit estimations representa-
tive of savings they might realize in their particular region of the country,
given the type of fuel they use for heat. Misunderstanding of the true costs
and benefits of these home improvements accounts for the economically
irrational choices that homeowners have often made in the past. Many electric
companies and state agencies will provide free speakers on energy conservation.
Two groups-of homeowners must be distinguished: those who own single
family houses, and those who own multi-family buildings rented for profit.
Education programs aimed at the first group should concentrate on ration-
alizing the cost of when to insulate: although all decisions to insulate in
areas with 4000 degree-days or more are economically sound in theory, there
are instances where the decision not to insulate may be justifiable. In parti-
cular, homeowners who plan to sell their property within a period of time
substantially less than the payback time of an investment financed under a
short term loan may rightly feel that the negative cash flow they will have
to support during the remainder of their occupancy will not be justified.
Since it is unlikely that they can increase the price of the house more than
their costs, they cannot realize the theoretical present value of the invest-
ment, and in fact may take a loss if they do not succeed in raising the
price. Retrofitting becomes a more reasonable investment for the current
owner the colder the climate he lives in, for where fuel savings are highest
the payback period is shortest.
Table 16 shows the revised net present value of insulation in the
case where a homeowner plans to sell four years from the time of installing
conservation improvements. If the full price of the improvement is realized
on the sale, then it is rational to make the investment in any case, although
the net value of the investment to a homeowner in a wanner climate (e.g.,
59
-------
Table 16
Present Value of Improved Insulation to •
A Home Owner Who Plans to Sell in Four Years
BALTIMORE
BOSTON
HIMNEAPOUS
Present Valu«
of Costs*
loan on $1750,
4 years, 10%
(1884,16)
(1684.16)
(1884.16)
Present Value of Benefits*
1) Resale Increase
. $2000
T*x
73.33
73.33
73.33
Fuel
502.59
889.90
1184.30
Incr.
1645.40
1645.40
1645.40
2) Resale Increase
SI 000
Tax
73.33
73.33
73.33
Fuel
502.59
986.90
1184.30
Incr.
622. 7-0
822,70
822.70
3) Resale Increase
SO
Tax
73.33
73.33
73.33
Fuel
502.59
688,90
1184.30
Incr.
O
0
0
, !
Net Present
Pre-Value
1
336 .86
723.47
1018. S7
2
(4B5.54)
( 99.23)
196.17
3
(1308.24)
{ 921.93)
I «26.5J)
•All prevent value* ai*u*e five percent discount rate.
-------
Baltimore) is very small indeed. If, however, the homeowner fe^rs that the
market will not allow him to raise the price fully to cover the cost of the
insulation, he may well face a net loss, though in colder climates this may
not always be true, as is shown in the table.
Naturally, the situation is different in the case of a new owner of an
older house. His expected stay in the building is likely to be in excess
of the payback period, so it makes sense for him to make the improvements even
if he were unable to recoup the capital costs on resale. Furthermore, he
can probably finance the improvement on his mortgage, and though his net
present benefit is lower, he realizes month to month cash savings right away.
From the community's standpoint, it should be to everyone's benefit,
including the towns, to encourage uniform retrofitting. If most of the town's
housing stock becomes insulated, owners will be better able to capitalize
the true benefits of fuel savings into the selling prices of houses, since
prospective buyers will no longer have the option of buying uninsulated
homes and paying only the costs of improvements. Tax assessments could thus
rise, and so would property tax receipts.
The situation for owners of multi-family homes is different: tenants
often pay utility bills, so owners have no direct incentive to insulate.
Were they to do so, they would have to charge more rent to pay off the cost,
making them less competitive with other rentable properties. While tenants
would have lower fuel costs, many prospective tenants fail to research operat-
ing costs when they make a decision to rent. This discourages retrofitting
in a competitive market. However, developers of new properties may well
take advantage—on their, own—of energy saving innovations in construction
in order to be able to offer lower rentals. By using long term financing
of these relatively inexpensive additions, they would experience no net
negative cash flow over the short term, and could minimize operating costs
from the start. The resale value of the property would also be increased by
perhaps a more predictable amount, as operating and maintenance costs of rental
properties are usually carefully evaluated on resale.
Public education programs have already occurred in various cities across
the country.27 The Michigan Consolidated Power Company advertises a booklet
they prepared illustrating that six inches of attic insulation could result
in a seventeen percent reduction of heating bills, and that the cost could be
amortized over 2.3 years. This booklet encouraged a sixty percent rise in
sales in insulation locally during the first two years of the program.
Philadelphia Electric, combining the efforts of local power suppliers and
Montgomery Ward department stores put out their own booklet on energy
conservation for homes, which included operational adjustments (thermostat
settings, for example) and structure changes (increased insulation, better
weatherstripping, etc.). They have since recorded increased sales in energy-
related equipment such as storm doors and windows, weatherstripping and
insulation.
Although local governments themselves may embark on public education pro-
grams to convince consumers to improve the energy efficiency of their pro-
perties, local power companies are a resource that should be exploited. They
have established .communication with home energy users over the years, are
61
-------
Table 17
Savings
Degree
Days
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
GAS
Savings/Year
lOOf3 ($)
28 (42.56)
36 (54.72)
62 (94.24)
74 (112.48)
87 (132.24)
99 (150.48)
112 .(170.24)
124 (188.48)
Cost Recovery
Period (Yrs.)
34.0
23.1
17.5
14.4
12.1
10.5
OIL
Savings/Year
gals. ($)
243 (85.05)
323 (113.40)
548 (191.80)
659 (230.65)
769 (269.15)
878 (307.30)
988 (345.80)
1096 (383.60)
Cost Recovery
Period (Yrs.)
47.2
22.8
10.3
8.1
6.3
5.8
5.0
4.5
ELECTRICITY
Savings/Year
KwHr (?)
6556 (229.46)
8757 (306.50)
14771 (516.99)
17752 (621.32)
21001 (725.59)
23647 (827.65)
26628 (913.98)
29543 (1034.01)
Cost Recovery
Period (Yrs . )
8.2
5.8
3.2
2.7
2.2
2.0
1.8
1.6
-------
familiar with local energy consumption patterns, and have competent profes-
sional staffs that can analyze the economics of local energy efficiency
improvements.
Problems: The problems that arise in consumer education programs are two-
fold. First, it is necessary for the program to continue over a long period,
so that as much of the local housing stock as possible will be improved.
Second, successful education programs, like all incentives, may result in
local shortages of required building materials over the short term. This
nay dampen enthusiasm for the program, especially if prices on materials
rise to reflect the shortage.
Energy Efficiency Labeling—Another way to promote energy conservation
innovations is through energy efficiency labeling of homes and apartments.
The probable energy consumption levels of new housing can be calculated on the
basis of construction techniques—such calculations are already made on a
rough basis for the sizing of furnaces and air conditioning equipment.
Using the analysis techniques developed by various current studies,28 quite
accurate estimates of home heat loss could be made by developers, and since
most residential subdivisions are constructed with a small number of differen
housing types in large multiples, the costs of complying with the labeling
requirement would not be excessive.
Energy labeling of existing housing is easier to do. It would merely
require that heating bills for the past year be made available to new owners
or tenants of any building. One mechanism by which this could be done is
the Occupancy Permit, recently used in some communities to control blight.
Under the occupancy permit ordinance, new renters or owners are required
to file at city hall for an occupancy permit, which is granted contingent
to an inspection of the property that concludes that it conforms to city
housing standards and is suitable for the prospective number of applicants.
Similarly, energy efficiency performance could be documented under an occup-
ancy permit system without the requirement for actual inspections—the per-
mit could be granted upon proof that the new owner or tenant had been shown
valid heating bills for the past heating season.
Tax Incentives—At least one tax incentive is already available for in-
sulation improvements—interest on any loan taken out for the purpose may be
deducted from federal income tax. This factor has already been taken into
account in calculating the net present value of investments in insulation
improvements.
Other tax incentives recently proposed include a twenty-five percent
income tax rebate on energy conservation equipment,^0 and energy tax sur-
charges on home heating fuels to encourage conservation. Neither of these
policies can be implemented on the local level. But, there are two routes
available to local governments—sales tax incentives (for those large muni-
cipalities that have city sales taxes) and property tax assessments.
Exempting energy conservation equipment (insulation, weatherstripping,
storm windows and doors, furnace efficiency modifications, etc.) from a local
sales tax would mean a break to local contractors or homeowners on the cost
63
-------
of improvements. The loss of sales tax revenues would be minor compared to
the net advantage it would represent to local contractors, banks and retail
establishments. Sales tax modifications usually ought to be made on the state
level, however, to represent widespread significant savings. Their value on
a local level might be largely psychological, helping to emphasize a city's
committment to energy conservation, which may supplement use of building
code revisions, property tax breaks, energy efficiency labeling, public
education policies and the like.
Property tax assessment represents perhaps a more fruitful implementa-
tion approach for local governments. Tax reassessments are not necessarily
made following home improvements such as retrofitting, where no net changes
to the size of a building are made. But, on new structures, where the assess-
ment of a building is contingent on its selling price, insulation requirements
would end up raising the property tax assessment by a small but significant
amount. In addition, this increase would tend to be regressive, representing
proportionally more of a burden to owners of less expensive homes. This is
because insulation costs are closely proportional to the outside surface
area of a building, which rises more slowly than its interior square footage
in larger houses; selling prices of housing are a function of many other
factors besides absolute building size, with more expensive new homes
seldom being larger in size proportional with their increased sales price.
An assessment policy that discounted all insulation and energy conservation
equipment in new housing before figuring the tax assessment would be a signi-
ficant spur to building improvements, and might be the equitable course
to follow if building codes are modified to specify higher standards. While
the total present value of such a tax readjustment would be small in compari-
son with long term energy savings, it might have a positive effect on
short term cash flow for homeowners.
AIR POLLUTION EFFECTS OF ZONING AND LAND USE CHANGES
Reduction of pollution emissions from stationary sources can be effected
indirectly through the use of zoning changes, but from the outset, readers
should remember that there are no necessary relationships between land use
and energy consumption: all correlations observed are contingent on assumed
or observed technologies for heating, transportation, and other energy land
uses. At present, many traditional assumptions about future energy techno-
ologies are threatened, and a variety of new energy technologies, such as
solar, geothermal, nuclear fission, nuclear fusion, wind and high-energy
kinetic, are at the threshold of major development. It is a virtual
certainty that some {or possibly all) of these will play major roles in the
nation's energy economy; each would also tend to promote land use patterns
compatible with itself. Until these technologies achieve greater definition,
analysis of the optimal configuration of land development for energy conserva-
tion remains partially speculative.
64
-------
Increases in Built Density
The range of densities to which land is developed is very broad, but where
conservation of energy for space heating is concerned the most interesting
interval is that which involves changes in building format from individual
structures (detached houses and commercial structures) to progressively
aggregated ones. Changes of land use density of detached building results in
negligible or zero savings on space heating needs; a moderate savings is
gained where^ detached buildings are clustered together to reduce incident
wind velocity, but the same effect can usually be gained through landscaping
and siting measures.
As was seen in the first part of this chapter, multi-family (i.e., attached)
dwelling units use less energy per dwelling unit for heating purposes. A
study by Arthur D. Little, Inc.,31 which analyzed typical units in four
regional climates, suggested that on average, a high-rise apartment in the
severe winters of the North Central region uses sixty-two percent less heat
per dwelling unit than a single-family house (though only about thirty-four
percent less per square foot); a low-rise apartment used fifty-eight percent
less (twenty-seven percent less per square foot), Townhouse-type attached
single-family units use twenty-four percent less fuel (overall, but are about
comparable to detached units on a per square foot basis). Mobile homes in the
same climate, although smaller than either apartment type (720 square feet
versus 900 square feet) used more total energy for heat overall; on a square-
foot basis,, furthermore, mobile homes used ten. percent more energy than a
conventional single-family house.
On the basis of such evidence it is apparent that going to higher density
housing saves energy. Adjusting these figures for average occupancy rates,32
low-rise apartments use about fifty-six percent less fuel per occupant than
detached single-family units, and high-rises about fifty-three percent less
Townhouses save twenty percent per person. It is interesting that walk-up
apartments appear to be the most efficient of all on a per capita basis.
Obviously, community planning cannot proceed on the basis of these average
occupancy figures. Not many people prefer high-rise living to single-family
houses—studies show that perhaps less than ten percent of the population
does.33 However, many suburban communities tend to ignore the small demon-
stratable market for more energy-efficient housing formats in favor of almost
exclusive emphasis on single-family detached units.
It is not necessary to repeat the process of translating fuel consumption
into total air pollution emissions. The Costs of Sprawl calculated emission
rates from space heating of buildings for six different community layouts,
ranging in developed density from 4.6 to 2.18 units per developed acre. Air
pollution emissions from space heating were found to be forty-three percent
less for a high-density planned community than for a conventional low-density
sprawled-out community, and twenty-six percent for a community with a planned
mix of dwelling unit types. A penalty may be paid in ambient air quality
when density is increased, however. In the immediate developed neighborhood
of a higher density community, savings in fuel burned per dwelling unit may
be more than offset by the increased development density.
65
-------
Heating-related emissions per developed acre in the high-density community
were found to be twenty-one percent higher than for the conventional sprawl
community, ten percent higher in the planned community, Although the number
of auto trips generated in the higher density communities were calculated to
decline in length and frequency on a per capita basis, auto-related pol-
lutants emitted per developed acre found to rise in the higher density
options. Considering the additional open space made available in the higher
density planned communities in which air pollutants can be dispersed, it is
not clear whether actual ambient air quality in the developed areas will rise
or fall.
APPENDIX III-l: BUILDING STANDARDS AND TECHNICAL DATA
Building Standard^
This section includes two sets of modifications ot present building prac-
tices appropriate for improving insulation standards in new construction, one
for single family housing and one for multiple family housing. It also
presents relevant portions of the recommended energy conservation standards
for buildings recently promulgated by the American Society of Heating, Air
Conditioning and Refrigeration Engineers (ASHRAE). The single family housing
standards are derived from the Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Minimum Property Standards,. as revised in 1974. These standards require
weatherstripping, and insulation, and limit total heat transmission through
walls, floors, ceilings, doors, and windows: 'They could easily be included
as part of a building code.
The standards for multi-family dwellings are simply the structural modi-
fications proposed by Hittman Associate's, which include reducing window
surface, improving glass use, and increasing insulation.
Both sets of modifications use technical measures of heat transmission
through walls. These measures, R and U, are used for simple heat transfer
calculations, and are derived as follows:
(1) Thermal conductivity, k=heat (Btu) per hour trans-
ferred through a 1-in. thick, 1-sq.ft. area of homogeneous
material per °F of temperature difference from surface
to surface. (The unit for k is {Btu)(in.)/(hr)(sq.ft)(°F).}
To qualify as thermal insulation, a material must have a
k value of 0.5 or less.
(2) Conductance, C=k/thickness, is the corresponding
unit for a material of given thickness. (The unit
for C is (Btu)/(hr)(sq ft)(°F>.) For a 2-in.-thick
plank of insulation whose k=0.20, C=0.10.
(3) Thermal resistance, R=1/C, measures a material's
resistance to heat flow. (A material with C=0.25,
denoting heat transmission of 0.25 Btu per hr through
1-sq ft of material per F, has an R value of 4.0.
Under steady-state conditions, it would take 4 hours
to transmit 1-Btu through 1-sq ft for a 1°F temperature
differential, inside to outside.)
66
-------
(4) Overall coefficient of thermal transmission, U,
is a unit like k and C, measured in Btu transmitted
per hour through 1-sq ft of construction per °F from
air on one side to air on the other. It relates,
however, to the several component materials in a wall
or roof. U can be calculated from the following
formula:
U
where ZR=sum of the thermal resistance of the components,
plus the resistance of the inside and outside air
films.
Insulation is generally labeled with its R value, to aid in calculating
its effect (and must be so labeled for the HUD standards). U is derived from
the R values of the materials used, including not only the insulation, but
also dead air spaces, structural members, and other components, u is a better
measure to include in standards than R, because it includes all factors related
to heat loss through walls.
Single-Family Residential Standards
507-3 BUILDING INSULATION
34
507-3.1 Materials used for insulation shall be of proven
effectiveness and adequate durability to assure
that required design conditions concerning heat
losses, sound control or fire rating are attained.
Insulation in contact with the ground shall not be
adversely affected by soil, vermin or water.
507-3.2 Labeling
Labeling of insulation shall be as follows:
a. Batt or Blanket. Insulation type, manufacturer
or distributor, R value of the fiber at the
labeled thickness.
b. Reflective. Insulation type, manufacturer, R
value for direction of heat flow, type of
facing.
67
-------
c. Blowing or Pouring Type for Use in Open
Horizontal Areas (Attics). Name, manufacturer,
recommended installation density, R value,
marking on bag of conformance with F.S. HH-
1-1030 or HH-I-515.
d. Labeling and marking of all other insulation
materials shall comply with the appropriate
standard listed below.
607-3 BUILDING INSULATION
607-3.1 General
a. Insulation of buildings shall be such as to assure
conservation of energy, economy of operation and
confort to the occupants. A building which is both
heated and cooled shall be insulated against the
more severe climatic conditions for the location.
b. INSULATION MAY BE OMITTED FROM SEASONAL HOMES,
NOT INTENDED FOR YEAR-ROUND OCCUPANCY, AT THE
DISCRETION OF THE OFFICE WHOSE DETERMINATION
SHALL BE BASED UPON CLIMATIC CONDITIONS AND
THE PROPOSED SEASON OF OCCUPANCY OF THE PROPERTY.
607-3.2 Overall Coefficient of Heat Transmission
a. All buildings which are heated or cooled
mechanically shall be constructed to comply
with the maximum U values shown in Tables 6-7.1,
6-7.2 and 6-7.3. U values shown do not include
adjustments for framing in walls, ceilings or
floors, nor for the sash frame in windows or
glass doors.
b. Where the stated U value of any one component
of roof deck, ceiling, wall or floor cannot be
practically obtained, such U value may be
increased to the minimum figure attainable
and the U value for other components decreased
until the overall heat gain or heat loss does
not exceed the total resulting from conformance
to the stated U values.
607-3.3 Roof Decks, Ceilings, Walls and Openings
a. For roof decks, ceilings, walls and door and window
openings, U values shall not exceed those shown in
Table 6-7.1. In areas of 4500 or less winter degree
days and 400 or more summer cooling hours, buildings
to be mechanically cooled shall be insulated as for
areas of 4501 to 8000 winter degree days, except
for glazing.
68
-------
TABLE 6-7.1
Maximum "U" Values of Ceilings, Walls and Openings
Winter
Degree
Days (2)
4500 or
less
4501 to
8000
8001 or
more
Flat
Roof(l)
Deck
.14
.09
.09
Masonry Wall
Construction
Ceilings Walls
.05 HO
.05 .10
.04 .10
Frame Wall
Construction
Ceilings Walls
.08 .08
.05 .08
.04 .08
Doors and
Windows
1.13
.65
.65
Notes:
(1) Indicates construction with rigid roof insulation and exposed
structural system. When roof cavity is available use column for
ceilings.
(2) Winter degree days are based upon the difference between 65 F and
the mean daily outdoor temperature.
69
-------
When blown or poured type of insulation is installed
in attics, caution shall be exercised to assure
complete and adequate application of insulation.
When eave vents are installed, adequate baffling
of the vent opening must be provided so as to deflect
the incoming air above the surface of the installed
blown or poured insulation. Baffles shall be installed
prior to insulation, shall be of wood or other durable
material and shall be installed at the soffit on a
60 degree angle from the horizontal.
607-3.4 Floor Sections
a. For floors over unheated basements, unheated garages
or ventilated crawl spaces with operable louvers,
the "U" value of the floor section shall not exceed
the value shown in Table 6-7.2.
TABLE 6-7.2
Maximum "U" Value of Floor Sections Over Unheated Basements,
Unheated Garages or Crawl Spaces (1)
Winter Degree Structural Wood and Metal
Days Slab Framing
2500 or less No requirement No requirement
2501 to 45000.15oTlO
4501 or more 0.12 ~0.08
(1) A basement, crawl space or garage shall be considered
unheated unless it is provided with a positive heat
supply to maintain a minimum temperature of 50 F.
607-3.5 Basement or Crawl Space Foundation Walls
Insulation may be omitted from floors over heated base-
ment areas or heated crawl spaces if foundation walls
are insulated. Foundation walls of heated basements need
not be insulated except where habitable rooms are pro-
vided or where 50 percent of the wall is exposed to
outside air. The "U" value of foundation wall sections
shall not exceed the value shown in Table 6-7.3.
70
-------
TABLE 6-7.3
Maximum "U" Values of the Foundation Wall Sections of Heated
Basement or Heated Crawl Space.
Winter Degree Days Maximum "U" Value
2500 or less No Requirement
2501 to 4500 0.24
4501 or More 0.17
607-3.6 Crawl Space Plenum Walls
When a crawl space is used as a supply or return plenum,
the crawl space perimeter wall shall be insulated to
provide a maximum heat loss of 35 Btuh per lineal foot
of perimeter wall assuming a crawl space air tempera-
ture of 70-F for return plenums and 110 F for supply
plenums.
607-3.7 Slab-on-Ground Floors
Edge heat loss of concrete slabs around the perimeter
of heated spaces shall not exceed a maximum value per
linear foot of exposed edge of 42 Btuh for unheated
slabs and 50 Btub for heated slabs. Calculations of
heat loss through concrete slabs shall be made using
the formula H = F x P.
Where: H = Heat loss of the slab edge (Btuh)
F = Heat loss coefficient from Table 6-7.4
(Btuh per linear foot of exposed edge).
P = Perimeter or exposed slab edge (linear
feet).
71
-------
TABLJE 6-7.4
SLAB EDGE HEAT LOSS COEFFICIENTS (Btuh per Linear Foot)
Winter Design Total Width of F for unheated slab
-Temperature Insulation(in.
-30 F or colder
-25 F to -29 F
-20 F to -2-4 F
-15 F to -19 F
-10 F to -14 F
- 5 F to - 9 F
Zero to - 4 F
+ 5F to + 1 F
+10F to + 6 F(l)
+15F to + 11 F
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
18
12
) R=5.00
34
32
30
28
27
25
24
22
21
21
R=3.75 R=2.50
40
38
36
33
31 42
31 42
F for heated slab(2)
R=5.00
46
44
41
39
37
35
32
30
25
25
R-3. 75 R=2.50
48
45
38 50
38 50
*Notes: (1) Where Winter Design Temperatures are warmer than +15F, peri-
meter insulation is not required. If installed in these
areas (edge only) use values shown for +15 F to + 11F above.
(2) Slab floor with heating pipes or ducts in or immediately
under slab.
(3) Insulation R-Values shown are for thermal insulation
resistance (R = 1/C).
Weatherstrippinci
All exterior doors shall be provided with a tight
threshold and weatherstripping to reduce infiltra-
tion of undesirable outdoor elements.
Weatherstrip windows to reduce infiltration of
undesirable outdoor elements.
72
-------
Materials Standards for Building Insulation
Cork Board
Cellular Glass
*Cellulose, Vegetable or Wood Fiber
Expanded Polystyrene Insulation Board-
F5herboard
FS HH-I-525
FS HH-I-551
FS HH-I-515
FS HH-I-524
FS LLL-I-535
Class C or E
or ASTM C-208
Insulation Board (Urethane) FS HH-I-530
*Mineral Fiber, Board (Roof) FS KH-I-526
Mineral Fiber, Insulation Blanket FS HH-I-521
Mineral Fiber, Pneumatic or Poured FS HH-I-1030
Perimeter Insulation FS-HH-I-524
Type II
FS HH-I-558,
Form A, Class 1
or 2
Reflective, Thermal FS HH-I-1252
Structural Fiberboard Insulating roof deck AIMA IB
Spec. No. 1
*Verraiculite ASTM C-516
*Perlite FS-HH-1-574
THERMAL AKD MOISTURE PROTECTION
Recommended Reference Guide - NAHB Insuldtidn Manual
for Homes and Apartments.
73
-------
Multi-Family Housing Standard35
The townshouse was defined with 1300 square feet of floor area.
The low rise was defined with 1140 square feet of floor area,
and the Highrise was defined with 850 square feet of floor area
per apartment.
Improvements included
a. reduction of window area to
Townhouse 95 square feet
Low rise 90 square feet
High rise 60 square feet
b. Storm windows on the townhouse and double glazing
on the low rise and high rise.
c. Increase the insulation value ("R" value) of the ground
floor, walls, and roof to
Ground Floor Walls Roof
Townhouse 2010.6 21.7
Low rise 20 10.6 21.7
High rise 20 10.6 9.7
ASHRAE 90-75 Standards
The following standards are taken from the recent publication by ASHRAE
of standards for the design of building sheels and heating and ventilation
equipment (HVAC). Unlike the HUD standards , these are not directly suitable
for inclusion in local building codes; rather, they are guides for engineers
and architects to use in designing structures and mechanical plants. They
are included here because they represent the way in which the Federal
Energy Administration is currently designing their approach to long term
energy conservation in buildings—that is, through the use of performance
standards rather than prescriptive building standards. For local governments
today, they have most relevance for the design and construction of commercial
and larger residential structures not for small-scale detached housing.
They are reproduced with permission of ASHRAE.
74
-------
44 EX
4.1
TJu cnUfil ft tat ">«»• t»Wi* ft*
fliu**en /»r itomil itttift of ih* «xt«n««n««loe»
4.2JJ Whm return iir otlUnf ptauminm-
p|oy<4. tht iwf/nilins munUy iMt
t. tot *mn»l tnwttnM pwjowfc »» *«»*
«ht otBittg prepei not *• ptemwuev* «• P«n »f
tlu> •cttM an winded only foe we in definin| ihe*t
(riwita. tn cam •*«« a. «y«em mi!)lb appraacn to
huildni d«4» • dettted. the nquuimuu of Sectle*)'
10 and/of 1
4.M Ti«
far bu-iinj fti«lo;H coatuvtion
4.J ifplitt w OM-
to; 3 «o
4.J.1 1 tnjJJjuonloCheailciijKlforlhinlhil
mam. Uu propcad 4».p> (ten" coauder «Ki0
ouncnKuo in £ic( ea in «u: iht poncinc Atff of U» buiU-
«ih
it. n u.-.i
floM "
*« «
.
rftai « «i«M«>«. eppoaunitki fa
pnutduxt M4 infocinMioa uwiJiiKd to
O»p:«l I?-:: «f *• 1*72 ASHRAI HANDBOOK
»w . •
fen in npotcJ to oiudaor ik «U nclox
»vl or rn.cluiu.aay ceded ^^. (i«l«!»s toitttticid
•nw bt^tra MO
. 4.2 J A roof tsumUy JB* »« «a*«i»« M »•
f» of ihe uppffl ofcnun tutfue.
44.4 AD IwUdimi Hut an holed uid/« mtchui-
aly eookd *•» »• connnicBd » M to ororide *> re-
DUMA itwimai jw furnonee of th> nikMU eorapomntt.
4.2.4.1 TheiuudUgnhwoftiiyoDeuiembly.
*»ch u toof/ailinj. will Of toot, iw/ tt iiaeu«f
•nd 0* U0 nlue for oiliei components deaewd pro-
tided thll the ownn htit pic «d/orlonfordi«entii»
kuildint envtlo]» don not nctcd ll» toul nKittinf
•bom coofonruaoc la Ihi tt>ud U0 nUut.
4J^ For caJcubiioni calkd for undtt UUnectlon,
dw foDowini winperuuKi iU> «pply:
e fK»n.
4.11 lit iwa «v< o/««en*>f Mtt cwuittt «f iI
•p«;u> -ill atu (iftdcdiii(fMeJ«J.i9i.btweu-
Boot l?«JnU. p«ri;h«[»lcJj»offk>on,tlc.).«inJo»
•
,
kcu fi*". ih«»tyeK«i««*'JiWii«m«P»«^ u> outdoor
w »4 «do«M »
at 0* loulfcurior "rfiot of «i* tan**. UKludiot
Wntn 1! 11.0
Summei M 2S.S »**
•Val«. from WTJ ASHRAE HANDBOOK Of
FUNOAMEKTALS'.Chjpltl 33.
4.U A bujllon lh>l » desigMd lobe both htatcd
It winicr and cooled ia aininwr lAu« meil lh« moM
mini»i of the hMtini ot coolinj requiremtnU of UM
uuncu tnvelapa u pnvidat In Ihu «ttk)« •*« le-
4.i.T Tfc«deiiiTiefbuadiiit«f(»«i»nafcoii>nvatio«l
aW wr c»a» eosdition. of Mnknted dei«riontio«
ftoa moutiiit condcruaiioii.
4 J Ciilirfa fot Tyj« "A"
4J.1 T»p."A"B«UlnpjWll»clud.-.
A-I Dttadied'oM-ndtwo-bmilydHelliafS
A-* ABotherreiiil«iliJbuUdlii««.3tK,*»«ln«.
mcludvis but not limited to
dweUingt and botelt and mouU.
.
4J.2.I Walt. Any buildinj that Uh«attdandjot
•Kdiankatyr coolei) itafl lu« » con*iw HW b« wwl to d.«nni» ae-
ojiubat conbkuiiau u meet the rcquiremeau of
II
ASHfAE STANDARD 9045
0.40
L 030
U0 WALLS-TYPE "A" BUILDINGS
TYPE A BUILDINGS SHALL INCLUDE:
A 1 DETACHED ONE ANDTWO FAMILY DWELLINGS
A 2 ALL OTHER RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS. THREE
STORIES OR LESS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED
TO:
MULTI-FAMILY DWELLINGS
HOTELS AND MOTELS
ANNUAL CELSIUS HEATING DEGREE DAYS (18 C. BASE)
(IN THOUSANDS)
-;;; irnTrHnnr-r-t:— 2.5
2.0
. 0.20
0.10
1.0
0.5
12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12
ANNUAL FAHRENHEIT HEATING DEGREE DAYS (65 F BASE)
(IN THOUSANDS)
ASHKAB STANDARD »0-7S
13
-------
10.0
9.0
8.0
D
5
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
R VALUES-SLAB ONGRADE
ANNUAL CELSIUS HEATING DEGREE DAYS (18 C BASE)
(IN THOUSANDS)
1.7
1.5
^ 1.1
0.9
fc 0.7
0.5
2
I 23456789 10 11 12
ANNUAL FAHRENHEIT HEATING DEGREE DAYS (65 f BASE}
(IN THOUSANDS)
14
ASHtAC IUNDAU »»«
0.50
0.40
.0.20
0.10
U0 WAIiS-HEATING-TYPE-T BUILDING
FOR ALL BUILDINGS NOT COVERED BY PARA. 4.3
ANNUAL CELSIUS HEATING DEGREE DAYS (18 C BASE)
(IN THOUSANDS)
123456
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
~ 0.5
8 9 10 11 12
ANNUAL FAHRENHEIT HEATING DEGREE DAYS (65 F BASE)
(IN THOUSANDS)
•at.
S
-------
Rg.4
Uo-ROOFS AND CEILINGS
TYPE "B" BUILDINGS
FOR ALL BUILDINGS NOT COVERED BY PARA. 43
ANNUAL CELSIUS HEATING DEGREE DAYS (18 C BASE)
(IN THOUSANDS)
0.7
0.6
0.5
ANNUAL FAHRENHEIT HEATING DEGREE DAYS (65 F BASE)
(IN THOUSANDS)
3
0.4
10 11 12
1«
ASHRAE STANDARD W-7S
Fig. 6
U0 VALUES-FLOORS OVER UNHEATED SPACES
ANNUAL CELSIUS HEATING DEGREE DAYS (18 C BASE)
(IN THOUSANDS)
0.50
0.40
fc0"30
0.20
0.10
V~- 2.5
9 10 11 12
2.0
1.5
~ "-::-—• 1.0
0.5
£
$
ANNUAL FAHRENHEIT HEATING DEGREE DAYS (65 F BASE)
(IN THOUSANDS)
ASHRAE STANDARD 90-75
17
-------
0>
4.J.2.I.2 The requirements for locationi with
leu r.'.*.:ni is u be mechanically cooled when
built or if prevision is made for the future w!0t-
lion of me^hanu-al ;oolm|. the t'o Oiall be 0 30
Blu h II1 F ( 1 -QW.m'K) minimum.
4.} : 2 Rwif Cedmi, An> bui)Jin| that isheated
ir.j'or m.-..h.iru.j!!) cix>!ed dall ha\e a combined
Ih.rmji lr<*<.^-I::tu'.ce ^J^elt^ value » for ruuf/ceiiin^s
not to (\..-,J 005 Bfj h ft' F I0:» » m:Ki fur
a;ea k.i:ft* »Cv<0 ljhr^r.!.c;t llcatjij Decree Djys(4444
(V>:.l ll.^'.:. U.r:.£ D^> tl o; !c»v «r.J r.^l tu ehcrtj
004B:.:. t:: I'lO^J » m'Kl I." Jivji»i:h nwie
thjn ^JOO FAh:er.h±it Ilc4tji( Decree Oa>s (4444
Celsius llf.:tr.: Dejiee Oa)s).
EVl'EmON ROJI ctil:nj assemblies in »hk.h the
fc.shcJ ir«:cn ;.* suif4ke i> £s*nM!:> tt.e unuer SiJe of
the lo;t' ^:.«. u;h as a »a>4er. cathcjril CCI!K.{.»UI>-
hi>e • I. j >aiue not 1 1 cxccedO.OS Btu.h • ft' • F (0.4S
% m*ki for any Heatjij Decree D^y area.
4 ) 2.2-1 tq : i>ui: be used to determine ac-
ceptable ;aR.bir.i:/>ns to meet the te^uticd l'o values.
4 J.2 J Floor, met L'uheaied Space* For floors
of hcatc J an^ or rrie.hjnk ilr> cuo!.*d spaces oter un-
tn.:a.'u:i'uf/>H'lekCCcJ thevuues
tf.,**. 1.1 1 ij 5
4.J 54 SUb-on-Oradc Flaen. For lUb-on-ftjJe
fluors. t!x ih:sur..e of the nwUliun aruuikl
l!» f-t.'Lr»-ier ol ilie floor ifciff be as b then toruont jli>
rv-*j >. th: sl.b for a niinmum loul Jislance of 24 in.
«0»mv.
4 4 Criteria to T> pe "i" luiU«i»s
4.4.1 T»p< "»" BuilJinis sMf include aft other
buiU:r;t not coveted b> the definitioa of Type "A"
442 Heamif Criteria
4 4.2.1 Mils. Any buiUm| thai is fnechankalry
hcjuj WuJ hjie a combined iheraial tiinsinutjnc*
va!je il ^ saiuel for the gross area of exterior wails not
etcee Jr.f the » aloes. stio»o in F» ). uanj lleatint;
Dtiree tX>i as pier* • the 1973 ASHRAE HAND-
BOOK * Product Directory. Systems Volume. Chapter
4i«.
4 .4.1. 1.1 to, I lAjfl be used to deicrmsne ae-
ctpuble cornbuutmu to meet the requirements of
Fil J
Equtwal FoonulaforDelemiinineCcmibiiutioiM
(See Fi(. I and Section 4J.2.I.)
,, . ^V.li *v. an * "window *wmdo» * "door Nloor
(See note below.)
U0* • the average thermal transmittance of the
gross wall area, Blu/h • ft> • F (W/m'K)
A0 • the gross area of exterior walla, ft1 (m1)
(« 4.2.2)
l^glj • the thermal transmittance of all elements
of t!ie opaqui wall area, Btu/h • ft* • F
t W/m'K)
Awaj| • opaque wall area, ft1 (m1)
• ihe thermal uansmittance of Ihe window
area, Blu/li • fl'• F (W/m'K)
^window " window area (including sash) ft' (m1)
I'duor * the thermal Iransmittanceoflhedoor are*.
Blu/h- ft- -F(W/m'K)
Aduo, • dout area, ft' (m1)
NOTE: Where more than one type of waD. window
andior door is used, the U x A term for that exposure
sftjtf be expanded into its sub
-------
OtTV. CK O» (mt «tt «f nutV» viBtMt ncwdlut
tti^jJwt item to F(|. t If tai,1 •
4.4J.I.I
ctpubW coniiBllMmi u meet Ibe rtquueraeoa »f
FU-*.
4.4J.J Xwi(Ccili«. Any bvildiai Ul« It n»
dunka^y a»M lU) hm • conMmd dimul mi»
Ua:
liaca of mOity imleo duw0t wilt, floon n4 !•«&,
<0d 18 odM opeotap to tht uHrtoc tn«loft jWTte
«wDu4. p**tti.«utiKntripi*d.« Mhawte Mbd,
£<(«.*« 1 Fonwdi for
(SttBOttbttew.)
4J
4 J I The :c<)iurerncnu of this lecikw arc limited
u ike* !oci';3ni vpiratuf exterior bvildiftf ambient
owJiaora from interior bwUnt conditioned a J?aoc
ar.J arerol *p?L;aMe»Ci« teparalxro of interior coa-
diucre£ ^*:cs frwn euh oir.ei.
45: Ccr.jl-4n;t n.t!. Oi« uitetia for t BcanSiVi IX A5TM E
M:-_l. *: of Ten far Ra:e of Air U'lxjje ihrcni^i Ex-
Urjr Uc-o»i. Curtain .UJJi uj Ooor>. U * preuurc
iiiitnaial of I So? Ib ft' (75 Pa). «hich is equivalent
totu rffect o(« IS nphd! I m/i)wirtd.
• 4 5 J Re^iiRrnenU
4.5 J.I v>indo»i(ASSIAU4.l'id<»iial fuia
Typ«) ICNSI AU4:";»MA »-J":MHHA l-Tl"x
SUir. J l',ut -«n oi lS.1 1) ;c i)^.'.' tic Jeujix J lo liitit
ui l• (!•*
iSce 4 .5.1.1
U0« the mnp ihcnul traiuraittance of thi
(TOO ioof/c«iUnj ana. B-F(W/m'K)
area (indudbtf frame) fl5 (m1)
NOTE: Whet* more dun one type of roof/ctilint and/
or ftyli^K to tued. tht U « A turn far that npotura
(MT b* eipanded into lit tub-etemenli, u:
"roof, Arorrf, * °roof,-
?" K"
4.9 J 1 Ennnce S»tnpn( Do«n for Rcikknlal
UK (Rt^JctuJ me oijy a> i imani of tpt*«in»rt»
U lnt-4 vninl (MHUA 1-74"). Entlinct Min(in(
4-xn .-c~ <•" tyr* ptr iqiuic tneier) of door aiea. (Se*
4J.I.)
4JJ.4. S«m»ui{ R«ohin| ocSlidini Doontor
Olhec Than R«iden(ii] UK. Thiie that be deupied to
imi u: l:*<-i«, ite air miiuatun lait ifu.7 nor exceed
II ft' rrat per liMat tool (I7 dm'/l per linear mcler)
ol4~a.-rad< (See 4.5.1)
43.4 Ciuicn tat Seaiuiv. Enuriu jokia irovnd
w2)^Dwt ud dMT franiei, beueea wall cavities and
*v.,2^« or duor fra-iiri, b«lw
-------
^T • temperature difference between exterior
mi interior desijn conditions, F (see 4.23)
SF • solar factor value given Btuili • fl1 (W,'mJ)
(tee fa "I
A,) * grass j:ej of exterior walls, ft2 (m1) (ice
NOTE: Wnere moic than one type of will and/or •
ier.s»:: i:i .n it u*i. the respect.-ve term Of terms shuY
b« evir.wca into sub-elements. u:
(L» » A, x TDtQ) « (L'Wi x A^ x TDEOj).ele.
TABLE FOR TEMPERATURE DIFFERENCE
Wall Construction—mass per unit area *^E(
44 24.5
37 21.0
30 17.0
23 13.0
0-25 0-125
26-40 126-195
41 - 70 196 - 345
71 and above 346 and above
Weight ofwall construction soil/be determined from the
1972 ASHRAE HANDBOOK OF FUNDAMENTALS.
Chapter 22".
Biffrfoot Use* in Section 4
'•* \MIR\I 1UM1BOOK 01 I CN
i'-::. \siiiui. v»v ik,\v.
S. ChapWtl
>' NKMAIS-l
12 MHMA 1-71
A-..IRU lUsruojK or li •*DAMI>TAIS. Ck»|>'«« I) ANS, A|M2 -Specification, for Aluminum SlUfe* Class
Doon." ANSI. New York. NY, 1972.
14 NWMA IS-J
11 M1IMA J-T4
14 ASHRAF HANDBOOK OF FUNDAMENTALS. Chapter'
II. ASHKAE. Ne« York, NY, 1972.
t. N<. V Ik. M. I»7J
\vi*\l II*M.KJ<»K 1 ri-duct Dvectoiv. Srtiemi
V. '.-».» hir-. 'I *» »>HHxr.V» V-ik.NY, l»71.
V>;M i-:» -'.' --.-J^J M.-:h. uem requirements for
et:;. :.»;-•::!/-:..'•» of er.;ii>.S> Mem criteria developed
Ir.-n ;: : ric,-:v.-.r.ri cl' this sectuw mjy influence
:>•: :.pe ->i nr.tr it u:;i.i!i.' itcrnt) lelection process in-
i.:.iJt in A.-irjjK-iwij\ ow evaluation.
s : s.-o[*
T\..t w.'.. n ; j.r.->i:i.s fiireru ar* esiablivhed for
Ki!-V - : H\ AC >) >-.-n^> <.'vj for wUvl vonstiuclion
EXCEPTIONS S,"v.ul ipt-lkaliuns. UKh as but not
bnr.J to h- ip:lil». U^>.rati>rirs.' thermally sensitive
t^jsf^-fr.t. Ajll be
designed to tmaximum relative humidity of 30 percent.'
Summer
Where comfort air conditioning is required or used,
the recommended indoor design condition Is 78F
(25.5*C) dry bulb. The actual design relative humidity
within the comfort envelope as defined in ASHRAE
Standard 55-74 'Thermal Enviromnental Conditions
for Human Occupancy"* shall be selected for minimum
total HVAC system energy u*.
Although the recommended design points are estab-
lished above, the HVAC system design sliouU permit
operating at minimum energy levels within the
boundaries of the comfort envelope.
Due to internal heat gains or losses, it miy be more
energy efficient to operau at other than the design
points for major portions of the year.
5.3.2.3 Ventilation. Ventiialion air shell conform
to ASHRAE Standard 62-73 "Natural and Mechanical
Ventilation."6
The minimum column value foreach type of occu-
pancy shall be used for design. The ventilation quanti-
ties tabulated in Section 6 of ASHRAE Standard 62-73
are for 100 percent outdoor air ventilating systems. Sec-
tion 5 of ASHRAE Standard 62-73 permits a reduction
to 33 percent of the specified minimum outdoor air
requirement for recirculating HVAC systems.
EXCEPTIONS. If outdoor air quantities other than
those shown in ASHRAE Standard 62-73 are used or
required because of special occupancy or process re-
• quiremcnts. source control of air contamination, or
conflicting codes, the required outdoor air quantities
ihall be used as the basis of calculating the heating and/
or cooling design loads.
5.3.2.4 Infiltration. Infiltration for healing and
cooling design loads shall be calculated by the proce-
dures in the 1972 ASHRAE HANDBOOK OF FUNDA-
MENTALS1. For one- and two-family residential build-
kits the methods contained in the manuals listed In
Appendix I may be used.
54 Controls
5.4.1 Temperature Control. Each HVAC system sfufl
be. provided with at least one thermostat for the regula-
tion of temperature. *"* thermostat staff be capahk
of being set as follows:
a. Where used to control heating only - 55 la 75F
(!3to24'C)
b. Where used lo control cooling only - 70 to S5F
(21I029T)
c. Where useil to control both heating and coolr-.g.
it shall be capable of being rt from 55 to SSF
(13 to 29'C) and stall be upatie of operating
the-system heating and cooling in sequence. Il
shall be aJjustlble lo provide a temperature
range of up to 10F (S.5*C) between full htitcg
and full cooling, except as allowed to 5.5.S.b.
5.4.2 Humidity Control. If an HVAC system Is
equipped with a means for adding moisture to maintain
specific selected relative hurrj^ities in spaces or zones.
a humidistat shall be provided. Pus device j*u,'; be cap-
able of being set to prevent new energy from be^.| uxd
to ptoduce space relative hun~.ijity above 30 percent rh.
Where a hurmdistat is used in an HVAC iy sum for con-
trolling rnoiituie removal to nuj-.tain ipe:if.j selected
relilive humidities in spaces or JO^es it shi" be cap-
able of being set to prevent new energy from ber.g
used to ptoduce a space relative humidity below 60
percent rh.
5.4 J Zoning for Tempers lure Control
5.4.3.1 One- and Two-Family Dwelling Units.
Attached or Detached, and Mobile Homes. At feast one
thermostat for regulation of space temperature ttell be
provided fo* each separate HVAC system. In ac*l:itoQ. •
readily accessible manual or ajtcrr;iuc means s'utf be
provided to partially restrict or shut olT the heaunf
and/or cooling input to each zone or floor.
EXCEPTION. Nonconditioned basements and
garages.
5.4J.2 Multi-Family Dwelling L'nits. Fur rnuiu-
family dwellingunits.each individualdweUi.-.guAiistaff
be considered separately and s build-
ing where the perimeter system offsets only thai
transmission losses of the exterior wail, ao enun
side of uniform exposure mijt be zoned sepa-
rately. A readily iccessblc manual of automatic
means ttaff be provided to pajuafly restrict or
ASHRAE STANDARD «0-75
-------
tfun »ff the Seating and/oi (count topul (foi DM
expoon) i« etch floor.
1.4.4 Cntrol Setback Hid ShattatY
5.4.41 OM. ml Tv««-Fan>ily and Uulu-Famuy
LWdlaig turn. Attached *t Detached. ud Mobile
Bonn. The thermostat required in i.O.I and 5.4.3.2,
or ID alternate flvant such at t f*tt*h or clock, stall
provide a it^Ly acwxto>,iiur.ualcr automatic mtus
far rei«:L-.f, lht«ner£> required for helling lad cooling
Awifli ptr. jii of SUI-K* or mJjceJ ne«4 such ubat
sv>l Un»:*d la ua^ccupwd periods sad sleeping hours.
L»cnn( ikcrswtui set points u reduce tat iff «otv
sunpLM ol' beasng oiiioi sAjff i:en t^bt e^preditlthareatlily accessible
IMUI o: 1.-..I:.- j off 0! recu-u-.f the e.ietjy used lor
H\*C a-nr.J fxnoit of non-use or alternate uses of
the b jt^mj sp«:cs or xtr.es served by the system. Th*
fouov:.-.; are eu~?!rfi that meet this requirement:
t. Man;.a2> a J;utu*!eauti>ruiMiifr.iiig devices
h. Mutual detues loi use by operstirvj. personnel
c. Automatic cor,:rol systems
5J Simultaneous Keating tot Cooliag
S)stenu thai e-;lo) tolii heating and o»!in| artuii-
lancju*!) IT. order u achstve comfort condnioMwitluji
• i^te i;« rJ-.f rent:/ etffk::ett«iuuiuaiio« of energy.
Their UK is discouraged Sclectm of suck system
ikiS cW li~j.-«J 10 ttou uuauona whsre DIOR efficiMt
ae:hi9ijs of he^unj ir.4 *ir conuiuoning er> u:i_ie4 b reit iviuin ob;ecuves. Stptnti
l>r.:r.> i>..-^li ^e conUe.-ed la serve ueu of On
tu^j^r-i »:'Jk sjbsuntully dufercnl beatin^coolint
bU chvu-:(rutk.-< (for turr?le. the penmettr IJK«
u compL-ej u l!» uterur spice). Siir.ultaneous
b»:in{ ud {ool.if b> Kheitini 01 recoolnt wppty
•tr or b> ccncufrent opc»t»wa of mdependcal h«aiin)
in^ ci.s;L-J r/i:e-ns ttnvv • cmtreofl loot >Ut bt
it^ncud u AcLneiu j below.
S.S.I Xct;&>e:ed erier^. pioviJcd the new eocrcy
tYper.Jed in' the t«M>tr$ piocessakstduAihetmoiinl
(tooic::J. 'V^' be (JM-'d for coatroi of tempciature and
kurrjjity *r* cntrf, is JifintJ it tiurty, oiiitr tkm
I.f .2 Se« enetp naj kt Died, olsus sfxttuiy, le
peeMEt rtfiwri humidity from riiiafabaor Mperotnl
tat cc~j';n tacsol w u ptereat condenunon a«
or outletL
$5.) Snr ejurty 11117 fcw used foe coxtnl il u»-
fcruun sf nuttstmud • itlattlti h 5J.4 «irav|k
SJJ.
S3A Reheat Systems. Syttoiu employinf reheat
aid serriai multiplt zooet, othet duel Ihott employ-
lo( vtrwMr «"• wJiune- for utnpentura control, itaff
bi pronied with control that will automatically met
the. tyttem eold tlr supply to Ox M|)mt tempenture
ten! that wiH atisfy the IOM requiiirt| the copltst alt.
Sbtft zone ichcat aysienu xAe/T be controlled to
stquenct ithcat and coolklt.
SJ-S Dual Duct and Multi-Zone Systems. Theai
sytttms skill be ptoridol with cont/ol that will auto-
matlolly reset (a) the coU deck ait supply to the
hithest ttmperature ihit win ntiify the tone requiiiof
the coolett all and (b) Uw hot deck ail supply to Ik*
Vowcst umpeisnm that win satisfy the zone requmni
the warmest air.
5.S.6 Recoolbj Systcmt Systems In whka heated
ait U retooled, directly or indirectly, to nu.inuia sp«oe
tempcratuit ilull be pronded witii control Uut wifl
autonutiolly reset the temperature to which the supply
ait it hcttcd to the lowest level that will satisfy the
>om nqulrlrtf, the wammt air.
S.5.7 Fur systems with multiple zonei. one or more
cones may be chosen to represent a number of zonea
with similar heating/cooling chanctnlnkt. A multiple
tone HVAC system Out employs itheaiuif of recoollni
lot control of not more thin 5,000 ft J/mui (2.36 n>lf>
CM 20 percent of the total supply air of the system,
whichenr si lett, lAeff be exempt from the Apply aar
ttmpmtvut met rtquiitmenl of 5i.4 thrwih s^-"-
S J J Concurrent operation of uxlependenl heatinf
and cooling systems servins cotnmois spaces and requir*
j*t the UK of new enctfy for hejtint 01 coolinf (Uf
be nwi»0-7}
EXCDTJONS. Cooling with outdoor air It not re-
furrof tinder any one or more of the following cocdi-
tlwie-.
• a. Fan system capacity lets than 5,000 fl'/mta
(2.36 m'/s) or 134.000 Bt»/h (39 J kW) total
cooting opacity.
b. The quality of theoutdoorair(aidefinedinTable
I of ASHRAE Standard 62-73*) is so poor as to
require extensive treatment of the sir.
c. The need foe humjdiflcation and/or dehumidifi-
cation icquircj the use of more energy than it
conserved by outdoor air cooling.
d. The use of outdoor as cooling may affect the
operation of other systems (such as return or ex-
haust air fans or supermarket refrigeration) so al
to increase the overall energy consumption of the
building.
*. Internal/cxtenuJ zone heat recovery or other
energy recovery is ysed.
f. Annual Fahrenheit Heating Degree Days are tea
than 2500(1390'q.
g. When aB space cooling is accomplished by a drcn-
laling liquid which transfers space beat directly or
Indirectly to a Keat rejection device such u a
cooling tower without the use of a refrigeiation
system.
3.7 Mechanical Ventilation
Each mechanical ventilation system (supply and/or ex-
haust) s/uU be equipped witha readily accessible means
foi either shutoff 01 volume reduction and shutoff
when ventilation la not required.
S* Energy fot Ak Delivery
The air transport factor for each all-air HVAC system
Ihfttnot be lea than 4.0. The factot staff bt based oe,
design system air flow for constant volume systems.
The factor for variable air volume systems may be
based on average conditions of operation. Energy for
transfer of air through hclt recovery devices shall nut
be included in determining the facto:; towner. nidi
energy tnaff be included \a the evaluation of the tffeo
dvencsj of the heat recovery system.
Sr<«t« StniiMe Heal HanmP
Xenira IMs) tara lapit)*
Si
h b Kcwrvncwtef that cnnsideration be given to th*
ue of recovery ayctcou which wfll comtm energy
(provided the amount upended la lest than the amount
recovered) when the energy traaafv potantHI and the
•tiantistg noun an conatttred.
5.10 Pijinglnjulatioa
AH piping installed to strve buildings and within buiU-
inp iA>J7 be thermally insulated in accordance with
Table S.I. except u stated m 5.10.3 (For stnue water
heating syiumi tee Section 7.)
S.10.1 Other Imulatitn Thickanitv buulatioa
thicknesses in Table S.I are baled on insulation harag
thermal resisuncesin the rinjc of 4.0 to 4.6 h- F- ft'/
Blu per inch (28 (o 32 m'K/W per mcier)of thickness
on a flat surface a! a mean lenperature o( "5F C4X).
Minimum insulatjon truckncu rtjJ/ be jicrcaaed foi
materials having R values less .than 4 0 h • F fi'/Bru
per inch (21 m3 K/W pei mem) of thickness 01 ™> U
reduced for matehali having R values greater than
4^h-F-ft1/Stu per inch (Km'K.'* per meter) of
thickness.
a. For materials with thermal reustar.ce ptitei thai
R « ^.(h-F-ft'.'Btu pei inch (3:m'K."Wner
neter) of thickness, the minimum mulauott
tKickneu mev be reduced as follovs:
la English unitf*.
*t TL Table S.t TluckArtt ,.
In SI Units:
)2 I Table i.l Ttictnm
AcruIR
-"— Imr-jinrTbitaisi
b. For material! with thermal resistance kss Dust
R- 4.0h-F-fi'/Btu per inchesrn'K.'Wper
meter) of thickness, the minimum insulaiioai
thickness staff be increased as followa:
In English unili:
4.0 I TjbK 5.1 TludkaMI . .
In SI Units:
J« a T.bk J.I
$.10.2 The recfuired thermal nsutances do awl
consider condensation. Additional inailaiioa *ith npor
barriers.ma>' be required to prevent condetuaboa uodcf
same conditioni.
EXCEPTIONS. Wpmg kisulatioa ss tot laqarad is
any of Die following cases:
• a. Piping installed wishui HV'AC asjuipmnt
b. Piping at temperatures beiwem iSF and I20F
(131049*0
c. wVntheheitlosaand/or hestgairtof Unpi^ag.
without insulation, does not incrtiae the eMrgy
rexjuremenu of the building
4, Piping instalM an basementa, cellan 01 Bstvaa9i>
ASKRAB STANDARD JO-75
-------
TaMrS.l
Muumuoi Pipe ImuIaticM
Piew|Sypr>
Htem*
feejTT; Jk HosWjtet
Ih^h. Pveicurc Terip
M*J: jrn Pressure. Temp
Lo» Prewjre Temp
Lw<* Trr^.fratun
S'.f i— ConJ£iiM!c
l:o: F«cJ »jier)
Coelu-iiSvuemj
Ck£r.:i*«!er.
Refrigerant, of Brine
Fluid
Tntpenlwe
Ran*
F -c
306-450
:s i-jos
:oi-2so
i:o-:oo
Any
40-55
Below 40
152-238
1:2-1$)
94-121
49-93
Any
4.5-13
Below 4.5
IntubtiM Thicknm for Pipe Sim*
Upto
2 in."
in. cm.
!
1.5:38
1.5 38
1.02.5
0.5 ] 1 J
1.0,2.5
1
1
0.5 i IJ
I.OJ2J
Itn.wd
U»
ia. cm.
1
I
1.5 !3J
IJ
1.0
J.8
2J
1%-J
in. on.
2.0
:.o
I.S
5.1
5.1
3.1
O.TS'l.»i l.0|2.5
1.0
0.5
1.0
t ^
1.3
2.5
1.0 1 2.5
!
0.75
1.5
L
3.8
2V4-4
in. em.
2J
2.5
IJ
1.0
IJ
IX)
IJ
6.4
4.4
3.1
2J
3.8
2.5
3J
5A«
.
in.
3J
3.0
2X1
1.0
IJ
1.0
IJ
cm.
S.9
7.6
5.1
2.5
3.S
2J
3J
S».end
Larger
in.
3J
3.0
2.0
IJ
2.0
IX)
IJ
cm.
(.9
7.*
5.1
3.S
S.I
2J
3.S
•Set 5 ID 1 arU 5.10 : (Pipe mm at nominal dimensions.)
••Renault TO InJivJuil Tnmuul tails (Ml eueedini 12 fl (3.7 m)in Irntth)
5.111 llfch-pmBire and medium-pretsure ducti
Attfbt Ink luud In Kcontaooi with the tppUobk
SUACNA SUadud, with UM raw of kilugt not *>
eXMal Che maximum rate specified1 ta ihu lUndird.
5.1U Tlieie It no rtanoiid it lhi> time for leak
tettini of low pnnuie ducta. When low prenun supply
aJr ducu aie located ouuid* of the cooditkxied tf*ot
(except return ail plenum), all trantvene jointl iMT
. be wiled wing mastic or mastk plus tape. For fibrow
(Uii ductwork, pnuuirc sensitne tape it acceptable.
**r*KMM Vtrt In Seelkin S
1 ASHRAE HANDMOK * Pn4«cl DmcKwr. ApptolkM
WilniM. ASHRAE. Niw Ybfk. NX If 74.
1 ASHRAE HANDBOOK of FUNDAMENTALS. CkapM 21.
ASI1R AE. New %ik. NY, 1*72.
' ASHRAE HAMOBOOKOFFUNDAHIKTAU.Ckvt«U.
ASHRAE. N«w Vxk. NY, 1*72.
4 ASHRAE HANDBOOK or FUNDAMENTALS, Outlet 31,
ASHRAE. N.W York. NY, 1972.
' ASHRAE Sundirf 53-74 Tkanal EminniMnul Coo4J.
don fat Huun Ocoi)»ncr.~ ASHRAE, New Hbck. NX 1 »74.
• ASHRAE Sunkri 62 J3 "Ninnl ni Meckuial Vnnto-
tioC ASHRAE, Km Vnk. NY. 1«7>.
' ASHRAE HANOtOOK OF FUNDAMENTALS. ASHRAZ,
5.I2J That b no uandirf at this time for dampo
lealuce. Automatic or manual dampers nuaiiij for the
purpoje of thuttini off ouutti air inukei for «enula-
tioa air ihnff be designed with tifhl ihul-olT characur-
fatki to minuniff air kakaae.
5.13 I
The HVAC tyttem d<4|n aUT provide neau foe
btlaocini the air and >«er s>iunu tuh as but not
United to dampen, temperature and picture ten con-
ejections and balanciai nhes.
• ASHRAE HANDIOOK » ftadun Dnnny.
Votun.. ASHRAE, N»V»k. NY. I»7J.
• "Rnidoiul Mutmi »d A* Cendiuciu.%- iyium - Ma*
•uiilMuaiuaiS»ii4A.Ai«. 1*71.
""Low tolocilr i*t Cod Communal SUKtordC 4a •!.
SMACNA. Wukinroh DC. l»6»
""H»h Vcloatr OKI CMRnKUM
SMACNA. »uk»(u». DC. 1H»..
"-F»rou Clu> Duct Commcoo Sunchr4k- M •4am,
SMACNA. thihinua. DC. 117:.
"-Tram Sonim Tape SSMeaMC SMACNA. ***u»«u«.
DC, H73.
lawil ^
with iMuUlcdwja»in
SO
10
i.ll AvHaihllwi Duct S> Mem Insdation
AH Ju:v p:.-njm ind trwljiurei iniulled « or on
bu^'ii* 7 !x iho.Tiuliy inulatcii 11 follows:
Sill All JJ.M itsumt. or purlwai thereof. sUT
bt r.M.ssl ij pro>ije i thermal iciutanct, eulujin|
film iCM«tM.*ei.of
R - jU F ft1 Bw (R -4yy m»K/W)
•here it • the Jt^pi iirmpnanue diflertnlial betweesi
ihe i« in .the dtut and the iuitoundn( air in F (K).
EXCEPTIOSS DIKI nsuluwn is not rcquiiej in
la) of the iV.'.i.ii Ci»s
a. »hfte^lu:;r(l4K)ocleu
b- Sup;!> ot return ail ductlmuaUcd • baiemena.
a'^m or unentilKed ciawl spacet with iuulited
want n one. and t»o-family dwe Hints
c. What ihe heat (**> <* km ol' ihe duels, without
Bv.lit.oi>. will not mcieasc the entity requsre-
nenuof t'.e b^UJir.;
d. Into HVAT e^upmeM
t. Exhausi airdwu
5.11.2 Ihiinsublcd ducta in unmsulated scctlontof
exterior waDs and in attics above the insulation mlfht
MI meet the requirements of this Standard.
5.11.3 The requited thermal resistances do not con-
sider contlensation. Additional insulation with vapor
barrien nay be required to prevent condensation under
some conditions.
S.I2 DuctConuniclion
All ductwoik i«>0 be constructed and creeled in ac-
cordance wilh Chapter I of Ihe 1975 ASHRAE HAND-
BOOK 4 Product Directory, Equipment Volume* of
the fono.inr, NLSCA/SMACNA or SMACNA standards:
a. RfMlcniiall kiting and Ail CooJitioninjSyuems
- Minimum Insialbtkn Siandards. Aupist 1973,
MSCA/SMArNA'
b. Low Vtkx.it> and Duct Construction Standards,
4thediiion. 1969'*
c. H«h Vdocity Duct Construction Standard*, 2nd
edition. 1969"
d. Fibrous ('.lass Duct Construction Standards, 3rd
edition. 1*72"
e. Presaure Sensitive Tape Standards, 1973 (to
Obroua |bo ducta only)'»
ASHRAE STANDARD 90-75
-------
FOOTNOTES
1. Battelle Columbus and Pacific Northwest Laboratories, (1973)
Environmental Considerations in Future Energy Growth, Volume 1,
for the Office of Research and Development, Environmental
Protection Agency, page 603.
2. This table was presented to Congress by the Federal Energy Admin-
istration as part of "A Legislative Impact Statement for Title X -
Building Energy Conservation Standards Act of 1975." This report
was prepared by Hittman Associates, Inc., Columbia, Maryland,
and is referred to hereafter as Hittman, Title X.
3. For specification of design characteristics for the building
types in question, see Appendix III-A.
4. Personal communication, M. Alford with J. Reed and T. Eleriza
of Hittman Associates, Inc., November 1975.
5. D.C. Chan, Residential Energy Consumption and Small Scale Options
of Energy Systems for Space Heating, NTIS: PB 239-941, November
1974. This conversion efficiencies may be high. More realistic
figures are generally quoted as 70% for gas and 60% for oil, but
use of the higher figures yields more conservative results.
6. The BTU content o'f fuels is taken as 1,021 BTU/cubic foot for gas,
138,690 BTU/gallon of distillate fuel oil, and 3,412 BTU kilowatt
hour of electricity. Source: "Monthly Energy Review," Federal
Energy Administration, Washington, D.C., October 1975.
7. Hittman Associates, Inc., Environmental Impacts, Efficiency and
Cost of Energy Supply and End Use, Volume 1, 1974.
8. Battelle, op.cit., p. 603.
9. Hittman, Title X, p. 19.
10. Electricity conversion rates: Fossil fuel steam/electric, coal—
10,176 BTU/kilowatt hour. "Monthly Energy Review," Federal Energy
Administration, Washington, D.C.
11. Hittman Associates, Inc., Residential Energy Consumption, Multi-
Family Housing, Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1974. (referred to hereafter
as Hittman, Multi-Family Housing)
12. Hittman, Title X.
83
-------
13. Briggs, et al. , Air Pollution Considerations in Residential Planning
Volume I: Manual, prepared for EPA and HUD, July 1974.
14. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Federal Housing Admin-
istration, Minimum Property Standards for One and Two Family
Dwellings, Revision 1, July 1974.
15. A study conducted by the Harvard Graduate School of Design for the
National Science Foundation found that the conversion of vacation
homes to year round use was a major phenomenon on the South Shore
of Massachusetts, and caused considerable environmental problems;
vacation homes often require considerably upgrading to make them
suitable for year-round use.
16. Hittman, Multi-Family Housing.
17. This "characteristic house" is fully defined in Hittman, Single Family
Housing: it is a two story building with four bedrooms, two and a half
baths, and a net floor area of 1695 square feet.
18. An average figure based on statements in Hittman, Title X, as well as
on figures contained in Abt Associates, In the Bank or Up the Chimney.
19. FEA, "Monthly Energy Review."
20. Abt Associates, In the Bank or Up the Chimney?, HUD, Washington,
D.C., 1975. ~
21. U.S. Census of Housing.
22". Present value calculations discount future expenditures back to
the present by the use of an interest rate; the concept of present
value is generally accepted by economists as the most useful way
to compare the value of money across time.
23. See Table III-7. Oil valued at $0.35 per gallon.
24. Estimates of future relative price increases of fossil fuels are
little more than guesses: the assumption of fuel costs doubling in
real terms by 2000 is taken from Hittman Associates, Technology
Assessment of Residential Energy Innovations, FEA, 1975.
25. Inflation rates have been much higher over the past few years,-
3% is taken as a conservative estimation of inflation over the
long term.
26, Musgrave and Musgrave, Public Finance in Theory and Practice,
McGrow-Hill, 1973. ~~
84
-------
27. The following examples are taken from Hittman Associates, Technology
Assessment of Residential Energy Innovations, May 1975.
28. Hittman, Multi-Family Housing.
29. The occupancy permit approach has been used in University City,
Missouri—a St. Louis suburb. "Occupancy Permits Provide an
Older Suburb with an Anti-Blight Tool," Journal of Housing,
National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials,
December 1975.
30. A preliminary analysis of'demand elasticity for these improvements
indicated that a twenty-five percent tax rebate would stimulate
a doubling of the rate of installation by single-family homeowners.
Hittman Associates, Inc., Elasticity of Demand to Retrofit as a
Function of a Tax Credit, FEA, December 1974.
31. Arthur D. Little, Residential and Commercial Energy Use Patterns
1970-1990, Washington, D.C. 1974.
32. Rates used were 3.520/d.u. for single family detached houses,
3.330/d.u. for low-rise (walk-up) apartments and townhouses, and
2.825/d.u. for high rise units. Source: Real Estate Research
Corporation, The Costs of Sprawl, prepared for the Council on
Environmental Quality, the Environmental Protection Agency, and
the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, D.C.,
April 1974.
33. John Lansing and-Gary Hendricks, Automobile Ownership and Residential
Density, Ann Arbor, Survey Research Center, University of Michigan,
June 1967, p. 104.
34. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Minimum Property
Standards for One and Two Family Dwellings, Revision 1, July 1974.
35. Hittman, Multi-Family Housing.
85
-------
SECTION IV
ON-SITE WASTEWATER DISPOSAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF ON-SITE DISPOSAL
Background
Although there are several technologies available for the on-site
disposal of sewage, by far the most widespread is the septic tank system.
The septic tank is similar to many ancient systems of disposal, traceable
as far back as 2550 B.C.,-'- but its modern form is attributed to John Louis
Mouras of France, who patented his invention in 1881. A two-chamber septic
tank was invented by Philbrick and patented in the United States two years
later. Government publications on septic tank disposal systems began to
appear in this country in the 1910s and 1920s, and an important advance
in the design of disposal fields for tank effluent was made by Henry Rypon
in 1928 with his introduction of the percolation test to rationalize field
sizing and location. This procedure remains as the principle field test
used today to evaluate soil suitability for septic tank installations.
The first significant proliferation in the use of septic tanks came
in the 1930's, when the rural electrification program permitted the widespread
installation of modern plumbing systems based on pressurized water supplies.^
But it was during the great suburban expansion of the 1950's and 1960's
that septic tanks became a major solution to residential wastewater disposal
nationwide: small municipalities on the outskirts of major cities had
neither the incentive nor the financial resources to construct centralized
Fewer systems.^
The septic tank system was a technological advance in rural areas,
blurring the old distinctions between urban and rural society: it matched
the service characteristics of a centralized urban sewerage system—reli-
ability of service and provision of plumbing amenities—at low cost and with
easy installation and little maintenance. Developers liked both its amenity
value and the ease with which costs and responsibility could be passed on
to the homebuyers.
Data from the 1970 Census of Housing shows that nearly twenty-nine
percent of the population of the United States is not served by conven-
tional sewers4 (see Tables 18 through 20). About fifty-nine million
people use septic tanks or some other method of on-site disposal;
approximately one-half million new systems were being put into service
annually in 1971.5
86
-------
Table 18
Housing Units and Population Served by Sewers and On-lot Sewage Disposal
Systems in the United States*
Sewage Disposal
Public Sewer
Septic Tank or Cesspool
Other
Total
Housing Units Served
48,187,675
16,601,792
2,904,375
67,693,842
Population Served'*'
144,625,187
49,826,792
8,716,872
203,168,851
*SOURCE: 1970 Census of Housing
+Assumed average occupancy per housing unit = 3.0.
Table 19
•Housing Units and Population Served by Sewers and
Systems
Sewage Disposal
Public Sewer
Septic Tank or Cesspool
Other
Total
*SOURCE: 1970 Census
in Rural and Urban Areas*
Housing Units Served
Rural Farm
& Nonfarm Urban
3,291,284 44,896,391
11,810,459 4,791,333
2,591,979 312,396
17,693,722 50,000,120
of Housing
Assumed average occupancy per housing unit =
On-lot Sewage
Population
Rural Farm
& Nonfarm
9,878,098
35,446,612
7,779,281
53,103,991
3.0.
Disposal
Served
Urban
134,747,089
14,380,180
937,590
150,064,859
Table 20
Housing Units and Population Served by Sewers and On-lot Sewage Disposal
Systems Inside and Outside SMSAs*
Housing Units Served
Population Served
Sewage Disposal
Inside
SMSAs
Outside
SMSAs
Inside
SMSAs
Public Sewer
Septic Tank or Cesspool
Other
37,833,694
7,693,047
55,1,900
Total 46,078,641
*SOURCE: 1970 Census of Housing
10,353,981 113,549,888
8,908,745 23,089,065
2,352,475 1,656,412
4 Assumed average occupancy per housing unit = 3.0.
Outside
SMSAs
31,075,300
26,737,727
7,060,460
21,615,201 138,295,364 64,873,487
87
-------
In a septic tank system, raw sewage decomposes anaerobically before
being applied to a subsurface disposal bed for infiltration into the soil.
Standards for installation have varied widely—in rural areas, local rules
of thumb have generally caused no problems in operations, as population
densities are sufficiently low and lot sizes sufficiently high to permit
generous margins for error. But problems did occur when these rules of
thumb were applied to large subdivision projects, and septic tanks began
to be installed on much smaller lots than before, with inadequate designs
and components. In some communities, failure rates within three to four
years of construction have been as high as one-third; overall failure rates
nationwide have been put as high as fifty percent, or as low as ten percent.
These failures prompted the Federal Housing Administration to conduct a number
of studies of septic tank and alternative on-site disposal methods, and
encouraged many local health departments to mistrust the use of on-site
disposal systems and emphasize the construction of conventional sewer
systems to replace them.
No practical system of wastewater treatment and disposal seems to
be without drawbacks, however, and regionalized sewage treatment is not
the best solution for all areas. If on-site disposal can be made to work pro-
perly, it offers the following advantages:
o Avoidance of costs for municipal sewer systems;
o Avoidance of point source discharges to streams;
o Groundwater replenishment.
While conventional treatment plants often claim that they are "ninety
percent efficient" in removing pollutants from wastewater, a figure that is
an overestimate in many cases, it is indisputable that the remaining portion of
the sevage pollutants reacYv receiving streams. 1Yv\is, a region of one million
people using such a plant discharges into streams a sewage load equivalent te-
at least that of 100,000 persons.10 And this may be an optimistic appraisal:
many treatment plants do not achieve (and may not be designed to achieve) ninety
percent efficiency—fifty percent may be typical.H Complete breakdowns of
plants also occur regularly, and completely untreated sewage may be discharged.
This chapter will present various design and regulatory approaches that
can be implemented on the local level to improve the performance of on-
site disposal systems, either presently existing or about to be installed.
While EPA does not advocate the use of septic tanks as inherently superior
to conventional sewage systems, it is highly important that localities act
to optimize the performance of this important and environmentally sound method
of wastewater management.
The Conventional Septic Tank System
A septic tank consists of a single chamber, usually of concrete,
into which all household wastewater flows. A typical tank is shown in
88
-------
Figure 3. Its length should be at least twice its width; it should have
an effective depth of at least four feet; and it should be large enough to per-
mit one or two days retention of liquids before discharging them into the soil.12
Solids in the influent are broken down and digested by anaerobic bacteria
(bacteria which live in the absence of oxygen) in the tank. The bulk of solids
are reduced in volume, and settle to the bottom as a layer of concentrated
sludge. Greases and foam rise to the top of the tank, where they should be
allowed at least eight inches of freeboard.13 A typical septic tank removes
all the incoming grit and produces an effluent with the following quantities:^
o Biological oxygen demand: 100-120 mg/1
o Suspended Solids: 50-75 mg/1
o Grease: 10-20 mg/1
Sludge that accumulates on the bottom of the tank rises over time, reducing
the detention time of liquids in the system, and reducing the overall level
of performance of the system. If the level of sewage or scum rises too high,
they will be discharged directly into the seepage field and clog it entirely,
backing up the system and possibly ruining the field permanently. Sludges
must, therefore, be pumped out routinely, usually about every three to four
years. Partial anaerobic digestion produces noxious sludge referred to as
septage; this must be disposed of after pumping, usually by introducing it
into conventional treatment plants (in which case it contributes to stream
pollution) or by landfilling it. Approximately four billing gallons (fifteen
million m^) of septage must be disposed of each year.15
The disposal field consists of perforated pipes laid in gravel filled
trenches (see Figures 4 and 5). The size of the field depends on the
volume of effluent to be disposed of, the permeability of the soil and
other factors. Typical field sizes range from 200 square feet for sandy-
loamy soils to 1,600 square feet for some tightly packed soils.
The remaining contamination of the effluent is filtered out by soil
particles and digested by aerobic bacteria (bacteria living in the presence
of oxygen) in the soil itself. Disposal pipes should be kept within
twenty-four inches of the ground surface since this is where most aerobic
bacteria are concentrated.16 The level of treatment given the wastes is
extremely high in a properly operating system, equivalent at least to what
is generally called advanced treatment. The purified wastewater ultimately
returns to the groundwater formations below the seepage fields, where it may
be recycled and reused.
Groundwater Contamination
The most important potential environmental problem associated with
septic tank installations is contamination of groundwater supplies.
The problem is typically most acute in areas where individual wells are
89
-------
INSPECTION
PORTS
Figure 3
Septic Tank Schematic
90
-------
HOUSE
DRAIN
TERMINAL
PLUMBING FIXTURES TO BE
PROPERLY TRAPPED AND
VENTED
HOUSE
SEWERS TO BE
LAID ON WELL
COMPACTED -^
EARTH
NON PERFORATED
TILE
ABSORPTION
FIELD
TILE
DRAINAGE
LINES
Figure 4
Typical On-Site System
-------
DRAINFIELD SQUARE FOOT AREA
VARIES WITH NUMQER OF BEDROOMS
AMD PERCOLATION TEST APPROXIMATED
200 SQUARE FEET OF BOTTOM AREA
IS THE AVERAGE REQUIREMENT
FELT-. X4" PIPE
TANK CONCRETE
LENGTH TWO WIDTHS
DEPTH FOUR FEET MINIMUM
750 GALLONS MINIMUM
vO
.>:i.J hr ROCK DISTRIDUTI°" >
• T-- BOX ';ili
S^^J ,,'sEific T.SiK :• .$•'-.. : .[:..
Jir;:l::-:.Ji'.:'.
OUTIOH -
'
-
•12" ' GREASE '
1 . IH- r
K 4' .-OUT
,V~f'" TEE
SLUDGE -
1
Lj
7
• — — ^...r Q
. • • ' i-'- • |:. .«.•— ;'• ;•
li'^lrlj 1
p."iV-! .'*4'.l'v>V •
ftFSKf
Figure 5
Layout and Specifications of Typical Trench System
SOURCE: Hancor Inc., On-Site Waste Management
-------
the source of domestic water. Between 1961 and 1970, 128 known outbreaks of
waterborne disease were attributed to contaminated drinking water, and ninety-
four percent of these outbreaks were linked to private water supplies. ^ Where
seasonal high water tables rise close to the bottoms of disposal fields, where
soils are shallow or of very high permeability, or where wells are located too
close to seepage areas (generally, less than 75 feet) , contamination of drinking
water by pathogens contained in wastewater can be a problem. While this con-
tamination is often difficult to document, it is the most commonly claimed
reason for the replacement of on-site disposal by conventional sewer systems. *-°
A septic tank and leaching field system can remove pathogenic contamina-
tion before it reaches the groundwater by a combination of oxidation, filtra-
tion, and many other processes. Essential to this action is a combination of
adequate soil depth and proper soil type. I9 An improperly sited leaching
field is often the cause of groundwater contamination. States very consider-
ably in the minimum depth to groundwater they require below the bottom of the
leaching field. Some permit as little as eighteen inches of soil between the
leaching field and the maximum groundwater level, others require considerably
more. Where the groundwater is used as drinking water, the Soil Conservation
Service recommends that at least four feet of soil be available between the
bottom of the trenches or seepage bed and the water table or impervious rock
formations. In addition, minimum distances between leaching fields and wells,
streams, and lakes are often established to protect these sources of drinking
water, but all such protective standards are useless if the soil on a parti-
cular site is inappropriate for septic tank use.
It is in the soil that the nutrients remaining in the septic tank efflu-
ent are consumed and the remaining particles and micro-organisms filtered out.
If the soil is too porous, the contaminated effluent can flow directly into
the groundwater, even- if the minimum distances between leaching field and
height of groundwater are observed.
Improper construction practices may also contribute to system failure:
the use of mechanical excavating equipment in building leaching fields may
smear the soil surface and cut down its infiltration capability .20 Most often,
hosever, fields failed either through general "aging," by being clogged
with particles or with an accumulation of anaerobically produced ferrous
sulfate precipitate, or because of inadequate septic tank maintenance, which
allows scoured sludge, scum, and unsettled, undecomposed sewage to flow
directly into the field.
Septic tank systems are, at best, not very effective at removing nitro-
gen and phosphates: soils have a varying capacity for phosphorus removal,
and few can hold nitrogen in the form of ammonia. In a malfunctioning
system these chemicals can pose direct health hazards (e.g., nitrates are
known to cause infant methemoglobinemia) , or can serve as undesired nutrients
affecting both groundwater and surface water supplies.
93
-------
Surface Water Contamination and Runoff
Contamination of groundwater is not observable directly, but surface
eruptions of septic tank effluent definitely can be. Effluent can back up,
can cause ponding on flat areas, or can runoff and cause contamination of
streams or lakes. Diseases may be transmitted through direct contact
(especially where children and anitials have access to contaminated areas)
or through contamination of drinking water taken from nearby lakes or streams.
Aside from such health problems, backed up systems cause unpleasant odors
and other aesthetic nuisances.
There are many reasons for leaching field clogging and system back
up. Heavy rains may saturate the soil, or a household may begin to generate
more wastewater than the system can handle (particularly when a house is
occupied by more people or appliances than it was designed for).
Other Impacts of Septic Tank Use
In addition to the direct environmental impacts of septic tanks on
surface water and groundwater, the use of this type of on-site disposal
involves indirect impacts on communities.
Land Use Effects: Because septic tanks require both the proper
type of soil and an adequate field size, they have a significant effect
on local land use. One study estimated that over sixty-eight percent of
the United States is unsuitable for conventional septic tank installation
because of soil problems.21 in addition, the minimum lot sizes necessary
for proper installations—usually at least one half acre—has in itself
important implications for land use within communities. Such lot sizes
are not usually compatible with some of the social objectives in planning
suburban communities—especially the provision of low and moderate income
housing. This latter is-a large issue unto itself, but it is inappropriate
to treat it here.
Several environmental issues are raised in connection with the land
requirements of conventional on-site wastewater disposal. In particular,
one must ask if a dispersed, low density development pattern is consistent
with
o Management of non-point source water pollution and
stormwater runoff.
o Air quality planning objectives.
o Transportation planning systems objectives.
o Energy efficiency (building, transportation, and discretionary
uses) .
o Community service provision (solid waste collection, police
protection, schools.
94
-------
Some of these issues are addressed in Section I. There are no ready answers
to the problem of coordinating multiple environmental objectives of the
local level, but readers should turn to Section VIII, Local Environmental
Reviews, for a discussion of one effective and relatively straightforward
approach.
IMPROVEMENTS IN ON-SITE WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS
Design and installation practices for septic tanks have improved over
the years, but improvements are still needed. A few communities have exten-
sive and well thought out regulatory policies regarding on-site disposal;
others rely entirely on highly variable state policies. A recent study
by Plews, 22 Which contained data from thirty-seven states, showed that local
departments generally have responsibility for on-site sewage regualtions.
Of the states responding, fifteen leave control entirely up to localities,
fifteen share the responsibility between localities and the states, six
states assume full control over regulations , and one (Idaho) has a system of
regional regulation which the study found to be a superior mechanism. Tables
21 and 22 summarize the design and installation requirements of the
responding states.
There is room, therefore, for considerable improvement in local standards.
This section presents some recent thinking on suitable improvements for on-site
disposal practice. Most of the ideas are not new, but few are widely imple-
mented. There is need for these ideas to be more widely disseminated, and
source references are provided at the end of the chapter to supplement this
overview.
The emphasis here is' on technological and design improvements and
associated implementation problems. On-site disposal practices have
traditionally been set purely for public health protection, but today other
issues, such as consumer protection and environmental control, are also
being considered. And, the use of on-site disposal has a heavy political
connotation that is beyond the scope of this report: in many rural areas,
septic tank permits are the only control available for new construction; in
suburban areas, the lot size requirements of septic tanks may serve as a
de facto exclusionary growth control device, or, conversely, they may be
granted to politically desirable subdivisions even though the housing sites
are actually unsuitable for this type of wastewater management. This sec-
tion presents methods for optimizing on-site disposal from the environmental
and public health points of view only.
Design and Maintenance
Design-. There are a number of sources that cover the design and
construction of conventional systems using septic tanks. The U.S. Public
Health Service Publication, Manual of Septic Tank Practices (Department of
Health, Education and Welfare, Publication No. 526 (Rev., 1967), is the most
widely used text on the subject, and is having an increasing effect on state
and local standards nationwide.
Improved Percolation Testing; Unquestionably, the most important
variable in the successful design of a conventional system is the disposal
95
-------
Table 21
Septic Tank Design and Water Depth Requirements
In Various States
States
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska8-
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Mexico
New York
North Caroline
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
1
1000
750
960
750
1000
750
75O
750
750
750
750
500
750
750
750
1OOO
750
750
1000
750
900
750
10OO
750
750
30 hour
750
750
750
750
2
1000
750
960
750
10OO
750
750
750
750
750
750
750
750
750
750
10OO
750
750
1000
750
900
750
1000
750
750
Detention
750
750
750
750
Tank Stee
Number ot
3
1000
900
960
900
1OOO
900
900
SOO
900
1000
900
900
900
900
900
1000
900
900
1500
900
900
900
1000
900
900
100 Gallons Per
9OO
900
975
900
In Gallons
Bedrooms
4
1200
1000
12OO
1000
1250
1000
1000
1000
1100
1250
1000
1150
1000
1000
1000
100O
1000
1000
2000
1000
1000
1000
1250
1000
100O
Day
1000
1000
1200
1000
Minimum
Water Depth open
5 (Feel) Discharge
1400 4
1250 4 No
150O 4 No
1250 No Minimum Yes
J50O 1.5 No
1200 1.5 No
1250 No Minimum No
1250 4 No
1250 No
1500 1.5 A. yes
1250 No
1400 Nona Yes
1250 2 Yes
.
1250 4 No
1250 No
J25O 4 NO
1250 4A. MO
i
1250 2A- No
2000
-------
Table 22
Absorption Field Design Requirements
In Various States
Setbacks
Minimum
Minimum
Minimum
Trench
State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska3-
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North 'Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Ftrtode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyomlna
Well
50—75
50—100
50—100
: 100
75
75-100
100
100
50-100
100-200
100
100—300
1OO
100
100
75
50
SO— 10O
100
100
100
50
100
35—100
75-1 OO
100
5O— 10O
100
Surface
water
50—100
100
SO
SO
50
SO
100—300
50
25
50—100
,
1OO
50
100
75
50—100
50
50
100
SO
100
SO— 100
100
100
50
50
Spacing Cover
(Feet) (inches)
6
6
6
6
6-9
6-S
10
e
6-7 .5
7.5
10
6
6
6
6—75
6
10
6
6
e
6
€-7.5
6-9
6
6
10
6-7 .5
6
12
12
12
£
12
12
12
12
12
None
6-12
2-6
.
12
6
4-6
6
e
6
12
12
12
12
None
6
12
12
6-12
Percolation
Restrictions
Nona
Nona
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
Yes
No
Yes
None
None
None
Yes
Nona
Yes
None
None
None
Yes
None
None
None
Widths
(Inches)
18-36
12—36
12-18
18—36
18—36
16—24
13-36
12-36
18-36
is
12—18
24
12-36
18—36
12-24
12—36
e— 30
24
12-36
18
18—36
12-36
18-36
18-36
12-35
18—36
12-36
Sizing
Perc
Perc & Soils
Perc
Perc
Perc
Perc & Soils
Perc & Soils
Perc & SOUS
Perc
Perc
Perc
Perc
Soils
Perc & Soils
Perc
Perc
Perc
Soils
Soils
Perc
Perc
Perc
Perc t Sol*
Perc
Pere & Soils
Perc & Soils
Perc
Perc & Soils
Perc
SOURCE: Plews, "The Adequacy and Uniformity of Regulations for
Outside Wastewater Disposal - A State viewpoint."
97
-------
field. Most often, this is done on the basis of percolation tests in the
field to determine the rate of infiltration of water into the soil. Although
the reliability of this test has been challenged, the percolation test is an
adequate way to evaluate soils for their suitability of wastewater disposal
if properly conducted.23 While more sophisticated tests are often desirable,
the percolation test remains the basis of disposal field design in the
majority of communities.
Presently, there is no standard method used nationwide by which
percolation tests are conducted.24 In concept, a percolation test involves
drilling a hole in the ground, filling it with water, and seeing how
long it takes the water to soak in. According to Winneberger, "most
fieldmen commonly perform what they believe to be percolation tests, but
in reality they only measure their ability to destroy soils."2S fo illus-
trate the inconsistency of results of such testing, Winneberger had three
firms perform tests at nine locations, making test borings to farther than
two feet apart. The results of these tests are illustrated in Table 23
and show virtually no uniformity at all.
Percolation tests, to be done properly, must allow for soil saturation
and swelling, and must reach a point of relative equilibrium or constant '
rate of drop, in order to provide a sound basis .for determining the absorptive
capacity of a soil. A recommended procedure for soil percolation tests
has been developed by Winneberger, and is presented below.
Tank sizing: According to analysis in the 1950's, when large-scale
suburban subdivisions were being built all across the country, builders
were already accepting the need for larger septic tank units to meet the
increased water use of houses with (then unusual) water-using appliances
such as dishwashers, garbage grinders, and home washers.27 These appliances
are much more widespread^today than they were then. Between this increased
water use and the tendency for maintenance to be postponed (thus reducing
the net available tank size because of sludge build-up), oversizing of
septic tanks is a good safety factor as a hedge against possible field
clogging. Some have suggested that the use of garbage grinders be prohibited
in areas with septic tanks, since they contribute a high volume of
organic wastes to tanks and pose an increased threat of sludge buildup.
The impact of dishwashers and garbage grinders on water use itself, and
thus on field sizing, is minimal. Figures 6 and 7 28 show daily
water use and chemical oxygen demand for a typical household.
Overflow Warning Devices: The most common source of failure of a
septic tank system is destruction of the absorption field due to lack of
maintenance of the tank. As recounted above, sludge builds up, ultimately
1lowing directly out into the field as solid matter and clogging the soil
particles. In order to signal the necessity for maintenance before the
field itself is destroyed, the use of an inverted cone sludge deflector
suspended two inches below the outlet tee of the tank has been suggested:29
rising sludge will raise the cone and block the outlet, causing a backup of
sewage into the household—a warning that cannot be ignored but which does
not jeopardize the functioning of the field nor cause as much damage
as the destruction of the field.
98
-------
Table 23
Replicate Percolation Tests
Performed for Three Soil Firms
Location
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
Ultimate Percolation Rate, min./in.
Firm No. 1
23
15
2
130
5
2
3
4
19
Firm No. 2
118
59
15
91
59
12
39
22
63
Firm No. 3
37
172
32
161
73
24
229
34
259
SOURCE: Winneberger, "Correlation of Three Techniques for
Determining Soil Permeability."
99
-------
Figure 6
Daily Household Water Use
15-,
o
I
\
x
•
a.
6
DISHWASHER
GARBAGE
DISPOSAL
BATH
OR
SHOWER
WASHING
MACHINE
M246810N246810M
AM PM
TIME OF DAY
SOURCE: Kreissl, "Rural Wastewater Research.
100
-------
Figure 7
COD Profile
SHOWER BATH
_c
0)
J^
O
GARBAGE
DISPOSAL
40000-
36000-
32000-
28000-
24000-
20000-
WASHING/^CSINK
MACHINE
46 810N24 6 810M
AM PM
TIME OF DAY
SOURCE: Kreissl, "Rural Wastewater Research.'
101
-------
Maintenance of septic tank systems is notoriously poor. Checking
the level of solids in a septic tank is an unpleasant and difficult task,
and it is understandable that even conscientious owners are likely to post-
pone doing it until trouble erupts in the backyard. Maintenance ports on
most septic tanks are buried between twleve and eighteen inches below the
surface of the ground: the earth above must be removed, the top opened, and
a measuring stick of some sort must be introduced to gauge the level of the
solids and scum. When maintenance is postponed, it is easy to forget the
location of the tank, and if properties are transferred to new owners, even
a general idea of the tank location may be lost. Drawings should be kept
locating the maintenance port in relation to fixed features on the lot, and
if possible a permanent market installed above the port (flush with the ground
if located on a lawn that must be mowed). If a seal is provided to keep odors
from escaping, maintenance ports can themselves be placed on grade.
A low visibility issue, one that should be explicitly addressed by
communities implementing comprehensive programs to improve on-site disposal,
is the fate of sludges pumped from septic tanks. Open dumping of sludges
is generally prohibited near population centers, thoguh in more remote
areas this highly undesirable practice may slip by. More common practice
is to introduce these wastes into nearby municipal treatment plants, or to
landfill them. The former is acceptable, but any comprehensive program for
continued reliance en septic tanks in a community should be accompanied
by effective facility planning of municipal plants, such that sufficient
capacity is continuously available for the routine disposal of septic
tank sludges. The extent of the disposal problem is major, as some four
billion gallons of septage are generated each year.^° Some communities are
building centralized septage treatment plants, with federal grants under the
Water Pollution Control Act.
Acceptable techniques for landfill of septage are somewhat different
from those pertinent to the landfill of municipal treatment plant sludge.
Although sludges can be suitable for landfill, (provided industrial toxics
are not present) septage is generally harder and more unpleasant to work
with, and its effects on soils are not as well understood as the effects
of secondary treatment plant sludge. Some states, such as Maine, are now
requiring lime stabilization of septage prior to land disposal, increasing
its pK to as high as 11 or 12 in an effort to kill off some of its pathogenic
organisms, and to make handling less unpleasant.
Extending the Life of On-Site Disposal Systems
Septic tank installations are often considered a stop-gap measure
prior to the development of municipal sewage treatment systems. Average
life-times for disposal fields are usually quoted as about fifteen years,
but some recent studies suggest that with proper design the fields may
last a good deal longer—perhaps indefinitely. While the data is not
yet sufficient to prove this claim, it does appear that the much maligned
septic tank system can yield effective service to a community, and postpone
(or conceivably avoid) the need to go to conventional end-of-the-pipe
solutions to wastewater disposal.
102
-------
In 19561, Fairfax C9unty, Virginia, passed a new septic tank ordinance
that made use of accurate soils surveys to establish criteria for new
installations. This has been updated from time to time, and remains one
of the most comprehensive such ordinances now in effect. The ordinance
calls for a soil evaluation of the drainage field including,
"...consideration of physiographic province, position of
landscape, degree of slope and soil profile (thickness of
horizon, color, texture). Such evaluations shall indicate
whether or not the soil has problems relative to the posi-
tion in the landscape, seasonal water table, shallow depths,
rate of absorption, or a combination of any of the above.
If absorption rate problems are suspected and there is no
indication of a water table, percolation tests should be
made but their results shall not be presumptive, prima
facia or conclusive evidence as to the suitability for
effluent absorption. Such percolation tests may be con-
sidered and analyzed as one of many criteria in determining
soil suitability for absorption of effluent."
(emphasis added)
The effect of this ordinance on actual performance of individual systems
has been beneficial. A study done by the County Health Department in
1973 revealed that "septic tank systems, properly designed and installed
under fairly good controlled conditions, were surviving, not an average
life of fifteen to twenty years as the department expected on the basis
of literature and field experiment, but more like twenty to thirty years.
It is true that of those that did fail, the average life span was about ten
to fifteen years, which had led officials to underestimate the life span of
all septic tank systems." For instance, of the 230 systems installed
in 1952, ninety-four percent were still functioning in 1971; and of the
approximately 1,500 systems installed since 1966, not one had failed by
1.971. ^ it is clear from evidence such as this that septic tank systems
are capable of giving prolonged service; as a consequence of this survival
data, the county dropped requirements for mandatory connections to new
sewer systems within five years of the installation of those systems,
except in the case of failure of the on-site system.
In 1973, further modifications to the septic tank ordinance were
passed, modifying some previous practices and adding a significant
technical innovation—split field absorption systems.34 The points of
departure were:
(1) to permit installation of drainfield laterals on
six-foot centers rather than eight-foot centers.
(to conserve absorption area);
(2) to require installation of all future absorption
systems in two separate sections with separate
distribution boxes and a flow diversion valve or
some other satisfactory method for utilizing half
of the total system for a period of time, then
switching to the other for a similar period;
103
-------
(3) to require an area to be reserved for possible future
expansion of the absorption system equal to fifty
percent of the area required by the initial installa-
tion.
Combined with controls over the installation of all new systems and require-
ments for mandatory maintenance, regular cleanings, and regular alteration
of drainage fields, the county expects that new systems will function
properly for "30 to 50 years or even indefinitely."35
Improved Maintenance
Lack of maintenance is the most often cited reason for septic tank
failures. Accumulating sediment in the tank finally reaches to the level
of the outlet and flows into the disposal field, blocking the soil and
backing up the entire system. Once this happens, the field may be per-
manently ruined—i.e., it would require excavation and relaying of the pipe
in order to restore adequate infiltration of liquids into the soil.
Various communities have experimented with making septic tank main-
tenance services available from the town for a small fee. (See Appendix
IV-1.) There is no legal impediment, however, to requiring maintenance as
a condition of operating a septic tank. This chapter presents the neces-
sary legal language to set up such a system below. Maintenance require-
ments would include at least biannual inspections of the levels of solids
in tanks, and compulsory pumping of septage if'the levels are excessively
high. Inspecting a septic tank is a time consuming and unpleasant task
that should be made mandatory if it is to be conscientiously done across
the entire community.
Alternating Disposal Fields
The purpose of alternating disposal fields is to permit each half of
the total field to rest and regain its absorptive capacity. When flow to
one half of the field is cut off, its soil increases its rate of aerobic-
decomposition, and biochemically degrades clogging materials into liquids
and gases. The soil near the trenches also dries out and cracks, improv-
ing the soil's texture and its infiltrative capacity.36 It is recommended
that alternating between fields be done annually. In order to aid implementa-
tion of this innovative approach, the pertinent sections of Fairfax County's
Ordinance are included in the Section entitled, "Improvements in On-Site
Management Systems," with minor revisions.
Design of systems to permit field alternation is simple. First,
fields must be laid out with an even number of trenches. While this may
be difficult on certain small lots, it should not be an obstacle if pro-
perties have been adequately zoned for the installation of on-site disposal
systems. Second, some means of diverting the flow from one half of the
field to the other must be provided: various valves are available for this
purpose.
ways
Actual layout of the alternating trenches can be done in a variety of
. Total size of the installation apparently need not be larger than
104
-------
the size of a single field. Winneberger recommended that trenches be laid
out in an interlaced fashion, with every other trench connected to one-half
of the distribution box.37 This tends to optimize sub-irrigation of vegega-
tion, especially trees: with separate alternate fields, trees in one-half
of the system would be deprived'of irrigation every other year; interlacing
the fields allows for a constant level of subirrigation and maximization of
evapotranspiration from the field.
At present, two companies in the United States offer a proprietary
device that performs the necessary function, though the requirements are so
simple that no valve is actually needed. The simplest version of the idea
would involve construction of a diversion box, with the septic tank output
pipe on one side and the two field outlets on the other. Use of the system
would simply require plugging one of the output pipes with a tennis ball or
other closure. The box could be opened yearly and the tennis ball moved to
the opposite pipe. For the average homeowner, this device has obvious
aesthe.tic defects, especially if he has allowed one of the field halves
to back up and is faced with a general overflow.
One of the commercially available valves, made by Hancor Corporation
in Ohio, is housed in a plastic box below ground. While it works well for
all ordinary situations, the homeowner would still be faced with an unpleasant
problem if an overflow occurred. The other valve, made by Franklin
Research in California, is operated from above ground level by the use of
a long key (see Figure 8). Diverting the flow between fields is thus
physically easier, and in the event of an overflow no part of the valve
system need actually be touched by the owner--control is from above ground.
The latter valve, with its increased consumer acceptability, is the one
used in Fairfax County, Virginia. While not identifying it by brand name,
the specifications set out in Section 22-44.1 of the ordinance identify
it for all practical purposes. Part (b) of the same section permits any
equivalent system to be used, provided it is approved by the Health Director.
Virtually all installations in Fairfax County actually use the Franklin
Research valve; the cost for the valve and its installation kit is about
$100, a modest additional cost for hew houses.
Once the use of split fields is adopted in a municipality's sewerage
system code, successful use of the systems must ba assured: the valve must
be switched annually. Fairfax County uses a mailed reminder: every year
postcards are mailed out to all owners using the system, asking them to
switch their valve, check off that they have done it, and mail back the card.
If no response is received after a reasonable length of time, the town sends
out someone to turn the valve. The procedure is less than two years old,
and it is not known if this approach will be successful. A more conservative,
though certainly more expensive approach, is to have all valves turned by
town personnel. This could be done whenever water meters are read, for
instance, though the cost would definitely be greater. Homeowners would
have to pay the costs, but the process would be more reliable over the long
run. Site visits would be charged automatically on an annual basis.
Location of the valve could be recorded on the city records—along with the
location of the septic tank maintenance port, if the maintenance permit
system is also used—minimizing on-site time.
105
-------
Figure 8
a. Layout of a Field with an Even Number of Trenches
4-LEACWM6 RODS
tr. A Flow Diversion Valve with an. External Regulatory Key
SOURCE: Clayton, J.W., An^Analysis of Septic Tank Survival Data from
1932 to 1972 in Fairfax County, Virginia
106
-------
Innovative Technologies
Various new technologies are being developed to handle small flows of
wastewater. Three of these are discussed briefly here:
(1) Alternatives to the septic tank, including "waterless
toilet" technologies which may potentially permit the
use of smaller disposal fields for handling washing
water ("graywater").
(2) The Mound System of on-site disposal, which allows
the use of conventional septic tanks on lots other-
wise not suitable for use because of inadequate
soil infiltration characteristics.
(3) Pressure sewers, which allow low density development
in areas of hilly terrain to be sewered at low cost
and which allow relatively inexpensive connections
to be made between existing sewers and lots on which
septic tanks have failed.
Variations on the Septic Tank—
A number of variations on the conventional septic tank are marketed
today,39 using both anaerobic digestion (as does the septic tank), and
aerobic digestion. Advantages quoted for the various systems include
higher effluent quality, less stringent disposal field specifications,
or both. A very brief description of some of these are presented here.
Anaerobic Systems; Improvements on the septic tank itself have been
designed and are being tested. Multiple chambers are used, in which wastes
are permitted longer digestion times and greater degrees of settlement are
achieved. An experimental septic tank at the Sanitary Engineering Center
at the University of California has been tested to yield fifty percent BOD
removal, and seventy-three percent removal of suspended solids—better over-
all performance than is expected with conventional installations. A fiber-
glass tank system, marketed by the Armon Company,40 has also been tested:
it uses separate inputs for sanitary and wash water wastes, thus isolating
the more concentrated wastes from the harmful effects of detergents and
cleaning solvents and giving them longer digestion time. Its performance
may be slightly better than the experimental septic tank. The theoretical
advantage of such improved anaerobic systems is in reduced requirements
for disposal fields: although the tanks and their installation are slightly
more expensive than conventional units, they are supposed to be used
to advantage where local soils are of fair to poor quality. The Armon unit
has been approved by tho Federal Housing Administration, but good data on
its actual performance under field conditions are not yet available.
Aerobic Systems: A variety of units are available for individual
household installation that use aerobic digestion of wastes, much as a
conventional secondary treatment plant does. Advantages of the system
are claims of a generally higher quality of effluent (eighty percent
107
-------
suspended solids removal and ninety percent BOD reduction), and a consequent
reduction in the size of the disposal field.41 Operating costs are higher,
since mechanical aereators are necessary, and the system is susceptible to
disruptions (and consequent variations in effluent quality) due to shock
loadings of concentrated wastes and harmful chemicals. Only a dozen or so
companies now produce aerobic units, and only about 20,000 to 30,000 have
been installed nationwide.42 Costs of installation run from about $1,100
to $2,500 per unit, with annual operating costs (electricity, service, main-
tenance, and disinfection) of between $85 and $210. Because of these high
costs, efforts have been made to find other means of economizing on installa-
tions, notably through allowing aerobic effluents to be discharged into
surface drainage (storm sewers), rather than requiring subsurface disposal,
as with septic tank effluent.
Under stable conditions, however, aerobic units may permit different
criteria for seepage bed design. University of Wisconsin studies show the
following:
parameter aerobic septic
BOD, mg/1 47 158
SS, mg/1 53 54
Fecal Coliform, no./ml 107 4,210
But, although some units do consistently produce effluent suitable for
surface disposal, others do not,43 and even the superior units are vulnerable
to occasional upset which might indirectly lead to the discharge of dangerous
pathogens into community waters. This danger and the administrative diffi-
culties of system monitoring of individual discharge performance have made
the use of aerobic units severely limited, at least for the present.
In-House Composting: Perhaps the most far-reaching innovation in the
field of on-site disposal is the idea of separating waste components
within households and disposing of them by separate technologies. One
system receiving wide attention in environmental circles recently is
the Swedish Clivus Multrum. Contained entirely within a building and having
no moving parts, the Multrum functions as a toilet and garbage disposal.
No water is used in its aerobic composting process, so all bathing and washing
water must be treated separately.
The Multrum has received interest because its effluent, produced
after about four years of continuous decomposition, is environmentally
innocuous humus and full of nutrients useful for fertilizer. It is
designed to be odor-free (it vents through its own chimney), and to those
accustomed to it, it provides the same amenities as conventional plumbing.
The two issues associated with this and similar waterless household waste
treatment technologies are:
(1) Consumer acceptance: "Black hole" toilets are not
likely to be accepted by the existing housing mar-
ket, and construction of the unit is presently suited
to first or second floor installation only.
108
-------
(2) "Graywater" disposal: Wastewater from sinks, washing
machines, and other water using appliances must still
be disposed of, either into sewers or on site.
The acceptability to consumers of systems like the Multrum may change
over time. Iowa, Maine, Nebraska, New Hampshire and Oregon have approved
the Multrum for general use, and in Vermont and Missouri approval is easily
obtainable under state codes. In total, installations have been made in
thirty-six states. Several research studies on the public health aspects
of the system are being conducted by various groups in this country and
Canada, though the National Swedish Board of Health and Welfare has studied
and approved it already. The system's marketers hope that, once the system
is widely accepted for general use by public health departments, increased
installation will follow, even in conventional housing developments. At
present, the Multrum is used mainly in rural areas, where water supplies
are limited and sewers unavailable. Most of the installations to date in
this country have been made by committed environmentalists, however, who
cannot be represented as typical consumers. Whether the device will ulti-
mately be accepted by the public remains to be seen.
The graywater disposal problem associated with Multrums and similar
units cannot be minimized. While graywater is free of the heavy nutrients
and contaminent loads associated with human wastes, it does contain most
of the greases and phosphates (from detergents) which are present in com-
bined sewage flows. In addition, the quality of graywater varies greatly
between households: for instance, graywater from households with infants
is likely to contain significant fecal wastes, possibly containing pathogens.
Because technologies for the treatment of graywater simply have not been
developed—there has been no need for it until recently—most health
departments require that it be treated by conventional septic tanks and sub-
surface disposal, or else be discharged to sewers. Although septic tanks
and fields can be smaller because of reduced waste loads and water flows,
the expense involved in the installation of a dual system is likely to
obviate the advantages of installing a Multrum in the first place.
If current research validates the claims of the Multrum1s manufacturers
that it is perfectly safe, local governments should, at the least take
steps to permit its use under applicable building and plumbing codes.
Advantages of the system to local communities include-.
(1) An approximate one-third drop in household water use;
(2) a. Significant drops in waste loadings and flow volumes
to local sewage treatment plants and reduction of
point source discharges to local water bodies; or
b. postponement or avoidance of conventional sewer and
treatment plant construction and operating costs;
(3) Where on-site disposal is practiced, a greatly reduced
hazard of groundwater contamination with either nitrates
or human pathogenic organisms.
109
-------
Mound System—
The use of on-site disposal is seriously hampered where seasonal high
water tables and slowly permeable soils exist. The two often go hand-in-
hand: in the spring and fall, infiltrating surface water may not be able
to percolate through slowly permeable subsoil horizons, and may remain
perched within a couple of feet of the surface. In such situations, the
"mound systems" described below may be used to permit safe disposal of
septic tank effluent, reducing the need to build more expensive conventional
sewer systems.
The theory of the mound system is simple and direct: if the existing
absorption field is inadequate, a new one can be built above it by importing
a suitable fill material. A typical cross section of a mound is shown in
Figure 9. There are various technical advantages to constructing a fresh
field above the surface, rather than excavating below the surface; perhaps
the most .important is that smearing and compacting the soil beneath is
avoided.45 Wastes are filtered through a bed of sand laid on top of the
existing soil, which in turn is covered with top soil and landscaped. While
the system is not suitable for every site condition, it can be used many
places where traditional septic tank installations would not be possible.
Because the level of the mound is raised above the grade, an electric
pump is often needed to life wastewater several feet for dosing into the mound.
This is an extra expense beyond the construction of the mound itself.
Mounds rise three to four feet off the ground,'and may be sixty-five feet
on a side for a typical home45—they clearly pose consumer acceptance
problems as a solution in conventional subdivision layouts, where they may
occupy most of the available backyard space. Nevertheless, there is no
reason why they cannot be landscaped attractively, making a virtue of a
necessity. They have been accepted for installation in Wisconsin under
conditions where soil percolation ranges between 60 and 120 min./in.47
and where the seasonal water table reaches up to two feet below the surface.
They-may be an important alternative available to communities that wish to
avoid having to build conventional sewer systems. Additional information
on the concept is available through the references listed in the back of
this chapter.
Pressure Sewers—
The Environmental Protection Agency has supported four experiments in
the use of pressure sewers, at Grandyiew, Indiana; Phoenixville, Pennsylvania,.
Albany, New York; and Bend, Oregon. 48 These systems pump wastewater under
pressure through shallow narrow gauge pipes, eliminating the need for
laying deep gravity flow lines. They are expected to be most useful in
areas where existing septic tank systems have failed and the terrain is
unsuitable for the construction of conventional sewers, or where new
development is desired in locations that either are very hilly or have high
water tables, making conventional gravity systems prohibitively expensive.
The specifications of the Phoenixville system are as follows. (Figure
10 shows a schematic installation.) Lines of three-inch PVC pipe are laid
110
-------
Figure 9
Hound Over Creviced Bedrock
CREVICED BEDROCK WITHIN
THREE FEET BELOW THE SOIL SURFACE
EVAPOTRANSPIRAT1ON
(GROWING SEASON)
EFFLUENT
*!/
• •-- -• • * ...-.-.-
•i*T.Tr-7r.'»r-~*rT'-Tr''T7.-'.' •.•rv.~I
TOPSOIL
I T I ^SOIL-FILL
ORIGINAL SOIL
CREVICED BEDROCK
SOURCE: Kreissl, "Rural Wastewater Research."
Ill
-------
Figure 10
Typical Pressure Sewer Installation
EXISTING VENT
/
EXISTING GRAVITY
SEWAGE PIPING
.CONTROL BOX
•COVER
.TERRAIN
PRESSURE SEWER
PVC PIPING
DRAINAGE FIELD
EXISTING SEPTIC
TANK/OVERFLOW
OVERFLOW LEVEL SENSOR
ON-OFF LEVEL SENSOR
ISTtNG GRAVITY SEWER
SOURCE: Mekosh and Rainos, Pressure Sewer Demonstration at the Borough
Of Phoenixville, Pennsylvania.
-------
thirty inches below the ground surface to escape freezing. They carry an
average flow of eleven gallons per minute under up to fifty pounds of pressure
per square inch. Sewage is ground up by pumper-grinders in each house before
it is fed into the pipes. In the event of a system failure, standby septic
tanks are available for overflow. In one case, a house served by the system
was separated from the existing gravity sewer line by one-half mile lateral
distance and sixty feet in elevation. The system involved no treatment of
sewage whatever, operating in an anaerobic (septic) mode with zero oxygen
levels.49
Costs for the system were as follows : The pressurized line was installed
at a cost of $3.00 a linear foot, and operating costs averaged $.50 per month
per unit served. The initial cost of installation of equipment (storage
tank to handle peak flows, Pump Storage Grinders, mechanical and electrical
connections) for each of five locations was $2,050. Since five houses and
seven apartments were served, this averaged to $850 per unit.
The installation was deemed a success. Further information on this
technology is available through the EPA. Pressure sewers may prove to be
a valuable option to have available for special use as a safety option in
areas where maximum reliance on conventional septic tanks is planned.
COSTS'O*1 ON-SITK DISPOSAL
Conventional Septic Tanks
One of the greatest advantages of conventional septic tank systems is
their low cost. Of all the standard methods of wastewater treatment
currently popular, they are the cheapest.
The calculations in Table 24 are based on 1973 dollars50 adjusted
to 1976 dollars at an inflation rate of 6^% per annum. Annual costs are
calculated using 8% interest amortized over the nominal life of the septic
tank--twenty five years. In calculating the annual costs of septic tank
and other systems using fields for disposal, it is necessary to make a judg-
ment of how the costs of land should be included in the annualized costs of
the system. Where zoning decisions are made to increase minimum lot sizes
to allow for adequate field size, it would be valid to include a portion of
the cost of the field in the analysis, assuming some increase in site value
for the added land. However, field costs are not included here; land costs
are too variable for a sample figure to be meaningful. It is a very simple
matter to include land costs as part of the calculations for any given assump-
tions about the proportionate share of lot costs to be accounted to wastewater
disposal, costs quoted for the disposal fields are for installation of trenches
only.
On the basis of these figures, costs for conventional disposal (with
alternating field valves) range from about $135 per year in good soils to
$326 per year in poor soils, with typical annual costs at perhaps $160 for
areas with fair soils. These estimates agree well with those of a 1971 study
by Werre conducted in Vermont,5i which estimated costs in 1971 dollars to
vary between $104 and $250 per year. Werre's study also estimated the cost
of sewering a typical town, and arrived at costs of $148 to $370 per household,
113
-------
Table 24
Conventional Septic Tank System
a. 1000 gallon pre-cast tank (25 year life)
b. installation
c. operation
d. maintenance (1 pumping/3 years @ $36/pumping)
Annual Cost (a-d) $82
e. diversion valve and installation (est.)
Annual Cost (e) $19
Subtotal (a-e) $101
Disposal Field
f. good soil (170 ft. )
Annual Cost
g. fair soil (500 ft. )
Annual Cost
h. poor soil (1600 ft.2)
Annual Cost
$34
$56
$225
$240
$330
$ 0
$ 12/yr.
$200
$360
$600
$2400
114
-------
exclusive of government subsidies. Where -hilly or rocky terrain exist, typi-
cal costs for conventional sewers can be many multiples of this—$10,000
per home is not uncommon.
Aerobic Systems
For the sake of comparison, the same analysis may be done on aerobic
systems. Table 24 shows'typical costs, and includes the cost of disposal
fields because local health departments typically do not relax disposal field
requirements assuming that occasional breakdowns of the system will occur.
Costs could be adjusted down proportionately to compensate for this, but
it is clear that, at present, aerobic units are generally not competitive
with anaerobic units on a cost basis.
Table 25
Aerobic System Costs
a. Equipment costs
tank, control panel,etc. (25-year life) $900
aeration equipment (10 year life @ $150/unit)
3 units $450
b. Installation $420
c. Power (annual <§ $42) $1080
d. Maintenance ($20/pumping every 10 months) $600
Annual Cost $331
Disposal Field
e. good soil (170 ft. )
Annual Cost
f. fair soil (500 ft.2)
Annual Cost
g. poor soil {1600 ft. )
Annual Cost
$34
$56
$275
$360
$600
$2400
115
-------
Other Systems
Clivus Multrunu Prices for. the Multrum System as of December 1975, are
quoted as $2762 for a completely installed unit, including $600 for an optional
side conveyor unit for use where necessary to adapt existing homes to the
system. Also included is graywater pretreatment system (trickling filter)
and its installation, but field costs for disposal of graywater are not
included.
It should be pointed out that this cost includes both a garbage disposal
unit and a toilet. Considering that the cost of a toilet (including soil
stack) is generally quoted at about $750 installed, this increases the cost
competitiveness of the system as a whole. The value of the garbage disposal
feature may or may not be accounted as a saving, according to community
practice and consumer preference.
There are claimed to be virtually no operations or maintenance expenses
associated with the system, although the company has recently modified most
installations to include an electric ventilation fan to keep the unit odor-
free despite varying atmospheric conditions. Emptying the chamber is done by
the owner; removal of the humus that develops at the bottom chamber is said
to be an innocuous operation.
Mound Systems: Construction costs for mound systems are currently esti-
mated at between $4000 and $5000, including all pipes, tanks, and pumps.
It may be possible in some localities to avoid mechanical pumping
in mound systems if design modifications are made to the plumbing in the house.^
If bathtubs are raised and toilets are wall mounted on the first floor, enough
elevation may be gained to enable the septic tank to be installed above grade
and covered with earth. Flow would then be entirely by gravity, and energy and
maintenance costs for pumping could be avoided.
TECHNICAL DATA
Recommended Percolation Test Procedures
A percolation test is used to identify a suitable soil stratus for septic-
tank practices and to estimate the size a system should be to have a reason-
ably long lifespan.
Where soils are shallow, percolation-test holes would best be placed at
the depth of the proposed disposal field. In deeper soils, it might be
ad-antageous to have deeper disposal fields; there, it might be best to place
percolation test holes at more than one level. Where very deep disposal pits
are contemplated, test holes should be placed in each stratum considered to
be useful.
In addition to percolation tests, exploratory holds dug with a backhoe
can expose soils in profile. This is worthwhile in evaluating the suitability
of a site for septic tank practices.
Logs of soil borings are of value, if descriptions are in terms of a known
soil classification system. Coloquial terms should be avoided.
116
-------
Digging a Test Hole; Dig or bore a hole with handtools either 12" square
or 15" in diameter.
If water is in short supply, or if soils tend to collapse, place a per-
forated pipe vertically in the hole and carefully pack gravel or some other
supporting material between the pipe and the hole wall. Perform the test
within the vertical pipe and adjust calculations to account for the dis-
placement of water by the gravel or whatever is used to support the sides
of the hole.
Preparation of a Test Hole: Remove any smeared soil surfaces from the
sides of the hole to provide as natural a soil interface as practical to
infiltrating waters. Remove loose material from the bottom of the hole and
add an inch or two of coarse sand or fine gravel to protect the bottom from
scouring.
Presoaking a Test Hole: PresoaK the hole by carefully filling it deeper
than about 8" with clean water. Do not drop the water into the hole from
much distance above; rather, ease it in gently.
If it is known that the soil has low shrink-swell potential and clay
contents are small (perhaps less than about fifteen percent), proceed with
the test. If not, let the hole rest overnight.
Measuring a Stabilized Percolation Rate for Soil Suitability Studies;
Where soil suitability is the only concern, such as in subdivision studies,
the following process would be practical and adequate.
Equip the percolation hole with a float gauge, note the time, and fill the
hole with clean water to exactly 6" above the soil bottom of the hole (do not
consider a layer of protective gravel as the bottom of the hole). After a period
of one hour, measure the water level. Refill the hole to 6" and repeat the
process until four determinations have been made. Use the last determination
to calculate the percolation rate.
If the percolation rate is less than one inch of water per hour, the
soil is unsuitable for customary practices and special considerations must
be made.
Report the percolation rate in inches per hour.
Measuring the Stabilized Percolation Rate for Design Purposes; Fill the
hole with clean water to exactly six inches above the soil bottom of the hole
(do not consider a layer of protective gravel as the bottom of the hole).
With a float gauge, and a timepiece, determine the time for the water to
recede exactly one inch. Refill and repeat the process until successive
intervals needed for one inch to be absorbed indicate that a stabilized
rate has been obtained. Do not allow much time to pass between refillings.
Report the stabilized percolation rate in minutes per inch.
117
-------
Septic Tank Maintenance Permit
As was the case for diversion valves and split fields (see above), the
mechanism by which a town may require and implement a septic tank maintenance
program will vary considerably, depending on the existence and extent of other
regulatory controls (at the state, county, and local level). In particular,
the constitutional and "Home Rule" doctrines of a given state may raise
rather complicated questions of a municipality's power to exercise a con-
tinuing regulatory function such as maintenance permitting. Again, for the
purposes of this report, we assume that the town has concluded that the
necessary authority and legal powers are available, and that it may lawfully
implement and supervise a maintenance permit requirement.
If the town already has in place an effective and comprehensive sewerage
disposal ordinance then maintenance permit requirements should probably be
inserted in the appropriate sections of that ordinance. In the event that the
municipality has no comprehensive sewer ordinance, virtually identical
maintenance requirement language can be coupled with a statement of purpose
to produce an ordinance which may be implemented independently. In either
case, the following model should be helpful in guiding the ordinance drafters.
Inclusion of the statement of purposes (bracketed) would depend on pre-
existing ordinances. This material is drawn from the work of David E.
Stewart, Small Scale Waste Management Project, Environmental Resources Unit,
Madison, Wisconsin.53
Model Section 1. Septic Tank Maintenance Permit - Purpose:
[it is recognized that proper maintenance of septic tanks
will increase the useful life of all on-site sewage disposal
systems which rely on soil absorption of septic tank effluent.
To further the purpose of increased life of such on-site
disposal systems, and to protect the health, safety and welfare
of the inhanitants of the town of , the town of ,
hereby establishes a septic tank maintenance permit program.]
Section 2. Permit Required.
No owner may occupy, rent, lease, live in or reside in,
either seasonally or permanently, any building, residence, or
other structure serviced by a private domestic sewage treatment
and disposal system; unless the owner .has a valid septic tank
maintenance permit for that system issued in his name by the
(sanitary inspector or zoning administrator). Owner
is defined to mean a natural person, corporation, the state
or any subdivision thereof.
118
-------
Section 3. Fee.
A fee of $ shall accompany each application for the
septic tank maintenance permit.
Section 4. Permit Application.
Application for a septic tank maintenance permit shall
be made to the (sanitary inspector or zoning administra-
tor) on forms supplied by him. All applications shall state
the owner's name and address, the address or location of
the private sewage system and shall contain the following
statement:
"I certify that on day of , 19 , I
inspected the septic tank located at the address
stated on this application, and I (check one):
pumped all sludge and scum out of the septic
tank, or
found that the volume of sludge and scum was
less than 1/3 of the tank volume, and I did
not pump the septic tank.
Signature
Sanitary .License Number
Section 5. Issuance.
The (sanitary inspector or zoning administrator)
shall issue a permit to the applicant upon receipt of the fee
and a completed application, properly signed by a person
licensed to service septic tanks and stating his sanitary
license number. The permit shall include on its face all
information contained in the application and shall contain
the date of issuance.
Section 6. Validity.
The permit issued under this section shall be valid for
a period of two years from the data of issuance.
Section 7. Sale of Property.
When property containing a private domestic sewage system
is sold the new property owner, prior to occupying, renting,
leasing, or residing in the building, residence or structure
served by the system, shall make application for and received
a septic tank maintenance permit; however, the system may be
used for a period not to exceed 30 days after making applica-
tion for a permit.
119
-------
Note that this permitting structure assumes the existence of a licensed
septic tank service firm. There is, of course, a potential for abuse or
exploitation whenever a private owner's compliance with a permitting standard
is based on the opinion or certification of a fee charging third party.
In the absence of state licensing and regulatory control of the septic tank
service firm, the town may wish to be rather creative in its efforts to en-
sure integrity in the permit process and protection of the interests of the
owners. One approach would be for the town itself to assume licensing or
regulatory control over the service. This alternative may, however, encounter
very serious constitutional or restraint of trade problems, depending on
the state involved. An alterantive would be for the state to assume licensing
and regulatory powers. In either case, the model ordinance, code, or statutory
language to accomplish licensing would be as follows (the material is again
drawn from the Stewart paper):
Licensing: (a) License; application; fee. Every person
before engaging in the business of servicing septic tanks,
seepage pits, grease traps or privies in this state
(municipality) shall make application on forms prepared
by the (department of licensing) of each
vehicle used by him in such business. The annual license
fee is $25 for each vehicle for a state resident licensee
and $50 for a nonresident licensee. If the
(department), after investigation, is satisfied that the
applicant has the. qualifications,.experience, and equip-
ment to perform the services in a manner not detrimental
to public health it shall issue the license, provided
a surety bond has been executed. The license fee shall
accompany all applications. The (department)
shall maintain a list of all those licensed under this
section and shall make the list available to all interested
persons.
The "Qualifications, experience, and equipment" should be defined to include an
acceptable septage disposal site, of course.
As a third alternative, the town could create a department charged with
the duty of regularly checking private septic systems, and given the power to
contract directly with private service firms to pump septic tanks when neces-
sary. The cost of pumping would then be assessed against the property owner.
This approach would assure that pumping occurred when, and only when, it was
necessary. However, it might raise fiscal problems for the town; more
importantly, it might lend to problems related to a town's power to contract
with private parties to have work performed. A legal opinion should be received
early in such planning.
Diversion Valves and Alternating Fields
The mechanism whereby a town may require that diversion valves and split
fields be included in new sewage disposal systems will vary considerably,
depending on the present nature of on-site sewage system regulations in the
town. In many instances, only minor revisions of existing codes or ordinances
will be necessary to include the new structural requirements. In other
situations,'where existing regulation is either weak or non-existent, the
town may be forced to implement an elaborate set of controls in order to
incorporate the suggested design standards. In either- case, the town or
120
-------
municipality must be certain that the new standards can.be mandated in a
manner which is consistent with any overriding state or county powers.
Thus, depending on existing laws and enabling legislation, it may be
necessary in some states to implement the design criteria at a government
level other than the municipality.
For the purposes of this report, we assume that the town has the neces-
sary statutory and constitutional power to implement the suggested design
criteria without further state or county involvement or authorization.
The primary issue facing town officials will, therefore, be the manner in
which the design change requirements are' implemented. If the town possesses,
in place, an elaborate or comprehensive set of standards for the construction
of on-site sewage systems, a slight amendment to those standards should
suffice. The following language is, therefore, designed to be added to
existing ordinance specifications for sewage systems. The material has been
taken, with minor revisions, from the Fairfax County, Virginia, Code for
Sewers and Sewage Disposal.
Section 1. General Requirements for Composition
of Individual Sewage Disposal Systems.
All individual sewage disposal systems installed or
repaired shall consist of the following:
(a) Building sewer
(b) Septic tank
(c) Diversion Valve
(d) Distribution boxes
(e) Distribution sewers
(f) Soil absorption system of hereinafter
specified materials.
Section 2. Specifications and Location of Approved
Building Sewers' ~ " ~—
[incorporate existing municipal regulations or
standards.]
Section 3. Septic Tank Specifications.
[incorporate existing municipal regulations or
standards.]
Section 4. Specifications and Location of Diversion
Valve. ~ " '
(a) There shall be a diversion valve located in the
four inch (or larger) pipe between the septic tank (or
aerobic tank) and the distribution boxes. The diversion
valve shall be a three-port, two-way valve of approved
materials (i.e., resistant to sewage and leak-proof and
designed so that the effluent from the tank can be directed
to flow into either one of two distribution boxes).
121
-------
(1) There shall be a manhole from the top
of the valve to the ground surface with
an appropriate cover to be level with
the ground surface.
(2) There shall be provided a handle of proper
length, designed so that the valve can be
turned above the ground surface.
(b) in lieu of the aforementioned diversion valve any
system that can be designed and constructed to conveniently
direct the flow of effluent -from the tank into either one
of two distribution boxes may be approved if plans are
submitted to the [Health Director] and he is satisfied that
such system is satisfactory.
Section 5. Specification for Distribution Boxes and
Watertight Lateral Lines.
[incorporate existing municipal regulations or
standards.]
Section 6. Subsurface Disposal Fields.
[incorporate existing municipal regulations or standards
in such a way as to provide for split fields of adequate
size and capacity.]
Where a comprehensive set of on-site sewerage systems controls or
design criteria do not exist, the municipality may need to draft and imple-
ment a somewhat elaborate sewage disposal ordinance in order to mandate
diversion valves and split fields. Naturally, the elements of such an
ordinance will vary considerably from town to town and state to state, depend-
ing on the contents and coverage of existing sanitary or health codes (state
or local) and applicable state or county regulations.
122
-------
FOOTNOTES
1. J.A. Salvato, "Problems and Solutions of Onlot Sewage Disposal,"
presented at the Second"National Conference on Onsite Disposal,
National Sanitary Foundation (NSF), Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1975.
2. Bailey, et al., A Study of Flow Reduction and Treatment of Waste
Water from Households, prepared for the Federal Water Quality
Administration, DOI, December 1969, page 29.
3. Ibid.
4. J. Kreissl, "Rural Wastewater Research," paper presented
at NSF Conference (see Note 1), Ann Arbor, 1975.
5, Ibid.
6. Ibid.
7- J.W. Clayton, "An Analysis of Septic Tank Survival Data from Fair-
fax County, VA." Journal of Environmental Health 36: 562-57.
8. Ibid.
9. Bailey, et al., op.cit., p. 31.
10. T. Martin, "Septic Tank Systems, The Need for Research," On-Site
Waste Management, Volume I, Hancor, Inc.
11. Ibid.
12. Ibid.
13. Ibid.
14. Kreissl, op.cit.
15. Ibid.
16. Alfred P. Bernhardt, Treatment and Disposal of Wastewater from
Homes by Soil Infiltration and Evapotranspiration, University
of Toronto Press, 1973. Second Edition, Volume One.
123
-------
17. American Water Works Association.
18. Martin, op.cit.
19. Soil Conservation Service, Soils and Septic Tanks, Agriculture
Information Bulletin 349, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
20. Bailey, et al., op.cit.
21. Patterson, et al., op.cit.
22. Gary P. Plews, "The Adequacy and Uniformity of Regulations for
Onsite Wastewater Disposal - A State Viewpoint," paper presented
at the Second National Conference on Onsite Disposal, NSF, 1975.
23. J-T- Winneberger, "Correlation of Three Techniques for Determining
Soil Permeability," paper presented at Individual Sewage Disposal
System Workshop, Cincinnati, Ohio, June 1974, in On-site Waste
Management, Volume III, Hancor, Inc.
24. Ibid.
25. Ibid-
26. Sol?. Conservation Service, op.cit. -, also Winneberger, op^cit.
27. Bailey, et al., op.cit.
•
28. Kreissl, op.cit.
29. Kreissl, op.cit.
30. Cited in Clayton, op.cit.
31 Clayton, op.cit.
32. ibid.
33. ibid.
34. ibid.
35. J.T. Winneberger, "The Principal of Alteration of Subsurface
Wastewater Disposal Fields," Hancor, inc., 1976.
36- Ibid.
124
-------
37. Ibid.
38. Unfortunately, field switching should probably be done more frequently
than tank inspection, making it unlikely that the two purposes could be
combined in a single visit.
39. Bailey, et al., op.cit.
40. Reference to this device was found only in Bailey, op.cit., and its
effectiveness may be overstated in this publication. The general idea
of better designed anaerobic units appears valid, though cost-benefit
advantages over conventional installations may be minimal.
41. However, according to Kreissl, studies at the University of Wisconsin
show no significant difference in the clogging properties of aerobic
and anaerobic effluents.
42. Bailey, op.cit.
43. A.P. Bernhardt, "Small Scale Water Units for Soil Infiltration
and Evapo-Transpiration," notes of presentation to Suburban
Sewage Disposal Conference, Michigan Department of Health,
1972, in On-site Waste Management, Volume I, Hancor, Inc.
44. C.R. Lindstrom, "The Clivus-Multrum System: Composting of Toilet
Waste, Food Waste, and Sludge within the Household," in "Water
Pollution Control in Low Density Areas," University of Vermont
University Press of New England.
45. Converse, Otis, Bouma, Walker, Anderson, & Stewart, "Design and Con-
struction Procedures for Mounds in Slowly Permeable Soils with Seasonally
High Water Tables," prepared under grants from the Small Scale Waste
Management Program, the Upper Great Lakes Regional Commission, and the
Environmental Protection Agency, April 1975.
46. Interpreted from Ibid.
47. Ibid.
48. Mekosh and Rainos, Pressure Sewer Demonstration at the Borough of
Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, prepared for the Office of Research and
Monitoring, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.,
July 1973.
49. Ibid.
50. R.J. Otis, "The Performance of Septic Tanks and Aerobic Treatment Units
'under Field Conditions," in On-site Waste Management, Volume IV,
Hancor, Inc.
125
-------
51. H.A. Werre, "Feasibility Study of Technical Alternatives in
Norwich, Vermont," in Proceedings of Sewage Treatment in Small
Towns and Rural Areas, A conference address primarily to the
State of Vermont, Thayer School of Engineering, Dartmouth
College, Hanover, New Hampshire, March 3, 1971.
52. Otis, op.cit.
53. David E. Stewart, "Legal, Planning and Economic Considerations
of On-Site Sewerage Systems," prepared for the Small Scale
Waste Management Project, University of Wisconsin, 1974.
126
-------
SECTION V
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Although we retain here the conventional term "stormwater," it is in
the broader context of general pollution control that the term is applied.
Stormwater management at the local level traditionally has two spheres of
concern: limitation of erosion and sedimentation, and flood control.
Pollution within stormwater, other than its sediment (soil) content, has
received little notice as a local issue. Toxicants and other substances
associated with human activities are contained in storm runoff wherever
development occurs, and control of these substances is now an objective of
Areawide Wastewater Management Planning under Section 208 of the Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (P.L. 92-500).
From the point of view-of the Environmental Protection Agency, the term
"stormwater" is largely replaced by "non-point source" water pollution. When
dealing with ambient water quality on a large scale, the major distinctions
to be made among sources of water pollution are between discharges of sanitary
and industrial wastes at specific outfalls (point sources) and discharges of
pollution into receiving waters in'the form of generalized runoff from the
land, carrying with it heavy lodas of urban and agricultural wastes. It is
becoming increasingly clear that non-point source runoff typically contains
extremely heavy pollutant loads, and that the goals of the Water Pollution
Control Act cannot be met until effective programs are in force controlling it.
This section emphasizes the control of pollutants that contaminate
stormwater, and makes a distinction between management techniques aimed at
controlling flood hazards and techniques to reduce the pollutant content of
runoff. Flood control is separate from the concerns of EPA in its Areawide
Wastewater Management Planning Program ("208 Planning Program"), as it
interacts with pollution control goals. Pollution control—especially the
source reduction of residuals—is the focus of this chapter. Fortunately,
general approaches to sedimentation and erosion control developed by local
governments over the past years are directly applicable to the management of
stormwater pollution, or can be adapted to it with a minimum of difficulty.
Flood Control Versus Erosion/Sedimentation Control
Flood control is important for obvious reasons: although floods are a
natural phenomenon, they cause great damage to property and are a threat to
life. It. is an appropriate function of government to protect citizens from
127
-------
these dangers, and this has traditionally been accomplished in two ways—
either by constructing physical barriers against flood waters (dams, dikes,
levees, channels, etc.) or by preventing the construction of buildings and
habitations in flood-endangered areas. The first approach is expensive, and
often has undesirable side-effects—for instance, dams silt up, cause
destruction of natural environments, and may tend to encourage development
where it is environmentally unsuitable (such as in floodplains where water
tables are high). In the long run, flood control engineering may fail,
causing greater destruction of property that might have occurred without
"protection" if the land had not been developed. The second approach--con-
trol or prevention of development in flood-prone areas--is preferred today,
as evidenced by the National Flood Insurance Program under the U.S. Depart-
ment of Housing and Urban Development.
Unfortunately, it is impossible to maintain a neat distinction between
the two approaches; development of land in nominally flood-safe areas may
lead to increased flood potential both locally and in the region. Engineer-
ing and design controls to prevent this danger are necessary in many areas,
and are often the major intent of what is now referred to as "stormwater
management." This is a fairly recent term,^ and usually implies compre-
hensive measures meant (1) to limit the rate and volume of runoff from pro-
perty for flood control purposes, and (2) to trap eroded soils and prevent
sedimentation and eutrophication of streams.
Urban development tends to exacerbate flood peaking problems. Greater
percentages of impervious surface prevent enormous volumes of rainfall from
being absorbed by the soil, and also accelerate its lateral travel toward
receiving streams. Figure 11 shows the percent increase in the number of
floods with different degrees of urbanization.^
One of the standard.approaches for correcting the tendency of urbanization
to accelerate peak is to retain stormwater on site, allowing it to runoff at
a rate not exceeding that under "natural" (i.e., undeveloped) conditions.
This can be done through a variety of controls/ implemented through municipal
ordinances. Some of these controls seek to increase infiltration of rainfall
into the ground, but in most instances there will still be excess runoff
that cannot be disposed of in this way—the limited disposal area will become
saturated, at least during more severe storms. In such cases, detention of
stormwater on site is advocated, with a controlled release rate equal to that
under natural circumstances for the site, considering slope, soils, etc. The
detention facilities serve a double purpose: they also allow eroded soil to
settle out and be recovered before stormwater is released, and thus would be
recommended as part of a pollution abatement program for stormwater.
Potential conflict arises, not over the rate at which stormwater is
releasedr but over its total volume. Depending upon the position of a
municipality in a river basin, too much detention of stormwaters may preversely
aggravate the flood peak: while the rate of discharge from controlled areas
may be "natural," the additional volume of rainfall captured by expanses of
impervious surface will prolong the time over which the detailed discharge
occurs. The flood peak arriving from upstream—itself perhaps accelerated by
128
-------
FIGURE 11
PERCENT INCREASE IN NUMBER OF FLOODS AT
VARIOUS LEVELS OF URBANIZATION
M
rt)
0)
JH
01
ft,
to
•o
o
o
rH
in
700
c
•H
1)
to
(0
01
M
U
c
+J
c
a)
U
V)
0>
500
300
100
20%
Percent Impervious
40%
60%
30%
100%
Source: "Hydrological Data for Land Planning," Luna B. Leopold,
January 1967. Flood is defined as overbank discharge.
Data are calculated for a drainage area of one square mile.
129
-------
urbanization—may then combine with this artificially prolonged discharge from
the controlled area to exaggerate the total flood peak to hazardous levels.
Whereas under truly natural conditions the runoff from the downstream area
would long since have subsided, the detained runoff—being much greater in
volume than under natural circumstances—now compounds the flooding problem.
It is the purpose of comprehensive floodplain management to take such
interactive effects into account, and to produce a coherent management
program for minimization of possible flood damage. This can seldom be ac-
complished by a single municipality acting alone, as river basins are seldom
contained within the boundaries of single local governments. Therefore,
although detention of stonnvater is desirable for sedimentation and pollution
control as well as for flood control, it may be important in some cases to
set maximum as well as minimum requirements for stormwater detention on-site.
As a general rule, runoff from storms greater than the two-year storm should
not be detained on-site unless a comprehensive floodplain analysis calls for
it.
Water Pollution and Stormwater
The "pollutant" most commonly associated with stormwater is sediment—
i.e., eroded soils. Loss of soils is to be avoided, not only because it
represents a loss to agriculture and property values, but also because it causes
eutrophication and obstruction of streams. Soil is picked up when small
particles are dislodged by impinging rain drops'; a great number of other sub-
stances are also picked up as well, though in much smaller quantities.
A great deal has been written about erosion and sedimentation control
measures. Of interest in this chapter are other pollutants carried by storm-
water. EPA has recently completed a study entitled Water Quality Management
for Urban Runoff3 that documented other pollutants contributed to stormwater
by urban surfaces. While the report is technical, many of its conclusions
have importance to local policymakers in their stormwater management planning.
Contaminants of many kinds accumulate on urban surfaces from dustfall,
littering, leakage from cars, and many other sources. When rain falls,
the energy of raindrops striking surfaces dislodges contaminants from streets,
rooftops, and sidewalks; some of these go into solution, others remain sus-
pended. Ultimately this pollution is carried by stormsewers into local
receiving waters (see also Section II). Pollutant concentration is greatest
at the beginning of a rain, and tapers off rapidly. Thus, programs to control
pollution in stormwater are concerned with frequent, low-intensity storm events,
not rare, high intensity storms that contribute to floods.
Figure 12 shows the process graphically. The hydrograph curve shows
the rate of runoff from a surface as a function of time, measured at a
specific outlet from the surface, for a specific storm event: at the beginning
of the rain, flow at the inlet is zero; it rises to a peak rate, then tapers
off to zero again sometime after the conclusion of the storm. The
pdllutograph shows the pollutant concentration in the runoff as a function of
time, and the loadograph shows the cumulative pollutant load released over
the same period, A sample "quantity/quality" hydrograph, worked out with the
130
-------
Figure 12 : Graphic Representation of Stormwater Runoff Pollution
I
4000
3 3000 -
s.
3
e
y 2000-
1000-
•D
I
Time
A Sample Quantity/Quality Hydroqraph Comprising a Hydroqraph,
a Pollutograph, and a Loadograph
Pollutqgniph
20
•a
100
—\—
120
40 60
Tim* (minute*)
Example of Pollutograph and Loadograph
SOURCE: EPA, Water Quality Management Planning for Urban Runoff,
•40,000
-30,000
-20.000
-10,000
131
-------
methodologies developed in the report, is1 shown in Figure 12.
The exact makeup of actual stormwater contaminants varies widely between
cities/ but a number of studies conducted over the past twenty or more years
have produced alarming results. One comprehensive study conducted between
1962 and 1964 in Cincinnati, Ohio,4 found that BODS and COD figures for
stormwater were comparable to sewage treatment plan effluent, and that sus-
pended solids content was about equal to raw sewage. A study from the
American Public Works Association conducted in Chicago in 1976^ examined the
water pollution potential of street litter alone, and found that this litter
alone, if washed away by a typical two-hour storm, would yield EOD5 loadings
of 160% of raw sewage.
A more extensive study conducted for the Environmental Protection
Agency,6 which used advanced techniques to duplicate the action of rainfall
on very fine particles (ordinarily missed by the collection techniques of
previous studies), found even worse potential for pollution from street
runoff. Example calculations for a hypothetical city based on extensive
data gathered by the study, are presented in Table 26; street runoff is
found capable, in the first hour of a moderate to heavy storm, of creating
load peaks "many orders of magnitude greater than the same city's untreated
sanitary sewage during the same time period."''
Streets in industrial areas were found to be particularly contaminated;
commercial areas rated below average, as did upper income residential
neighborhood, but streets in fair to poor condition averaged two and one-half
times greater pollutant loads compared to streets in good to excellent con-
dition.8 Ninety-five percent of the pollutant loadings were found to lie
within forty inches of a curb.
The study also examined other, more toxic, contaminants in street runoff,
such as heavy metals, highway deicing salts, grease and oil, and pesticides.
Heavy metal pollution was found to be highest in industrial and commercial
districts, and in cities with high particulate levels of air pollution. Con-
centration of metals in runoff was found to be ten to one-hundred times
greater than in sanitary sewage,^ but not so great that it would upset
treatment plants if it were treated. Copper, cadmium, zinc, and lead levels
were found to be high enough in street runoff to kill certain aquatic organisms.
Highway deicing salts were common in the runoff from northerly cities
during certain times of the year. Although they may have a significant
impact on lakes and streams, their influence on major rivers was estimated
to be small.!0 The impact of certain special additives often found in de-
icing salts, such as cyanides and chromate compounds, could not be evaluated.
The content of pesticides in stormwater was found by the study to vary-
widely; extensive data were not collected, and average figures would be mis-
leading. Table 26 represents the data on chlorinated hydrocarbons and mer-
cury concentrations in collected street dirt from nine U.S. cities.
132
-------
Table 26
Calculated Quantities of Pollutants Which
Would Enter Receiving Waters in a Hypothetical City*
Settleable plus
suspended solids
BOD5
COD
Kjeldahl nitrogen
Phosphates
Total coliform
bacteria (org/hr)
Street Surface
runoff
(following 1-
hour storm)
(Ib/hr)
560,000
5,600
13,000
880
440
Raw Sanitary
Sewage
(Ib/hr)
1,300
1,100
1,200
210
50
Secondary
Plant Effluent
(Ib/hr)
130
110
120
20
4,000x10
10
460,000x10
10
4.6x10
2.5
10
NOTE: Since the above-calculations were based only on a 5-day accumulation
of street litter, the above discharge of contaminated runoff could
conceivably occur many times in a year.
*The hypothetical city has the following characteristics:
o Population - 100,000
o Total land area - 14,000 acres
o Land use distribution: residential - 75%
commercial - 5%
industrial - 20%
o Streets (tributary to receiving waters) - 400 curb miles
o Sanitary sewage - 12 mgd.
SOURCE: EPA, Water Quality Management Planning for Urban Runoff.
133
-------
Results such as these suggest the importance of controlling pollution
in storrowater runoff, but it is difficult to estimate the impacts of these
pollutants on the ambient physical environment. Both short term and long term
effects are involved, and neither is documented well at present:
Short Term Effects; Storm events produce short term impact
loads of pollutants on receiving waters, often of far
greater concentration than continuing pollutant loads con-
tributed by sewage treatment plants and other point sources.
These impact loads can have a catastrophic effect on living
organisms in the water: average population levels.in re-
ceiving streams may, therefore, be more dependent on storm-
water pollutant loads, which occur sporadically, than they
are on chronic pollutant loadings.11
Long Term Effects; Pollutants entering the food chain
through discharges into streams and rivers have a number
of long term effects on the health and generic structure
of living organisms, many of which are still inadequately
understood. A portion of the contaminants introduced
into the food chain will ultimately be consumed by man,
causing damage to human health and/or destruction of
valuable food supplies.
On the basis of data such as that gathered in the studies mentioned above,
208 Planning Agencies are placing control of non-point source pollution on
the list of priorities for areawide wastewater management. Strategies for
stormwater pollution abatement appropriate for application by local governments,
.whether or not they lie in the jurisdiction of a 208 planning area, are out-
lined below
Groundwater Depletion
Increases in impermeable surfaces due to development activities result
in reduction of groundwater recharge on a site, unless special measures are
taken to retain rainfall and introduce it into the water table. Roadways,
sidewalks, housing, and even landscaping all act to shed water rather than
retain it and allow a portion to seep into the ground. Steep slopes, which
tend to shed water rapidly in their natural state, do so even more quickly
when impervious surfaces are expanded. Ground that is stripped during
development may also dry out and harden, reducing its porousity, and the
passage of construction machinery on a site may compress the soil and pro-
duce the same effect.
Many erosion and sedimentation ordinances now in effect around the
country specify that discharge of runoff from a developed area should not
exceed the rate under "natural" conditions (see below), but this does not
mean that absorption of water into the ground necessarily remains the same
as it was before, for the duration of the runoff may be longer than it is
under natural conditions. Efforts to maximize recharge of groundwater are
important wherever it is used as a supply of drinking water, and in extreme
cases to prevent subsidence of the land. It is also beneficial for flood
control, and for maintenance of dry weather stream flow, in which groundwater
plays a major part.
134
-------
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT CONTROLS
The stormwater management controls described here share one or more of
the following goals:
Erosion/sedimentation control
Abatement of pollution from street runoff
Maximization of groundwater recharge.
The interactions of many municipal ordinances on stormwater management are
complex. Parking controls, controls of on-site sanitary wastewater disposal,
and solid waste management practices all have an impact on stormwater manage-
ment and water quality. Readers are referred to those chapters for further
reference.
Erosion and Sedimentation Controls
Erosion is caused by a wide variety of factors, natural as well as
artificial. Natural factors include soil and rock types, steepness of slopes,
intensity and frequency of rainfall, and type and extent of vegetation.
Human-activities affecting erosion include agricultural and forestry practices,
flood control systems, and urban development, both in construction and after-
wards. Erosion attributable to human endeavors is, unfortunately, vastly
greater than that which occurs under natural circumstances, especially where
agriculture and urban development are concerned. Both of these activities
strip the soil of protective vegetation, reducing its capacity to trap and
hold water just when it is most susceptible to erosion.
Catastrophes such as the Dust Bowl of the 1930's are now being avoided
by more enlightened, agricultural soil management, but according to a possibly
conservative estimate of the American Water Resources Association, over
$14 million is still spent every year simply to remove sediments from our
water supplies.12 Much of this comes from urban development—over one hundred
times as much soil is lost from land under development than from land in
farming.13
Erosion and sedimentation controls are applied in a growing number of
coKimunities to reduce the loss of soils from construction sites and developed
areas. Often approvals for construction are contingent on the use of
approved controls. Although these controls may be familiar to many readers,
they are reviewed here because some of them may be adapted for use in con-
trolling other forms of pollution from urban surfaces. Several states,
including Pennsylvania, Maryland, New Jersey and Michigan, have set up
statewide programs for erosion and sedimentation control, and have published
manuals for use in concert with local ordinances that present in detail actual
construction measures to be used. The Soil Conservation Service is another
invaluable source of technical advice. The following summary of basic
technical measures will familiarize the reader with current practice.14
Delaying Runoff—
A basic approach to erosion and sedimentation control is to delay runoff
on-site, gradually allowing it to enter the storm drainage system over a
longer period of time and thus limiting the maximum flow rate discharged to
streams, and its erosive potention on the site.
135
-------
(1) Terrace, diversions, runoff spreaders:
These measures increase the time of concentration for
stormwater, allowing it to flow at nonerosive
velocities over vegetation. Concentrated flow is
changed to sheet flow. Groundwater recharge is
enhanced, erosion reduced.
(2) Rooftop measures:
riat roofs may be made to retain water for a sub-
stantial period by the use of gravel barriers (which
act as levees) or by the use of roof drains with
ponding rings. Sloping roofs may use "findams" which
act to make the slope over which rain flows longer
and more gradual, though water cannot be retained very
long—this option is useful where short intense storms
are common to help reduce stormwater peaking, and can
also be used to increase water supply in some cases.
(3) Detention basins, ponding areas:
Sites may be designed with grassy depressions
or basins which, though normally dry, retain
stormwater after a storm and release it slowly
through a restricted outfall into a conventional
stormsewer or nat.ural stream. Recreational
facilities such as tennis courts are sometimes
used in this way. Permanent decorative ponds may
be used to the same purpose if they have enough
excess capacity on top of their permanent storage
to handle stormwater,
(4) Landscape grading:
Grading landscaping to moderate or low slopes
slows the velocity of stormwater, minimizing
erosion as well as lagging the peak flow.
On-Site Disposal—
A second basic approach is to dispose of stormwater on-site. Groundwater
recharge is increased. Techniques include:
{1} Dutch drains:
These are trenches dug in the ground, filled with
gravel, and often covered by a tile latice or even
grass. Their function is to intercept sheet
runoff and hold it to be absorbed in the ground.
(2) Seepage basins, ponds, etc.:
Any of a variety of basins, seepage pits, wells,
gravity shafts, tile fields, etc. whose function
is to aid groundwater recharge and dispose of
stormwater. The range of sizes and capacities is
related to site land use, aesthetic considerations,
volume of runoff to be handled, and the porosity
of the soil. For maximum recharge, the volume x>f
136
-------
water held should at least equal the volume of runoff
from all impervious surfaces on-site for the maximum
local twenty-four hour storm.
(3) Porous paving:
Lattice blocks, modular pavers, and simple bricks may
be used to create a porous paving if the underlying
soil is porous enough to dispose of rainwater quickly.
Porous asphalt is also available for road surfaces: it
is still experimental, but may significantly reduce
stormwater runoff from large paved areas, simplifying
drainage designs. It should not be used where runoff
may be heavily polluted, however.
Minimization of Disturbed Areas—
These approaches reduce erosion directly.
(1) Site analysis:
A site development plan should include considerations
of soil types, vegetative cover, and topography.
Critically erodable soil, steep slopes, streambanks,
drainageways, and the like should be .identified and
left undisturbed if possible. Development should be
scheduled to take place during periods of low pre-
cipitation and low runoff if possible.
(2) Minimization of stripped areas:
At best, stripped areas should be no larger than immediate
construction needs. However, the high mobilization costs of
earth moving equipment often require large areas to be
exposed at once. Optimum stripping timetables should
be developed at each site to prevent unnecessary
stripping, particularly for long construction projects
spanning several years.
(3) Conservation of topsoil:
Topsoil should be stripped to a depth of 9' and
stockpiled. These piles should be seeded if they
are to remain longer than a few months.
(4) Seeding and mulching:
Sites under development for more than six months should
be seeded. Temporary mulching with straw or other
materials can be used to cover sites under active
construction. Crushed stone may be laid on heavily
trafficked areas. Sod may be used on critical areas.
(5) Cultivation of slopes:
Slopes left bare too short a time to be seeded can
be cultivated across the slope to reduce erosion markedly.
137
-------
Protection of erodable areas—
(1) Temporary diversions; checkdams:
Temporary channels nvay be set up diverting runoff
from erodable exposed areas. These should be
designed to handle at least a five year storm
at major building sites. Temporary checkdams
may also be built to slow runoff velocity in
drain channels to prevent gully erosion from
occurring.
(2) Slope drains:
Where runoff cannot be diverted from a vulner-
able area, temporary or permanent slope drains
may be installed to protect the slope. Broad
grass channels may be built on long gradual
slopes where flows are less than 8 feet per
second; temporary sectional downdrains may be
used on unstabilized steeper slopes; and
downspout slope drains may be installed subsur-
face on permanent steep pitches. Energy dis-
sipation may be effected by catchbasins in
subsurface systems/ by riprap or other rough
surfaces in surface drainage systems.
(3) Slope stabilization:
Slope stabilization for permanent grades may be
effected by mechanical means—retaining walls or
slope paving—where vegetative methods are
inadequate. Chemical stabilization compounds are
also available, and may be considered. Vegetative
stabilizing through seeding or sodding is preferred
with plant materials selected with regard to soil and
climate conditions; duration, quantity, and velocity
of runoff; time required to establish cover; and
site use. Mulches are used to protect slopes while
vegetation is being established.
Sedimentation Control Measures—
A certain amount of sediment will be carried in the runoff from any
site. This must be trapped before it reaches any natural watercourse.
Runoff must be held temporarily and particles allowed to settle out.
The amount of soil recovered depends on the speed of the runoff, the length
of time in detention, and the size of the suspended particles.
(1) Streambank protection zones:
The establishment of buffer zones with natural cover,
from as narrow as 50' to as wide as 300', allows sedi-
ment particles to be caught and held by ground vegeta-
tion as sheet runoff approaches the streambanks.
138
-------
(2) Simple mechanical traps:
Sediment can be recovered simply by damming drainage
channels at intervals with sandbags or other obstacles,
and allowing soil to settle out. As individual dams
silt up, they can be replaced.
(3) Detention ponds:
In addition to their function of detaining runoff and
releasing it slowly, detention ponds may function as
sediment basins, trapping large quantities of soil
before allowing runoff to be discharged. Larger
structures may include stone and perforated pipe filters
which resist clogging. Sediment basins must be cleaned
periodically to maintain their 'effectiveness.
Appendix V-l of this chapter contains a good example of an erosion and
sedimentation control ordinance that could be enacted in a municipality. The
key to any successful local program of erosion or sedimentation control is
some sort of permit system that requires every prospective developer to
obey specific standards and file an accepted plan for erosion control manage-
ment before he is allowed to begin earthmoving activities.
Exact methods by which developers are to minimize erosion losses
are not usually specified in ordinances/ except in general terms. As in
the ordinance presented here, reference can be made to a readily available
manual, often provided by the state, which delineates a-"number of technical
methods. The choice of which to use is left largely to the discretion
of the developer or builder. The value of this approach is that amendments
and updates may be added to the manual on the basis of experience and new
technology without having to go through the formal process of amending the
ordinance. Since the aim is to minimize erosion loss rather than set per-
missable maxima, this is«not a performance-standard approach; it is similar,
however, in that it encourages flexible response. An alternative approach
is to set up general principles in the ordinance by which permit applications
will be evaluated.15 por instance, the ordinance may state that the minimum
practical areas of land shall be exposed at any one time, that natural features
shall be preserved, or that steps be taken to design the development in such
a way as to minimize erosion potential after construction is complete. Lastly,
if a community is particularly confident that it can identify proper control
techniques for any particular class of development,16 exact procedures can
be spelled out in the ordinance itself. The first approach is probably most
effective, but reauires preparation of or reference to a suitable manual; the
second approach is acceptable where competent personnel are available to
review permit applications; the last approach'is the least flexible of the
three, but may be appropriate for certain communities.
Highway Deicing
In 1971, nine million tons of sodium chloride were used for removing snow
and ice from roads across the country, and use for 1975 was projected at that
time to run to twelve million tons.1^ (This does not include the use of
calcium chloride which accounts for about 3.5% of total salts used.1^) Up
until the early 1960s, highway departments depended mainly on the use of
139
-------
abrasives—sand, cinders, washed stone, and screened slag—for treating
slippery roads, but the higher efficiency of salts has caused them to take
the dominant role in winter road maintenance since then. Highway departments
emphasize the improved safety of roads treated with salt, and justify the
costs and environmental impact of bare pavement policies during the winter
in terms of accidents avoided and lives saved. (See Table 27 for typical
costs.)
Studies conducted around the country indicate, however, that the use of
salts on roads is excessive. In some areas, salt has been applied at a rate
of one-hundred tons per road mile during the winter,19 and concentrations of
chlorides have been found in street drainage as high as 25,000 milligrams per
liter20 (up to 2,720 g/1 in stormsewers). Environmental impacts attributable
to the use of salts include groundwater contamination, contamination of
surface water supplies, and damage to farm supply ponds, roadside soils and
vegetation. In addition, salting damages road surfaces and highway structures,
and corrodes automobiles.
The seriousness of the damage to the environment caused by salting
varies with the intensity of application, but all the effects of salting are
not yet identified. Groundwater contamination serious enough to cause the
replacement of wells has occurred in New Hampshire; contamination of water
supplies in sixty-three Massachusetts communities has been attributed to
salting; similar effects have been noted in many other states.21 Special
additives used to prevent caking and for other purposes may have more severe
impacts than the salts themselves, according to one EPA report:22 sodium
ferrocynaide is often used, and is known to give off cyanide when exposed to
sunlight (ferric ferrocyanide should be used instead.) Phosphate additives
are also used, although adverse impacts may follow. Since some of these
chemicals accumulate from year to year, the long term impacts caused by
additives may be even greater than the current problems indicate.
Communities should reevaluate their salting programs to use the minimum
necessary to maintain safe traffic flows, and to focus application at critical
areas in road networks. Most highway departments are committed to the "bare
pavement" policy, and may characterize reduction in salt use as "trading
shrubs for lives." Yet, it is not altogether clear that bare pavement is
necessary for highway safety—it is required if dry weather speeds are to be
maintained under all conditions, but communities should question whether
fifty-five miles per hour must be preserved at all costs. The question has
a political dimension—the public reacts strongly when road conditions de-
teriorate in the winter and commuting times are increased; officials
responsible for highway deicing can justify minimum use of salt in terms of
savings in application costs, preservation of road surfaces, protection of
automobiles against corrosion (which in some states can amount to millions of
dollars of private losses annually) as well as environmental benefits,
but they must also consider related issues of access for ambulance and lire-
fighting equipment.23
Storage of salt and disposal of salt-contaminated snow and ice are other
issues of significance. Proper siting of depots and adequate covering of
140
-------
1973 Costs of
Agent
Salt/NaCI
NaCl/CaCl
NaCl/Sand
Table 27
Deicing (Massachusetts
Application per
Lane Mile
350 Ibs.
350 Ibs.
.1000 Ibs.
Turnpike Figures)
Cost per
Lane Mile
$2.27
$3.50
$1.57
SOURCE: Tourbier, Water Resources Protection Measures in
Land Development.
141
-------
storage piles to prevent contaminated runoff should be observed; appropriate
designs are readily available from state highway departments or EPA.
Disposal of road accumulations containing chemical deicers should be done to
minimize impacts on local water bodies.
Recently interest has been shown in the use of marine salts for deicing
purposes—the salts are finer in texture, and act rapidly to melt ice.
However, study results indicate that marine salt produce more environmental
contamination than mined salts.2*
If a community continues to use salt (and most in the snow belt may be
expected to), it should keep abreast of research in alternate ways to keep
roads clear. Abrasives alone may never be considered adequate substitutes for
chemical treatments, since they require reduced speeds, and entail increased
maintenance in the spring cleaning catchbasins and roadsides. Promising areas
of research include the development of polyurethane tire chains (which would
not degrade road surfaces), the use of compressed air with a snow plow for
more efficient plowing, and the development of hydrophobia substances to
reduce the adhesion of ice on pavements.25
Combined Sewer Management Practices
Although the emphasis of this chapter is on land use .and related controls
on the management of stormwater, it is important to deal briefly with the
role of sewer systems and opportunities for improvement in operations and
design practice. This is a large subject, so this section is meant only as
an overview of alternatives open to local governments.
The original purpose of sewers was to drain stormwater runoff from
cities to prevent floods. Household wastes were explicitly excluded from
storm sewers until the early part of the nineteenth century, when the develop-
ment of dense industrial cities and the introduction of modern plumbing re-
quired the disposal of sanitary wastes through the sewers to protect the
public health. This was the origin of the so-called "combined" sewers. As
the health effects of sanitary discharges into local waterways became better
understood, some cities instituted various levels of treatment of the com-
bined wastes: new sewers were constructed to "intercept" the sewer flows
before they reached the stormsewage outfall, and to carry them to newly con-
structed plants.
New sanitary waste connections were continually added to the old lines
as neighborhoods developed, and as existing areas were redeveloped to
increased densities. More and more sewer capacity was dedicated to sanitary
flows; although some original sections of systems have been upgraded over
the years, capacity constraints are common in many of the older systems in
operation today: often there is little reserve left to carry the stormwater
for which they were originally built. This has led to serious environmental
problems, as even minor storms may cause overflows and discharge of untreated
sewage to streams.26
Both treatment plants and interceptor sewers have-usually been designed
142
-------
to handle little more than a system's dry-weather base flow, which consists
almost entirely of domestic sewage. Thus, the overall system may have little
capacity to handle increased flows that occur during storms, when flows can be
fifty or more times what they are during dry weather. Relief points are
therefore provided throughout the system which permit the exit of peak flows
during storms. Common engineering estimates are that between two and eight
percent of the total annual municipal flows are discharged without treatment,
an amount not considered significant.27
It is clear now, however, that much more pollution reaches receiving
streams from combined sewer, overflows than was commonly thought. Air pollution
is one usually unrecognized source: oxides of sulphur and nitrogen dissolve in
rain droplets, and between 500 and 900 tons of particulates fall on each
square mile of most metropolitan areas every year.28 city surfaces are also
contaminated with street litter, deicing chemicals, pesticides, animal droppings,
and other pollutants which are washed into storm sewers. (For general charac-
teristics of storm sewerage, refer back to Table 26.)
Even beyond this level of contamination, a further burden is placed on
receiving waters by what is called the "first flush" effect. Since flow in
combined systems is lower during dry-weather periods than during storms,
there is a tendency for sediment to collect within the pipes near joints,
along long shallow slopes of pipe, and where flow velocities are not high
enough to allow constant scouring. This sediment is washed out with the
first large storm, and can cause heavy impact loadings on streams—BODS
concentrations during first flushes may exceed those of untreated municipal
sewage.29 Fish and vegetation that would be able to tolerate lower levels of
chronic water pollution will succumb to sporadic high levels of contamination
caused by overflows during storms. A comparison of "first flush" and extended
flows is shown in Table 28.
The response to the problem of combined sewer overflows has, for the
past 25 years or so, been to construct separate sanitary and storm sewer
systems in new comraxmities. Economics have.also contributed to this decision:
while the construction of sanitary sewers may be an immediate necessity, it is
often possible to postpone stormsewer construction and rely on natural drain-
age. Storm sewer systems,'therefore, tend to become more and more fragmented as
one moves away from older urban centers, and open channel flow of stormwater
increasingly common. Integrated programs for both classes of wastewater are
seldom undertaken.
Clearly, construction of separate stormsewers, (Or in older communities,
programs to separate sewers) cannot solve the general stormwater problem: it
was'originally thought that separate systems would yield one uncontaminated
flow, the "clean" stormwater, and one polluted flow, the sanitary sewage;
this is not the case due to the heavy contamination of urban surfaces.
In addition, most separate sanitary sewers are de facto combined sewers:
infiltration of water through cracks, unauthorized (or in some older com-
munities, authorized) roof drain connections, submerged manhole covers,
basement drains, and deteriorated joints causes surges of flow in sanitary
sewers during wet weather. Documented increases-range from 20% to nearly
500% in some instances.3° Such surges in supposedly separate systems can
143
-------
Table 28
Comparison of Quality Characteristics from First Flushes and
Extended Overflows of a Combined Sewer (7) Hawley Road Sewer,
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
First Flushes
Characteristic
Chemical Oxygen Demand
BOD
Suspended Solids
VSS
Total Nitrogen
Coliforms
500-765
170-182
330-848
221-495
17-24
Extended Overflows,
mg/la
113-166
26-53
113-174
58-87
3-6
a. At 95 percent confidence level,
b. Coliform 1.5 x KM to 310 x 105/100 mi.
SOURCE: Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., Urban Stormwater Management and
Technology, An Assessment, EPA, Washington Environmental
Research Center, 1974.
144
-------
lower treatment plant efficiencies, and often require bypassing untreated
sewage directly into receiving waters.
Many separation programs have been abandoned because of the technical
difficulty and enormous costs associated with tracing and repairing old com-
bined sewers and building new parallel systems. It has not been until recently
(over the last ten years or so) that an understanding of the full dimensions
of the pollution problems of stormwater have reinforced the movement away
from separation. Alternatives to separation are more promising and economical/
though the National Commission on Water Quality has estimated that pollutant
abatement efforts to correct the impacts of combined system's will cost
$79.6 billion nationwide.31 There has been a revival of interest in con-
structing new combined systems, despite their historical problems, in order
to achieve at least partial treatment of stormwater. The major current
approaches to combined sewer improvements are outlined below. Interested
readers are urged to consult the reference listed in the back of this chapter
for more detailed information; Regional EPA offices, 208 Agencies and the
U.S. Public Health Service should also be consulted by officials making
policy decisions in this area.
Source Control—
The first line of defense against pollution associated with stormsewer
flows or combined sewer overflows is source reduction, the subject of the
other sections of this chapter (see also Chapters II, IV, VII). Approaches
include better solid waste management to reduce street litter, improved
street cleaning to pick up more of the fine particles that accumulate along
curbsides, reductions in the use of deicing chemicals, and strict enforcement
of erosion control ordinances. Flow reductions can be implemented through
runoff control ordinances specifying standards for allowable areas and
impervious surfaces and giving criteria for disposal of stormwater on
site.
Separation of Systems—
Separation of sewers can be accomplished (1) by adding a new gravity flow
sewer and using the combined sewer as a stormsewer; (2) by adding a new storm-
sewer and using the combined sewer as a sanitary sewer; or (3) by adding a
pressurized "sewer within a sewer" inside the combined sewer. (See Chapter IV
On Site Wastewater Disposal, for a discussion of pressure sewers.) Recent
studies by EPA32 indicate strongly that separation of flows is neither
economical nor desirable. Table 29 shows comparative cost estimations of
sewer separation versus various alternatives in seven U.S. cities.33 Although
separation may occasionally be preferred, both water quality considerations
and economics appear to dictate against it in most cases.
Infiltration/Inflow Control—
The oldest sewer systems in this country were often built of brick and
mortar, which was not watertight even when new. All systems as they age tend
to develop cracks and defective joints which allow groundwater to infiltrate
the system and increase wet weather flows. In some areas with high
water tables, infiltration is a-constant problem. Inflow is the addition
of flows through licit or illicit connections from roof leaders, cellar and
yard drains, foundation drains, cross connections, and other sources of
145
-------
Table 29
Estimated Costs of Sewer Separation in Various Cities
Location
Study Area
Acreage
Density
People/Acre.(year)
Estimated cost,a $/acre
Type I12
(gravity)
Type 2C
(gravity)
Type 3
(pressure)
Boston, Mass.
Boston, Mass.
Bucyrus, Ohio
Chippewa Falls, Wis.
Chicago, 111.
Cleveland,
Des Moines, Iowae
Milwaukee, Vlis.
Sandusky, Ohio3
San Francisco, Calif.
Seattle, Wash
Seattle, Wash.
Washington, D.C.
Washington, D.C.
Regional Costs<3,f
New England
Middle Atlantic
South Atlantic
Southern
Midwest
West
National Average
53
(along Summer St.)
12,000
2,340
90
240,000
13,000
1,836
157
(along Prospect Ave)
2,205
303
(along -Laguna St. )
925
(Southwest District)
695 .
(E. Central District)
11,741
12,800
5.5 (1969)
11.7 (1968)
72.0 (1966)
16.5 (1969)
67.5 (1960)
150,400
81,800
4,930 4,660
8,420
28,220
32,30P
6,450
23,330
204,800
20,680
41,210
34,330
61,140
9,740
9,950
45.0 (1965)
45.0 (1965)
66,250
52,950
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
35,580
24,350
24,530
16,720
10,710
9,250
18,260
a. Adjusted to ENR = 2000.
b. Type 1 is constructing new sanitary sewers & using existing combined sewers for storm sewers.
c. Type 2 is constructing new storm sewers and using existing combined sewers for sanitary sewers.
d. Type 1 or Type 2 not identified in report.
e. Combination of Type 1 and Type 2.
f. Average costs.
g. NA = not available. NOTE: acres x 0.405 = ha
SOURCE: Metcalf & Eddy, Urban Stormwater Management and Technology, An Assessment, op.cit.
-------
supposedly clear water. Both infiltration and inflow take up valuable pipe
capacity, increasing the hydraulic loads at treatment plants and, especially
in combined systems, leading to more frequent bypasses and overflows.
Inflow must be controlled by city regulatory action. New inflows should
be prohibited/ and occasionally old ones may be eliminated by more restrictive
sewer use regulations. Inflows previously discharged to sewers can be
disposed of on-site or diverted to stormsewer systems.
Infiltration control is a complex subject. In new systems, infiltration
can be reduced by proper design and selection of system components; thermo-
plastic pipes (usually PVC, polyvinylchloride) are especially resistant to
infiltration. In old systems, a systematic cleaning, inspection, and repair
of pipes is necessary; usually pipes are sealed with plastic liners
(polyethylene) and repairs made to joints. Thereafter regular cleaning and in-
spection is required.
Flushing and Polymer Injection—
As indicated above, the first charge of stormwater moving rapidly through
a combined sewer after a typical dry spell (four days or more) can produce
the scouring of accumulated sediments from a pipe and its relatively in-
stantaneous discharge (less than one hour).^ into receiving waters. To pre-
vent this, sewers can be flushed out periodically, though the technology to
do so is still experimental. Either fresh water can be introduced (e.g. by
firehose), or sewage itself can be dammed up and released. Possibly tele-
metered systems can be developed and installed to flush sewers automatically.
The estimated costs for such a set-up are presented' a£ Table 3035, although
telemetry costs are not included. These costs were estimated for a demon-
stration project and may not be representative for any widespread implementa-
tion of this technique in the future.
Polymer injection involves the use of polymer gelled slurry to reduce
hydraulic friction in pipes and thus temporarily increase usable capacity
during storms. Where lines are marginally inadequate for storm flows,
backups and surcharges can be reduced and more of the flow can reach the
treatment plant without overflow. The polymers apparently have only
nutrient effects on bacteria, and they do not disrupt plant processes.
Demonstrations have been conducted in Richardson and Dallas, Texas;
a completely automated unit with upstream and downstream flow level
sensors cost $146,000.36 The proces sis of most use as a temporary measure
to mitigate short term problems before a long range solution can be implemented.
Regulators—
The function of regulators in a combined system is to divert wet-weather
flows beyond available treatment/interceptor capacity. Improved regulators
of many types have been designed to increase the accuracy of control and
even to provide a measure of quality control—some can induce hydraulic flow
patterns that tend to separate and concentrate solids for treatment. A
discussion of these mechanisms is not appropriate here, however.
Storage—
A major strategy in controlling stormwater pollution c.an be storage of
stormwater within, the system for later treatment following the storm event.
147
-------
Table 30
a
Estimated Flushing Costs for Demonstration Project
Detroit, Michigan
Alternate 1 2
Number of Flush Stations per Lateral 2 4
Area per lateral, acres 9 9
Daily solids removal, percent 61 72
Installed cost, of fabric flush tanks $6,380 $12,900
Cost of telemetry and controls — —
Monthly power cost $2.24 $4.69
Monthly maintenance cost $115 $229
Capital cost per acre $708 $1430
Monthly maintenance and power cost $13.00 $26.05
per acre
a. ENR = 2000
b. Not estimated
NOTE: Acre x 0.405 = ha.
SOURCE: Metcalf & Eddy, Urban Stormwater Management and Technology,
an Assessment, op.cit.
148
-------
This can be accomplished by using in-line excess capacity within major con-
duits of the system (as has been done in Seattle, Minneapolis-St. Paul, and
Detroit) ; or by constructing lagoons, tunnels, or tanks off-line. Costs
for the implementation of these strategies are, of course, highly variable.
Treatment—
Treatment of stomwater or combined sewage can be handled in a variety
of ways. Physical treatment measures include sedimentation, screening,
flotation, and filtration; these are the most practical and appropriate for
treating combined sewage overflows. Biological and physical/chemical treat-
ment may be indicated where higher quality discharges are necessary or where
flows are to be reclaimed for other uses (e.g. irrigation). Disinfection
can be used in conjunction with these processes to reduce enteric pathogens
in the discharge—chlorination is the most popular technique.
Pesticide and Fertilizer Control
Inappropriate application of pesticides and fertilizers can cause en-
vironmental damage through the distribution of these materials by the action
of stomwater runoff. Fertilizers can contribute excessive nutrients to
streams and lakes, causing eutrophication, and they may cause nitrate contami-
nation of water supplies. Pesticides may have both short and long term toxic
effects on humans and animals. Municipalities may choose to enact ordin-
ances which limit or ban the use of certain substances, or make use contin-
gent on a local permit.^9
The impact of fertilizers and pesticides is in large part dependent on
the location of the use, as well as on the mode and extent of application.
Stream and lake banks are usually especially sensitive areas for application
of any substance capable, of environmental damage, and use of fertilizers and
pesticides might well be limited here as well as on steep slopes, aquifer
recharge areas, or wetlands. Chapter VIII deals with the mapping of communities
according to environmental sensitivities to human activities; programs may be
instituted under a local environmental review process to manage the
application of these substances. Enforcement of local restrictions on these
materials may be a problem, since it is difficult, if not impossible, to
monitor actual application.
IMPLEMENTATION AND COSTS
Management of stormwater requires conscientious and continuing efforts
on the part of the community, both in the public and private sectors. Areas
of concern for government include:
Maintenance of Erosion/Sedimentation Programs;.This
involves review of applications for permits, inspec-
tion of construction on site, and enforcement against
violations.
Oversight of Winter Road Salting; This requires in-
spection and maintenance of equipment and applications
processes; inspection and maintenance of stockpiles;
149
-------
review of the content of deicing chemicals to assure
that unwanted additives are absent; monitoring
of stream and groundwater quality to assess possible
contamination; monitoring and disposal of snow and ice.
Combined Sewer Management Practices; The variety of
management and design practices mentioned in this sec-
tion involve continued maintenance of systems. While
some innovative practices such as flushing and polymer
injections may be handled automatically, increased
O/M expenditures are entailed for manpower, machinery
and chemicals.
Street Cleaning; Machinery must be maintained in good
operating order; parking restrictions must be enforced
to permit thorough street cleaning; and street cleaning
practices must be monitored to assure maximum removal
of litter and dust.
Pesticide and Fertilizer Control; If a pesticide and
fertilizer management program is in force, it must be
monitored routinely. If a permit system is used, review
of permit applications will be necessary, and inspec-
tion on-site may be desirable for large scale applica-
tions of chemicals.
Areas of concern for the private sector are:
Erosion/Sedimentation Control; Applications for permits
will require expenses for plan preparation in conform-
ance with state standards, and time spent in the appli-
cation process'; execution of the plan will entail
materials, labor, and supervision expenses in complying
with the plan; compliance after construction will in-
volve continued maintenance of erosion and sedimentation
control systems.
Road Salting; No direct costs are incurred in the private
sector for improved road salting practices; tax money will
probably be saved if reductions in salt application are
substantial. Indirect costs will be incurred in increased
travel time' during inclement weather, but substantial
damage to vehicles through rusting can be avoided with less
salting.
Combined^Sewer Management Practices; Costs for this
program would be passed on to the private sector through
taxes or user charges; no indirect costs would be in-
volved in terms of time or labor expended in this sector.
150
-------
Pesticide and Fertilizer Control; Control over-the
use of these substances may inconvenience private
property owners; if development and construction
practices are properly guided, however, critical
areas may be left undeveloped and restrictions on
the use of these materials can be minimized.
It becomes clear that both responsibility and costs associated with
stormwater management programs are dispersed through the public and private
sectors. Doubts are immediately raised regarding any community's ability
to continue to implement an effective program without widespread public
acceptance of both goals and methods. Thus, in addition to the responsibil-
ities already outlined, communities may need to inaugurate public education
programs aimed at increasing public acceptance and participation in storm-
water management programs—particularly in the realm of pollution control.
Here, modifications of accustomed building practices, parking patterns, and
street cleaning and maintenance operations may be objected to by local
citizens.
Costs for the various programs described are dependent on local con-
ditions. Expenses for the review and processing of erosion/sedimentation
control plan applications will vary from community to community, according
to the extent of the required documentation as well as the number of
applications processed. Costs of improved building practices are hard to
document: Table 31 gives some example figures .from Tourbier's study,
Water Resources Protection Measures in Land Development.
ORDINANCES
Recommended Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance
The following ordinance is taken from Model Environmental Protection
Ordinances, published by the South Branch Watershed Association, Lebanon,
New Jersey. It is used with reference to a manual adopted by the New Jersey
Soil Conservation Service for recommended practices in erosion and sedi-
mentation control; similar manuals are available from other sources across
the country, and may be referenced in any adopted version of this ordinance.
The ordinance has been adopted by various communities, and is said to work
well given adequate attention to monitoring and enforcement.
Recommended Stormwater Management Ordinance
Similar to the sedimentation and erosion control ordinance, this storm-
water ordinance published in the same volume follows the same manual on
sedimentation and erosion control. It involves a permit system for earth
moving operations, and is representative of the better stormwater management
ordinances enacted nationwide.
151
-------
Table 31
Costs of Erosion and Sedimentation Control Measures
METHOD
COST (year of estimation)
COMMENTS
On-Site Disposal of Stormwater
(groundwater recharge)
1. Dutch Drains
(gravel filled ditches)
2. Porous Pavement
3. Lattice Concrete Block
Pavement
4. Infiltration Pits,
Trenches, Tile Fields
5. Seepage Beds
6. Seepage Areas
Erosion Prevention Measures
1. Removal, Storage, and
Replacement of Topsoil
2. Diversion and Inter-
ceptor Berms
3. Stabilization of Critical
Areas with Sod
4. Mulching Seeded Areas
(seed, fertilizers, straw
mulch, tacking)
5. Grass Channels
(handling runoff to 8 fps)
$15/cubic yard (1972)
($30 adjusted) (see
comment)
$5.50/square yard (1973)
$9.50/square yard (1972)
$ll/cubic yard of storage
(1972)
S9.35 cubic yard of storage
(1972)
$5/cubic yard storage (1972)
$60/1000 square feet (1972)
$125/linear foot (1971)
$2.50/square yard (1973)
S200-500/acre (1971)
Sod—Si/square yard
Seed—S.08/square yard (1972)
Credit usually given for 50%
of provided capacity
About 1.7 times as expensive
as conventional asphalt
About 3 times as expensive as
conventional asph.alt
Minimum 50 cubic yards
Require overflow system—for
use where percolation rates
prohibit infiltration pits
Shallow disposal areas for
multiple use
Rough maximum cost
Rough maximum cost for steep
slopes
Costs vary widely according
to materials availability
and scale economies
SOURCE: Tourbier, Water Resources Protection Measures in Land Development.
152
-------
Ul
Ul
MODEL MUNICIPAL LAND DISTURBANCE ORDINANCE
TO CONTROL
SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION
An ordinance to establish regulations for controlling soil erosion and sedimentation
within trie municipality of - *
ARTICLE I
TITLE AND PURPOSE
A.
TITLE
This ordinance shall be known as the "
• Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance.
Municipal Soil
B. PURPOSE
The purpose of thii ordinance is to control soil erosion and sediment damages
or,d related environmental damage by requiring adequate provisions for sur-
face '.voter retention and drainage and for the protection of exposed so.l
wrfoees in order to promote the safety, public health, convenience and general
welfare of the community.
ARTICLE II
RULES APPLYING TO TEXT
For the purpose of this ordinance certain rvles or work usage apply K> tho text-
as follows:
I Words used io the present tense include the fujure tense; and the singular
includes the plurot, unleis the context clearty,.indicates the contrary.
2. The term "shall" is always mandatory and not/discretionary, the word "may"
It permissive,
3. The word or term not interpreted or defined by Ms article shall be used
with a meaning of common or standard utilization.
B. DEFINITIONS
The following definitions shall opply in the interpretation and enforcement of
this ordinance, unless otherwise specifically stated:
1. Applicant- A person, partnership, corporation or public agency requesting
permission to engage in land disturbance activity.
2. Critical Area - A sediment-producing highly credible or sever'/ eroded
area.
3. Excavation or Cut - Any act by which soil or rock is cut into, dug,
quarried, uncovered, removed, displaced or relocated.
4. Erosion - Detachment and movement of soil or rock fragments by water,
wind, ice and gravity.
5. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan - A plan which fully indicates necessary
lone! treatment measures, including a schedule of the timing for their instal-
lation, which will effectively minimize soil erosion and sedimentation.
Such measures jhall be m accordance with standards as adopted by the
Stote Soil Conservation Committee.
6. Farm Conservation Plan- A plan which provides for use of land, within its
capabilities ond treatment,- within practical limits, according to chosen
use to prevent further deterioration of soil and water resources.
7. Land - Any ground, sol!, or ecrth includes morshes, swcrps drainagewcyj
ond areas not permanently covered by water within the municipality .
8. Land Disturbance - Any activity involving the clearing, grading, trans-
porting, filling and any other activity which causes land to be exposed to
the danger of erosion.
9. Permit- A certificate issued to perform work under this ordinance.
TO. Mulching - The application of plant residue or other suitable materials to
trie land surface to conserve moisture, hold soil in place, and aid tn
establishing plant co'--:r.
11. Sediment - Solid material, both mineral and organic, ihot is in suspension,
is being transported, or hoi been moved from its site of origin by oir, water
or gravity cs D product of erosion.
12. Sediment Bcsin - A barrier or dam built ct suitable locations to retain
rock, sand, gravel, silt or ether material.
13. Soil - All unconsotidated mineral and organic moteriol of any origin.
14. Soil Conservation District - A governmental subdivision of this State, which
encompasses this municipality, organized in accordance with the provisions
of Chcptcr24, Title*, N.J.R.S.
15. Site - Any plot, parcel or parcels of land.
-------
J6. State Soil Conservation Committee - An agency of the State established
in accordonce with the provisions of Chopfer 24, Title 4, N.J.R.S.
. 17. Strioping - Any ocfivify which significantly disturbs vegetated or other-
wise stabilized soil surface including clearing end grubbing operations.
B.
ARTICLE 111
PROCEDURE
REGULATION
1. No land area shall be disturbed by ony person, partnership, corporation,
municipal corporation or other public agency within rhfs municipality un-
Fess; the applicant has submitted to the building inspector a plan to pro-
vide for soil erosion ond sediment control for such land area "n accordance
with (he Standards for Erosion and Sediment Control adopted by the New
Jersey State Soil Conservation Committee and administered by the
Soil Conservation District and such plan has been approved;
and o valid land disturbance pemtJ has been issued by the building in-
spector except os exempted by ARTICLE V.
DATA REQUIRED
The applicant must lubmit a separate soil erosion and sediment control plan for
each noncontiguous site. The applicant may consult with the
Soil Corservation District in the selection of appropriate erosion and sediment
control measures and the development of the plan. Such plan shall contain:
1. Location and description of existing natural ond rr.an-rr.ade features on ond
surrounding the site including general topography ond soil characteristics
ond o copy of the soil conservation district soil survey (where available).
2. Location and description of proposed changes to the site.
3. Measures for soil erosion ond sediment control which must meet or exceed
STANDARDS FOR SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL adopted
by the Stcfe Soil Conservation Committee. STANDARDS shall be on file
ot the offices of the local soil conservation district and the township clerk.
4. A schedule of the sequence of installation of planned erosion and sediment
control measures as related to the progress of the project including antici-
pated storting and completion dates.
5. All proposed revisions of data required shall be submitted for approval.
C. REVIEW AND APPROVAL
1. Erosion and sediment control plans submitted with subdivision and iTte
plan applications shall be reviewed by the planning boord ond cp-
proved when in confomonce with the Standards for Erosion and Sedi-
ment Control, -The board may seek the ossistopce of the
Soil Conservation District in the review o? such plans and mcy ceern
as approved those plans which have been reviewed ond determined
adequate by the Soil Conservation District.
2. All other types of soil disturbance not exempted in Article V shall
come under the review of the municipal public body or designated
municipal officer in accordance with their merrorarrdun of under-
standing wi:h the Soil Comervafion District.
NOTE: PLANNING BOARD REVIEW POWERS
The planning boords of New Jersey hove explicit
statutory authority for their subdivision review
powers and have judicial support for their site
plan review powers.
There are, however, many other land use matter*
that reflect on planning ond physical development
of the municipality over which !he planning board
has no explicit or implicit review powers.
However, pursuant to the provisions of N. J.S.A.
40:55-1.13, fhe governing body of a municipality
may require the planning board to review ond re-
port upon ony class oF matters, (i.e., soil distur-
bance other than that associated with subdivisions
or sil'e plans) prior to fine! action thereon by any
municipal public body or municipal officer.
Therefore, in instances of soil disturbance other
than that proposed in subdivision and site plan
applications, the initial enforcement jurisdiction
may be delegated to the building inspector with
the requirement {by ordinance) that he refer the
matter to t;ie municipal p'cnnirg board pursuant
to the provisions of 40:55-1 .13 for report end re-
commendation.
-------
KtVIEW AND APPROVAL (olternofe procedure)
Soil eretion end sediment control plom shall be reviewed by the municipal
engineer {or other designated official) and approved when in conformancewith
the Standards for Erosion and Sediment Control.
The municipal engineer may seek the assistance of the _
Soil
Ul
U1
Conservation District in the review of such plant and may deem as approved
those plant which have been reviewed and determined adequate by the said dis-
trict.
ARTICLE IV
PRINCIPLES AND REQUIREMENTS
GENERAL DESIGN PRINCIPLES
Control measures shall apply to all aspect* of the proposed land disturbance and
(halt be in operation during all stages of the disturbance activity. The following
principles jholl apply to the soil erosion and sediment control plort.
1i Stripping of vegetation, grading or other soil disturbance shall be done in
a manner which will minimize soil erosion.
2. Whenever feasible, natural vegetation shall be retained and protected.
3. The extent-of the disturbed area and the duration of its exposure shall be
kept within practical limits.
4. Either temporary seeding, mulching or other suitable stabilization measure
shall be wed to protect exposed critical areas during construction or other
land disturbance. •
5. Drainage provisions shall accommodate increased runoff, resulting from
modified soil and surface conditions, during and after development or
disturbance. Such provisions shall be in addition to all existing requirements.
O. V/ater runoff shall be minimized and retained on site wherever possible to
facilitate ground water recharge.
7. Sediment shall be retained on site.
8. Diversions, sediment basins, and similar required structures shall be Installed
prior to any on-site grading or disturbance.
8. MAINTENANCE
All necessary soil erosion and sediment control measures installed under this
ordinance, shall be adequately maintained for one year offer completion of
the approved plan or until such measures ore permanently stabilized 01 deter-
mined by the municipal engineer. The municipal engineer shall give The
applicant upon request a certificate indicating the date on which the measures
called for in the approved plans were completed.
C. MAINTENANCE BONOS (OPTIONAL)
1. In the event that certain work required under the permit cannot be performed
within the time set for completion and*is postponed, a cash bond in form
approved by the Borough Attorney in an amount equal to the cost of such
uncompleted work may be deposited with the (designated official) to
guarantee performance, which amount sholI be determined by trie Building
Inspector. No such permission to postpone work shall exceed six (6) months.
Upon failure to complete the work, the (designated official) shall use
the money deposited with the Borough to finith the ur.finished portion of the
work in accordance with the land disturbance permit. Any unuttd portion
of the monies deposited shall be returned to the applicant.
2. Prior to acceptance of work performed in accordance with the land disturbance
permit, the Building Inspector shall obtain a cash maintenance bend from the
applicant. Such bond shall be in an amount equal to fifteen (15) percent of
the work performed by the applicant as determined by the SuiUS ng Inspector.
Such bond shall guarantee proper maintenance of the distur'jed site fcr the
period required by this Ordinance. Upon expiration of the period of the
maintenance bond, the full amount less the costs incurred for maintenance
shall be returned to the applicant.
D. FEES (SUGGESTED SCHEDULE)
1. Initial application $25.00 per acre or pott thereof.
2;' Extension $5.00 'per acre or port thereof.
3. In addition to the above, the applicant shall pay a reasonable engineering
inspection fee upon submission of a voucher by the Municipal Engineer.
Said fee shall not exceed $500.00.
E. PENALTIES (SUGGESTED PROVISION)
Any person,partnenhip, corporation, municipal corporation, public agency or
other entity violating any provision of this Ordiance shall be subject to a fine
of not more lhanSSOO.OO and not more than ninety {90} days in [ail, or both.
Notwithstanding this provision, the (municipality) may proceed to obtain
-------
injunctive or other oppropriote relief. In the event fhot construction is
involved, the Building Inspector shall Issue o Vop work notice" which
shall be effective until recinded. In addition to the penclfies herein pro-
vided, expenses incurred by the (municipality) in repairing or correcting
ony such violation shall also be re cov e ro b 1 e from the violating party.
ARTICLE V
EXEMPTIONS
The following activities ore specifically exempt from this Ordinance:
I. Land Disturbance associated with existing one and two family dwellings.
2. Use of lond for gardening primarily for home consumption.
3. Agricultural use of lands when operated in accordance with a farm conser-
vation plan approved by the local soil conservation district or when it i$
determined by the local soil conservation district fhat such use wil! not came
excessive erosion and sedimentation.
ARTICLE VI
INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
The requirements of this Ordinance shall be enforced by the municipal engineer who shall
also irspect or require adeqjate inspection of the work. If the municiap! engineer finds
existing condition* not m stated in the applicant's erosion and sediment control plan he
may refuse to cparcve further work end may require necessary erosion and sediment control
ir.eesuret to be promptly installed and may see1* other penalties os provided in Article IV E.
ARTICLE VII
APPEALS
Appeals from decisions under this ordinance may be mode to the municipal governing body
in writing within ten days from the do'e of such decision. The appellant shall be entitled
ro o hearing before the municipal governing body within thirty days from the date of
appeal. The municipal governing body may thereafter reserve, modify, or affirm the
aforesaid decision.
ARTICLE VIII
REPEALER
All Ordinances or port! of Ordinances inconsistent v/ith the provisions of this Ordinance
ore hereby repealed to the extent of such inconsistency.
ARTICLE X
VALIDITY AND SEVERABILITY
If any port of this Ordinance is found not valid, the remainder of this Ordinance shall
remain in effect.
ARTICLE XI
EFFECTIVE DATE
This ordinance shall take effect immediately L-pon its enactment and publication in the
manner provided by law.
-------
AN ORDINANCE FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF SURFACE WATER RUNOFF IN THE
TOWNSHIP OF COUNTY OF HUNTEROON - STATE OF NEW
JERSEY
STORM WATER MANAGEMENT
TKii ordinance inn developed as port of o regulation storm wafer
management study and plan for three municipalities. The ordi-
nance it currently before the participants for their consideration.
It is offered here as a sub-watershed approach to the universal
problem of drainage. The concept is suited to semirural and de-
veloping drainage basins rather than those already quite urban-
ized.
The goals to be implemented through the ordinance are:
1. To maintain the integrity of stream channels for theii
biological functions as well as for drainage.
2. To induce water recharge into the ground where prac-
tical.
3. To maintain the present-adequacy of culverts and
bridges.
4. To lessen non-point pollution through the various de-
tention devices employed.
5. To lessen the threat of flooding by items normally con-
tained within the banks of the streams.
The run off standard of "good gross land" cover is something less than
forest cover but higher than "rotation crops" or "previous cover."
The ordinance allows for considerable innovative methodology on
the part of the engineer in pursuit of these goals. This may very
well become more definitive in o given municipality through ex-
perience. Copies of the complete study, Regulation Storm Wafer
Management Study and Planning - Clinton Township, Lebanon
Borough, Readington Township ore available for $2.50 from the
South Branch Watershed Association, 34 Center Street, Clinton.
New Jersey 08809.
ARTICLE I
Title: This ordinance shall be known os the
surface water management ordinance
Township
General Intent; The general intent of this ordinance it to manage the increased rote
and velocity of surface water runoff created by-alteration of *he ground cover and
natural runoff patterns.
Purposes: This ordinance is deemed essential and necessary to protect the public hectrh,
safety end welfare of the citizens of Township and the surrounding
communities by accomplishing the following purposes;
I. Maintain the adequacy of natural stream channels end prevent accelerated
bank erosion by controlling the rote and velocity of runoff discharge to
these water courses so as to avoid increasing frequency of the bankful
stage.
2. Prevent degradation of the stream biota caused by excessive flushing and
sedimentation.
3. Prevent degradation of stream water quality due to impairment of the stream's
biological function.
4. Enhance the quality of non-point runoff by water retention measures.
5. Preserve present adequacy of culverts and bridges by'suppressing'arti-
ficially induced flood pecks.
6. Reduce public expenditures for replacement or repair of public facili-
ties resulting from artificially induced flood pecks.
7. Prevent domcges to life ond property from flooding resulting from ex-
cessive rates and velocities of runoff.
8. Conserve the taxable value oF property by enhancing the environmental
character of the streams of the township.
ARTICLE II
DEFINITIONS
APPLICANT - Any person, partnership, corporation or public agency requesting
permission to engage in land disturbance activity, construction or development.
-------
ill
09
APPROVED PLAN - A plon to control surface water runoff which has been approved by
the municipal planning board.
CHANNEL - A water course with a definite bed ond bonks which confine ond conduct
continuously or intermittently flowing water.
CONSERVATION EASEMENT - An agreement or covenant running with the land which
prohibits ell land or neg«totion disturbance in favor of a permanent dedication to natural
open spece; each agreement to be entered into between the applicant ond the munici-
pality.
D»AtNAGE\VAY - Any water course, trench, ditch, depression or other hollow space
in tr.e ground, natural or artificial, which collects or disperses surface water from land.
ENVIRON,V.ENTALLY CRITICAL AREA - Any area which should not be disturbed by
uses ircorpotible with the paramount public interest In the prevention of surface
wcter runoff and attendant environmental damage. Examples of environmentally
criliccl irrpacl oreas include but are not limited to lakes, ponds, flood plains and
flood hazard areas, designated stream corridors, steep slopes, highly erodable soil
wetlands, swamps, marshes, bogs, acquifer recharge and discharge areas, and heavily
wooded areas.
LAND DISTURBANCE - Any activity involving the clearing, grading, transporting,
filling of !and end any other activity which alters land, topography or vegetative
cover.
•MEADOW OF GOOD HYDROLOGIC CONDITION' - As defined by sheet RTSC-
NE-Ergineer 2CO, sheet I of 2 published by USDA-SCS February 1970.
NATDitAL DRAINAGE FLOW - The topographical pattern or system of drainage of
surface water runoff from a particular site, including the various drainage ways ond
watercourses which cony surface water only during periods of heavy rains, storms
or floods.
NON-POINT RUNOFF - Surface water entering a channel from no definable dis-
charge source.
SEASONAL HIGH GROUNDWATER TABLE - As shown on map subject to field inves-
tigation
SURFACE WATER - All water produced by rain, flood, drainage, springs and seeps
flowing over the land or contained within a natural or artificial water course.
SURFACE WATER RUNOFF - The dispersion or drainage of surface water by natural
or artificial means.
alt: (any overland flow of water across the ground surface to the nearest conduit) •
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN - A plan consistent with the purposes and
policies of this ordinance which fully indicates necessary land treatment measures and
techniques including a schedule for implementation and maintenance.
SUP.FACE WATER RUNOFF DAMAGE - All damage or harm to property values, land,
vegetation and water supplies, including but not limited to, flooding, soil erosion,
siltation ond other pollution of watercourses, ond diminished rect-arge of ground wafer
supply which damage results or is likely to result when the dispersion of surface water
typical of the land in a 'meadow of good hydrologic condition* is increased in rote,
velocity or quantity.
WATERCOURSE - Means rivers, streams, brooks, waterways, lakes, ponds, marshes,
swamps, bogs ond all other bodies of water .natural or artificial, public or private
which are contained within, flow through or border on (municipality)
or any portion thereof.
WATERSHED - An area of surface wat-jr runoff related to a point of conventratioa
(such as the topographically determined confluence with another body of water or
a man made culvert etc.) as shown on Map * Watersheds Overlov. Regional
Natural Resource Inventory Report 1974.
10, IS er 100 YEAR STORM - The most intense probable precipitation to occur in a
given region in a 24 hour period, with a frequency of once In 10, 15 or 100 years.
ARTICLE III
ADMINISTRATION
A. Applicability - A surface water management plan shall be approved by the Planning;
Board prior to site plan approval, special exception, zoning variance, issuance of build-
ing permit, preliminary subdivision approval or any other land disturbance activity as
the case may be.
No person shall engage in any land disturbance activity or any property within the
township without having submitted a surface water runoff management plan together
wiffrerosion and sediment control plans to the planning board and obtaining approval
of such plan and a permit or written waiver of necessity from the planning board.
B. Waiver - The Planning Board may waive the need for a surface water management
plan for plots of two acres or less upon written recommendation of the municipal engineer
certifying there is no appreciable increase anticipated in rate or velocity of runoff based
on plans submitted.
C. Exemptions - The fol lowing are exempt from the provisions of this ordinance;
1. Site plans for development where the negetative cover of the land will not be
: disturbed.
-------
in
*
2. Agricultural me of lands when operated in accordance with a farm eonservo-
. lion plan approved fay the locot Soil Conservation District.
0. Planning Board Approval - The surface wafer management plan or any major
emcndr.tnt shall be approved by the Planning Board in the manner and form and
according to the regulations hereafter set forth.
The Planning Board in approving laid surface water management plan may impote
lawful conditions or requirements designated or specified on or in connection
therewith. These conditions and requirements shall be provided and maintained at
a condition to the establishment, maintenance and continuance of any use or occu-
poney of any structure or land.
E. Minor Arrendmenti - Mi nor omendmenti to a surface wafermonagemenf plan may
be approved by the Municipal Engineer who shall notify the Planning Board of the
rcture and reason for the change.
F. Enforcement If at any time the municipal engineer finds existing conditions not
a stated in the applicant's approved plan the planning boon) or its designated agent
shot! aider cessation of all work and seek to enjoin the violation or take such steps
looking to the enforcement of the plan a may be lawful.
ARTICLE-IV
STANDARDS
A. General Standards - In the preparation of o surface water monoement plan, the
following general principles shall be adhered to:
1.' The rote and velocity of runoff from the site following completion of the
' planned development shall not exceed that which would prevail under
total coverage in a Meadow of good hydro/logic condition, (permanent
' meadow) as defined by Soil Conservation Service Standards, or previous
cover, whichever produces the least amount of run off.
2. Maximum use shall be mode of presently existing surface water runoff cof-
trol devices, mechanism or areas such as existing berms, terraces, grass
waterways, favorable hydrologic soils, swamps, swales, watercourses,
woodlands, floocplains, as well as any proposed retention structures.
3. Whenever practicable, clutter development (based upon standards in Sec-
tion ___ of the zoning ordinance) shall be employed and permitted if
it will reduce the total area of impervious surfaces, preserve open space
end topographic features critical to surface water mangement.
4. Evaluation shalt be made of the nature of the subwaterihed of which the
site is a port, the receiving stream channel capacities and point of con-
centration structure as shown on the Base Maps showing roods, streams,
cut
-------
2. All outfolls or* to be designed in a manner to retard velocities at the outfall
and provide stream channel protection.
3. V.'hen o natural drainage pattern is necessarily intercepted, as by a street,
this shall be considered.
4. Alt structures and land treatment practices shall conform to "Standards and
Specifications Tor Soil Erosion and Sediment Control in New Jersey" latest
edition adopted by the Hunterdon County Soil Conservation District..
5. All water carrying structures and/or retention areas shall be completed and
stabilized prior to diversion of water to them.
6. As preliminary to developing the surface water management plan there shall
be an inventory of the site showing ol I existing natural and manmode drainage
related features as listed in Article IV:3. (berms, terraces, grass waterways,
favorable hydrologic soils, poorly drained soils, swamps, swales, watercourses,
woodlands, f loodploini). These shall be incorporated in the plan to the great-,
«st possible extent in accordance with their functional capability.
7. Drainogeways end watercourses which normally carry or receive surface water
runoff shall not be overloaded with increased runoff, sediment or other pollu-
tion resulting from disturbance of soil and negotation or incident.to develop-
ment, construction or other activity.
8. Due consideration shall be given to the relationship of the subject property
to the natural or established drainage pattern of the subwatershed(s) of
which it is a part as shown on Mop, Watersheds Overlay,
Township, Stormworer Management Study, June 1, 1773.
9. Surface water runoff controls shall be designed to assure that the land in
question uses no more than its proportionate watershed share of the natural
stream and culvert capacity os set forth in tables, Appendix C Stormwafer
Management Study, June 1, 1973 or os ascertained by field measurements.
10. The curbing requirement may be relaxed by the municipal engineer in the
Interest of acceptable drainage accommodation that will relieve concen-
tration of flow or discharge to a stormwoter sewer system.
11. Inovative surface water runoff control and recharge devices may be pro-
posed such as rooftop storage, drywells, cisterns, roof drain infiltration
trenches, provided they are accompanied by detailed engineering plans
and performance capabilities.
ARTICLE V
DATA REQUIRED
The applicant shall submit a separate surface water management plan for any pro-
posed lot, subdivision, cluster development, site plan review, ,pec,ol «*«P''°"'
£. variance or any lend disturbance activity except « ^^*™g
III, Band C. The surface water management plan shall be coord.noted wjth the
soil erosion and sediment control plan required by the So.l Eros.on and Sed.ment
Control Ordinance.
Such plan shall contain:
1 . Lot and block numbers of the site as shown on the current tax map of the
township.
2. Name and address of the owner of the land. ^
3 Size of subwatershed and location of the site within the subw3fershed(s) «
shown on Map _; _ «hntd to in Report _ - ™3.
4. Location, description and quantificalion of significant
features on and surrounding the site, including topography,
surfaces, soil and drainage characterises, with particular otter :on ^ o n.
location and description of presently existing *f^«™°"C°^
devices, mechanisms or areas, swcmps, flood pla.m, swales, ~ *£
vegetation, steep slopes and other features critical to the purpose, of lh,.
ordinance.
5 Siz- of nearest culvert or bridge downstream of discharge area, profiles and
5* cro* VecTion of stream channel upstram of that structure a, .nventar.ed m
r° 1973 as well os profiles and cross sections of
sTream channel at ail points of proposed surface water discharse from tn.
site, as required by the municipal engineer.
6. Location, description and quantification of proposed changes to the site
nature with particular attention to
.f.
ways to absorb, retard, contain or control
7. Designation of critical or other areas to be left undisturbed ,„„„ b. shown
in sufficient-detail to be accurately marked on the land. -
8. Computation of the total surface water runoff before, during and after lh.
disturbance of land and/or construction of .mperv.ous surface*.
9. Proposed measures for surface water management.
10. A schedule o. the sequence of installation of lh. s
structures, stipulating current maintenance, cont.nued ma.nl
responsibility for same.
-------
1!. Proposed mofnferance schedule for oil surface water monegemenf itructurw,
stipulating current maintenance, continued rnoirttenanee end responsibility
for some.
12. AH proposed revision! of required data os well os such additional data as the
planning board may require.
ARTICLE VI
REVifrV ANP APPROVAL
Surface water management plans shall b« reviewed by the planning board with th«
edvice and ossitronce of (he municipal engineer, the soil conservation district
ard the environmental commission. The planning board's consideration of appli-
cations shell be guided by but not limited to the following factor*:
1. The suitability of the applicant's proposed surface water management
measures, devices and planning techniques, whether involving on- •
site or off-site measures, or some combination thereof, in respect to
(he total surface water runoff, velocities and rates of discharge which
the applicant's proposed construction ot land disturbance moy generate.
2. existing topography, present vegetation and hydrologic soil factors, as
shown on mop. Hydrolofiic Soils, USDA Soil Conservation Service
township stormwater management, June 1,
1973, subject to field verification.
3. .Ground water recharge end discharge areas, wet soils and seasonal high
ground water table os shown on mop alluvial, poorly drained and some-
what poorly drained soils, USDA Soil Conservation Service,
^ township stormwater management study, June I, 1974 subject
to field verification.
4. The design storm.
5. Natural drainage flow ond pottern throughout the subwafenhedfc)
affected by the plan.
6. Land uses in both the immediate vicinity and surrounding drainage
region.
7. Any other applicable or relevant environmental and resource pro-
lection ordinances, statutes and regulations.
8. Any other factors relevant to the coordinated, adjusted and harmon-
ious development of the site, vicinity, township and region.
If, after considering the above factors, and after consultation with the municipal
engineer, soil conservation district and environmental commission the board deter-
mines that the proposed land disturbance or construction will generate no lurfoct
water runoff that will not be mancged in accordance with standards of this ordinance
orwill be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare in light of
the paramount interest in the prevention of conditions which may result in surface
water runoff damage, the board shall approve the plan and issue the necessary
permit.
If, however, after considering the above factors ond after consultation with the
municipal engineer, soil conservation district ond the municipal environmental
commission the board determines that the proposed land disturbance or -construc-
tion will generate surface woter runoff which will not be managed in accordance
with the standards of this ordinance and v/hicli will be detrimental to the public
health, safety and general welfare in light of the paramount public interest in the
prevention of conditions which moy result in surface v/afer runoff damage ond en-
vironmental degradation, the board shall deny the permit, and shall clearly and
concisely state the reasons.
ARTICLE VII
IMPLEMENTATION
A. Limit of Contract - Critical impact areas ond other areas fo be left undisturbed
shall be physically marked with survey stakes or protected with temporary snow fence
prior to any land disturbance.
B. Timing - The planning board shall require the construction and/or Installation
of surface water management improvements in accordance with the schedule of
sequence of installation as approved.
C. Bonding - The planning board shall provide for the posting of performance
guarantees and maintenance bonds in the same manner os provided in the subdivi-
sion ordinance of Township.
0. Inspection - The applicant shall beor full ond final responsibility for the in-
stallation and construction of all required surface woter runoff control measures
according to the provisions of his approved plan ond this ordinance. The municipal
engineer shall inspect the site during its prepsrotlon ond development end certify
that all surface woter management meosures hove been constructed in accordance
with the provisions of the applicant's approved plon under this ordinance.
During the twelve months subsequent to the dote of completion the engineer period-
ically shall inspect the site to ascertain that the provisions of flic applicant's op-
proved p!cn are complied' with, including limit of contract for areas lo be left un-
dislu'bed. The engineer shall give the opplic'anl upon request c certificate indi-
cating the dote on which trie required meosures were completed ond 'or accepted.
-------
E. Mointenonce - At the time of opproval of the plan, responsibility for continued
maintenance of surface water runoff control structures and measures shall be stipulated
end property recorded.
The lowrship shall retain the right to enter and moke repairs and improvements v/bere
necessary *o insure thct all control measures as well as areas dedicated to surface
water retention or groundwoter recharge ore adequately maintained and preserved.
The township may charge the ov/ner for the costs of these services if such maintenance
is his responsibility.
PENALTY
(-»
A. Any person violating any of the provisions of this ordinance shall, upon
conviction thereof,
B. Continued violation
C. Injunctive relief - Nothing in .this ordinance shall be construed as fo
precent the township from seeking ijifuncfive proceedings to restrain
violations of any provision of this ordinance.
APPEALS
Appeals from decisions under this ordinance may be made to (he municipal governing
body in writing within ten days from the date of such decision. The appellant shall
be entitled to o hearing before the municipal governming body within thirty days from
,
-------
FOOTNOTES
1. Roy F, Weston, Inc., A Manual on Storm Water Management for Evaluating
and Mitigating the Effects of Land Use Changes on Runoff.
2. A. Strong, "Regulation of Urban Development to Control Runoff and
Erosion."
3. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Planning and
Standards, Washington, D.C., December 1974.
4. S.R. Weibel, R.J. Anderson, and R.C. Woodward, "Urban Land Runoff as a
Factor in Stream Pollution," Journal of the Water Pollution Control
Federation, Vol. 36, No. 7, July 1964.
5. American Public Works Association, Water Pollution Aspects of Urban
Runoff, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, Water Pollution
Control Research Series WP-20-15, January 1969.
6. J.D. Sartor and G.B. Boyd, Water Pollution Aspects of Street Surface
Contaminants, Envrionmental Protection Agency, Research and Monitoring
Environmental Protection Technology Series, EPA-R2-72-081, November 1972,
7. Ibid.
8. Ibid.
9. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Quality Management Planning
for Urban Runoff, p. V-ll (referred to hereafter as EPA, Urban Runoff) .
10. Ibid., V-12.
11. The ability of trout to survive in a stream is often used as a measure-
ment of water quality. Trout require 5 mg/1 of oxygen to survive, and
can tolerate 3 mg/1 for a short period. Obviously, if oxygen levels
stay at 5 mg/1 for 364 days a year, but drop to 2 mg/1 for 1 day because
of a heavy pollutant load, there will be no trout in the stream.
12. Strong, op.cit.
13. Ibid.
163
-------
14. J. Tourbier and R. Westmacott, Water 'Resources Protection Measures in
Land Development - A Handbook, Delaware University, Newark., Water
Resources Center, April 1974. NTIS: PB-236-049. This report is one
of the most thorough and valuable available on the subject of practical
measures of erosion and sedimentation control, and is highly recommended
for community use.
15. Edward Selig, "Regulatory Dimensions of Nonpoint Source Control,"
March 1976.
16. Ibid.
17. Edison Water Quality Laboratory, Envrionmenta.1 Impact of Highway Deicing,
EPA, Water Quality Office, Water Pollution Control Research Series 11040
GKK, June 1971.
18. Ibid.
19. Ibid.
20. Ibid.
21. Ibid.
22. Ibid.
23. Tourbier, et al., op.cit., p, 149.
24. Edison Water Quality Laboratory, op. cit.
25. Tourbier, et al., pp.cit.
26. McKee found that in Boston a mild drizzle (.01 inch per hour) will cause
combined sewer overflows. With, a rain of 0.1 inch perhour, 73 percent of
the sanitary wastewater would overflow, even with a treatment system de-
signed to handle three times that average dry-weather flow. McKee, J.E.,
"Loss of Sanitary Sewage Through Storm Water Overflow," Jounral Boston
Society of Civil Engineers, 34, No.2, p. 55, 1947.
27. Metcalf and Eddy, Inc. Urban Stormwater Management and Technology,
an Assessment, prepared for the Environmental Protection Agency, National
Environmental Research Center, December 1974. (Referred to hereafter as
Urban Stormwater.)
28. Ibid., p. 88.
29. Ibid., p. 75.
30. Ibid., p. 67.
31. National Commission of Water Quality, Draft Final Report, 1975.
164
-------
32. Urban Stormwater, p, 147. In addition to the loadings of pollutants
carried by the separate stormwater flows, the frequency of discharges in
a separated system must fae considered. A separate stormwater outfall
produces far more frequent discharges than a combined system does, since
flows between 1.5 and 3 times the dry-weather flow can usually be handled
by the interceptors and the treatment plant.
33. Ibid., p. 149.
34. Ibid., p. 75. Based on observation of 28 overflows of a large combined
sewer in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, during 1969. Quality comparisons between
the first flush flow and extended flows for these observations are shown
in Table V-3.
35. Although some older systems, such as Boston's, were originally built
with machinery for flushing the pipes, the capability has seldom if
ever been used. Flushing of sediments has generally been restricted to
small lateral lines. Cost figures presented here are taken from "A
Flushing System for Combined Sewer Cleansing," FMC Corp., 11020 DNO. EPA,
March, 1972.
36. Ibid., p. 168.
37. Ibid., p. 168.
38. Ibid., p. 198.
39. Selig, op. cit.
165
-------
SECTION VI
NOISE CONTROL ORDINANCES
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF NOISE
Noise is an important environmental problem in urban areas, and one which
has traditionally been the responsibility of local governments. Fireworks,
soundtracks, and other similar noise sources have often been required to have
permits, or evey simply banned to keep the community quiet. Even zoning owes
much of its early success to the idea that it would separate the noisy industries
from the quiet residential areas.
In recent years, though, it has been realized that noise is not just bother-
some, but can have an impact on the health and welfare of the community.
Attempts have been made to quantify that impact, and to try to control noise
and reduce its damage.
The most obvious impact of noise is hearing loss. Exposure to very loud
noise sources can cause pain and physical damage to the ears and temporary or
permanent loss of hearing. More importantly, though, long-term exposure to
somewhat quieter sources can have the same effect. Restlessness, loss of sleep,
inability to understand speech, and other interference in people's activities
can be caused by even lower levels of noise.^
These long-term effects are shown in Table 32. The unit Leq(24) is the
yearly'average sound energy, as measured in decibles.2 For hearing loss, it is
necessary to be exposed above the level given, on the average, for several years.
The Ldn measure is similar, but provides a penalty for night noise of 10 dB
because of interference with sleeping in sensitive residential areas.•*
The psychologic effects of various short-term noise types are quite well
understood. The levels which cause pain or immediate hearing loss or damage are
known. Below these levels, sources concentrated at a single frequency are less
desirable than sources spread over the frequency band—a tone is more bothersome
than a roar. Warbling or pulsing tones are even more bothersome, and should be
penalized in noise standards. (See Table 33)
In general, the long-period standards can be set fairly easily, and there is
only a small range of reasonable levels for setting the short-term standards which
should be done with consideration of community conditions.
Figure 13 shows one of the welfare effects of noise, relating the average
noise level to the percentage of the population annoyed by it.7 Below about
50.dB, there is essentially no community reaction. At 75 dB, on the other hand,
approximately twenty percent of the community is likely to call complaints in to
166
-------
Table 32
Yearly Average* Equivalent Sound Levels Identified r..
Requisite to Protect the Public Health and Welfare With
" ' 4
An Adequate Margin of Safety
Residential with Out-
side Space and Farm
Residences
Residential with No
Outside Space
Commercial
Inside Transportation
Industrial
Hospitals
Educational
Recreational Areas
Farm Land and
General Unpopulated
Land
Measure
Ldn
Leq(24)
Ldn
Lcq(24)
Leq(24)
Leq(24)
Leq(24)(d)
Ldn
Leq(24)
Leq(24)
Wq(24)(d)
Leq{24)
LCq(24)
A .Iml0°; . , To Protect
Activity Hearing Loss
. -, . , Against
Inter- Considcra- _ , ....
. . Both El-
fcrence tion , . ,. .
fects (b)
45
45
(a)
(a)
(a)
45
45
(a)
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
45
45
70(c)
(a)
70(c)
45
45
70(c)
Outdoor TO,.
. . . ,, • , To Protect
Activity Hearing Loss . i
. f, . . Against
Inter- Considera- „,.-/•
. .. Both Ef-
ference tion
fects (b)
55
(a)
(a)
55
55
(a)
(a)
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
55
70(c)
70(c)
55
55
7(Xc)
70(c)
b.
c.
d.
CODE:
a. Since different types of activities appear to be associated with different
levels, identification of a maximum level for activity interference may be
difficult except in those circumstances where speech communication is a
critical activity.
Based on lowest level.
Based only on hearing loss.
An Le (8) of 75 dB may be identified in these situations so long as the
exposure over the remaining 16 hours per day is dow enough to result in
a negligible contribution to the 24-hour average, i.e., no greater than
an Le~ of 60 dB.
NOTE: Explanation of identified level for hearing loss: the exposure period
which results in hearing loss at the identified level is a period of 40 years.
*Refers to energy rather than arithmetic averages.
SOURCE: Office of Noise Abatement and Control, EPA, Information on Levels of
Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with
an Adequate Margin of Safety, Washington; EPA, 1974.
167
-------
Table 33
Continuous Sound Levels Which Pose
An Immediate Threat to Health and Welfare
(Measured at 50 Feet or 15 Meters)*5
Sound Level Limit '(dBA) Duration
90 24 hours
93 12 hours
96 6 hours
99 3 hours
102 1.5 hours
105 45 minutes
108 22 minutes
*Use equal energy time-intensity trade-off if level varies;
find energy equivalent over 24 hours.
Impulsive Sound Levels Which Pose An
an Immediate Threat to Health and Welfare
(Measured at 50 Feet or 15 Meters)
Number of Repetitions per
, _ , _. .. ,-_,. 24 hour Period
Sound Level Limit (dBA) ;
145 1
135 10
125 100
Maximum Noise Levels that Allow Communication
with 95% Intelligibility (dBA)6
Communication Distance (meters)
.512345
Normal Voice 72 66 60 56 54 52
Raised Voice 78 72 66 62 60 58
SOURCE: Office of Noise Abatement and Control, EPA, Information on Levels of
Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare
With an Adequate Margin of Safety, Washington, EPA, 1974.
168
-------
the police or noise control officer. The level of noise which people will accept
is, of course, conditioned on the amounts they are used to, so this table will
vary somewhat from place to place. The shape, though, will stay about the same—
there will be some baseline level at which few people will be bothered, a fairly
rapid rise until most people are annoyed, and then a slower, rise until everyone
complains.
Figure 13
Annoyance from Noise
% of people
highly annoyed
80
60
40
20
50
60 70 80 90
Noise Level (day-night average)
dB L
dn
EPA is- developing a Community Noise Ordinance Workbook which should be avail-
able in 1976, and which will expand the Model Noise Control Ordinance (see
Appendix VI-1) and discuss the various standards and options in detail.8 The
publication should be extremely valuable to communities considering noise control
'programs. Most issues mentioned in this report are discussed in detail in that
publication.
TYPES OF NOISE CONTROL
Basic Ordinances
Most urban communities have some sort of noise ordinance, making it illegal
to create noises which are a nuisance or which disturb the community. This is not
sufficient to control noise pollution. Subjective standards are easily ruled in-
consistent and arbitrary, particularly when enforced on major industries or other
continuing noise sources.
169
-------
Thus, objective standards are required which limit the levels of noise
affecting others. The easiest method is to set standards related to noise
levels by zoning class, and measured at the property line. Thus, the Smiths
could not operate an air conditioner which caused noise levels of 60 dBA or
more at the Jone's property line. More important, the steel plant in the bor-
3ering industrial zone would have similar noise level restrictions on its
operations.
These standards can be tested using simple maximum sound level meters, al-
though further equipment is desirable for continuing enforcement. The next
section discusses equipment further. Figure 14 shows some examples of what
noise levels communities set as their criteria.9
Sound and Vibration magazine publishes a yearly review of community noise
control ordinances.10For 1975, they received information from 539 municipal-
ities, with results shown in Table 34. Since the listinq is voluntary, it
is most likely to receive contributions from communities with active noise con-
trol programs; the listings in the table may not be representative of all
communities.
Even so, many communities use only traditional subjective nuisance ordinances,
which are weak in court prosecutions. Actual measurements are most common for
property line regulations of noise levels in different zoning districts. The
control of noise through zoning and the use of objective criteria and instruments
for such cases cannot be recommended too strongly—they are the key to a success-
ful noise control program. Vehicle noise, construction and new building stan-
dards, and time-averaging standards may improve noise control, but zoning-related
controls and objective criteria are the first necessary step.
Table 3411
1975 Review'of Community Noise Control Ordinances
Percent of Communities with Ordinance Related To:
Regulation in-
cludes accoustical
criteria
Regulation does
not include
accoustical
criteria
No Regulation
Nuisance Zoning Vehicles Construction Building
113 188 117 42 22
359
18
93
55
67
333
329
442
509
170
-------
Figure 14
Fixed Source Noise Levels Allowable at Residential District Boundaries
3°l
DAYTIME LEVELS £
NIGHTTIME LEVELS £J
AVERAGE DAY-S6.TS
AVERAGE NIGHT- S1.M
117CITIES -DAYTIME LIMITS
118 CITIES • NIGHTTIME LIMITS
2»
D
8
5
D
»
D
ii q j» o
D
09
"JO 8S 80 JS 70 65 60 55 50
-------
Time-Averaging Standards
Table 33 provides information on standards for continuous exposure for a
forty-year period. For short periods, of course, higher levels of noise can be
tolerated: noise damage is dependent on both the intensity of the noise and on
its duration, and sources which are loud and continuous may cause more damage
than some which are even louder, but brief. Ordinances specifying only maximum
sound levels are only partial responses to the complex problems of community
noise control.
It is desirable to provide for some sort of time-averaging in the standards.
The main focus of initial noise control should be on those sources which are
continuing long term problems, and this is easiest with time-averaging controls.
There are several reasons for this focus. First, it is easiest to enforce
standards on sources that can be monitored over a long period, as compared to
those that are intermittent. By the time an enforcement officer reaches a con-
struction site, the offending equipment may be shut down. Continuing sources
are easier to measure, and therefore, more amenable to regulation. A second
reason is that continuing sources of noise are more important ^rom a health
standpoint. Quieting a noisy party or construction site may make a difference
for a few days or weeks, but quieting a factory will reduce noise levels for as
long as the factory remains in operation. Thus, the focus on continuing sources
is related both to the expected benefits, and to the ease of enforcement.
Once the continuing sources are well-monitored and meet standards, it will
be important to broaden the noise control effort to reduce noise from the more
difficult and less important short-term noise sources. For most communities,
though, noise control resources can be allocated best by implementing time-av-
eraging standards and monitoring the major continuing sources which have the
largest long-term effects on the public health and welfare. Short-term nuisances
can be controlled, where necessary, using standard nuisance provisions of the
noise ordinance.
Measurement of time-averaging standards is more difficult, and requires more
expensive equipment and more inspection time. Time-averaging meters are readily
available, and will compute the average sound energy levels for however long they
are in place. Without such meters, it is necessary to take readings on peak
meters, perhaps every five minutes for an hour, to get sufficient information
for the averaging process. In communities greatly concerned about noise control,
however, the time-averaging approach appears more desirable for control of major
sources.
The problem with the pure averaging approach is that there is no control on
peak sources. A company could set off an explosion once per hour, and still be
within standards if it was otherwise quiet. There are two reasonable solutions
to this: either implement a set of peak standards with the time-averaging ones,
or combine the two.
The way to combine the two is by the "cumulative distribution" method.
Over any period, the amount of noise varies, and the major interest is how
often it is above certain levels. The variation can be recorded, and it is then
fairly easy to compute the levels which are exceeded ninety percent of the time
172
-------
and ten percent of the time, for example, in many ways this is equivalent to
the peak and average measurement, but it may be preferred in some cases.11
Motor Vehicle Controls
A number of communities have provides standards for new motor vehicles,
recreational vehicles, or other types of equipment sold or used within their
jurisdiction. Some measurements of the actual levels of noise from private
automobiles are shown in Table 35. Such measurements are made at a fixed
distance from the vehicle, usually fifty feet, but it may be desirable to allow
closer measurement for places where that is impossible.
13
Table 35
Caltrans Measurements of Automobile Noise
Percent of Cars with Noise Greater than Limit
Speed Limit 85dBA BOdBA 76dBA 75dBA 72dBA
<35 mph 0 .06% .3% .7% 3.3%
>35 mph .04% 1.6% 14.0% - -
For trucks, EPA suggests noise standards of 88 dBA for stationary use with
a full engine load (for example, a power take-off), 86 dBA for thirty-five mile
per hour or slower zones, and 90 dBA for higher speed zones, all measured at
fifty feet. These standards will be set for interstate carriers, and the local
government cannot set other standards, either stricter or looser.14 If commun-
ities object to these standards, provision of special sound-isolated truck
routes may be possible. While the federal government has pre-empted the control
of noise from interstate carriers, it has not pre-empted the related land use
controls: truck routes are allowed, given EPA approval, and buffer zones around
load terminals may also be possible to implement'.15 However, truck routes must
be approved by EPA if their principal purpose is to control noise, and not to
increase safety, protect pavement, or for some other reason.
Controls on vehicles other than trucks may be set as desired by communities.
However, controls on the sale of unusually noisy automobiles are unlikely to be
effective, except perhaps in major cities. Most communities should concentrate
on the use of motor vehicles, and on insuring that they meet reasonable maintenance
and operation standards. This may be particularly important for recreational
vehicles, which generally operate in otherwise quiet areas.
Interior Noise in New Construction
The time-averaging standards provided in Table VI-2 are most significant when
considered in relation to existing land uses. If construction is planned near
an existing noise source, the new buildings should be required to provide suf-
ficient insulation to reduce the noise to a reasonable level (for residential
buildings, 45 dB L^n). The new users move into the area in full knowledge of
the source, and it should be their responsibility to control for its impacts, to
173
-------
a large degree. Thus, construction should not be allowed in areas where exist-
ing exterior noise levels are too high.
California has implemented this idea for new construction near
transportation facilities such as highways, railroads, and airports.^ New
construction is required to be designed for 45 db CNElP-^ for residential build-
ings, and acoustical analysis is required for sites within the 60 dB footprint
of transportation facilities. When necessary, inspection may be required before
occupancy is allowed (see Appendix VI-3). Because of the performance require-
ments, the developer of a site in a noise zone is required to bear the costs of
insulation and other improvements to meet standards.
The difficulty here is that communities vary widely in their interpretation
of what constitutes tolerable levels of interior noise, and what land uses are
compatible near major noise sources. Exterior noise cannot be escaped totally:
it does little good to construct expensive soundproofing that is defeated each
time a door or window is opened. Certain land uses, however, are more tolerant
of noise than others. Office buildings, for example, are occupied during the
day when tolerance of noise is highest. Offices or commercial sites may also be
sealed during the day, though this depends on energy use and climate control
system efficiency. In sum, interior noise standards for industrial and commercial
buildings may well be higher than those for schools and residences, but certain
land uses might be excluded from noisy areas on the basis of ambient exterior
noise a'lone.
Construction
Construction noise is an important problem in urban areas, where construc-
tion of a high-rise may take years, and where nearby residents receive all the
impacts. On federally-funded projects, an environmental impact statement (EIS)
may be required, which would consider the noise effects of construction, but this
may not result in reduced noise levels
Construction requires heavy equipment, which is often noisy. Some commun-
ities 'have required that contractors use quieter alternatives to standard
equipment—for example, quiet pavement cutters instead of pneumatic hammers.
This is important, and should be a policy for local government construction and
maintenance. If a construction site is generally quiet, with only a few per-
iods where standards are exceeded, then a time-averaging measurement may be
best. Where construction is concerned, some level of nuisance must often be
tolerated if buildings are to be built at reasonable cost.
A large number of books, articles, aid handbooks have been written about
noise insulation. In general, though, insulation used to control heat will also
reduce noise transmission, and vice versa. Thus, the suggestions for structure
insulation and for storm windows, weatherstripping, and so forth, given in
Section III will also reduce noise.
There are materials designed primarily to reduce noise, from simple acoustic
tiles to much more exotic supplies. For residential applications, false acoustic
ceilings may be valuable, and the use of drapes or rugs to deaden noise may
help, but more expensive abatement is generally not cost effective.
174
-------
As with heat insulation, it is much less expensive to add noise insulation
to new structures than to retrofit old buildings, primarily because the same
equipment must be used. Retrofitting will be expensive, and should only be done
when necessary, for example for schools or public buildings in airport exposure
areas.
The use of landscaping and site planning to reduce noise is another option
for new development. Highway noise can be greatly reduced by providing barrier
hills or groves of trees between the highway and the buildings, for example.
Several manuals are available on using such designs to reduce transportation noise;
they may be of interest either to transportation planners or to developers
considering sites near major noise sources.18
Nuisances
One of the biggest community noise problems is the control of "nuisance"
noise. In most communities the police have been responsible for controlling
sources such as barking dogs, loud parties, and public disturbances. These
sources' are almost impossible to measure with sound level meters because they
vary quickly; nuisance noises are also far more disturbing psychologically than
their pure sould level would indicate. Since disturbance noises must be mea-
sured subjectively, they are difficult to define in court.
However, it is possible to limit the hours during which certain types of
sources can operate. For example, musical instruments, loudspeakers, construc-
tion, and loading, may not be allowed in residential areas in the evening and
at night. The wording in the EPA ordinance is "between the hours of : pm
and : am the following day, such that the sound therefrom creates a noise
disturbance across a residential real property boundary or within a noise
sensitive zone."19 (the community should fill in the critical times)
Citizen suits related- to nuisance noises are also an important means of
controlling noise disturbances. While it may be impossible for the police to
gather data about loud parties, the neighbors can, and should be able, to sue
if the disturbance is great enough. This is also the only way they can recover
damages. However, the suits should be based on the community standards as set
forth in the ordinances, to insure consistency.
EFFECTIVENESS AND COST OF NOISE CONTROLS
Problems in Defining Effectiveness of Controls
One EPA survey listed the percent of communities citing various problem
noise sources; some of its data is listed in Table 36. Noise from surface
transportation, particularly from trucks and motorcycles, was listed most often
as a problem. The sample from which the responses were drawn consisted only of
communities with active noise control programs; therefore, whether or not the
problems cited were those that caused communities to institute control programs,
these problems turn out to be the most intractible.
175
-------
Table 36
Problem Noise Souces
Source
Surface Transport
Airports
Industrial
Construction
Air Conditioners
Dogs
Other
% of Municipalities Citing
74
32
29
28
27
13
30
The most often cited noise problem, by a margin of more than two to one, is
surface transportation noise. Within this category lie two general problem areas:
the control of chronic traffic noise, and the control of isolated vehicles with
defective mufflers or some other offensive noise source (loud tires, honking
horns, etc.). In the first case, noise monitoring is of little use: while it
definitely reveals and quantifies the problem, enforcement actions are impossible
since individual motorists are usually not violating n'oise standards—the problem
is with cumulative effects. In the second case, the violations are so transient
that enforcement may be impossible; even if a sound level reading is taken, it
may be impossible to identify or catch the offender.
The next most frequently cited problem—airport noise—is equally difficult
to control on the community level. Planes operate under federal noise control
regulations and cannot be made responsible to any local standard; airports have
the freedom to act relatively independent of local community pressure to abate
noise, often citing the economic benefits they bring to the locality. Improve-
ments are gained through long term pressure by the community on the airport, and
accommodations ultimately reached may not be amicable.
Industrial, construction, and air conditioner noise are cited in the survey
with roughly equal frequncy. In these categories, identification, citation, and
correction of violations is more straightforward; although some violations are
transitory, an effective noise control problem can be designed to measure noise
levels accurately, using appropriate combinations of time-averaging and peak sound
readings to document offenses. The rate at which these categories appear on the
survey may indicate that programs are making headway—fewer citations in these
areas might have indicated lack of significant problems; more might have indicated
inability to make progress against them.
Interestingly, the "barking dog" and "other" categories in the survey are
listed as problems by about one-third of the respondents. These categories subsume
176
-------
most of the general nuisance offenses, and are an important area of community
concern. It is not known how many communities have set up.noise programs in
response to unusual nuisance categories of noise problems, however.
Gauging the effectiveness of any noise program is difficult; while the survey
quoted above yields no answers, it does underscore the problem areas. Typically,
noise control effectiveness is measured on a case-by-case basis, with success
related to the number of violations corrected. This may be true over the short
term, where a noise program is being started up. If, however, the number of
violations continues to be large, a high rate of enforcement action may actually
reveal the failure of the noise program to achieve significant reductions in
ambient noise levels. The problem is analogous to crime control—a high arrest
rate for felonies can hardly be taken as evidence of a low crime rate.
22
Several studies have analyzed community noise levels in an attempt to
define a meaningful baseline against which to measure progress, but no recognized
procedure is available and the cost of comprehensive noise monitoring is high.
The best course to follow may be the simplest: perform a noise survey to analyze
the extent of standards violations before a new program, and regularly recheck
survey sites after enforcement actions. The key is to measure the same problem
areas repeatedly; while the results are not comprehensive, they will be useful.
In general, nationwide municipal enforcement of noise ordinances has been
low. Of the cities with ordinances responding to the EPA survey, one-eighth
of the cities were responsible for eighty-three percent of total enforcement
activity. •* Given the high rate at which such problems as transportation noise
were cited, the low rate of enforcement actions on the part of the other seven-
eights of communities must be taken as a sign of program failure in the pre-
ponderance of cases. Since nationwide data on program success is poor, however,
it would be highly valuable for communities undertaking new programs to attempt
to quantify the progress of their controls against, baseline measurements, and
to communicate their results to the EPA.
Implementation and Organization of Noise Control
Noise control has been implemented on its own, and as part of a number of
other departments in the local government. Table 37 shows some of the options.
From the results, and from other information in the survey which described the
activity of the agencies, it was found that those noise control organizations
which were in environmental departments or on their own were the most active,
and those included with uhe police department were least active.26
Table 37
Responsibility for Noise Control
Public Health 20%
Environmental 18%
Police 23%
Planning 14%
Building 9%
Other 15%
177
-------
The reasons for this 'are not clear. The police have a large number of
duties, so in some communities noise control, may not get sufficient emphasis
when included within the police department. On the other hand, it has been
traditional to include nuisance noise control functions with the police, and the
inactive communities may not have added further functions and may not require a
separate department.
In general, though, a noise control organization will be most effective
and most credible when it is either part of a general environmental pollution
abatement department or, in large enough cities, on its own. EPA suggests
that a population of 500,000 is sufficient to support a separate department.
For this reason, the Model Ordinance is written for an environmental control
department, although it could be modified to define an independent group.
ORDINANCES
The Model Community Noise Control Ordinance, prepared for and published by
the EPA, is quite broad in scope and is well drafted. The introduction in the
EPA materials provides most of the background needed to instruct a community
in the purposes and design of the ordinance, and in the areas of potential
modification to meet the community's specific needs. As noted by the EPA drafters,
the section of the ordinance dealing with enforcement will be the one most likely
in need of revision to make it conform to local practice and law. The Community
Noise Ordinance Handbook provides a number of useful options, for enforcement
and standards, and should be acquired by any community serious about setting up
.a noise program.
Special enabling legislation for noise control may be necessary in some
instances. EPA and the Council of State Governments have developed a model
enabling act for local noise control programs (see Appendix VI-2), coordinated
with the powers required in local communities. In most states, however, such
special enabling legislation will not be required, because the communities already
have the necessary powers. The final draft of this Model state ordinance was
written at the Second National Symposium on Environmental Legislation in 1973.^
According to the introduction to the act, it
...attempts to give the state maximum authority
to regulate noise pollution consistent with the
preemptive provisions of the Federal Noise Control
Act of 1972.
For the purposes of this chapter, Title 3 is the most significant portion. It
contains the provisions enabling local governments to produce noise control
plans, which include:
1. Noise levels which will not be exceeded in specific zones;
2. Procedures for implementing transportation system plans;
3. Plans concerning land use;
178
-------
4. Requirements of building designs;
5. Implementation procedures;
6. Strategies for compliance with state and federal regulations; and
7. Noise restrictions for construction activities.
These powers are sufficient to enable local government to adopt an ordinance
similar to the EPA model ordinance included in Appendix Vl-1.
The California noise insulation ordinance for new construction is given in
Aooendix VI-3.
179
-------
Appendix VI-1
EPA 550/9-76-003
MODEL COMMUNITY NOISE CONTROL ORDINANCE
UST OF PROVISIONS
CONTENTS
MODEL COMMUNITY NOISE CONTROL ORDINANCE
ARTICLE! SHORT TITLE
ARTICLE II DECLARATION OF FINDINGS AND POLICY; SCOPE
ARTICLE III DEFINITIONS AND STANDARDS
00
O
SEPTEMBER 1975
PREPARED BY:
National Institute of Municipal
Law Officers
in conjunction with
The ILS. Environmental Protection Agency
Thit document hn bttn ippt ovtd foe fcnnil
•nilibihty. li d.w not coniiitim i tundud,
tpcciJiuliun.ex icpiUtion.
ARTICLE IV
4.1
4.2
4.2.1
4.2.2
4.2.3
4.2.4
4.2.5
4.2.6
4.2.7
4.2.8
4.2.9
4.2.10
4.3
4.3.1
4.3.2
4.3.3
4.3.4
4.3.5
4.3.6
4.3.7
4.3.S
4.3.9
POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE (ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECT!ON)/(N01SE CONTROL) OFFICEf R)
Lead (Agency/Official)
Powers of the (Environmental Protection)/(Noise Contro')
Office(r)
Studies
Education
Coordination and Cooperation
Review of Actions of Other Departments
Review of Public and Private Projects
Inspections
Records
Measurements by the Owner or Operator
Product Performance Standard Recommendations
Noise Sensitive Zone Recommendations
Duties of (Environmental Protection V(Noise Control) Officer)
Standards, Testing Methods, and Procedures
Investigate and Pursue Violations
Delegation of Authority
Truck Routes and Transportation Planning
Capital Improvement Guidelines
State and Pi-dor.il Laws and Regulations
Planning lo Achieve Long Term Noise Goals
Administer Crjnts. funds jnd Gifts
Periodic Report
PAGE
17
17
17
22
22
22
22
23
23
23
23
23
24
24
24
24
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
26
26
26
vi
-------
00
ARTICLE V DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF OTHER
DEPARTMENTS
5.1 Departmental Actions
5 •> Departmental Cooperation
5.3 Departmental Compliance with Other Uws
5.4 Project Approval
J J Contracts
5.6 Low Noise Emission Products
5 7 Capital Improvement Program
ARTICLE VI PROHIBITED ACTS
6.) Noise Disturbances Prohibited
, Music.! Instruments ind SimiUr
Devices
6.1.2 l.oudsPrtkor> 'Public Address Systems
6.:.J Street S,il^>
6.2.4 Anmuh and Birds
6.25 LcwJinS •">'' Unloading
626 Conjunction '
6 ;.7 VtluJ-- or Motorboit Repairs ind Testin«
6^'s Aitporl and Aircraft Operations
6 ' 9 Pbccs of Public Entertainment
6.:. 10 txpliftivi-i. Fiiearms. and Similar Devices
6 : 1 1 Poui-red MoJcl Vehicles •
6 "• II Vibration ,
6.M 3 Sutionar> Non-Emer^-ncy Sisnalinj Device*
6.: M Emcigcncv Sicnjluif Devices
6.MS Moiothoati
6.^..I6 Noise Sensitive Zones
6.M1 Domestic Power Tools
6.M8 Tampans
ARTICLE Vlt EXCEPTIONS AND VARIANCES
7.1 Emergency Exception
7.2 Special Variances
7.J Variances for Time to Comply
7.4 Appeal*
Vii
PAGE
26
26
26
26
27
27
27
27
27
27
2B
28
28
29
29
29
29
29
30
30
30
30
31
31
31
32
32
32
32
33
33
33
34
35
ARTICLE VIII SOUND LEVELS BY RECEIVING LAND USE
8.1 Maximum Permissible Sound Levels by Receiving Land Ute
8.2 Correction for Character of Sound
8.3 Exemptions
ARTICLE IX MOTOR VEHICLE MAXIMUM SOUND LEVELS
9.1 Motor Vehicles and Motorcycles on Public Rijhis*>f-*'ay
9.1.1 Adequate Mufflers or Sound Disiipalive Devices
9.1.2 Motor Vehicle Horns and Signaling Devices
9.1.3 Refuse Collection Vehicles
9.1.4 Standing Motor Vehicles
9.2 Recreational Motorized Vehicles Operating Off Public
Rights-of-Way '
ARTICLE X LAND USE
10.1 General Provisions
10.2 Construction Restrictions for Habitable and Insiitulio.iil Structures
10.3 Recreational Area Restrictions
)0.4 Site Study Requirement
10.5 Commercial and Industrial Construction
'10.6 Sound fron New Transportalion Systems in Residential Areas
10.7 Equivalent Measurement Systems
10.8 Zoning Ordinance or Comprehensive Plan
10.9 Truth in Selling or Rcming
10.10 Appeals
ARTICLE XI ENFORCEMENT
11.1 Penalties
11.2 Abatement Orders
11 J Notice of Violation
1 1 .4 Immediate Threats to Health and Welfare
It. 5 Cilizcn Suits
11.6 Other Remedies
IJ.7 ScKTjbilily
11.8 Effective Date
vlii
PACE
36
36
36
37
37
38
38
38
39
39
40
40
<0
41
42
43
43
43
43
44
44
44
44
44
45
4 5
45
48
48
48
-------
00
ro
TABLES
Tj!-le I. Sound Levels by Receiving Land Use
TJV:.- 2. Molor Vehicle and Motorcycle Sound Limits
Tjb!.- 3. Recreational Motorized Vehicle Sound Limits
Tjblc 4. Continuous Sound Levels
laVs 5. Impulsive Sound Levth
TjM.- 6. Pron>ions Undfr Which Civil Actions Miy Be Commenced
FACE
36
37
39
46
46
47
PREAMBLE TO THE MODEL COMMUNITY
NOISE CONTROL ORDINANCE
INTRODUCTION
Pwpose
The Model Community None Control Ordinance (model ot Jinancty is imencVc: to be
I basic tool which communities, both larje and small, can ilse to cur.str.ict noise control
ordinances suited to local needs and conditions. The complete mcJcl ordinal:^-, i::..-_:-;
optional provisions, is perhaps most suitable for larger commur:i!:.-s. with por •.:!-:: >r?s ci'
•bout 100.000 01 more. Smaller communities and larje comrm:;iiiiis »ith lin.,i<.-J rc^ ::e.-s
may wish to adopt only those provisions which atMrett iheir imM p'esvns r°!s- i1'^'"1- ™.
It is imporlanl lhat the community ensure that all proxiuoiKa^>|-i.--i ^icKi!.-:i; ir. i.'..!a-:-i
to local nroJs and coniJilrons: iljai M provisions arc conMSK'nl \\ :•.'.: cr..- jr)o:!:.-r. »ii.. c:, .1
local taw. anil with Slate anJ I cJcialljw: jud. linjlly. ilut ^11 ;-ro. %.*•;.. ,n.• .-|..-r j:.J ::...:•
wise well drafted so that enforcement problems will be mininn/i-d.
Background
This model ordinance is an outgrowth of the Fedeul None Control Act of 1 97; (49
UiC. { 5 4901 et seif.) jnd the tremendous increase in intere>l rffjrtJinj nci^ abjt;menl
and con'rol which Ihc Act has precipitated. Many exniing communii;. noi« orJi.ijncss are
based on outmoded model ordinances and/or the common 1»» appiojch to roi^- ^ortrcl
which relics exclusively on difficult to enforce nuisance provisions ft I.I!L- i!ii' r:cJ-.-l
ordinance preserves common law with Article VI provisions r'olnhi:::r noi-,; J»:^rr;n^L-s.
it also contains definitive performance standard* for motor vehicles j^J oi!..-j ^OI.I.L-S of
community noise. The increase in reliable monitorin; equipment juiUM. 10 kk jl (^xerr.-
mcnts, coupled with definitive standirJs incorporatevt into lool noix- control or J;njr.vs.
should result in ordinances which arc more easily enforceable Hun many hue been in the
It is anticipated thai ananalagous model ordinance will form r"i of a oerl-hook on
community noise abatemcnl and control lo be published by th>- L'.S. tn>irornu-ntjl Proicc-
tion Agency during Lite 1975. In addition toconljinint (he model ordinance t rvrhjps »ilh
lx
-------
t!:»ci:»iiorisof 3 number of alternative provisions), the workbook miy contain chapters on
the U';j! t^*is of noise control, the hejlth effects of noise am) various enforcement approaches.
AMVio.:;.•)• the model PI Jtnance will stand alone as a legal document, for proper enforce-
n.r! !<•-• ('::•• i\>:i.iij nimi additionally have 3 code of recommended practices or rules and
r.c. :_;:„•-.. A ...'-. cue c.'n.'ial -jvcificjlions for sound measuring equipment and mcasurc-
r.'.-r: ":.'. J . .•.. ~[ i;:\ Jo,, urn*::: I s.'iouM also provide detailed proccduics for measurements
to u: I.--,.' l\ r *. r'j::; provisions of I he orJinjnce. such as motor vehicles and stationary
so. :.-> T,- j--:-: ccvv.iii,.:.!;!.1* in t.'ie development of 3code of recommended practices. EPA.
;: -:. •: ^ . j r - J.I voJv- »hic!>, v.hcn completed, will be sent lo recipients of the model
c:_:r --..c.
communMie,. Each community h» Its own set of environment:!, health. ecor,oni
other goals it wishes to attain. Each community .!*> has ,1< own con.,(un. on cf
S£ «d .neir impoc, which H wish, to con.ro,. The Icvc, and e^n, o ^
fullv within the purview of local decision. Of course, locality »>!! «.,sa to cO..,.-
±S"ac "•
• .War,« « ^'.. ll- .S. En,
ic,nd
.....
*-.«• H
.r :..e
,r ,„ Je
.,._r ;^!
. ,.-.._.
. ; _..o.
• • '•• -
Protection Agency, March 1974).
l::I-;rrf
CO
ca
L>m!np of Various Provisions
• c.-' .•« of th< mpJi-l ordinance can most readily be obtained by reiding the List
- V- i::n a corv.niurut} determines which activities it wishes to icgulatc, the
. r . '. J prcn:»-ort or pfOUMons can be located by referring to this list.
-*.; :' :,..•! I'-e I >-I of Prov ;sions suepests that certain acts may be prohibited by
.v". ;•: -:--.'i. 1 T „• \.:np.'. uv- ol a nui*y go-cart could violate Section 9.2
. '...: W .i.l.'sOjViali.-i;: Oil PuNic Kiglih-Of-Way"), as well as Section 6.1 (Noise
.-•'. It r.jv tc ilut a commumt)•devices sucli multiple coverage. In tins case,'
-t -, •••••i I1.; ov.ner or opeiator of a noisy go-cart would probably come under
, :• •• :.- ,-as:lj cv.lprceJ. but could come under both provisions violated, at the
.: :'•.. i !'k r..-:::,:it aeencs II a coinmumlv does not desire such multiple cover-
..: . -1 ..i ivri iin pMUMc.'ii or it U'n ewmpt acts covered by olher provisions
;!.• ^c-..-r...'*. Such inodil'icjlions deserve careful consideration, however, so that
: r -.Mv the OrJinjnce more than desired or otherwise jeopardize enforcement.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
P(.hc>
n;; Lcveb
In l!::s rr)p,l:l ordinance, recommended values for sound levels in the performance
s:j.-J_.'J- .ju- :\.'n uiiuiieJ in most cases. Sut'fOileJ limes for Hie curfews on the hours
c: 1 . wC::Jn»t ul jctiMliesor the operation of equipment hnvc also generally been omitted.
Tl -• i.-j»o : fo; ::., « om^sions is that tlie ijuflers of the ordinance feel that there is no singte
r -T l ,: l..^l ^j-i t.' chosen fur c-jch provision that would be appropriate for all types of
Preemption
Under the Noise Control Act of 1972 (49 U.S.C. ? 5 *«0\ fi .«, >. «'"="»»; °'
,ocal authority will become preempted on the effective date of rec,la«,cm ....-lo, c ..
U S Environmental Protection Agency pursuant to Sections (v ! - ar.u I i o. t ..s A.t in
this discussion, we will present Die scope of Federal prcenv-ti.-n - 1 M~~ ^ - I r^_ _J '
of the model ordinance which were draneJ *holl> or parii^.1:. to ic-;'^-- :o ' - :--
prccmption.
An overall requirement to monitor Federal preemptive r.-ji.L!io:is -J to i -T-^:= ^
• them in the locul noise ordinance is conumcd in Section 4..vo I!) I. 1 !:•> >•->- ••--• f'^- •--'
tlut at such time as Federal regulations become elfecuve «!,Ui ,:e b> l.-v rr.. .... c.
the laws of State and local jovctnmenls. the EnvironmeniJ P.ol.-.tion O::i..,r, N.-.v. ^r..-
trol Office(r) (EPO/NCO) shall review the provisions of the lo.al t.rd:nir..e vv:.:.:. ni> , e
affected and make appropriate recommendations for chantes to the c.ty cour.c.. k-t,sia.u
body.
The purposes of including such , provision in this ordinance are to fac.l.la'.c the cocrii-
«lion of the local noise control efforts w,th the Federal noi* rrcsum jr.J to ic.^e t..e
possibility Of defendants raising Federal preemption us a dei.-,.^ to Jiart«:, ol lool la»
viol.)tions.
With regard to (he scope of preemption, the preemptive proton of Seciicn . oi ihe
Noise Control Act differs considerably from those of Sections I , and k. 1.;.- Sect.on
provision is relatively narrow, prcvmplins local bvvs covcnnc new proJi:,l r.c.-e ™^™
levels which arc directed at the manufacture or sale ol su.li prodiut*. I he P^«i| n^ r
visions of Sections 17 and 18 are very btoad.prccmpt.ng local no,* la«s»huti ailed UK
operation of interstate motor and rail carrier vehicles.
-------
00
*»
In Section 6. lubscction 6(eX 1) provide* that, after the effective date of an EPA regu-
lation prMt-riSn: noiv,- emission loeU for a speciflc new product or component, no Stale
or poluiwal iut-Jivivion thereof may adopt or enforce with raped to that particular new
product or ..-omponont any law or regulation wliieli sets a noise emission limit on such pro-
duct (or eor:;f«n? nl I enforceable afjinx iht manufacturer of tlic pro Jucl, applicable at the
time ol vj!.'. uiiioi >IK!I lj» of ri'Ciitjiion is Kkiuical to the Fcderjl rctnbtioM. Thus, (he
fTfem^licn i> j;jin»l Slate an J local laws which re£Ulut<; the noi« levels of a new product
(i.e.. i j-luu~. ' w*><-h Iws not yet been sold to the first retail purchaser) and which, at any
time. ir,-.r.Kt de maniiljcturer of llic proJuct.
State anJ local governments, under subjection 6(cK2l, retain authority lo control
|«cniu.'t> l>> jil other available means. Thisiubseciion states that nothing in this section
pitkluJii or J.-ni.-> the rifhl o( Sute or local government to establish jnJ enforce controls
on cr.iitor.r.-.cmal no>>e anJ sources lhacof lluouth llw lieensing. regulation, or restriction
of the me, 01 oration, or movement of any proJuct or combination of products.
Thui. although 3 kval fcnernmenl may not enforce i noniuVntica) local law regarding
the nc^e l.-ve! <-f an EPA-regulaicd new product which affects the manufacture or sale of
such rruju-"t. &•< I"'1' *o\irnment mjy refuljte the product noise impact through regula-
tion* IT. !':•:.. '-Me ae-in>t ihc owner or o(pital lone, or requirements for rx'iiodic inspection anJ licensing ol the
Broji.-r fre.'mptivr coverage is found injections l7(cKI)snd l8(cHU. These sections
provtJ; ir.ji. ji'ici thetlTectirt date of an EPA regulation applicable to noise emissiorxs from
interstate uil or motor carriers, no State or political subdivision thereof nuy adopt or en-
fo.-CJ j-.» Ha.-.iJarJ applicable lo the *ime noise source unless such standard is identical to
•the Fe^trjIs'.jnJjrd. However. Sections I7(c)(2)and 18(cX2) provide llut nothing in these
sec!:crs •..'-.-" J:niri>h or enhance the tiiihl of State apd local governments lo establisli and
enforce st *r.Jar J> or controls on levels of environmental noiw or to control, license, regulate,
Miestrut tli; use. opera lion, or movement ot any reguLIed product if two conditions occur:
I. the EPA Administrator, after consultation willi the Secretary of Ihe Department
of Transportation, detcrmires that vuch local law ts necessitated by special local
conditions, ind
2. if he determines that such local law is not in conflict with the EPA regulations.
Thuv.cn tl.c effective dale of Iru tPA regulations under Section l6((Xlobcr 15, 1975)
tnd Sfvtion I ' r undetermined JS yet), local Eovcrnmenls ihoulJ review on> oidiiiancc provi-
vo-s J.T '•• ''• 10 nolit' erii>uor.s resulun; from the uw or operation of motor vehicles with
impacted areas.
Hearing Board and Ad.hury Council
nrcfn to atili« a Hejnrf BojrJ (or iri
courts.
-------
The Cit} /County may also wish to use I Hearing Board lo make determinations on
Special Vjru.ices I Section 7,2) and Variances for Time to Comply (Section 7.3), Thii
would free IPO SCO personnel lo perform otKcr tasks under the ordinance. However, the
EPO. NCD tOulJ still be consulted on technical matters.
If the Cil) /County decides to have a Hearing Board, the terms of existence and opera-
tion o; t!:e BoarJ shojM be specified in the ordinance.
A Noise Control Advisory Council should also be considered by the City/County. The
fur.ctic..> o:" tins cuuncil could include providine (I) advice on development of lite noise
control; ro.-rjiu; < 2) rc^o:iin;endjt:ori! OH winch provisions ol' (lie model ordinance sliould
be ir.J__'?J in the City County ordinance; (3) recommendations on sound level values and
curfev, periods for the various pros i>ions, and (•)) stimulation of public interest on noise
abatcir.,-11 Tins Council couM also be responsible for writing the periodic reports, specified
in Section -)..«.9. concerning the progress of the locjl noise conirof program.
SPECIFIC PROVISIONS
00
tn
Article Hi - Definitions
1. Section 3.2.16. Definition of "Motorboal"
A community which serves as tn international port miy wish to explicitly exclude
vesssli in :r.;ernational commcrct from the definition of motor bott. since many such vessels
»oulJ :i effectively prohibrted from using the port (under Section 6.2.15, Motorboats).
'. Section 3.2.29. Definition of "Sound"
The term "sound" is generally u«d as the operative word in thii ordinance rather lhan
the urn "noi«" This is to ivoid the problem of associating "noise" wilh a sound that ii
"dMurhnf " or "unwanted", with the attendant possibility that in order to prove a violation
of the oi J:p.jrce. proof mu>t f-e given that the sound had indeed been "Jislurbine" or
"ur.w a-iU'J". Because the substantive provision* of the ordinance have been narrowly drawn
»nd ofiin coruiii objective critciu. proof of jn additional subjective element is unnecessary.
3. Section 3.;.". Dtfiniiion of "Person"
The definition of person does not include Federal agencies and departments. This is
because 1,; Jl dcc:Mon> hav« not yel determined the extent of a locality's authority to bring
action Ji'jimt the Fedeial covcrnmont for noise control violations.
Seelion 4 of the Noise Control Act of 1 972 requires that all departments, agencies, and
instrumentalities of the executive. Icpslitivt. and judicial b»nc!i«of tl« Federal Cos.-rnnen
comply with Federal. State, interstate, and local requirements respectn-.f eontro. ar. a. ele-
ment of environmental noise to the same extent that any person is subject to such rc^re-
ments The Federal Courts of Append decidins cases under idenn^l Ijr.J-.uw ir> -^ "•>*
Air Act. have disagreed as to whether tins lanjuafe extc:.^ to aJm.n.Mut^Jas ue.l as >-!>•
na v 5,-rtrr. SO: F. Id I :.'S.? C,r ,9 -.
Com^a.M.ofKtnn.ckyvRK.M.. .
Kuckelshata is pending before the Supreme Court. anJ a TO- •l.:i'.e:-. e! i. ;.-<.... .> ->O
Further qwslioni, exist as to whether a State or loc.-l ein,rr-.-..nt .UP. tr: •.: ,:.-..o.: .r_, .»
the Federal GovernmL-ni for violations of their noise controlbvvs.t.-c'.iL.v".^. .-•-.- a...
Accordingly, the key definition of "person" in the model orJ^un.c. «r.Ui s:r^> -> an
applicability section, docs not include tiu: Federal Govcrnm.-nt.
requir
In the absence of su.h spetificity, Section 4 of ihe No,,e*Co:-trol A,, con!ir.U« to
uire tl.ut che Federal Covcrnmenl comply with the local orJm^e. Ho»oa. -.1 is .'.t. t
each community to determine Ihe position it will lake v.-nh r,-^t to .1-.- relev.r.t ivs-.«.^
such as whether the Federal Government must comply witl: idmir.isttat;'..- r^-' •*••••• -•-
whether penalties, orders, and enforcement action, will be c:reclcd at the Fc...-r,[ Govern-
ment under Article XI (Enforcement).
ArUck IV - Powers and Duties of the (tnvironmental Protection) '(Noise Control) Office,.»
1. Resolvine Interdepartmental Conflicts
Section 4 2 4 (Rcv,cw of Actions of Other DepartmemsK Scct.on 4.2.5 ni> *.»..
to specify in the ordinance a methoJ for resolving such lOi'.lVts. r".i-;'» -> ---or-'-•-- ••-
city council, county board of supervisors, mayor, etc.. to r.efotute dilf.'rcr.e. ^ rr,..ve
final decision.
2 Education
Section 4 2 2 authorizes the (Environmental Pioteciiont acnon^^
ap..insl it by the 1-1'O. Tlic KPO officer should use his discretion in hanJIms nututs t! t..is
type.
-------
3. Review of Public and Private rVojeett
of ..V o.v,rjn;, V ""Ie SOU"d ICVeU °f SOUnd '"*»"«" i« violation
•he ro
00
tTi
impacting
^nV?c[^
^">/Co.mty w.shes to I,,,,,, siuu.ion. whc
*• l-ii
ll Lcvcls by """""* una LV) -
Jcierimncd without jn im|K.i:ll-on un
s s,,UJ,cd. so a wa,,h arrant ,s no, needed ,„ these
Article Vlll - Sound Lewis by Receiving Und Vte (Defining Und tie Districts)
Article Vlll sets property line sound limits Tor the broad receiving IjnJ utt citeroriet of
residential, commercial and industrial. Many communities are employing this type of quanti-
talive limit to provide stronger legal control over undesirable sound levels Hurt is attainable
with an ordinance containing only nuisance provisions.
If the community land use/zoning code accurately reflects Ihe actual u the U~J :» icr.tA
and the way it is actually used (e.g., commercial esublishmeniMn a re»iJe::t;j! rcr:e>. or if
Iliere are large tracts of unzoned land, Ihe community mjy prclcr to bj>e rrc|.vr!j. line
limits on Ihe actual use of the land. This would provide greater protection lor impacted
properties.
A related mailer to be considered in controlling property line noise is that of the
occasional non-conforming land use. An example is the ca>e of a sinele rovi^'tice: io.'jteJ in
an industrial area. It may not he possible for several manufacturers im|!.icl:r>? the r.'s:-;n;t
10 lower their noise levels (o meet the limit specified lor ttsijcn'.iil ;rcj5. SitLj!ior.» of this
type will require some discretion in cnl'orceinent.
Figures 1. 2, and 3 summarize graphicjlly the properly line loeU set by current muni-
cipal noise ordinances.
Article X - Land Use
The basic purpose of the Article X land use planning provisions is to ensure that no new
residences, institutions or recreational areas are constructed in hif\\ noise areas, as determined
by the appropriate sections. Although Ihe Article was drafted to siand in JepenJvnity from
the existing community land use planning or zoning systems, it is irnporiaM for a commLrily
considering enactment of this Article to siu'dy Ihe interaction ot Article N »!t!i fie Ijrd use
planning anO/or poningbwiand to reconcile them where rKY^\jr>. It »:jv be t.-iter. for
example, to enact Article Xasan amendment to JM existing Ijr.J ii»_- |ju r.it::.-r :::jn js a
part of the noise control ordinance. Furthermore, rvcjusc lh^ Article effecinelv reKMV*
land subject to its provisions, the community may want 01 n.'.'J 10 t.ike >|Vv.ijl ncjs^rci
before eiucttnvnt of this Article. These may include J general iJ^Miifu'jt.L'ii of llie areji thai
will be affected by these pruvivions.
-------
AVIMAt.t It** ** n.
AVIIMU.I HH.HI »| J*
tlltHM* ftAVIMl |Mlt«
II* Cllllt «M**MIM 1MMU
•E.
J
MMIOHTtO lOUNO llvf 1M M*
Figun 1. Fixed Source Noise Levels Allowable tt Residential District Boundaries
187
-------
o
03
00
g.
5
Arllcte XI - Enforcement
Provision* in (his Article are more likely (o need revision to conform with loi-jl Ijw
than other provisions of the moilel ordinance. For example, the Oily County mjj wish 10
make violations of Ilie ordinance "infractions," similar to minor traffic violjiions. nt!:cr i^n
misdemeanors, due to the stignu altjchcd to such violations
The City/County may wish toensuie that the public is reasonably u-tlt-informcJ of
jctivities proliibiicd by ihc ordinance pcfori- fully «ffcctuj|::ii: n» ont'ori\rin.':i: p r-.'-:rjin. Fcr
example, the City/County may utilise a di-crttionary rohi:;. •;!' i>i-i"? in -kjt'i:rer; crJ.-r
fora fif:.t viobtion. followed liy a citation for the original \-,o!jt;un. it t!\- jl-j:.-™1..::! crJ.T
is not complied with. This approach is provided lor in Section 1 1-' ' A'.^uir.'.-t OrJi1:1. j:'.»J
would be used for violation* tlul arc presumed to be uni:iU':ilionjl Ihj I TO NCO :"_>
wish to fsljblisli guidelines for use ol the abjicmenl order, injicat .:iy. for i'\j'r,;-!i' j; ;-ro
priate types of violatiom foj which an order may be issued ;mJ nuvimum time r^rio- of sn
order.
The enforcement scheme contained in this ordinance also includes 2 prtniiiot; fjr ci::;.%n
suits (Section 11.5). The ail vantage of the citi/cn suit ii-.TDjeh .'•> that r^n; nc!_: -r.scf
the ordinance which the 1:PO/\CO Iw. iJiMifl'n.ient revj'.ir >.•.•> 10 rro».'CJt.' c^v. t-: ',.- .'..\.
dealt with by persons affected by the violjiion. PJO'.IMUM* ,.::,..; v.:.:.:. .-:-.• .i:..1;- ..r »:..•
another arc limited to those listed in Table VI, to minimize ih,1 po»i^;l.l> o: "i.^r^>sr:.e.:t"
suits.
Section 1 1.3 (Notice of Violation) is incomplete in Kieral respects for easy :ijpiation
to the local law of the particular City/County.
Section 11.4 (Immediate Threats to Health and Welfare) proiides the CTO SCO »t:h
the authority to force immediate abatement of-sourccs prod-.icins sound int.'n^ :.^> thai rot
only violate the ordinance hul are also unquestionably lumiuil to the h.'aUh of the fyt!:.-
exposed to them. The sound levels regulated (see Tables IV jnj Vi are Jvlr.erjtely jt-t h:;.'i.
Because there is no procedure in this provision lot bjlancuii; ; i:;-':i. h.-jli!i v,j;!i e.-or.orr,:; or
other ronsidcrations; public health is the sole determinant. The tieilth anJ we'.tjrc ctiter:cr.
for the levels sot is a temporary threshold shift of JO dB at
Subsection (b) limits the applicability of this provision to impacts on members of tf e
general public who arc involuntarily exposed to the sound I mplcnee e\ro»i.res at their
workplace are exempted bctjuic employee sound evposure level, are recubtcj ur.Jer the
Occupational Safety and Health AcH 29 U.S.C. 55 6b9rrir?. t!9?0)|.
13
-------
Sc >ere sanctions foi noncompliance with the order ire provided for in subsection (d),
to that i.1:.1 vcuiiJ will not continue to be a detriment to public health. If (he order is unjusth
fi.-J a .uurl c.in r» jlijaw or suspend il soon after the order is issued, in a mandamus type
rrt'.-.-.-u'i'.t- T!ii» remedy i» contained in subsection (c), which may need lo Ix modified to
cjr.iorr: with lo^j! proccJure.
I'; ,:.T S.-.UDi) II 6iOlhcr Remedies), common law and suttitory remedies previously
L--.J lo ;.ijL:; i'\u1'.>!ir sour.J will iiill remjin avjlljble It is desirable 10 retain such
U'-i:_i' .5 to j.!o« rflijl- persons ihe posubiliiy of recovering danu;cs or other remedies
for :": .• i.".-.:? ol' i'Vt.-iMso sounJ >ince prnste rtxoi'cry is nol prorideJ for under the
cu- .J:K ,v Ti..~ cru^nj:uc i> intcntled lo expand existing sounit control Jjw, nol to limit il.
MODEL COMMUNITY NOISE CONTROL ORDINANCE
FORMAT
In r.-;^-"f ihe'nwd.'l ordinance it is essential that certain typographical symbols and
f.-ir-.j! ue Jr.J,-r>ioeJ. Several brief rules have been followed in drafting. These are:
\->
00 |. Tl..-lyjterbl contained in square brackets ( I is optional, depending on the needj
a".' iv;\!:'io:> c>l'j eiu-fi eomimrmiy I Of course, communities developing ordi-
*. P.:.••;:,. v> I ) ar< teiicrjlh used 10 ilesigiutc alternative choices, but in some
cjM1* ii-ni jin e\j'!jiutor> iiiloimjiion. depending on the context.
3. B!jtAi must rv filled in by Hie community with appropriatt information.
4. ttlu-reu-r the term !TO NX O appears, the title of the community's lead noise
tnioutmcnl a£eiK> or ol'fuial ^liould be uiwrted.
14
15
-------
MODEL COMMUNITY NOISE CONTROL ORDINANCE
Con:il> ) of __ _ •
AOTICLI..I ,,LCLAR-XTIOX OF FINDINGS .WD-POUICY; SCOPE
M Me'! XRATION OF nNWNtS AND POLICY
"
vO
O
exrtS4ivc souml jnd vra
- ««*« - "«* of itsdt^or
SC Ol't
n, « *»*« ,iu» *p«y " ««
nj,,;1? »,.;»n the limili of UK- iCi(y,Coiiniy) of
ARTICLE.H1 DtFIMIIONS
J I TERMINOLOGY
" A1, l..r.,.,ni^ «« J m ,h,S orJ,nance, no, defined belt.-. ** **|" fT
S,!,^ .,,l,'WV,M< Pufhcn.onsof the AmencwNanon,! Sunchnh
Ir..li1iiu- I ANSH o< n* sucrtsici (xxly.
dBA.
3.2.2 "COMMERCIAL AREA" MEAN'S
((As defined in the community (comprehensive nljnX'uonin; orditunivM.
3.2J "CONSTRUCTION" MEANS
Any site preparation, assembly, erection, sub>t.iruij! repair, aJtcrolion. or
similur action, but excluding demolition, for or of public or pm::ie ri,-h!$-
of-wny. structures, utilities or similar property.
3.2.4 "DAY-NIGHT AVKRACK SOL'ND LEVEL (I-J,,I" MEANS
The 24-hour energy averafc of )!H- A-n'cifhteJ sounJ prcwuic Ic^cl. «i)h
the l:vcls during the period 10:00 p.m. 10 7:00 a.m. the following djy
increased by 10 dBA before svcraginf.
3.2 3 "DEC1BEI (dB)" MEANS
A unit for measuring the volume of a sound, cqui! to TO time* ih? lofj-
rilhm to the base 10 of the ritio of the preiM.re of ihe ifunj i-.;.M..'cd to
the reference pressure, which is 20 micropascj'.s (20 mierjriL'tt ions p;r
square meter).
3.2.6 "DEMOLITION" MEANS
Any disinjniling, intcnliunjl di^tniction or i.'i
i of ^
public or privjtc riglitof-way surfaces, or siinibr property.
3.2.7 "EMERGENCY" MEANS
Any occurrence or set of circumstances involving actual or imminent
physical trauma or property dimjgc which (J'.-rrumJi mrni-Jutc jetton.
3.2.8 "EMERGENCY WORK" MEANS
Any work performed for tlie purpow of prevent int or alK-viaii.?: the
physical trauma or property damage threatened or cjuseJ bj an
3.2.9 -F.NVIRONMr.NTAL PROTrCTlOX OFFICE(R),SOISL CONTROL
OFFICL(R) (EPO/NCO)" MHANS
The municipal aijcncy or department having lead ri^non^bilily tor ttm
Ordinance. (If no sueli agency it Ueticiuted. Ilic term Mull IIK-JII the muniei-
pat offieial having lead responsibility for this ordinjnee./
17
18
-------
3 , ,0 "EOnVALENT A-WEIGHTED SOUND LEVEL (U,)" MEANS
•*•-**" . •..-.:— *MJ! limr ntrnOfi
un'..-» o:!icr»i« specitied.l
, M I "CROSS VEHICLE WEIGHT RATING (GVWRV MEANS
r ih 1 1,- i nanufKturcr as the recommended maximu
™» :n=r^^.
, M* "IMPULSIVE SOUND" MEANS
^^
--MOIOR CAKRH K VL...CLE LNGAGU1) IN .NTEKSTATE
niou-i carr.cn engaScJ m interstate commerce.
MOTOR VEHICLE" MEANS
etted u, -he mo-or veh,,c co.e of „, St,«c,/(AnV vch.c c .hlch .
not iiuluJin;: motorcycles.)
-> 16 "MOTORBOAT" MEANS
Any ,c«e. Much opor.ucs on w,,cr and which « P«,*««d by .««««.
fJaJm*. but not Ihmtcd to. b«,». barges, ampl'.b.ous cralt, water
towing devices and ho*er craft.
19
3.2.17 "MOTORCYCLE" M BANS
(As defined in the motor vehicle code of the Suiet '(An unenilo^'d xoicr
vehicle having a saddle for the use of the opcrjior jnJ tuo or thr.v \v'.,•*•'»
in contact with the ground, including, but not limited to, motor »CC'J:.T»
and minibikes.)
3.2.18 "MUFFLER OR SOUND DISS1PATIVC DEVICE" MEANS
A device for abating the sound of escaping gjics of jn i::lenul coi!iSi»t:on
engine.
3.2.19 "NOISE" MEANS
Any sound which annoys or disturbs humans or vvhu'h c^.iscs cr lc::Js to
cause an adverse psychological or physiological cllect on h.inuns.
3.2.20 "NOISE DISTURBANCE" MEANS
Any sound which (a) endangers or injures the safety or health of I^I.TI j*is
or animals, or (b) annoys or disturbs a reason:;!'!-' person cf ncir;.:! *:v.->
tivitics, or (c) endangers or injures personal or rejl ;voj^ rty.
3.2.21 "NOISE SENSITIVE ZONE" MEANS
Any area designated pursuant to Section 4.^.10 ct ilus ordinance for UK*
purpose'of ensuring exceptional quiet.
3.2.22 "PERSON" MEANS
Any individual, association, partnership, or corporation, and nJ-iJVs -i.>
officer, employee, department, agency or instruMicni J:t> of j Si.;e or ar.y
political subdivision of a State.
3.2.23 "POWERED MODEL VEHICLE" MEANS
Any sclf-propdied airborne, walcrbornc, or landborne plane, vessel, or
vehicle, which is not designed to carry persons. inthiJin;:, but no: limited
to, any model airplane, boal, car, or rocket.
3.2.24 "PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY" MEANS
Any street, avenue, boulevard, highway, sidewalk or alley or similar place
which is owned or controlled by a governmental entity.
20
-------
VC
(O
3.3.2S "Pt'DLIC SPACE" MEANS
Any real property or slruclurcj thereon which in owned or controlled by
a governments! entity.
3.:.:6 "PURE TONE" MEANS
Any so.mj «!jieh cjn bo distinctly heard as 3 single pitch or a set of iingJe
pi Mies. For i he purposes of l!iis ordinance, t pure tone shall exist if the
onc-ilmd oc-i.ive b.md sound pressure level in the band with the tone
exec*: J-, I hf jniliiiK-trii: averse of the sound pressure levels of the two
iOM!h:uo;ii O!ic-l!ilTj octave bands hy 5 cJU for center frequencies of 5OO
Hr jncJ jhovc jnd by 3 ilB for venter frequencies between 160 and 400 Hz
DiiJ by I 5 i!B for center frequencies less than or equal to I 2} Hi.
3.2.:7 "RIAL PROPERTY BOUNDARY" MEANS
An imj'ln^ry line along the gronnj suiface, and its vertical extension,
wilier! s.-pjijfes the real property owned by one person from that owned
by .mother person, but not including inlra-building real property divisions.
3.:.:8 -RLS1DLNT1AL AREA" MEANS
((As defined in the community fcumprchemiie pbn)/fzoning ordinance)).
?.:.:<> "KMS SO!'X!-> PRFSSL'Rf Ml-.ANS
The M|iurc root of the time averaged square of the sound pressure,
denoted Prnis-
.V:..-0 "SOI ND" MEANS
An ii^iD-ition in pressure, particle displacement, particle velocity or other
physicJ lurjiueUT, in i medium with imtmal forces that causes com-
picnioii jnd ureljktion of tlul medium. The description of sound may
inJuJV jny chjrjcterislit: of such sound, including duration, intensity and
frequency.
.'.:..»i -sousi) ui:vi t" MI:ANS
Tin.- u.-i-hted NOiinJ pn-istirv level obl.iined bv the use of i sound level
nivi,-r j,..l I'u-qiienty "n-liliiip network, such js A, B. orC as specified in
Aii\ri>. jn NJIIOIIJ! Sundjiil^ liHIilnu b|H-cificj(ions for sound level
nh'l>rMA\SI SI.-4 - |07|, or tile Ijtest ippicm-il revinon IhereoO. Ifthc
li.-.)uciii> »ci|:l]nnjcniplo)L-Jis not iiijicjlul. (he A-weiglitinE shall jpply.
3.2J2 "SOUND LEVEL METER" MEANS
An instrument which includes a microphone, amplifier. RMS detector,
Integrator or time averager, output meler, and weijhtirg networks used to
measure sound pressure levels.
3.2.33 "SOUND PRESSURE" MEANS
The instantaneous difference between the actuil pressure asui the averjfe
or barometric pressure at a given point in space, js produced by sound
energy.
3.2J« "SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL" MEANS
20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the RMS sound
pressure lo the reference pressure of ;0niicropj>cals t^t) x ICH' N m-).
The sound pressure level is denoted Lp or SPL and is expressed in decitvJi
3.2.3S "VIBRATION" MCANS
An oscillatory motion of solid bodies of deterministic or rjrdcm nature
described by displacement, velocity, or accclvrjtion with re^rv"! to a
given reference point.
3.2.36 "WEEKDAY" MEANS
Any day Mondjy through Friday which is not a legal lioiidiy.
ARTICLE IV POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE (ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION)/
(NOISE CONTROL) 0!rFICE(R)
4.1 LEAIMAGENCY/OFriCIAL)
The noise control program established by this ordinance shall be admin»-
tered by (title of municipal agency or lead official).
4.2 POWERS OF TMF. (ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION) (SO1SE CON-
TROL) OI-TICE(R)
In order to implement and enforce this ordinance jnd for the general
purpose of sound and vibration abatement jnd control. (Sic LI'O NCO
shall have, in addition toany other authority voted in it, the po»er to:
4.2.1 STUDIES
Coruhict. or cause lo be conducted, research, monitoring, and other
Undies rcljlcd lo sound and vibration.
21
22
-------
«.:.:
V0
u>
EDUCATION
(a) Conduct proframt of public education regarding:
1 1 ) The cauxi, effects and general methods of abatement and con-
trol of noiic and vibration;
12) Th<- actions prohibited by this ordinance and the procedures Cm
reportine violations;
(b) I'ncouracc the participation of public interest groups in related public
information efforts.
COORDINATION AND COOPERATION
(a) Coordinate the noise and vibration control activities of all municipal
(b) Cooperate lo the extent practicable with all appropriate Slate and
Ft'dctjl agencies;
(c) Cuoperatc or combine lo the extent practicable with appropriate
county and municipal acencics;
->|ui".i any oilKr department or agency responsible for any proposed or
lln jl standard, rcpuljiion or similar action to consult on. the advisability
uf reuiing tlic jclion. if there is reason to believe that the action i> not
i'on^i>lent with this ordinance.
4.:.5 RhVltW OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PROJECTS
ReMen inihlii: and private projects, subject to mandatory review or approval
hy other departments, for compliance with this ordinance, if such projects
are likely to «use sound or vibration in vioblion of this ordinance.
•«.:«• INSI'i:CTIONS
tit Upon presentation of proper credentials, enter and inspect any private
property or plate, and inspect any report or records at any reasonable
lime when granted permission by the owner, or by some other person
willi apparent authority to act for the owner. When permission is
refund or cannot be obtained, a search warrant may be obtained from
a court of competent jurisdiction upon showing of probable cjusc to
believe that a violation of this ordinance may c*ist. Sucli inspection
may include administration of any necessary tests.
f(t» Stop my molor vehicle, motorcycle. or motorboat operated on a
pubbcr^f-way, pub|ic vsux. orpub.ic WJItfru fCJ40njt!
suspected of violating any provision of thi. «rJ,innw. ,n! i>su, ,
°thM °' ' '
EPO/NCO
tPO/NCO may reasonably require.)
4.2.7 RECORDS
Require (he owner or operator ofsny commercial or irjustru! a.-iM.v ,o
estabMi a,,d niilmljlfl Iccords Jn- so^e in ^orj'n"
™/Nrn' 3"d Pr0"d"r" Md 3I suc" 'Of;'"on5 «" «»=« » *"
tPO/NCO .nay rc,sorably prescribe and .0 furnish rcrom oflfcc rcsulu
of such measure™.-™ to IHc I:PO/XCO. The (.CO NCO ,njy requi- it-e
Beiiwemenu 10 be conduc,cd in ,hc preu-na- of it» enforu-ra.-,, cffilj,.
4.2.9 PRODUCT PERFORAIAXCE STANIMRD KIICOMMrNJMTIOXS
(a) Develop anil recommenJ (or |iro,iuilj;.;!iy;i 1 1,. f, - .. .,ro..,j .. .
authority) prorMom wsl,hiin« the „,,. a,,d op.r.ixn cr'Jnv plojai,
•ncluJ.ng t|,c specifR-acion of maximum allowjbk wui.d cr.ms on '
levels of such product.
[
prov,5,ons prohibili^g f ,he appropriate wthoritv)
for the de^hon of nui« 5en5,1ivv zone, which tuntein n«,,e scniltl>e
.actmt.w. t.xt!,t,lls quiet ,o,,eis|,al! lv consider.- J ro,sc .ensmve zones
unl.lotlierw.sccVMt.u.cd. NoKc iem.tive act,Mt,cs incMJc >w ne not
lim,te,l to. operations of schools, l.bmies open ,o ,l,e puWic. clmrvhc,
nospitals. and rursini: homes.
23
24
-------
4.3
4.3.1
4.3.2
4.3.3
4.3.4
4J.5
DUTIES OF {ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTKW/tNOlSE CONTROL)
OFFICE(R)
In order to implement and enforce this ordinance effectively, the ETO/NCO
dull within a reasonable time after the effective dale of the ordmance:
STANDARDS. TESTING METHODS. AND PROCEDURES
Develop, I recommend to the appropriate authority.l and promulgate
standards, testing methods and procedures.
INVESTIGATE AND PURSUE VIOLATIONS
In consonance »ith Section 4.1.6. Article XI. and other provisions of this
ordinance, investigate and pursue possible violations of this ordinance.
DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY
Delegate functions, where appropriate under this ordinance, to personnel
within the EPO/NCO and to other agencies or departments, [subject to
approval of I •
TRUCK ROUTES AND TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
(a) Study the cxi«i:>g uw.-roiuiion systems, such as truck toutts within
the comiiiunily;dcicr,i,inei,r.-aS with wnsithriiy to sound and vibra-
lion caused by transportation; recommend changes or modifications
to Uinspotlalion systems to minimize the sound and vibration impact
on residential areas and noise sensitive zones.
(b) Assist in or review the total transportation planning of the community.
inclu Juig planning for new roads and highways, bus routes, airports.
,nd other sysu-ms for public transportation, to ensure that the «mp»ct
Of sound and vibration receives adequate consideration.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT GUIDELINES
Establish noise assessment pipelines for the evaluation of proposed impro«-
ments for the Tjpiial implements budget and program pursuant to Section
5.5. These juiJvlino* Hull jssist in the determination of the relative priority
of each implement in terms of noise impact.
4.3.6 STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS
(a) Prepare and publish (with the approval of
] i list of
Prcpiic anu puousn i*»u"« «»"• *,|'i«w— ^- _ .
those pioOucts mjnufj.tun.-d to meet specified noise emission hmit«
under FcJcul. State, or community la* for which "tampering en-
fotcirnKDt will be conJuctcJ.
(b) Make recommendationj for modifications or amendment* to [his
ordinance to ensure consistency with all Sute and Federul Ij^s and
regulations.
[4.3.71 PLANNING TO ACHIEVE LONG TERM NOISE GOALS
(Develop a generalized sound level map of the (city.'county), a long term
plan for achieving quiet in the (city/county). 2r>J l«:!ii i!ie approval of
.] intcgrite Shis pljn into the planning procrs> of the
(city/county). |
ADMINISTER GRANTS. FUNDS AND GIFTS
Administer noise program grants and other funOs jnd cjfts from public
and private sources, inclujing the Slate and Ft Jcul governments.
43.8
14.3.9)
PERIODIC REPORT
(Evaluate and report,every
yeai(i) following the effective date of
tltis ordinance, on the effectiveness of the (citv Verity I nois? cor:rol
program and make recommendations foi any K-s-vslaiive or b/iprtsiy
changes necessary to improve the program. T1;S rcp'jrt''."'.'. 1. rai^c to
Ihc (Noise Control Advisory EoarJJ'f jppropri.::e j-.:::'.o:i!; i v '.::;'.\ rr.jy
amend it after consultation v.nh ll» UPO NCO. ar.ii t:..n SLiv:n:i i: tc ti:s
(appropriate aulhonty). for approval.)
ARTICLE V DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF OTHER DEPARTMENTS
5.1 DEPARTMENTAL ACTIONS
All departments and agencies &!»{!. to the fullest extent consistent with
other law, carry out their programs in such a manner as to further the
policy of this ordinance.
5.2 DEPARTMENTAL COOPERATION
All departments and agencies shall cooperate with the EPO NCO 10 the
fullest extern in enforcing this ordinance.
5.3 DEPARTMENTAL COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER LAWS
All departments and agencies shall comply »'ith 1\-k!f rjl and Stale laws ind
regulations and the provisions and intent of this ordinance r
-------
in
$.4 r-ROJECT APPROVAL
All department! whose duty it a to review and approve new project*or
chances to existing projects, that result, or may result, in the production
of sound or vibration shall consult with the EPO/N'CO prior to any «ich
approval.
S.S CONTRACTS
Any written contract, agreement, purchase order, or other Instrument
whereby the (city/county) is committed to the expenditure of
do»jr% or more in return Cor goods or services shal! contain provision*
requiring compliance with this ordinance.
$.6 LOW NOISE EMISSION PRODUCTS
Any product which has been certified by the Administrator of the United
Suits Environmental Protection Agency pursuant to Section IS of the
Noirf Control Act as a low noise emission product and which be deter-
mines is suitable for use as a substitute, shall be procured by the city/county
and u«J in preference to any other product, provided that Jtich certified
proJiK-l is reasonably jvailjblc and lias a procurement cost which is not
more tiun 11:5l r--^ ittunt ol the least expensive type of product for
uhi.h it i» ceilil icd » * substitute.
S.7 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
All departments responsible for a capital improvemenb budgel and program
than prepare an analysis of the noise impact of any proposed improvement*
in Kftadjnce wiih noiw assessment guidelines established by the EPO/NCO
pursuant to Section 4.3.5. Proposed capital improvements include land
acquisition, building construction, highway improvements, and utilitle* and
fixed equipment installation.
ARTICLE Vt PROHIBITED ACTS
6.1 NOISE DISTURBANCES PROHIBITED
No person shall unreasonably make, continue, or cause to be m»;
(e) In such a manner as to create i noise disturbance to any person other
than the operator of the device. when opcrilcJ by any pjsscr.;fr on
a common carrier;
(d) This section shall not apply to non-commrrcijl spoken language covered
under Section 6.2.2.
LOUDSPEAKERS/PUBLIC ADDRESS SYSTEMS
(a) Using or operating for any noncommercial purpose any loudspeaker,
public address system, or simitar device between the hours of 10:00
p.m. and 8:00 a.m. the following day, such L''.J! the sound therefrom
creates a rtoisc disturbanix across a residential rcj! property boundary
or within a noise sensitive zone.
(b) Using or operating for any commercial purpose any loudspeaker,
public address system, or similar device (I ) >uch that the sound there-
from creates a noise disturbance across a real property boundary or
within a noise sensitive zone, or (2) bet ween the hours of _ p.m.
and _ a.ra. the following day on a public rijht-o^way or public
space.
-------
v£>
6.:.J STRUCT SALES
Ofurins for sale or selling anything by jhouting or outcry within any rest-
denial or commercial area of the ot,,,J> .Mich crcaic a ,,o,« Ji.lurfcincc across a K«dent»l real property
boundary or »,tlu,. a noise sensitive zone. (This provision shall not apply
lo public zoos, t
6.J.S LOADING AND UN'LOADISG
Loading, unloadins. opening, closing or other handling ofboxes. crates,
coni.,in.-rs. builJinn maieruls. garbage cans, or similar objects between the
hollt, Of p m. and a.m. the following day in such a manner
« 10 causcTrioTsi disluibancc acioss a residential real property boundary
or within 3 noivc sensitise zone.
6.:.6 CONSTRUCTION
0,'cutmxor [>crmutint the operation of any tools or equipment used in
comtuietion, drilling, ot demolition work:
(a) Between the hours of p.m. and a.m. the following day
on wcckJai s or at any lime on (Sundays/weekends) or holidays, such
that the sound therefrom creates a noise disturbance across « residential
real property boundary or within a noise sensitive zone, except for
emergency work of public service utilities or by special variance issued
pursuant to Section 7.2;
(b) At ai> other lime such that the sound level al or across a real property
boundary exceeds an Lcq of dBA for Ihe daily petiod of operatton.
U) This section shall not apply to the us. of domestic power tools subject
to Section 6.2.17.
VEHICLE OR MOTORBOAT REPAIRS AND TESTING
Repairing, rebuilding, modify.ng. 01 testing any motor vehicle, motorcycle.
01 ntotorboat in such a manner as lo cause a noise disturbance across I
Icruial i«l property boundary or within a noise sensitive zone.
S.2.S AIRPORT AND AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS
(a) The EPO/NCO dull consult with the aL-pott prorrictor to recomnenJ
changes in airport operations to minimize any nc.se disturbance which
the airport owner may have auihomy to control in its cjpacity as
proprietor.
(b) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit, restrict, penal-
ize, enjoin, or in any manner regulate the v.'osemcnt of ji'crjfi which
arc in all res)xxtsconducted in SL-cordance w:!.1!. or pursi;;nt Jo,
applicable Federjl laws or refjljtio^s.
6.2.9 PLACES OF PUBLIC ENThKTAINMINT
Operatin", playing, or permitting the operjlion or pb>in? of any nJio.
television, phonojraph. drum, musical instrument, sound ampjiler. or
similar device which produces, reproduces, or amplifies sounJ in a::y place
of public eiitcrt:inr!:L-nt at a sound level greater i.'un <;BA as rezd
by the slow response on a sou:id level m;t;r a; jj-.y point t!ui i^ r.crrr.j'.iy
occupied by a customer, unless a conspicuous a•.•.«! lv;j:t!e s:t:: i^ located
outside suth place, near each public entrance, sl.ilirf "WAKMNG.
SOUND LEVELS WITHIN MAY CAUSH PERM.VNENT HL.AMING
1MPA1RMLNT."
6.2.10 EXPLOSIVES. FIREARMS, AND SIMILAR DL\ 1CLS
TlK use or firing of explosives, fuciirins, or sJn!:!jr Jc\i;es v.-:,:c;! crfjte
impulsive sound so as to cause a noise dislurl-jnce jcross j real prcferly
boundary or on a public space or ri^ht-of-way, withoi.t first ol-tjin;.n£ a
special variance issued pursuant lo Section T.2. (Sjcli perm,; need not
be obtained for licensed game-hunting activities on prop:rty where such
activities are authorized.]
6.7.11 POWERED MODEL VEHICLES
Operating or permitting; the operation of powered model vehicles so as to
create > noise disturbance across : residential teal jropriu boynJary. in
a public space or within a nose sensitive zone beiuivn il;; hours of
p.m. and a.m. the following day. .Maximum sound levdj
in a public sjiace during Hie permitted period cf o;\Tjt.o:i shall eor/orm to
those set forth for residentij! land use in T;t\- 1 p| S.'.t.on S.! a:ij v;-..1.!
be measured at i distance of feet (motet-.) l>.-in a:'.> poini c-: the
path of Ihe vehicle. Mjunuum sound levels for re>iJeiitul prc|vrl> and
noise sensitive zones, timing Ihe permuted period of O|>cralioii, shall be
fovemcd by Section B.I and Section 6.2.16.rej|>eiitiely.
30
-------
6.M2 VIBRATION
Operating or permitting the operation of any device that creates vibration
which is above the vibrjtion perception threshold of an individual at or
beyond the property boundary of the source if on private property or at
feet (niclcril from the source if on a public space or public right-
of-v. jy. For the purpose* of this section, "vibration perception threshold"
nicjni llu- mininiuni crotind-or structure-borne vibraiioiul niolion neccs-
sart 10 CJUM- 3 normal poison lo be aware of the vibration by such direct
mc-ins as. but not limiu-d to. sensation by touch or visual observation of
mutiny objects.
6.M3 STATIONARY NON-EMEKGENCY SIGNALING DEVICES
(a) Sounding or permitting the sounding of any [electronically-amplified]
iif.ia! from any stationary bell, cliiinc. siron, whistle, or similar device.
interned ptimjrily for nonemergcncy purposes, from any place, (for
mare i!un minutes in any hourly period.)
lib) Dot ices used in conjunction with pljces of religious worship shall be
exempt from the operation of this provision.)
|(c) Sound sources covered by this prevision ami not exempted under sub-
section (b) >!ull uo cxcniplod by (jpprcprijie aulliorityl tisitlg
criteria set lonl) in Section 7.;.)
6.:.I4 EMERGENCY SIGNALING DEVICES
ii: i!:e jctititj. pro-
vided that conspicuous signs are displayed indicating the presence of
the zone.
6.2.17
6.2.18
DOMESTIC POWER TOOLS
Operating or permitting the operation of any mechanically powered saw,
drill, sandcr, grinder, lawn or garden tool. snowWower. or similar device
used outdoors in residential areas between the hours of p.m. and
.a.m. the following day so as to cause a noise disturbance across a
residential real property boundary
TAMPERING
The following acts or the causing thereof are prohibited:
(a) The removal or rendering inoperative by any person otlior than for
purposes of maintenance, repair, or replacement, of any noise con-
trol device or clement of design or noise label of any product identi-
fied under Section 4.3.6. The EPO/NCO may, by /csu.'jljon, list
those acts which constitute violation of this provision.
-------
vO
CD
llh) The I intentional) rcmovinf or rendering inaccurate or inoperative of
any sound monitoring instrument or device positioned by or for the
IPO'NCO. provided such device or the immediate area is clearly
labeled, in accordance willi tPO/NCO regulations, to warn of the
potential illegality.)
(cl The us*.1 of a product, identified under Section 4.J.6, which has had
a noivc control device or clement of design or noise label removed or
rendered inoperative, with knowledge thai such action lias occurred.
ARTICLE VII EXCEPTIONS AND VARIANCES
7.1 EMERCtNCY EXCEPTION
The prOMMons of Iliis ordinance shall not apply to (i) the emission of
sound for the purpose of alerting persons to the existence of an emergency.
or (b) I he emission of sound ID the performance of emergency work.
7.2 SPLCIAL VARIANCES
(a) The (F.PO/XC()).'f llejring Board) shall have the authority, consistent
will] tln> section. 10 grant special variances which may be requested
purs-.iant ID Sections 6.2.6 (Construction) and 6.2,10 (Explosives.
Firearms, and Similar Devices).
(b) Any person seeking a special variance pursuant to this section shall
Tile an application with the (LTO/NCO)/! Hearing Board). The appli-
cation s.'iall contain information which deinonstrales that bringing
the source of sound or activity for which the special variance is sought
into compliance with this ordinance would constitute in unreasonable
h.irdsliip on the applicant, on the community, or on other persons.
INotivc vf an application for a special variance shall be published
according lo (junViction^l procedure).] Any individual who claims
lo N: jdvi-rwly al'lctted by allowance of the special variance may file
a stjMiienl vmh [he (tlO/NCOj/dlcaring Board) combining any
mtornulion to support his claim. If lite (CPCVNCOAHcaring Hoard)
finds Hut a sufficient controversy exists rcgaiding an application, a
puMic hearing may be laid.
(c) In determining whetlier crsoiis of not granting the special variance
atjMUI (he adverse impact on (he health, safety, and welfare of person
7.3
affected, the «dversc impact on property affected, and any other
adverse impacts of granting the special variance. Aprlicanis for
special variances and persons contesting special variance? may be
required to submit any information live IKPO, SCO i ill-.vring Hoard)
may reasonably require. In erantirj: or Jcn>iti; an appluMlion. llie
(EPO/N'CO)/(Heuring Board t >lutl place on put-he fi'.e i ccps ci ihj
decision end the reasons for denyine or friiitini1 ihc ipvcial»jri^n^e.
(d) Special variances shall be granted hy notice to the applicant cor'Uin-
ing all necessary conditions, including a time linii: on the permiiled
activity. The special variance shall not become etiirktivc until J\
conditions are agreed to by the applicant. No:ico:np!u:i.e with any
condition of the special variance shall terminate it jn J subiecl the
person holding it to those provisions of this orduuruc r:;'.:!jt::)j the
source of sound or activity for which the spelial \ jriancc was erjnted.
(e) Application for extension of time limits specified in special variances
or for modification of other substantial conditions shall be treated
like applications for initial special variances under subjection (b).
(0 The (EPO/NCO)/(Ifearing Board) may issue tuiiluin.-s tapproved by
1 defining the procedures to be followed in jp; !;. ing
for a special variance and the criteria to be co-.vi^-rcd in J-.-ci;.:-.j
whether to gram a special variance.
VARIANCES FOR TIME TO COMPLY
(i) Within days following the effective date of this ordinance, the
owner of any commercial or industrial source of sound may apply to
the (EPO/NCO)/(ilcaring Board) for a variance in time to comply
with Section 6.2.12 iVibiaiion) or Article VIII. The I I'PO XCO),'
(Hearing Board) shall have the authority, consistent with this section,
to grant a variance, not to euvi'd days from the effective date
of this ordinance.
(W Any person seeking a variance in time to comply shall file an applica-
tion with the (EPO/NCOMHearing Board). The application sl'.jll
contain information which demonstrates that bringing :he tourie of
sound or activity for which the variance issougiil i:ito compliance
•wilh this ordinance prior to the dale requested in Ihc j;>plicalio:i
would constitute an unreasonable hardship on the applicant, on t!ie
community, or on oilier persons. [Xutice of an ai'fticatx'rt for j < jriance
in lime to comply slull be published jccurJin; lo (juri-dictional proce-
dure) ) Any individual who claims to be adversely .if fee ted by jlk>»an,-e
of the variance in lime to comply may file a statement u-jth Hie (EPO'
33
-------
VO
N'CO)/(Hearing Board) containing any Information to support hU claim.
Jf the (EKVNCO)/nd oilier persons of not granting the variance in time
to comply against the ajvi:rsc impact on health, safety, and welfare of
persons alfecicd. ilic adverse impact on properly affected, and any
other adverse impacts of granting the variance. Applicaius for variances
in time to comply jnd persons contesting variances may be required to
submit any information the (EPO/NCOlAHcaring Board) may reason-
ably require. In granting or denying an application, the (El'O/NCO)/
(lu-jn:;: Bojrd) shall |iljc.voii public- file a copy of the decision and
the reasons for denying or granting the variance in tune to comply.
(d) Variances in time to comply shall be framed to the applicant contain-
ing all necessary conditions, including a schedule for achieving com-
pliance. The \jtunce in time to comply shall not become effective
unul all conditions are agreed to by the applicant. Noncompliance
with any contlihcn of the variance sh:!ll terminate lite variance «nd
sur-jcci the p>r»nn iuAtiii;! n to iliose provision* of Iliis ordinance for
which llu' vjiijme was crjntcd.
it) Appl'^aiion fur extension of time limits specified in variances in time
to comply 01 for modification of oilier substantial conditions shall
be Healed like appiicatioi^ fur initial variances under subsection (b),
eicepl that tlic (LPO/NCOj/tMearing Roird) must find that the need
for the extension or modification cleaily outweighs any adverse
impacts of framing (he extension or modification.
(f) The (CPO,\COl'(llcjrinj Board) may issue guidelines [approved by
) defining the procedures to be followed in applying
for a variance in time lo comply and the criteria to be considered in
deciding whether to jjranl a variance.
APPEALS
Appeals of an adverse decision of the (EPO/NCO)/(!fearing Board) shall be
made to the (appropriate court of law). Review of the court shall be (de
NOic)/(>imitcd lo whether the decision is supported by substantial evidence)/
(as specified by the ).
ARTICLE VUt SOUND LEVELS BV RECEIVING LAND USE
8.1 MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE SOUND LEVELS BY RECEIVING LAND
USE
No person shall operate or cause to be operated on private property any
source of sound in such a manner as to create a sound level which exceeds
the limits set forth for Ihe receiving land use category in Table 1 when
measured at or within the property boundary of the receiving (and use.
Table 1, Sound Levels by Receiving Land Use
Receiving
land-use category
R-l.R-2.etc.
(Residential, public
space, open space,
ifricnliuralor
Institutional)
C-l.C-2.ctc.
B-1,11-2, etc.
(Commercial or business)
'M-l.M-2.ete.
(Industrial)
Time
(A) a.m. -(B) pan.
(B) p.m. - (A) »m.
At all times
At all times
Sound level limit, dBA
Ll
L2
8.2 CORRtcTION FOR CHARACTER OF SOUND
For any source of sound which cmiis a pure tone or impulsive sound, the
maximum sound Jcvel limits sei forth in Section 8.! shall be reduced by
<1BA.
8.3 EXEMPTIONS
The provisions of this article shall not apply to:
(a) Activities covered by the following Sections: 6.2.6 (Construction).
6.2.8 (Aircraft and Airport Operations), 6.2.10 (Explosives, Fire-
arms, and Similar Devices), 6.2.13 (Stationary Noncmcrjcncy
35
-------
O
O
- locomotives and cars: and
| (J| (NoJMt.nioii.iry farming eqiii|>mcrrt)/iiK\l al >U reel or 15 Meiers)
\" , . .1 nu'U'T
v. li . i !.( ftR ot 10.000H'».
9.1.2
9.1.3
ADEQUATE MUFFLHRS OR SOUND D1SSIPATIVC DEVICES
(a) No person slut! operau- or ejuu- lo be operjieil jn\ motor vehicle Or
motorcycle not equipped with a muffler or other sotmj Ji»!pjtivc
device in food working order anj in constjnt ojvrutioii:
(b) No jvrson shall remove or render inoperative, ot eaise to k- removed
or lenilered inoperative, other Hun for purpcx.'s of nuinleiunce.
repair,'or replateineiit. any inufller or sounj ilib>i;utive Jexi.e on a
motor vehicle or motorcycle:
(c) The UPO/NCO may. by(;vmlelmes)1regn|jiion> lul'j.M to approval
by J.Jist those aets which eon>:iUito Mol.ilion of tliis
MOTOR VEHICLE HORNS AND SIGNALING Dt VICES
The following aiMsjiJuJ (lie causing thereof arc deelarcj to he in \iola)ion
of this ordinance:
(a) The sounding of any horn or oilier auditory sipi.jtj.e.c'eMcc on or in
any motor vehicle on any public richl-of-w.,y or p'l '•'- *r-'^. except
(as a warning of Jji'terl/tJi provided in (he \v!:.cle ctJc).
|(b) The sounding of any horn or other auditory sier.jlin; J.-vi.v which
produces n sQund level in excess of dUA j[ 'feel
(metcn).
REFUSE COLLECTION VEHICLES
No person shall:
(a) On or after (2 years) following the effective djte of t!::» ordinance,
operaIc or permit the operation of the tompjciinf meclianisni of
any notor vehicle which cofnpjctsrefiiw and wliich creates, isirinj
the conijijc.'iiis tyclc. j sound le\el in excess 01' JBA when
nic.iSLired ;;! feel (r.K'UTs) from jny poml en ihe ^cMc'tf;
(b) Operate or permit the opcrjtion'of tlie compjcr.iis m.-ilvi:i^n of
any molor •.ch.i^ii; v.hic5l t0mpji.ls rcf'.ii.-. 'o^t.v^x;; l!,j liui.r^ cf
p.m. and j m. i.V- follow ir,;; J.iv in j TV -:.Iciy,iJ .iroa
or noi^j sensitive /one;
(c) Colled reluse »itli a refuse culleetion vehicle lvt»cen the hours of
p.m. and a.m. Ihe loHu\Mitj; djj in a roijcniul aroa
or tioi%v' sct^Mti^c /one.
37
-------
to
O
9.1.4 STANDING MOTOR VEHIC'LCS
No pervjn »lull operate or permit the oporation of any motor vehicle with
a J.TO« u'hiele weijilit ratiny (CVWR) in excess of ten tliousunil (10,000)
pounds, or any jvmliary equipment attached to such a vehicle, for a period
longer than minutes in any hour while the vehicle is stationary, for
reasons oilier than traffic congestion, on a public righl-of-w.iy or public
space within I 50 feet (J6 meters) of a residential area or designated noise
sensitive lone, between the hours of p.m. and .a.m. the
following da>.
•
9.: Rl CRi: ATIONAL MOTORIZED VEIIIC'LCS OPLRATINC OFF PUBLIC
RIGHTS OF4VAY
(a) (l.xtept as permitted in subsection (b) or (c).| no person shall
operate or c:iii>t' to be operated any recreational inutori/ed vehicle
off i piil-lie right-of-way insueh a manner that the sound level
emitted therefrom cutecds the limits set forth in Tahlc 3 at a distance
of 50 feel 115 meters) or more from the path of the vehicle when
op.-raied on a public space or at or across the, boundary of private
properly when operated on private property. This section shall apply
to all recreational motorized wtiiclcs. whetlier or nut iluly licensed
and rcfMcrcJ. mcliulmc. but IKK limited lo, cummi.ra.il ur mm-
coinm.-icial racuif teliieles. inulurcyc.'es, to carls, snowmobiles,
amphibious craft, cjm()i;rs and dimi- buggies', bul nol including
nioiorboats.
((b) Permits for motor vcliicle racirtfi events may be obtained from (appro-
priate authority) according to procedures and criteria set forth in
|(cl Speci.il variances for may be obtained from (appropriate
authority) according to procedure and criteria set forth in
Table 3 Recreational Motorized Vehicle Sound Limits
(Measuted at SO Feet or 15 Meters)
Vehicle type
Snow mobile
Motorcycle
Ans oilier vehicle
Sound level, dBA
A
B
C
ARTiCLE X LAND USE
10.1 GENERAL PROVISIONS
10.2
(a) No owner of any land shall commence or cause 10 be commen.ed
construction of any structure covered In S.-ct'o::» !0.:. 10..' 10 5
or 10.6 unless approico1 l«j tl.c r.l'O \C O as p:vu<*cJ n: i.'-.ii'
Article.
(b) Any application for approi-al required In t.'us AriiJe v!-.j!l be sub-
mitted in writing 10 I'M l.'l'O MO. «n!i j tt.;-> :„ !.';.• < U.^.-.'J;.;^
Department).'! An'rojviatc D.-pjriii>.-i!i>. l> [':;.• o« .•:,.- o; :!;,'.'j.-J
on which ilie structure IN proposed to K >.i"i>ir ^d jr. ' *!•./'
loin tlu' following information:
(!) identification of the land on which ,<„ to>,struclK>:i n r:oposcj
(2) Jlu- M.VIJOII of tin, Aft,clc under ..Inc.1! j|TMijl K IL\H!^II-J:
(J) infortiution ami ,.'rtj suppornnp ihc dj,m t'ut if..- jprror^Jlo
ri-quircincn/s u;,'J tv UK't.
(•>) any othi-r information wliith l!u- [-.PO VCO r.uy rcjvOM.i1-!.
OONSI!U:(TION R| STKKTIONS I OK || Mill \|(| I A
TIONALSIRUCTUKLS
(a) Except as pro\iJi-d in subsection u >. no IK-» «iii;jlt- (jrn:'.\ n.-i.!t-;trm.-lion u-\i|..:Jin.c M,b>!Ji:::al
repair or .ilieration) if the cMeiior ilj\-,!i;::-.t .i>vr.,j.v .O;.-J I'.'u-lTljn
anyw.'K-re on the site ol the proposed uriKtme is proic.:.-J to '-c in"
JUA w,(l,.n
excess of
yearx f
completion date of the structure.
(b) P.xeept :is provided in Mibseetniii tcl. no new niiiHirle-fjmilx rewdencc.
dormitory, mobile home park. traiiMenl lodsm;:, -Jiool. hus'ital.
nursing home or s.niiljr Mim-uiie. or M,|>M.JI:II.I| inod.:^al:or ofsiidi
CMMine slriRture. shall I,,.- j|.pr,,u-il Inr ^.MMI.M..,!, ,1 ,•„. , Uir.,jr
day-niflil.na.ij.-esoiiiul le'el (l.jni an> where i'n l,\- M|e ol ti-.e propl>v.jrx
followiiit tlie i-jiiiiuu-J ujinpletion Uji,- ol Hie slriM:;,e ,ir nioJili-
calion.
(c) Conslriitlion ol!n-r»ist proh,l>iieJ pnr»ium to Mibvcln-.-n ia» or (!)>
sli.ill Iv allowed if t!ie eMerior d.,> -niilii ..ur.iVi M.nnJ I.'U'I i Lj,,l on
llic site of (lie proposed structure is projected not to Iv m e\ee>s of
39
-------
O
NJ
10.3
dBA for . years following construction, provided tlwl
Iliere is incorporated into the design and construction of the structure
well sound attenuation measures as are nccvssjry to reduce the maxi-
mum interior day-night average sound level I Lj,,) to dBA.
Subsection. t.,1 and (b) slull not apply to .my sile development plan
or Us cquujl.nt on which four or fewer dwelling units are to be
constructed.
Prior to issuance ofany occupancy permit for any structure regulated
pursuant lo subsection (c). Hie owner o! the structure shall submit
lor I TO SCO renew Hie report of an independent lesiins agency
Ijppro.ed t>> the liTO.NCOJ ccrnl>,ny Hut sound attemi.ition mea-
sures lij\c been properly incorporated inio the de-sign and construc-
tion ol Hie structure jnd thai the interior L,|,, meets the criterion
spec-it ted in subsection (c). Such report shall contain the results of
simultaneous measurements of the exterior and interior day-night
jteragc soiuul leu-Is for a representative sample of locations.
(c) The I.PO SCO may conduct such inspections and measurements as
ore necessj.j 10 ensure the accuracy of any report submitted pursuant
to subset lion id) and to ascertain compliance with this section. These
mai nJu.ie cm-.i:.- inspections by a certified independent testing
afcnc) during specilied periods ol' coiisiriiction.
RtCRLAl IONAL AKLA KtSTKICIlONS
(al li-ucpt as proiuled in subsections (hi. (c). and (d) no land slull tx
designated or jpproxed for construction or use as a public or private
exterior recreational area, including, hut not limited lo, children*'
pl.i>grounds, otildoor theaters and amphitheaters, picnic grounds.
tennis courts and swimming pools, if the exterior day-night average
sound lexel jnx»liere on the site ol the proposed recreational
area is projected to be in the excess of JUA within
years following the construction or designation of the site.
Ib) UPS wciionsiull not apply lo the designation or approval ofany
frecn Ivli or o|vn spj»e in anv area in which the Ij,, exceeds the
k-icl sp.-vil.ej in subjection (aI regardless of whether such green belt
or o|vn spa»e is o|vu lo puhhc use. prui ided that no recreational
improvement or Ijciht) is constructed thereon.
(cl
Desi^tuciiii 01 jppr.ojl ol cMenoi recreational areas otherwise pro-
hihlc.l under Million la I Oull be jlloneJ if the L,|n s|X.-cillc«J in
llul MiKe.i.on tJM be.uh,e»ed by appropriate means of sound allcnu-
JIIOM M.JI j, Ivrmx. lurnerx or buildings, jt the ix-rimeler of or
cK< SX!K re mi Hie Mle
10.4
SITE STUDY
(a)
h repo,, shall b nubv ..
, ,,on. Mninf. or buij* ' ^
s I10I b,cn mjdc Jnd , 3Vri
wron£f,,,iy p,ohibited lln(),r Sectio Yo i .
(1) llKCKisiing dJVn.jhljveratcwMtJI.^.s.L.,,, , _
ld™<'l''«''on of the, moor sources of so,:nj lor '. „-'"'". .
""
roi.owing completion of tl,c projec.-; jr.J ,',e prTj^Td f iu-t
site and/or cf Hie structure proposed to be M,'.^ °" **"'
of sound i,,cnUJ|ion aiMicipjtc-d as , ,,JU|, ofih "n"-"' "
(b) In dctermmrn,; whether an app|icjnl ,holl|J N. ,„,„„."J"^' ^'^
full report purstunt to subsection (a,. ,h, I.PO NCO ,'. ;• -O'r *
Circular I.T;0,: (Noix. Ahjienienl and Co,:ro:, Jnj „',"« P,W." 1
42
-------
O
U>
IO.S COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL CONSTRUCTION
No new or substantially modified structure on land used or zoned as com-
mercial or industrial shall be approved for construction unless the owner or
diwloper of such land has demonstrated, in accordance with guidelines
published by l!>e EfO.NCO, that tiie completed structure and the activities
jsxo.utcd with iinJ on the same property as llic structure, will comply wilh
the |TOHMons of Article Vlll at the lime for initial full-scale operation of
such activities.
10.6 SOUND FROM NEW TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS IN RESIDENTIAL
AREAS OR NOISE SENSITIVE ZONES
No plans for conduction of now transportation systems or expansion of
ih.- cjfj.it> of existing transportation systems will be approved for loca-
tion in or near residential areas or noise sensitive zones, regardless of the
soime of project funds, unless such plan includes all control measures
r.i.'i.-»3r\ to ensure lhal the projected day-night average sound level (Ljjn)
due to the operation of ttu- transportation system do« not exceed
dBA at any poinl on residential property within years after the
e*rvclcd completion of the project.
10.7 EQUIVALENT MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS
For the purposes of this Article, alt measurements and designations of
sound lewis shall be expressed ill day-night average sound levels (Ljn) or
in any other equivalent measurement system the EPO/NCO may reasonably
approve.
10.8 ZONING ORDINANCE OR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
(i I No proposed zoning ordinance or comprehensive plan shall be approved
unless such plan includes a sound analysis which (I) identifies existing.
and projected noise sources and associated sound levels for
years in and around the area under consideration, and (2) ensure!
usage of adequate measures to avoid violation of any provision of thi$
ordinance.
(b) No zoning change application shall be approved unless (he site feasi-
bility study submitted, as required by the (Zoning Board of Appeals)/
(Planning Commission), contains an analysis which shows (I) the
impact of existing and projected noise sources for years on
the intended use. anil (It the projected noise impact of the intended use,
when completed, on surrounding areas. Such site study shall ensure the
live nl ;ulei|ii.ile «•*• of u.k-i|ii,ili- measures to jvoiJ violation of any provi-
sion of ilns crdm.nuc.
10.9 TRUTH IN SELLING OR RENTING
No person shall sell or rent, or cause to be fold or rented, any structure
or properly to be used for hunun habitation, where the structure or
property is exposed lo sound levels regularly in excess of (an L^q in any
hour of dl)A)/(an Ljnof- dBA I. without rnakr.c. full
written disclosure to all potential buyers or rcriers of the <\i-t:nce of
such sound levels and of the nature of the sources. The EPO NCO S'.jll
develop a standard format for written disclosure's, which >!:ill include
information on the effects of noise on human health and welfare.
10.10 APPEALS
Any applicant may appeal an adverse decision by the EPO NCO un-Jrr
this Article, in the (appropriate court of law), on in.- erounds that the
EPO/NCO disapproval was arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable.
ARTICLE XI ENFORCEMENT
II.I
PENALTIES
(a) Any person who violates any provision of this ordinance shall be
fined for each offense not more than dollars.
(b) Any person who willfully or knowingly violates any provision of tfct*
ordinance shall be fined for each offense a sum of not less than '
dollars and not more than dollars.
(c) Each day of violation of any provision of this ordinance shall consti-
tute a separate offense.
(11.2
A3ATEMENT ORDERS
(a) Except as provided in subsection (b). in lieu of hsuin; a notice of
violation as provided for in Section 11,.", the EPO NCO or other
(agency/official) responsible for enforcement of any provision of
this ordinance may issue an order rcqi:trin£ abatement of any source
of sound or vibration alleged to be in violation o! this ardinjnce within
a reasonable time period and according to fuiJetinc* (to Vv approved
by appropriate authority) which the EPO SCO nu> prcwrilv.
(b) An abatement order shall not be issued: 11) for any violation covered
by Section II.1 (b);d for any violation of :or.
(3) when the U'O/NC'O or other enforcement latency official) lu»
K-avin to believe lli.it there wilt not be compliance with the abatement
order.)
43
44
-------
11J NOTICE OF VIOLATION
(Except where i person is acting in good faith to comply with an abste-
mcn! order issued pursuant to Section 11.2 (a)), violation of any provi-
sion of this orJinance shall be cause for a (notice of viohtion)/(summons)/
(conipl=int)/(informa!ion or indictment) to be issued by tlic EPO/NCO or
other responsible enforcement (agency official) according to procedures
(which the CPO/SCO may pres.cribc)/(set forlh in ).
11.4 IMMEDIATE THREATS TO HEALTH AND WELFARE
(a) The liPO/NCO shall orjer an immediate hall to any sound which *
exposes any person, except tliosc excluded pursuant to subsection
(b), to continuous sound levels in excess of those shown in Table 4
or to impulsive sound levels in excess of those shown in Table 5.
Within days following issuance of such an order, the EPO/
N'CO shall apply to the appropriate court for an injunction to replace
the order.
(b) No order pursuant to subsection (a) shall be issued if the only persons
exposed to sound level* in excess of those listed in Tables 4 and S ire
arc exposed as a result of(l) trespass; (2) invitation upon private
property by ilic person tjtising or periuiltiiif ihc sound; or 13) employment
mcnt by (tie person or a contractor of the person causing or permuting
the sound:
(c) Any person subject to an order issued pursuant to subsection (a) shall
comply wilh such order until (1) the sound is brought into compliance
with the order, as determined by the EPO/NCO; or (2) a judicial order
his superseded the EPO/NCO order.
(dj Any person who violates an order issued pursuant to [his section shall,
for each day of violation, be fined not less than dollars nor
more than dollars.
IIJ CITIZEN SUITS
(a) Any person, other than persons responsible for enforcement of this
ordinance, may commence a civil action on his own behalf (I) against
any person who is allceed to be in violation of any provision of this
ordinance set forth in Taule 6 below or (2) against the UPO/NCO where
there n jllctxJ a failure of ihe tPO/NCO to perform my act under
this ordinance which is no! discretionary. The court
sJijII luve jurisdiction, without regard 1u the amount in controversy,
to grant such relief as it deems necessary.
Table 4. Continuous Sound Levels which Posv an Immediate Threat
to Health and Weifare (Measured at 50 Feet or 15 M>-u-nt*
Sound level limit
-------
to
o
Table 6. Provisions Under Which Civil Actions May Be Commenced
6.M (a) (RaJios. Television Sets, Musical Instruments
im) Similar Devices)
6.?.- (Lou JsptakctsfPublic Address Systems)
6.2.3 (Street Sales)
6,;.5 (Loading and Unloading)
6.J.6 (Construction)
6.2.7 (Vehicle or Motorboat Repairs and Testing)
g 19 (Places of Public Enlcrlainment)
6 MO (Explosives. Fucatms. and Similar Devices)
4.2.11 (Po»<.T<.-J Model Vehicles)
6.2.12 (Vibration)
(6.2.131 (Stationary, Non-Emergency Signaling Devices)
6.2.M (F.mcrecncy Signaling Devices)
5;.15 (Motorboais)
g; (7 (Domestic Power Took)
6.2. IS (Tampering)
g| (Maximum Permissible Sound Levels by
Receiving Land Use)
9.1.3 (Refuse Collection Vehicles)
9 | .4 (Standing Motor Vehicles)
9.2 (b) (Moior Vehicle Racing Events)
9 2.1 (b) (Motor Vehicle Horns anil Signaling Devices)
10.9 (Truth in Selling or Renting)
47
(b) No action nuy be commenced
(1) under subsection (j)(I)
(A) prior to d«ys ifter the plaintiff h»s jiven notice
of the alleged violation to the EPO/NCO [and tp Ihe
alleged violator! of such vio!stion,or
(B) if Ihe EPO/NCO h;s commenced and is diligently prose-
cuting an action against the alleged violator »ith respect
to such violation, (but in such action any affected psnon
may intervene as a matter of ri£!:i 1, or
(2) under subsection (a)(2), prior to days after the r!-i"tiff
has given notice to the EPO/NCO that he will commence such
action. Notice under this sutsection sliall be £iven in a msr.ner
prescribed by the EPO/NCO.
(c) In my tction.under tliis section, the EPO/NCO, if not a party, rr.iy
Intervene as a matter of right.
(d) The court, in issuing any final order in any action brought pursu-nt
to subsection (a), may at its discretion award llu> costs of lil:jjlion
to any party.
11.6 OTHER REMEDIES
No provision of (Ms ordinance shall be construed to impair any common
law or statutory cause of action, or legal remedy therefrom, of any person
for injury or damage arising from any violation of this ordinance or from
other law.
1!.7 SEVERABIUTY
If any provision of this ordinance is held to be unconstitutional or other-
wise invalid by any couit of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provi-
sions of Ihe ordinance shall not be invalidated.
11.8 EFFECTIVE DATE
This b^/ordinancc shall take the effect on _________^__
48
-------
K>
O
ffl
Appendix VI-2
Suggested State Noise Control Act
Title 1
Station 101. [short Title.] This let. Bay be cited as the, [state]
Mitt Control Act.
Sertion 102. [findings and Policy.] Hi* Initiator* finda and
declares thati
(II Excessive noli* i» a urious hazard to the public health
ar.l welfare arjj the quality of life.
121 A substantial body of science and technology exists by which
ex=«fsive r.oise cay be substantially abated.
!3) Iicr. 'person has a right to an environment free fron noise
t>.at r.ey ;«2?ar3i£e hi* health or welfare or degrades the quality of
life.
, <%! !t is the policy of the State to prevent noise which say
-<•.-.ii-.:;;« the health or welfare of the public or degrades the quality
Of life.
Section 101. [Definitions.] As used In this Aett
!11 •«fcini»trator" aeans the head of the state agency advlnieter-
i«g the state noise control program.
(2) 'Agency esans the state agency adBlnlstering the state noise
control pr»;raau
(3) 'Local government* mean* [hen Insert appropriate unit (county,
ejr.ici;tllty, etc.) and any Halts as to sice or type of unit to which
tMs Urt shall apply].
(41 Viol**" neans the intensity, frequency, duration, and character
of so--.ii froa a source or number of sources. Noise includes vibrations
e! s'^-aaiible frequency.
(31 "Person" seam an individual, corporation, partnership, or
asi??istion, and includes any officer, eeployee, department, agency, or
ir.str—entality of the United States, a State, or any political Bub-
d>vi«;o.i of a state.
O> 'Product* Means any Manufacture red article or goods or com-
ponent thereof.
Section 104. [state Agencies.]
»r.4
report to him on the advisability of revising such star.jard or regula-
tion to provide such protection. Such agency shall corflete the
r»Tio«t«d c«viev and report to the administrator within such tise as
the administrator specifies, but such tine tp«ci!ied may net be less
than 6O days from the data the request was nace.1
Title 2
Section 201. [Adoption of Comprehensive Noise Regulation Program,
•ales and Regulations.]2
(a) The administrator [or appropriate state board or agency] (hall
develop, adopt and maintain a comprehensive ststevide program of noise
regulation which may include, but not be United to, the following.
iror those states which so desire, the request and report may be by
law required to be published in any equivalent of the Federal Register.
States should be aware of the preemption provisions of Section
6(e) (Noise mission Stanaards for Producti Diitr.buteJ in Ccr,-?rc«,
B(c) {Labeling). 17(c4 (Railroad Noise Ent?non s* »nd»r:U), and 14
-------
KJ
O
(1) control* on environmental noise (or on« or more sources
t>.«r«oD through the licensing, regulation, and restriction of the use,
operation, and movement of any product or combination of productsi
(2) noise er.ission standards for products which, in the
airur.istrator's judgment, are najor sources of noise, or are products
f:r w?.i;h noise emission standards are feasible and are requisite to
protect the public health and velfare. Such standards may include but
j.-.all r.:.: t» li-iled to adoption by reference of standards or regula-
tions siopted by the administrator of the United States Environmental
?r"t:ticn Aoenry pursuant to the Noise Control Act of 1972 (Public
la* Vi-57<) or any anond-ient thereto:
(3) labeling requirements which prohibit the sale or offer
to sell or th* lease or offer to lease of any product, or class or
csti = cr'.' thereof, without notice to the prospective purchaser, lessee,
or _-=vr of the noise levels and characteristics emitted by such product,
or :tf effectiveness in reducing noise, as the case nay be;
(4) development and adoption of ambient noise standards;
(5) development and adoption of a plan for the achievement
of ar—itr.t r.oiae standards;
(6) noise insulation and abatenent standards for any occupancy
or class of occupancies of buildings, and the limitation of human
tjrtcr-'re to noise generated by sources interior to such buildings. Such
r.-ii* insulation and abatement standards shall be based on criteria
for t:.e limitation of noise exposures appropriate to building and
octrMpir.rj* use:
(7| establishment of special noise insulation districts within
wl-.i:.v. sr.tcifie-J b'jildir.g performance standards and noise insulation
sta-iiris shall apply, in order to protect building occupants from
exressiv* noise of external origins)
' [ TPTirTi: In the event that appropriate building regulatory legisla-
tion his teen enacted by the State, insert the following after Section
2'i'K) ir. li«iu of (6) and (7) above;
(15) Consult with state ar,d local governmental agencies when
• uch i-jeT-.cies adopt and enforce codes, standards and regulations dealing
with r.oise insulation and abatement for any occupancy or class of
occu~4.-.cy.]
(8) regulations for the protection of all employed persona
witMn the State against exposure to excessive noise at their place of
vor/c:
ntirn
r th»
; 1
se to t
of thi
ir c^ra
:e eKte
:ity as
[OPTIONi If a state agency presently has pcv-r to regulate occupa-
tional health and safety, including noise exposure, insert Ef-er
Section 202(15) in lieu of (8) above:
(16) Consult with state agencies adopting rec-jlations fcr the
protection of employed persons within the State a^airst exposure to
excessive noise at their place of work.]
(9) license, registration, or perr-it
construction, installation, use and operation
or facilities, or classes thereof, includi.-.c s
administrator jr.ay deem appropriate for the rur
(10) control on airport and aircraft
preempted by federal law. It is not the inte
to preempt power of local governr'.or.ts, whe
proprietors of airports or jnder police pov-.-r
(11) procurement standards which es
perforr-ance specifications for products pur-".
or utilized in the perforrance of contracts ;
by state monies.
(b) (1) Any regulation promulgated pursuant to t:.e a'-Jt'r.cr
this Act shall be one which, in the judgrwrt of tu.e ad-inistrst
appropriate state agency], is requisite to rr^tect the r^irlic h
and welfare, taking into accent the r.agnit-ie i:.d ccr.diti^r.s c
of the product or activity involved alone or in crr'i'ir.atic" vit
sources, the degree of noise reduction achieva-le thrc-ch the a
of the best available t^chrol&'jy without ur.-ijt r'.-.*-ri _MC- *_o :
state corxr-.erce, and the cost of compliance. In c:-terTinlr.c tr.«
of noise reduction achievable through the application cf tr.s b?
available technology, the adninistrator [or 2; .-r-.r-riat'.- E-.a-,» «
shall take into consideration technology which ray be available
the time the regulation beccnes effective. In co-.siierir.^ avai
Sagency shall weigh the utility of th« activity in relation t3 t
of the technology.
(2) Regulations pronJulgated pursuant to this Act shal
adopted following a public hearing and pursuant to tho provisio
State Administrative Procedures Act ,
(31 Regulations prcnulgated pursuant to the authority
this Act shall be applicable throughout the State or to fjch^pa
regions thereof specifically designated in such regulations. •«
l be
r.s of
of
rts or
3This section has been left flexible so that States nay adopt re-
gulations that reflect the apportionment of powers to te d^ciici in
BurbanX v. Lockheed, now pending in tha i;^it»d States S>_'pr
-------
o
oo
Section 202. [Mrjnistrativ* Powers and Duties.] In order to
srir.t the purposes of this Act, the administrator shall have the
r to:
(1) cause to be conducted a program of studies, research and
"i^z'.'.~ related to environmental noise;
(2) review and coment upon enviroimental impact statements re-
I-.T ;-rc"eots having any portion of their potential iirpact within
-:r;:rs of this State ar.d (a) prepared in compliance with the
--*'. £-.vlror-?ntal Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. Sect. 4321 et
i cr, (tl prepared in compliance with [state Environnental Policy
if ir.y], where the environmental iirpact of the proposed project
(2 provide technical assistance to other state agencies and to
:•:•:}'. 5ji-iivisiors of this State, including drafts of model local
:-\r s:
;;i ;,-r.i-ict rrograns of public education regarding the causes and
. -t: rf r.oise ar.d r-eans for its abatement and control and encourage
; IT".- t •.:: aticn of professional, scientific, conservation and other
'..- ;- -.ireot 3rour,» in related public information efforts;
[51 "Dr2ir:ate the procrars of all state and local agencies relating
•!;;* studies ar.d noise control!
''.i cccotrats with the appropriate agencies of the United States,
'.*. f.*r Stitts or any interstate agencies with respect to the
•--•;., rr^vj-.ti:rf and abatement of noise;
',"•} rtreive and disburse all funds pertaining to the State's noise
trol ^r^-jran from private and public sources;
•p.tract for property and services, including consulting
I:)
ice 5;
cpoir.t such advisory groups and comittees as may be necessary
in carrying out the state noise regulation progran; [Here
conditions or Imitations concerning advisory groups (such
;-?r«?r.t for expenses) or the state statute applicable to
roj-s, if any. ]
upon presentation of proper credentials, enter any building,
rrentes. or place and inspect any noise source for the
ascertaining the compliance or non-compliance with any regula-
'!••• -ave ce-n adopted by the administrator [or appropriate
.-/] rerejr.Jer. If, in connection with such inspection or
,?n, rcise measurements, recordings or tests of any type
f:r analysis, a duplicate of the analytical report shall be
to t-.e person who is suspected of causing such noise pollution
• - - it le f-erefor;
(11) have access to, and require the production of, bccV.s and
papers pertinent to any matter under investigation:
(12) require the over or operator of any noise source to estab
and maintain records end nake such reports ar.d furr.ish
as the administrator nay reasonably prescribe;
(13) require the owner or operator of a-y noise :c-rce to EO.-:;-J
the emissions thereof in accordance with such Ti»tr.cis ar.f i-rc-ed^rts
and at such locations and intervals of tir'j a? th? air.r.: = tr;".3r ra1
reasonably prescribe and to provide tne aO.i.iisvr-stor vit^. fr.e r^Ej'.ts
thereof; and
(14) investigate complaints, institute ar.i conduct surveys a-"d
testing programs, conduct general ariuent nox^e =a_-rlir.c yr'-rirs,
maXe observations of conditions which may or co ro^s'- or affect
noise pollution, wake tests or other deterr-.iT.aticns of r.cise sources,
and assess the degree.-of abatement required.
Section 203. [Procurement of Low-!loi£?-E-ission Frti^ct^.''
(a) The administrator shall certify any trodjct:
ID which has been certified by t':.': oi-i.-.i strator of -.-a
United States Environmental Protection Acsr.ry j-jrfua'r.t t: 5-Tticr. 15
of the Noise Control Act of 1972 as a low-r.o:?r--'---;3sic- "r-.i.tt cr
which the administrator dpternines enits noise i". a--^r.;s s;r-.ifi.c;*.*ly
below the levels specified in r.oise enissior. ^ta-Jjrii :s?'jv; r^riair.t
to federal law or this Act; ard
(2) which he determines is suitable for use as a suz=tit^te
for a type of product at that tine in use by asc-.-.cies of t.-.e state
government.
(b) Certification under this section shall te effective for a
period of one year fro™ the dsta of issuance,
(c) Products certified pursuant to subsection (a) of this section
shall be acquired by purchase o"r leas* by the state
-------
to
o
(d) Ary statutory price or bid limitations notwithstanding, any
cojr.ty, ruricipality or other political subdivision may acquire by
t_rc:.-*3e cr lease a certified low-noise-emission product in lieu of
ctr.er products if it determines that such certified product has pro-
r.r^rr-t crsts vhich are ro wore than 125 percent of the retail price
-f t-« le«st expensive type of product for which it is certified as a
S ..CSt 1 tUtO .
;e) The administrator shall, from time to tin* as he deems appro-
priate, t? = t the e-issions of noise from certified products purchased
ty '.--: state CTO ve rr.ier. t . If at any tine he finds that the noise
trirs.i.T Isveli exceed the levels on which certification vas based,
•-••= = l-iMs'.rator shall giv% the supplier of such product written
r.:tir: zi t'ris fir.iir.a and give the supplier an opportunity to make
r-.rt-f»r.' repairs, adjustments cr replacements. If no such repairs,
ai; -.- '--e.-.-.f , or replacements are made within a period to be set by
t: - i i--:r :s t rator , he ir.ay order the supplier to show cause why the
:r:i.:t irvclvad should be eligible for recertif ication.
.fi 7'.e ad-ir. 1st rator shall promulgate the procedures required to
s section.
f-rrticr. 2T-J. ["ranting of Variances.] The administrator £>r
a~; re "ria:e state beard or agency] may grant individual variances be-
•/: " i • ~e Iir;tdti3'.s prescribed in this Act or in any regulation pro-
r.^7at---i pjri-ar.t to this Act, whenever it is found, upon presentation
- .. ;:._• pttit icr.ir of aO-quate proof, that compliance with any provision
-i ~.r-^~ A_-t, ary regulation promulgated under it or an order of the
di*;-. ; 5 trat ?r would ir.r.'c-se an arbitrary or unreasonable hardship. In
rrjr.ti.-.j cr denying a variance, the administrator [ or appropriate
ststT i;jrl or ace.-cy] shall file and publish a written opinion stating
tl'--? facts ar.d reasons leading to his decision.
Section. 205. [conditions for Variances.]
'.1} Jn granting a variance the administrator [ or appropriate state
irsrJ -r aser.ry ] r.ay inpos<> such conditions as the policy of this Act
r^'.-ires, If the hardship conplained of consists solely of the need
f:r a r?ir;r.able delay in which to correct a violation of this Act
cr of the rej-Jlations promulgated ur.der it, the administrator or
a^rr rriate state board or agency may condition the grant of such
viriar.ces -jron the posting of sufficient performance bond or other
se:urity to assure the correction of such violation within the time
trsscribed.
(b) Variaires shall be granted pursuant to this Act in accordance
with the following provisions;
(1) The administrator shall designate a schedule o£ compli-
a re fteijifvir.g a definite tir.e period within which full compliance with
f..s .-.;t a-,d t_he rules ai.d regulations adopted hereunder shall be
(2) In order to implement the schedule of corplia»e, * vari-
ance may be granted pursuant to the provisions of this A:t for S'jch
period of time not exceeding one year, as shall be specified by the
administrator. Such variance may be renewed for aiiiticral ptriccs
of one year by affimative action of the administrator, i^t or.ly if
satisfactory progress toward conpliar.ee in accordance witr. the
schedule of compliance has been shown.
eking
a-y state
cr.5 who
e admin-
Section 206. [Filing for Variances.! Any person se
ance shall do so by filing a petition for variance with t
The agency shall promptly give written notice cf sjch pet
person in the county in which the installation, property,
for which variance is sought is located who has ir. vrlt;r.
notice of varianee petitions, and shall publisr. r.ctice of
in a newspaper of general circulation in such cour.ty arc
equivalent of the Federal Register . The acer.c-' shall :r
investigate such petition and shall consider the views o*
might be adversely affected by the grant of a variar,ce.
istrator or appropriate state board or acency , in his c
concludes that a hearing would be advisable, cr if »r.y tt
a written request for a hearing or a writter. objection to
of such variance within £ ] days of the notice provided
hearing shall be held under State Administrative ?rcccd-res Act .
Section 207. [Administrator's Report.] The adnir.istratcr shall
prepare annually or such other appropriate period a report to the
Governor and the Legislature on his progress in abating ar.i preventing
noise, including the administrator's recoprrier.datior.s for &•-•/ fjrther
legislation needed to implement the State's policy as stated in
Section 102 of this Act. The first such report shall be suir^tted
one year after the effective date of this Act.
[OPTION: If there is already a requirement for a report on
environmental programs, the following alternative may be substituted:
In each report submitted pursuant to [state statute requiring
environmental report], the administrator shall include inforrJtion con-
cerning his progress in abating and preventing r,oise and the adminis-
trator's recommendations for any further legislation needed to i-ple-
raent the State's policy as stated in Section 132 of this Act.]
-------
to
>-•
o
Title 3
Section 301. [local Programs.] Ml local governments. as defined
in 5-ctioa 103(3) of this Act, shall nay develop, adopt, amend and
rair.tain a comprehensive program of noise regulation. Such program
[ sh*i:~[r-ay] include a study of the noise problems resulting from uses
ar.d ac-.ivities within its jurisdiction and the development and adoption
of a ::::se Control Plan.
=«-7*-.cn 302. [rioise Control Program.] Any Noise Control Plan
aisjtti curs-jant to Section 301 of this Act [shall][may] include, but
nit te lirited to, the following:
(1) noise levels which will not be exceeded in specified zones
or other designated areas;
(21 the designation of a Noise Control Officer;
(3) clans, and procedures necessary for the implementation of
;lans, tii transportation systems within the jurisdiction;
(4) elms concerning land use within the jurisdiction;
(5) requirements of building design necessary for the approval
cf «-•...• ctr-str-jction within the jurisdiction;
{c> the ir-Fle^entation procedures of the Noise Control Plan
a.il --.* r-ilaxi&n of the Uoise Control Plan to other plans within the
<~) strategic!) for assuring compliance with state and federal
rois% rerjl atior.s j 5
(6! noise level restrictions applicable to construction activities.
Section 303. [local Powers.] Local governments [way][shall]
»i=;.t ar.^ enforce ordinances necessary to implement the Noise Control
PAar. Jfcr.i any other program adopted pursuant to Section 301 of this
?.-'..'• Crdir.anc«s adopted pursuant to this section may include more
strir.eer.t standards than those adopted by the administrator [or
appropriate state board or agency].
'Ttat-s nay wish to provide t procedure whereby local Noise
Control Plans rust be approved by the administrator and/or are more
closely interrelated with the state noise control progran.
-TMs authority nay be too broad to comply with the laws and
co.-.i:itjtion« of sane States.
Title 4
Section 401. [unlawful Acts] It shall be unlawful for my
person toi
(1) violate or fail to comply with this Act or any reo-jlation
adopted pursuant to it, or the terns or conditions of ar.y permit,
license, variance or order issued pursuant to this Act or pjrsuant
to any regulation adopted hereundarj
!2) refuse, hinder, or interfere with by force or otherwise the
performance by the administrator or by any duly a-jthorizei a;ort
or employee of the agency cr their assistants of arw -l-tv ur.der the
provisions of this Act; or to refuse to such accnt, er-rloye-?, c-r
assistant entrance to any premises upon proror id-jr.ti f i;a-;-;-i ar.d
presentation of a search warrant; or to hinder or interfere with the
conduct of an inspection, test, or taking of a sarply by sucli iuth;r-
iied agent, employee, or assistant where entry to the rreriieE was
obtained by consent, or by presentation o! proper idtr.tificatic.-.,
and search warrant;
(3) on any property or premises ovned or lease! by su:l-. p*:sor.,
allow the creation, continuance, or naintenar.ee cf ar.-.- r.s^se, or allov
the installation, use or operation of any r,c;sc s^-jrce, vhich n^ise
or source violates or fails to comply with this Art, or any r'=:.:ation
adopted pursuant to this Act, or the terns or cc.-.ditior.s cf ar.y ;«r-
mit, license, variance, or order issued pursuant to this Act cr
pursuant to «ny regulation adopted hereunder;
(4) intentionally renove or render ir.civrable, cthtr thar. for
purposes of maintenance, repair or replaceaov.t, a--y device cr eler.ent
of design incorporated, in compliance with this Act, ir.to any
product, structure, machine, equipment, vehicle- or atilicar.r* for
the control, abatement c>r prevention of noise cr.issior.s, either crior
or subsequent to the sale or delivery to the ultirate carch^ser:"
to to use such product, structure, nachine, e-jjit-snt, •.-ehicle'ir ajpli-
ince after such device or element of design has been re-mv;! or rendered
inoperable with knowledge of the removal or rendering ir.o-oraile of
such device or elencnt of design;
(5) renove any notice affixed to a product or container p-jrsuar.t
to regulations prescribed under Section 201(a)(3) prior to sale Of
the product-to the ultimate purchaser;
(6) attempt to obtain a permit, license, registration or variance
required or permitted under this Act or any regulations adictei
pursuant hereto by misrepresentation or failure to disclose all
re1evant facts.
Section 402. [search Warrants.] whenever an aqent or errloyee
ofthe administrator has been refused access to property, cr has be*?n
refused the right to exarine any noise source or noise control ecpjirrert
-------
or device, or has been refused access to or examination of books,
pa:«rs, and records pertinent to any matter under investigation, or
reasonably requires access to such property, source, equipment.
d«vi-*, tooks, pacers or records with
ut prior notice to the owner,
search warrant to any state
State to issue the same to
xariine such property, noise
i books, papers, and records.
sj;h 37»r.t or erploye* nay apply for
official authorized by the laws of th
er.a::!* hin cr her to have access and
srurce. control equipment or device,
It shall be sufficient probable cause to issue a search warrant that
the ir..-;*;ticn or examination is necessary to properly enforce the
cr: .•; 5i--.s of this Act or the standards, rules and regulations adopted
j^rsjj.-.t hereto.
S^rtion 403. [civil Remedies^ [The Legislature may include
hire tr;;-idures for the issuance and administrative adjudication of
cri-irs of the administrator of of the suspension or revocation of
ji:—;-i. licsr.ses and variances according to applicable state law.
£tat* authorities ray be given power to enforce local noise laws
or re^ulaticr.s. A provision authorizing anyone entitled to bring.
artic-3 IT. the nare of the State to seek enforcement of the order
Tjy :-: i-.rl-ied. Civil renedies including fines and injunctions
r£; als: ce included. States nay wish to consider giving complain-
1:7 :itiz«r.s a portion of fines collected and/or attorneys' fees
a-.d costs, including witness fees and investigation costs.]'
Section 404. [criminal Penalties.] [The Legislature nay Include
her* ir.y cririr.al penalties (including fines and periods of imprison-
re.-.t) ts te irposed for violations of any provision of this Act,
rer-lstiors pronulgated pursuant to this Act or order of the
aircr.istrator. ]
.Section 405. [citizens' Suits.] Any person may commence a civil
suit en his cvn behalf against any person who is alleged to be in vio-
lation of any provision of this Act or of any regulation established
pursua-.t to this Act, or against the administrator [or appropriate
stare hoard or agency] where there is alleged a failure of the
a±-ir.istr»tor [or appropriate state board or agency] to perform any
ait or duty under this Act which is not discretionary with such
ainir.istrator [or appropriate state board or agency].
Title 5
Section SOI. [savings Clause!) The provisions of this Act are
not exclusive, and the remedies provided for in this Act shall be in
addition to ar.y other renedies provided for in any other law or
available ur.der cornon law.
States Tiay wish to consider the creation of a special noise
frtvor.tion ar.d abatement fund to receive grants, gifts, fines, and
cer.alties collected pursuant to the Act to be used upon appropriation
of the State Legislature for noise control and abaternent.
Section 502. [severabillty.] It is the ir.tent of the Legislafire
that the provisions of this Act shall be severable. In the ever.t tl-.it
any provision hereof, or regulation issued h»reu.-der, shall be h*ld
to be in violation of any provision of the Cor.stifjtior. of the '.r.ited
States, or of the State, or of any provision of federal law, t:-.*-.
all other provisions hereof or regulations iss-jed hereurier shall
remain in full force and effect.
Section 503. [effective Data.] This Act shall take effect ...
-------
Appendix vi-3
California Noise Insulation Standards
California Administrative code. Title 25, Chapter 1, Subchapter li
M:p:ei rebrjary 22, 1974)
fcrticlt •!. rioise Insulation Standards
::-3ise Insulation Standards
tO
fsr--..-.cs wit.-! sptech and sleep
:) irrlication ard Scope. The provisions of this article relating to
:.-,. M: :r-=,laticn i,';rforr.ance standards apply to new hotels, motels,
a:art.-£-.t ,.c_:£i.-s ar.d dvellings other than detached single-family dwellings.
7--»i- regulations shall apply to all applications for building
ferrits r.iie sjsst^jent to the effective date of these regulations.
T:^s* regulations shall bo effective 6 months after the adoption
by tr.». Co-T-:ssion and Housing and Connunity Development.
(el Definitions. The following special definitions shall apply to thi»
article as applicable:
(1! r.-ijict Insulation Class (IIC) - A single number rating for
c«ilir.s- floor construction that represents the ability of the construc-
tor. to isolate inpact noise, where measurement procedure is based on
AST.1: E-;>2-73T and *5 defined in L'BC Standard No. 35-2.
C) Sound Transnisslon Class (ETC) - A single figure rating for
floor-ceilir.g ar.d interior wall partition construction that represents
t>% ahil:*/ of th* construction to isolate airborne noise, where mea-
i,r*-t-; cro:-d-jre i* based on ASTH E90-70 or ASTM E366-71 and as de-
i;-
-------
(6) Airborne Sound Insulation Field Tests. When required, airborne
sojr.i insulation shall be determined according to the applicable Field
Xirborr.e Sour.d Transmission Loss Test procedures of UBC Standard Ho.
35-3. All scur.d transmitted fron the source room to the receiving
rccr. shall be considered to be transnitted through the test partition.
(7) Inpact Sound Insulation Field Test. When required, impact
soi-1 i.-.sulation shall be determined in accordance with UBC Standard
3£-2.
(r-TTi: Excerpts froa the 1973 UBC Appendix Chapter 35,
reprc:J.:ced with permission of International Conference
of r-iildir.g Officials. 5360S. Workman Hill Road,
Vhictier, California.)
(e! Kcise Insulation fron Exterior Sources.
(1) location and Orientation. Consistent vith land use standards,
r«5ii^-.tial structures located in noise critical areas, such as proxinity
t: select system of cour.ty roads and city streets (as specified in 186.4
of t.-.e State o! California Streets and Highways Code), railroads, rapid
tra-sit lir.es, airports, or industrial areas shall be designed to prevent
th« ir,tr-sicr] of exterior noises beyond prescribed levels with all
•Hterm iccrs a^i windows in the closed position. Proper design shall
ir.il-i*, tjt shall not be limited to, orientation of the residential
s^r-ct-r*, set backs, shielding, and sound insulation of the building
itself.
12) Interior .Voise Levels. Interior conrnunity noise equivalent
levels (CVTL.) with windows closed, attributable to exterior sources
sr.ill r.et exceed an annual CNEL of 45 dB in any habitable room.
(3) Airport Koise Source. Residential structures to be located
vithi.-. ar. anr.ua! CNEL contour (as defined in Title 4, Subchapter 6,
California Ai-inistrative Code) of 60 require an acoustical analysis
ir.cvi.-.c that the structure has been designed to limit intruding noise
to th* prescribed allowable levels. CNEL's shall be as determined by
th» Ideal jurisdiction in accordance with its local general plan.
(4) Vehicular and Industrial Noise Sources. Residential buildings
or structures to be located within exterior comnunity noise equivalent
level cor.tours of 60 dB of an existing or adopted freeway, expressway,
sa;or street, thoroughfare, railroad or rapid-transit line shall requir*
ar. accustical analysis showing that the proposed building has been
desisrei to linit intruding noise to the allowable interior noise
levels prescribed in Section 1092(e)(2).
Exception: Railroads, where there are no nighttime (10:00 p.m.
to 7:30 a.B.) railway operations and where daytime (7:00 a.n.
to 13:00 p.m.) railway operations do not exceed four (4) per day.
(f) Compliance.
(1) Evidence of compliance shall consist of subnittal of an acous-
tical analysis report, prepared under the supervision of a cerES.i experi
enced in the field of acoustical engineering, with the applicaticn for
building permit. The report shall shov topographical relatic-ship
of noise sources and dwelling site, identification of r.oise so-jrcJ* ar.d
their characteristics, predicted noise spectra at the exterior cf the
proposed dwelling structure considering present ard future l*-d -J5»:«,
basis for the prediction (measured or obtained frcn putlishii dita),
noise attenuation measures to be applied, ar.d a- analysis cf t>.e r.c-ise
insulation effectiveness of the proposed cor.strjcticn sr.r.'ir.c tr.it the
prescribed interior noise level requirements ar; r.et. If ir.t = r:cr
allowable noise levels are net by requiring that vir.iows be ^-;;:-=.-able
or closed, the design for the structure rost also specify the -ear.*
that will be cnploycd to provide ventilation, ar.i coolir.3 if r.tctssary,
to provide a habitable interior environment.
(2) Field Testing. Only when inspection indicates that the con-
struction is not in accordance with the aprrev«d dt = i?r., field testir.g
may b? required. Interior noise neasurerents shall t* ta'^or. -j.-ier
conditions of typical maximal exterior noise levels vitr.ir. Itcil lirits.
A test report showing compliance or noncor.pliar.ee with preecriied in-
terior allowable levels shall be submitted to the Bjildir.c C::::iil.
Where a complaint as to nonconpliance with this article r?T:ir«i •
field test to resolve the complaint, the cor-plair.ar.t shall pest a tcr.d
or adequate funds in escrow for the cost of said testir.?-. E'jch casts
shall be chargeable to the complainant when such field tests shcv
that compliance with these regulations is in fact present. If such
tests show noncompllance, then such testing costs shall be borr.e by
the owner or builder.
-------
Footnotes
Office of Noise Abatement and Control, U.S.E.P.A. Information on
Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health
and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety. Washington: U.S.E.P.A.
1974 (PB-239 429).
2. ibid.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7. Chanard, R.C. and R.A. Simmons. Community Noise Ordinance Workbook.
Denver: U.S.E.P.A., Region 8, 1860 Lincoln St. 80203. DRAFT,
In Preparation.
8. ibid.
9. National Institute of Municipal Law Officers and U.S.E.P.A.,
Model Community Noise Control Ordinance. EPA 550/9-76-003,
September 1975.
10. Bragdon, C.R. "Municipal Noise Ordinances, 1975." Sound and Vibration
9(12):24-30, December 1975. (The list of ordinances is a yearly feature;
S)V is available from Acoustical Publications, 27101 E. Oviatt Rd,
Bay Village, OH 44140)
11. ibid.
12. Office of Noise Abatement and Control, op. cit.
13. Chanard and Simmons, op.cit.
14. National Institute of Municipal Law Officers, op.cit.
15. NIMLO, op. cit.
16. see Appendix for text of ordinance
17. Another similar measure of noise — Community Noise Exposure Level.
18. NIMLO, op. cit.
19. Urban Systems Research and Engineering, Inc. The Audible Landscape;
A Manual for Highway Noise and Land Use. Washington: U.S. Department
of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 1974.
20. Office of Noise Abatement and Control, U.S. EPA, 1974 Survey of
State and Municipal Noise Control Activities, Washington, D.C.:
ONAC, 1975, DRAFT.
21. ibid.
214
-------
22. Senko, A. et al. New York Urban Noise Survey Methodology. Cedar Knolls,
N.J.: L.S. Goodfriend Associates, 1971. (PB-210 306)
Sutherland, L.C. et al. A Program for the Measurement of Environmental
Noise in the Community and Associated Human Response. El Segundo, CA:
Wyle Laboratories, 1973. (PB-228 563 and PB-228 564).
Bishop, D.E. Program for the Measurement of Environmental Noise.
Canoga Park, CA: Bolt, Beranek, and Newman, 1973. (PB-225 305)
23. Office of Noise Abatement and Control, op.cit.
24. Ibid.
25. Chanard and Simmons, op. cit.
26. 1974 Survey of State and Municipal Noise Control Activities
27. ibid.
28. Council of State Governments. Recommended State Legislation, 1974.
Lexington, KY: Council of State Governments, 1974.
215
-------
SECTION VII
SOLID WASTE CONTROL
The responsibility for solid waste management has traditionally fallen on
local governments, and there are no signs that the federal government will enter
the field with major programs. Federal and state roles are primarily regulatory
in nature; standards are being promulgated for collection, disposal, and re-
source recovery, and a few demonstrations and technical assistance efforts
are underway. Although some states are setting up authorities to aid in the
recycling or recovery of waste, local and regional governments will continue
to be the focus of operations.
The environmental impacts of solid waste management are broad and com-
plex. In some areas, such as public health protection, conventional systems per-
form fairly well; in others, such as waste-related water pollution control, they are
much less effective. Because the severity of these impacts vary greatly
according to local conditions, it is impossible to quantify them here, but
most categories of environmental impacts are associated with solid waste
as described below:
Air pollution arises from three waste-related causes: vehicle emissions,
waste processing, and landfill decay gases. Vehicle emissions can be reduced
in a number of ways, such" as improved truck routing; they are generally minor.
Gas emissions from incineration or other processing are controlled by state
air pollution agencies, often with little realization that the solid waste is
also a pollutant, and that strict enforcement only shifts the way in which the
pollution will occur. Landfill gases, mostly methane and carbon dioxide,
pose a safety hazard and can be controlled in well-designed landfills.
Water pollution also results from solid waste. Leachate and runoff from
improperly managed landfills can pollute the groundwater and surface streams,
and the pollutants can contain high portions of toxics, viruses, and metals.
Water pollution arises from urban storm runoff, caused by spillage or littering
of solid wastes on draining surfaces.
Land use impacts associated with landfills can be important. Landfills
can reclaim marginal land for uses such as parks, or for some types of build-
ing sites, but poor design and operation can lead to subsidence and to reduc-
tions in the property values of landfill neighbors, through odors, blowing
paper, and aesthetic impacts.
The impacts of solid waste on community noise are fairly small, except
in the neighborhood of processing and disposal sites, where operation requires
216
-------
heavy equipment, and where the truck traffic is concentrated. Noise in waste
collection is also a problem, although the newer vehicles show greatly reduced
noise levels. Procurement of collection vehicles should consider factors such
as noise, life-cycle cost, energy use, and safety.
Materials and energy use can be reduced through solid waste management.
On one hand, recycling centers and resource recovery plants can increase the
use of reclaimed materials; on the other, careful truck routing and planning
can conserve energy and materials in operating the system.
Solid waste and the solid waste management system affect public health
and safety in a number of direct ways. Litter and uncontrolled waste present
obvious fire and disease hazards, particularly in poorer and older areas.
The primary justification for public solid waste collection is to remove these
hazards, and the breeding grounds for rodents and insects that compound them.
Safety hazards are also associated with the collection process itself; solid
waste collection is one of the most injury-prone of professions.
The necessary response to these complex environmental impacts must be a
comprehensive management program, and consequently local governments view
solid waste much more from a management than from an environmental point of
view. To some, the solid waste problem has been how to collect the waste
in an efficient and environmentally sound manner, without exorbitant costs
of $30 to $40 per ton. To others, the basic problem has been to find disposal
sites that can actually be used, and not vetoe'd by citizen resistance; the
real costs and environmental effects of landfills are often unimportant to
local citizens in comparison to the impacts on them of a nearby site. Litter
is a third area of concern, and the basis of more citizen complaints than
anything except waste not picked up on collection day. Leaf pickups have
thrown many communities into chaos after bans on outdoor burning (to reduce
air pollution) led to great increases in yard material collection. The list
goes on, but these perceptions are typical of how "the solid waste problem"
is seen on the local level.
Environmental regulations affecting solid waste must of necessity be
keyed to procedural and management issues more than to indices of ambient
environmental quality. The EPA Model Solid Waste Ordinance, contained in an
appendix to this section, describes a number of procedures for improving
systems operations, and there are numerous guides and manuals available
to aid in solid waste management.^'2'3 This chapter will not attempt to re-
peat the material contained in all of them.
Instead, this chapter concentrates on less common approaches, extensions
and expansions of common practices that have potential for local environmental
quality improvements. Included are such topics as improved litter prevention
and suggestions for household storage control and source separation programs.
These topics are usually overshadowed by the continuing operational problems
of collecting the waste on time, and disposing of it at an acceptable site.
In addition, some of the secondary implications of a number of increasingly
popular options are discussed, such as the potential adverse impacts of some
collection pricing schemes.
217
-------
The chapter is broken up into four sections. In the first, the
problems of solid waste management are briefly discussed. The second section
describes procedures for controlling pollutants from solid waste, and the
third evaluates these alternatives according to their costs and benefits.
The final section describes model ordinances, programs, and sources of informa-
tion on the proposed improvements.
THE SOLID WASTE PROBLEM
Conventional Collection
Most municipalities understand the problems faced in conventional solid
waste management systems. First and foremost, the waste must be collected
Spillage must be kept to a minimum, and efficiency must be improved to keep
costs manageable. Private firms must be regulated to insure that they perform
in an environmentally acceptable manner, since their incentives are to maximize
profit,, rather than maximize service quality. Resource books such as Solid
Waste Collection Practice by the American Public Works Association and
Decision Maker's Guide to Solid Waste Management by EPA discuss collection
improvements in vehicle choice, routing, labor management, equipment mainten-
ance, and so forth, in full detail.4
A fairly efficient collection system can be defined according to present
practice. This average-to-good system would use two-man crews with the driver
also collecting. In a single-family, detached housing pattern, it would require
a twenty-yard packer truck, perform weekly collection of mixed refuse from
curbside with a mix of cans and bags (or, preferably, bags only) and cost in the
neighborhood of ten to fifteen dollars per ton. The crew would make two trips
per day to a disposal site five to ten miles away. Management would be by the
modified incentive system^, where the crew is allowed to leave early if the route
is finished, but is paid overtime when collection requires more than eight hours
for the route. Only residential units would be included—major commercial
areas would be the responsibility of the owner or collected by a special crew
using stationary compactors and other equipment to increase productivity.
Costs would be paid out of the general tax revenue or from user fees, often
collected with the water bill. The operation could either be public, operated
by the public works department, or contracted to a private firm for the whole
community.
The problems with this average operation are:
1. Rising costs;
2. Labor disputes;
3. No incentive for recycling;
4. Possible health problems with fly breeding in summer;
5. Spillage, primarily by dogs or in collection;
6. Unsanitary storage, particularly near apartments;
7. Contracting with private firms and making sure they
perform acceptably;
8. Regulating public performance, particularly where
small public health departments are attempting to
regulate large public works departments.
218
-------
Litter Collection
Litter collection and street cleaning are much more expensive than con-
ventional collection on a per ton basis.6 Street cleaners are expensive
to operate, and require frequent maintenance. They are only able to operate
when the streets are clear of parked cars, and are most effective in picking
up large objects like le'aves or cans.7 Litter baskets reduce the amount of
street litter, but their contents must be collected within the most densely
used areas of the community, since those are where litter baskets should be
installed. In many less dense areas, litter may best be left to property
owners to pick up on a regular basis.
However, litter and other street wastes have important environmental im-
pacts. Some of these were discussed in Section II: Parking Controls. There,
it was shown that the fine particles in street wastes can have significant
water pollution impacts, and that parking controls can greatly increase street
sweeping effectiveness. Larger pieces of litter, though, can be equally
important. The problems of unsightly streets are obvious, but in addition,
garbage, dog feces, and trash provide food and shelter for flies and rats.
Many street and building fires start from uncollected litter.8 Leaves and
paper can block storm drains, causing local flooding. Glass bottles and metal
cans, which form the bulk of roadside litter, may cause injuries, particularly
to children. Controlling street litter is an important environmental quality
issue, and should be part of any community's solid waste management program.
(See Section B.4 below)
Source Reduction
Per capita solid waste generation has risen continually since measure-
ments started, probably because' of the increased affluence and urbanization
of the population.9 The-depletion of natural resources to make packaging
materials and the discarding of papers and other household wastes is a serious
national problem; local communities absorb part of the cost of this profligacy
through the large volumes of waste which must be collected and disposed.
They would benefit if waste production declined: landfills would last longer
with less waste, and collection would be less expensive if source reduction
occurred.
Reducing waste at the source is difficult, however. Consumers are willing
to pay high prices for convenience, and regulatory changes affecting packaging
practices must come from the states or the federal government. Some local
bottle bans, for example, have been ruled unconstitutional because the states
have not given local governments the necessary powers. But, others have
stood, and local support for state legislation is critical. In general,
the problem faced by local communities is that of reducing waste at
the source by merely encouraging changes in consumption, alternative methods
of disposal, or recycling. Most local regulatory programs are not legally or
administratively feasible at this time.
219
-------
Processing and Disposal
The processing and disposal of solid waste generally only require ten
to twenty percent of the solid waste budget, but are often responsible for
a much larger fraction of the management problems. The most common difficulty
is in finding a disposal site, particularly now that most states have set strict
standards for landfills. Handling of hazardous wastes, sewage treatment
sludges, or other types of waste besides the municipal collection can increase
the difficulties. So can pressure from citizens to do some sort of recycling,
particularly in areas where it will only increase costs.
Some of these problems are primarily technical, such as the definition
of what is environmentally acceptable in a landfill site,11 (see Table 38)
or the design of a resource recovery plant. Others are social or political,
such as convincing a community that a specific site will not affect surrounding
property values, or that a regional landfill located in the community must be
accepted. Some of the problems, though, can be partially solved using ordinances
and local government powers, in conjunction with technical and political con-
siderations.
Table 38
The Wide Range of Pollutant Levels in Leachate Composition
pH
Total Hardness, mg/1 "as CaCO-
Total Alkalinity, mg/1 as CaCO-
Total Iron, mg/1
Sodium, mg/1
Potassium, mg/1
Sulfate, mg/1
Nitrate Nitrogen, mg/1 as N
Ammonic Nitrogen, mg/1 as N
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), mg/1
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD 5), mg/1
Total Volatile Acids, mg/1 CH3COOH
Total Dissolved Solids, mg/1
4.9 - 8.4
30 - 13,100
100 - 20,805
2 - 1,000
8 - 1,805
28 -3,770
24 -1,220
5 - 196
0.2 - 1,106
246 - 750,000
5.9 - 920,000
<100 - 10,000
1,740 - 11,254
SOURCE: J.F. Hudson, et al., Evaluation of Policy-Related
Research in the Field of Municipal Solid Waste
Management, Report R74-56, Department of Civil
'Engineering, MIT, 1974.
220
-------
The siting of processing plants or landfills is always difficult, parti-
cularly in urbanized areas where the site affects surrounding residents.
Proper site design, including leachate and gas controls, buffer zones, and
adequate traffic routes, can greatly decrease the direct impacts of the
site, but cannot eliminate them completely.12 Public education campaigns
can answer citizen objections, but can never make the neighbors of the pro-
posed site happy about it in advance, even with plans for conversion of the
completed landfill into parks or other beneficial uses. The role of ordinances
here is twofold: first, to use zoning and similar powers as an aid to site
acquisition, rather than a hinderance; and, second, to insure that the site
is operated acceptably, so that a model will be available to aid in acquiring
the next site. In general, public uses such as landfills, fire stations, and
other public buildings should be allowed in most areas of the community. The
distribution of "noxious" facilities should be spread out, so that one neigh-
borhood gets the landfill, one the sewage treatment plant, and one the alcoholism
outreach center, but no area is faced with all the unwanted facilities. Options
such as flexible zoning, which allow sites of public value to occur anywhere
within a specified area, should be considered {See Section I). If provision
is not made for site locations in the comprehensive plan and the zoning regu-
lations, it may be impossible to find a site which is acceptable on all counts.
Public control should be placed over landfills, whether run by private firms
or by the disposal agency. Public health standards have been set and enforced
by a number of states, but there is generally room for local involvement in
permitting, monitoring, and regulating. Local boards have responsibility
over groundwater and surfacewater, both of which are affected by landfill.
Public health agencies can have permitting authority for all landfills,
including public ones, arid can require performance bonds from the private
operators.13 Combined with an effective inspection program, analyzing
leachate, runoff, and the general site condition, the result can be true
sanitary landfills.
The local government can expect only a minor role in controlling the
impacts of sewage sludge and hazardous wastes.14 The technical issues of
designing landfills for toxic materials, and of insuring that such landfills
are properly operated, should be the responsibility of the state, since such
sites generally serve a larger jurisdiction than that of the local government.
However, local governments should have an understanding of the problems,
and should be sensitive to the condition of the groundwater and general environ-
ment near such sites. If the sites are privately operated, permits should be
required like any other landfill, so that there is a local interest in over-
seeing their impacts.
While the permits and siting problems for transfer stations, incinerators
and resource recovery plants are slightly different, the issues are the same:
such sites provide a public service, but they also have adverse local impacts,
and should be regulated. Noise, traffic, and odors are more important for
facilities than they are for landfills, however. Private facilities should
properly be limited to industrial zones, since they are industries, process-
ing raw materials into useful products.
221
-------
When all else fails, most communities -try to combine their landfill or
facility siting procedures. This is the outgrowth of a long tradition of
putting facilities on community boundaries, so that the impacts do not affect
local voters, but instead those of the next town over. With interlocal
agreements, one community generally tries to convince another to accept waste,
for a suitable fee or other considerations. This seldom succeeds. The
successful interlocal agreements come when a number of communities decide to
save costs and siting requirements by finding a site on which they all can
agree, and also working out a compensation procedure for sharing the burden.
This works best for resource recovery facilities, where the site location
problem is not as severe; it is least successful for landfills, but can work
there, especially if the plan has phased sites impacting each of the commun-
ities over time. In any case, interlocal agreements take a great deal of
Gare in planning, and require special arrangements for financing, authority,
and sharing the burden. Most states are now attempting to promote or operate
regional systems, primarily for resource recovery.
Besides these major facilities, local governments are also involved in
processing solid waste through recycling. There are two models for community
recycling programs: the separate collection model, and the recycling center
model. Recycling centers are simple operations, where citizens voluntarily
bring their waste to a central point and separate it into the valuable com-
ponents (glass, sorted by color; aluminum and steel cans; newspapers and
other high quality papers).15 Municipal or volunteer labor then process
the waste and transport it to users, who save money and energy by using the
reclaimed materials. Program success can depend on whether the community
will dedicate land; whether union or volunteer labor' is required; and whether
the funds are donated to a "good cause" or enter the general tax levy. Muni-
cipal participation, through low-level support for volunteer programs, and1
through the provision of some equipment and space, can be extremely effective.
The other option is to provide separate collection service for certain
products (most commonly, newspapers). Technical details are easily available,
but there are some significant legal issues.ib If the papers are valuable, there
is a tendency for scavengers to appear, and to collect the papers before the col-
lection crews. This leads to questions about whether such scavengers should be
allowed, and also whether they are stealing from either the homeowner or the
community when they remove the "waste." Most communities have outlawed scavenging
for this reason.I7 In at least one case, however, it was proposed that the
scavengers be licensed by the community, and required to post a performance bond.1**
So long as the price for waste newspapers was sufficiently high, they would col-
lect the waste at no cost to the community, and would be providing some savings
in collection cost and landfill space. This program has not been implemented
but appears promising.
222
-------
OPTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT
Improvements in Household Storage
Before the solid waste ever enters the "solid waste management system"
it must be stored on the premises where it is generated. Acceptable
storage systems range from traditional thirty-gallon metal cans to plastic or
paper bags, or, for apartments, ten cubic yard containers or roll-offs with com-
pactors attached. Injuries to collection personnel often result from old or
overfull containers, so the municipality has a major interest in insuring
safe and sanitary storage. And since solid waste fires, spillage
litter, and fly-breeding are often the result of improper storaqe, there are
important public health justifications for municipal regulatory actions to
improve it.
For residential collection, this is fairly easy. A standard can be set
as part of a comprehensive solid waste ordinance describing what sorts of con-
tainers are acceptable. For unacceptable permanent containers, such as old
cans with split seams or without lids, a notice can be pasted on the can by
the collectors stating that it must be replaced. If this is not done by the
next collection, it can be treated as trash and collected; the resident will
then need a new container for the next collection. For unacceptable disposal
containers, such a paper shopping bags, the problem is more difficult. They
should be collected, but, if the problem persists, an inspector should issue
a violation notice to the resident, in a form similar to a parking ticket
if possible. (It is worth lobbying for legislation allowing such citations.)
These two procedures can help insure that the storage containers are of
satisfactory quality. Provision of bags or containers in portions of the
community may provide another option.
Insuring public health in multi-family housing areas is extremely dif-
ficult. Inspection programs can cite landlords and building owners, but the
ability of such inspections to lead to cleanliness has not been proven. If
the violator is a tenant, he is protected by anomymity. If the landlord
is the violator, small fines and orders to improve will have little effect.
For landlord-caused violations, as for other housing code problems, certificates
of occupancy can be made contingent on inspections, though this is expensive.
A special housing court can also be a useful technique, although even it will
fail if neither the tenants nor the landlord see an immediate incentive to
keep areas clean and sanitary. Outside inspections of the practice are
often satisfactory, and it would be possible to require permits for equipment,
such as containers or compactors, used to haul, process, or transport wastes.
The permits would allow annual inspection, not only of the equipment, but of
•the ways it is used.
The local government also has options related to the sorts of interior
household storage that are allowed. Some communities have required the use
of plastic or paper bags, with great success in reducing collection costs and
potential for reduction in fly breeding, rats, and spillage.20 However, plastic
bags may impose an additional expense on householders, and may be subject to
breaking or damage by dogs, particularly if the bags are too thin or filled over
capacity. The expense problem can be mitigated by free distribution of plastic
223
-------
or Kraft-paper disposal bags in lew income areas. In any case, communities
should require that the National Sanitation Foundation standards for bags be
met, to minimize spillage and injuries.
While not a true storage option, composting should also be considered
here. Many communities do not allow composting of household waste, yet it
can be healthy and environmentally sound.21 The dangers of bacteria, virus,
and insects do exist if the compost heap is not carefully used, but a permit
program can easily be set up to provide for annual inspections by public
health officials. The fee should be small, and the reductions in waste
generation could be significant, particularly if consequent reductions in
garbage allowed reduced collection frequency. Incentives to householders
for composting would include lower solid waste collection costs (if
individually assessed) and the availability of compost as a soil conditioner
(see also "Improvements on On-Site Waste Management Systems" in Section IV).
Improved Collection Operations
The Environmental Protection Agency, the American Public Works Associa-
tion, and other groups have been concerned with the efficiency and effective-
ness of solid waste collection procedures. Collection accounts for the
majority of solid waste management costs, usually between seventy and eighty-
five percent, and improvements in collection efficiency may greatly reduce
costs,22 Many such improvements have been suggested: reductions in crew
size, curb instead of backyard collection, improved vehicle design, well-
planned collection routes, use of transfer stations to reduce long hauls,
incentive systems for the crews, changes in collection frequency, combina-
tion of trash and garbage collection, injury reduction programs, conversions
from public to private operation or vice versa, etc. All are well-documented
in the literature about collection, and all may lead to cost savings or
increases in productivity.23 We will not attempt to review them all, but will
concentrate on those that may have unrecognized environmental side effects.
Curbside pickup (as opposed to backyard collection) reduces the costs
of collection by about fifty percent, on the average.24 It means that
crews do not have to enter private property, which reduces legal problems
and saves fuel. However, it can lead to unsightly streets on collection day,
and probably results in increased spillage by dogs. The cost savings are
undoubtedly worthwhile in most communities, but curbside systems require
that the waste be stored in tightly covered containers or heavy bags, and
these storage standards must be enforced. Curbside pickup also requires
that collection be performed on schedule, so that the waste is not left on the
street longer than necessary; this is less important in backyard systems.
In fact, it is probably desirable in curbside systems to have inspections to
make sure that residents do not place the waste out too early, or leave the
cans at the curb too long. It may also be important to have a set-out,
set-back crew to aid elderly or infirm citizens.
Storage arrangements involving large wheeled carts have been developed
for curbside collection in single-family areas.25 The carts should contain
a week's waste for a family, and are to be wheeled to the curb. They are
high-impact plastic, have a guarantee, arid have tight lids. If required by
224
-------
the community, they will help eliminate spillage and aesthetic problems with
curbside collection. They are costly, and best suited to generally flat,
suburban areas.
Changes in frequency may also affect the environmental impacts of solid
w,aste collection. As might be expected, weekly collection costs less than
twice-weekly collection (about twenty-five percent), but it may have other
impacts.26 In blighted areas, high collection frequencies reduce street
litter and can improve the appearance of the area. In warm climates, twice-
•~\ ~j
weekly collection may be required to inhibit fly breeding in the waste.
(An alternative is to require the use of plastic storage bags or well-
designed containers like those described above.) More frequent collection
may also make recycling easier, particularly in areas where storage space
is limited. In general, though, weekly collection is acceptable, particularly
if combined with stringent storage requirements.
Private or public operation has been a continuing issue in solid waste
management. Private operations have generally been found to be less expen-
sive, particularly in areas where the municipal system has had a monopoly
for a long period.28 However, private operations must be carefully contracted
and regulated, with performance bonds, permits, and similar procedures to make
sure .that the work gets done acceptably. The incentive for the private
operator is to cut costs wherever possible, and that will mean that the ser-
vice will be the minimum acceptable to the community (as it should be for
economic efficiency). The .EPA Model Solid .Waste Ordinance deals with the
regulation of private firms in great detail, and is discussed in "Ordinances
and Equipment" in this section.
Pricing of solid waste management is another issue of importance. Many
systems use general tax revenue or support collection by a flat fee for ser-
vice paid by all households. Both forms burden the poor proportionally more
than'the rich, the flat fee system being the more regressive of the two.
Tn recent years, a number of communities have placed limits on the amount
of waste collected per household, or have sold bags with special markings
which are priced to cover collection costs.29 In the latter arrangement,
all wastes must be placed within a fee-paid bag (or have one attached),
in order to be collected. In both approaches the idea is to increase the
equity of collection pricing: it is fair to charge every household for the
amount of waste it produces. Such a system has a serious drawback, however.
For, in providing an incentive to reduce wastes placed out for collection,
it may indirectly encourage littering or illicit dumping with harmful environ-
mental effects. Free service for households with low-incomes can reduce
this problem somewhat.
There are three ways residents can reduce their volume of waste: one is
to pack things more tightly, for example by crushing cans and cartons. This
may lead to increased density in the truck and landfill, and may have a posi-
tive effect. But it may also lead to over-filling containers and increased
spillage. The second option is for households to increase their recycling,
and thus reduce the amount of waste they produce. This too has a positive
result. The third option, however, is for households to dispose of wastes
privately: if procedures are provided for carrying the waste to the local
225
-------
landfill some residents may do so, but it is more likely that such disposal will
involve littering, dumping waste in vacant lots, or illegal backyard burning.
Any community experimenting with pricing mechanisms should monitor the amounts
of waste collected, recycled, and picked up as litter. There is evidence
that the volume of waste collected falls, but there is little information on
whether the remainder is recycled, littered, or simply not generated.30
Each of the topics discussed above involves a major change in the col-
lection service, and each has some side effects related to the type of
service provided. The same is true for many of the other potential collec-
tion improvements, so careful analysis of the impacts of any change should
be done before the change is implemented. The EPA ordinance contained below
provides useful suggestions on the normal range of options; both legal and
economic analysis should be applied to the alternatives listed above.
Recycling Incentives
Local governments should support voluntary recycling programs to the
extent of their ability. Not only does recycling aid national goals of re-
ducing resource consumption, but it also can reduce the costs to local govern-
ments of solid waste collection and disposal. While most collection costs
depend on the number of collection stops rather than the volume of wastes,
recycling will at least reduce the number of hauls per day for the collection
vehicles. More important, especially in urban areas, increased recycling
will reduce the volume of landfill required each day, and increase the use-
ful life of landfills. If sufficiently practiced, recycling, garbage grinders,
use of bags for storage, and composting can reduce collection frequency for
specific items to once/two weeks or even once/month. The result is large
savings of manpower and equipment.
The basic issue hefe is how local governments can increase
recycling, primarily through separation of valuable materials by the
residents before collection (source separation). The easiest option is to
set up a recycling center, probably using volunteer labor, that will accept
materials from residents and sell the materials to secondary materials
brokers. In most areas, this approach is likely to break even, or perhaps
show a slight profit, if the materials include newspaper, glass, and metals.
A large number of these programs presently exist, and more are formed when-
ever market prices for these materials are high.31
A more expensive approach is to collect recyclable materials on regular
collection rounds, but to keep them separated.32 Collection costs will rise,
but a much greater volume of materials will be separated. Participation
seems to depend on the length of time the operation has existed, and appears
insensitive to whether separation is voluntary or "required" (see Figure 15).
Designs are available for adding racks for the reclaimed materials (usually
newspapers) to standard packer trucks.33 Since newspapers generally form
over ten percent of the volume of residential solid waste in urban areas,
savings in landfill space will be significant.
226
-------
Figure 15
Increase in Citizen Participation in
Recycling Over Time
100- •
90
BO
y
S 60-
I *'
£ 40-
30-
20-
10-
(BOWIE!
• N IGREAT NECK)
• N (WEST HARTFORD)
• N (BRIAftCUFF MANOR)
N IHEMPSTEAOl
• VOLUNTARY PROGRAM
• MANDATORY PfiOGRAM
N NEWSPAPER
P MIXED PAPER
BAYi
• P 'VILLA PAfiKI
-1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 h
4 b 12 '.£» 24 28 32 36 40 44
PROGRAM DURATION )nK>olla)
SOURCE: EPA
However, before any such programs are attempted, it is crucial to find
a market for the reclaimed goods. A number of communities have been forced
to landfill separated materials because they could not afford to sell them
at the market price. The secondary materials market undergoes frequent
price shifts, and the price paid for a material, such as Grade 2 newspaper,
may range from $25/ton at some periods to $3/ton at others.34 It is extremely
important to find a user with a fairly constant demand, such as a roofing
plant. The price will not be $25 a ton, of course, but should be sufficient
to stabilize the economics of the program. Ideally, the waste newspaper
should be shipped to a user producing new newspaper to close the reuse cycle,
but there are few such plants in existence at present.35
Newspaper and, to a lesser extent, glass are the most common materials
recycled by municipalities, but cans (particularly aluminum cans) may have
enough value to involve the private sector in recycling. Thus, while cans
might be a valuable byproduct of a municipal recycling program, the local govern-
ment should specialize on the "unwanted" glass and newspaper to achieve the
highest overall rates of recycling and to insure that recycling is actually
increased.
227
-------
Litter Control
This brings us to the final way local communities can reduce pollution from
solid waste: litter control. Litter laws are generally underenforced by the
police—the "crime" seems so minor and insignificant that the effort involved
in enforcing the law is too much bother. Even in cases that go to court,
most are dismissed with only small fines: a $50 to $100 maximum fine is
seldom enforced. Enforcement of litter regulations may have a major
impact on urban environment, but the enforcement cost is too high to make
it seem worthwhile. Enforcement of anti-litter ordinances is uncommon,
except in special cases.
There are other ways to reduce littering, however, which can be imple-
mented by the local government. "One is the provision of litter baskets in
commercial areas. The costs of providing and collecting from them is not
large, particularly when compared with street sweeping costs for the same
amount of material, and the effectiveness is high. One researcher showed
that littering nearly doubled in areas without litter cans.36 (see Table 39)
Street sweeping and clean-ups can also reduce future littering. In the same
study, it was shown that areas that were already dirty received about twice
the amount of litter as clean areas, all else being equal. Street sweeping
is expensive, but probably not as expensive as either rat control programs
or special periodic cleanups. Street sweeping may also be partially sub-
sidized by businessmen's associations in commercial areas, where the problems
are largest. Any collections by street sweeping will also reduce water
pollution (see Section III),
.The final option for litter control is public involvement. Littering
is much more common by people under eighteen years of age than people
over eighteen (see Table 39) , and programs in the schools may be effective
in reducing the amount of littering. Keep America Beautiful, Inc. has a great
deal of information on how to get people to stop littering.
Table 39
The Impact of Visual Environmental Quality on Littering
Percent of People who Litter;
Litter cans
No cans
Clean Area
15
34
Percent of People Under 18 who Litter:
Clean Area
Litter cans 59
No cans 77
Dirty Area
33
51
Dirty Area
77
95
SOURCE: Finnie, "Field Experiments in Litter Control.
220
-------
The Keep America Beautiful approach involves an Action Research Model
(ARM) which relates people's littering behavior to community norms. In a
simple example, if people expect busboys to collect dishes in a cafeteria,
they will leave the dishes on the tables. If most people get in the habit of
busing their own trays, then almost everybody will do so. In many ways, the
Keep America Beaufiful approach attempts to change from the first norm
("Somebody else is responsible") to the second ("I clean up after myself").
Other norms are also involved—those of the solid waste managers, who have
the responsibility of running the litter control system; those of the
politicians; and those of the people who stand by watching others litter
without seeking to restrain them. (See Table 40) .
Table 40
Common Litter Norms
LITTERERS: It's OK to litter where litter already is.
Its OK to litter where someone else is
responsible for cleaning up.
Its OK to litter in places where the individual
has no sense of ownership for the area.
MANAGERS: I've always run my operation this way.
It's somebody else's responsibility.
I'm only one, what I do won't make any difference.
VICTIMS: Nobody else gives a damn, wny should I?
Those people (ghetto residents, sanitation workers,
container manufacturers, fast food operators,
other scapegoats) are responsible for this mess.
You can't fight city hall.
SOURCE: Keep America Beautiful, Inc., ARM Final Report,
New York: KAB, 1975.
In a number of cases, the Action Research Model has been applied to find
those changes which will be most effective in changing the community norms
to make littering unacceptable. There are a large number of possible approaches,
but they generally require a citizen's committee to evaluate changes, a survey
to establish norms, publicity, and some changes in the collection operation,
at a minimum. Both the detailed changes and the results vary from community
to community, but the public officials in all test communities have been very
satisfied with the results and will continue the ARM approach, as developed
into the "Clean Community System." Table 41 shows some of the results.
229
-------
The appendix at the end of this section presents a litter control ordinance
developed as one portion of the approach for one of the test communities.
Keep America Beautiful, Inc. should be contacted for further details on
implementing the ARM in a community.
Table 41
Measurements of Litter Accumulation In
Communi ty
Charlotte, NC
Evansville, IN
Ma con-Bibb Co. ,
Reno/Sparks, NV
Sioux Falls, SD
Tampa, FL
Clean Community
Total
Percentage
Change in Litter
-71.2
-40.3
GA -57.0
-33.6
-50.9
-73.0
System Communities
Percentage Change/
Year of Program
-32.8
-48.4
-31.3
-36.7
-29.8
-33.7
Date of
Sample
4/76
5/76
2/76
3/76
5-6/76
4/76
Compared
To
2/74
7/75
4/74
4/75
9/74
2/74
Processing and Disposal Technology
Solid waste interacts with other pollution problems, primarily through
the way in which it is processed and disposed. The air pollution problems
of incinerators are well known, as are the leachate effects from sanitary
landfills too close to groundwater or unsuitable soils. 38 The air pollu-
tion and water pollution controls also generate large amounts of solid waste,
primarily in the forms of sewage sludge and slurries from power plant
scrubbers.39 Municipalities generally do not have to worry about agricultural
mining, or industrial wastes, but they do have the responsibility for sewage
sludge, and they should consider it in their planning. Since the biggest
problem in solid waste management is often site acquisition for disposal,
minimizing the number of disposal sites can be an important goal.
Alternatively, it may be desirable to have a large number of short-term
landfills, each operating on a small site for a year. The burdens would be
spread around the community and areas needing fill for park development would
receive it. This has been suggested in the literature,40 but has not been
attempted in practice. While in most cases it will be best to minimize the
number of sites, the option of increasing them in this manner should at
least be considered.
One way to minimize disposal sites is to process the waste, and at
present that generally means to build a recycling plant. However, recycling
plants are expensive, largely untried, and have unknown costs and environ-
mental impacts.4^ Though they are presently being implemented where con-
ventional options seem unavailable, they are probably the long-term solution
to the solid waste management problem-
230
-------
There is, though, one important question related to recycling plant
economics: if much of the value of the reclaimed materials comes from the
metals and glass in solid waste, what effect do source separation programs
have on plant economics?46 For example, a plant which is supposed to operate
for a net cost of $10/ton (after sales of reclaimed materials and fuel), may
actually operate for a net cost of $12/ton to $15/ton if the metals and glass
are not available. Since the community recycling programs and recycling plants
are often operated by different agencies, coordination is required.
RATING THE OPTIONS
A large number of ways to improve solid waste management in local
governments were mentioned in the preceding section. These options involved
ways to change the standard storage-collection-disposal system to either
consider outside factors, or to respond to changing conditions. The major
options discussed were:
1. Improved residential storage containers
2. Inspection of containers during collection
3. Inspection of containers at other times
4. Permits for household composting
5. Private or public management
6. Changing collection location
7. Changing collection frequency
8. Pricing for each can collected
9. Operating recycling centers
10. Separate collection of materials to be recycled
11. Enforcement of litter ordinances
12. Providing litter baskets
13. Using the KAB Clean Community System to reduce
littering.
There are four factors which must be considered for each of these suggestions:
what difference they will make; how much they will cost local government; how
much they will burden local residents; and how they can be implemented.
Table 42 gives a general rating for each of the options ranked in order
of declining effectiveness; detailed discussions are given in the sections
below.
Effectiveness of the Options
This section is concerned with the environmental benefits and costs of
the options mentioned above. Each has certain characteristics which influence
whether it is beneficial or harmful, and how much difference it makes.
Changes in collection service—decreases in frequency and change from
household to curbside collection—have a minor effect if combined with
satisfactory storage. Flies breed in about five days, so weekly collection
will allow fly breeding if containers are open or uncovered. If plastic
bags or well-designed cans are used effectively, however, this impact will be
minimal, assuming good performance by the collectors. The same is true for
spillage at the curb—with good containers, it will be minimal; with poor
containers, it will be a major problem.43
231
-------
to
W
N)
OPTION
Separate Collection of
Recyclable Materials
KAB-ARM for Litter
Improved Storage
Containers
Inspection during
Collection
Recycling Centers
Inspection Outside
Collection
Litter Baskets
Residential Composting
Litter Enforcement
Change Location of Col-
lection to Curbside
Private/Public Operations
Reduce Frequency of
Collection
Pricing by Can or Bag
i
Improved Street
Sweeping
Table 42
EVALUATION OF MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENTS
EFFECTIVENESS
excellent
very good
very good
very good
good
moderate
moderate
moderate
low
mode rate- low
variable
variable
unknown
See Chapter
II
COST TO GOVERNMENT
moderate-high
.moderate -high
savings possible
near zero
low
high
high
paid by permit
BURDEN ON RESIDENT
low
change in values
expensive
zero except for
violators
high
minimal
IMPLEMENTATION
PROBLEMS
easy
fairly easy
difficult
easy
easy
easy
easy
— easy
high i — difficult
savings more effort i variable
private less
expensive
low difficult to
'• shift
i !
savings
may provide net
income
less convenient variable
•
incentive to litter easy
-------
The use of proper storage containers may be the most important
change a community can make in its solid waste management. Requiring
thick plastic or paper bags, which meet NSF standards, can reduce the impacts
of storage and collection considerably if enforced. Provision of permanent
containers by the community can have a similar effect and may, in suitable
areas, even reduce total,costs. In any case, inspection by the collectors
to make sure the containers are suitable will be important, and the easiest
way is to supply then with stickers to place on unsatisfactory containers;
any container found with a sticker at the next collection is considered trash.
With sufficient public education before the rule is implementd, complaints
can be reduced to an acceptable level.
Inspection outside the collection process is probably just as important,
since spillage and unsanitary conditions at apartments or commercial sites
is a continuing problem. Probably over half of urban fires start in trash,44
and waste handling in large buildings is particularly shoddy: once the
waste leaves the office or apartment, it is often ignored. Similar inspect-
tions of residential composting, residential incinerators, and other waste
handling procedures can be implemented by requiring permits whose cost
covers the inspection fee.
Pricing by the can attempts to increase the equity of the solid waste
management system, but may as a result give people incentives to litter,
.especially if alternatives are not available for low income households.4^
Three types of recycling programs can be effective on the local level.
One is the recycling processing plant, which probably uses the waste most
effectively, but should be looked at primarily as a method of waste disposal
for the community. The other two require source separation; of these, a
system that collects directly from households will be more effective than a
system requiring residents to make their own waste to a recycling center.
Even paying centers are often less effective than separate collection,
resulting in twenty percent less participation and fifty percent less waste
in one analysis.4& Publicity, particularly personal contact, greatly in-
creases the amount of waste separated, and large houses with sufficient
storage space are more likely to recycle materials than people in apartments
or overcrowded dwellings.4^
The most effective way to reduce litter, both on the streets and
in vacant lots, is to take a comprehensive approach like the ARM developed
by Keep America Beautiful, Inc.48 Provision of litter baskets, improved
collection procedures, public education campaigns, and litter ordinance
enforcement are all pieces of the process, but effective litter control
really requires that the pieces be put together, and the KA3 approach
appears to be the best available.
Cost to the Government
Several of the proposed improvements provide savings to the local govern-
ment. Conversion from twice-weekly to weekly collection saves about twenty-
five percent of collection costs, and changes in location save about fifty
percent. Requiring standardized or disposable storage containers may also
233
-------
lead to savings: bags reduce costs about thirty-five percent for collection,
and standardized containers without mechanized pickup may also reduce costs
somewhat. Conversion to private collection can reduce costs because of higher
productivity, but only if the contract is with a local government: individual
contracting with private firms is likely to lead to major problems in assigning
responsibility for unsatisfactory service, and overlapping routes will greatly
reduce efficiency.^9
Inspection programs related to household storage will have very low
costs, since they will be integrated with the collection operation. Other
inspection programs of waste handling equipment, storage are'as, and compost-
ing can be self-sustaining through permit fees for yearly operations.
Recycling centers can operate at about $16/ton if volunteer labor is used.
This must be compared to the prices for the reclaimed materials, and to the ex-
pected savings in collection and landfill costs, which are different for each
community.
Separate collection program costs are more difficult to estimate. Racks
for installation under trucks for newspaper collection cost about $200/truck,
and the whole program might increase collection time by about fifteen percent,
with fifty percent participation or more.51 Again, these costs must be com-
pared to the value of the paper and the savings in landfill space. It is
extremely important to get long-term agreements on a paper price; otherwise
shifts in the paper market will greatly change the expected cost of the program.
In any case, both recycling centers and separate collection are close to break-
even operations, in most instances.
The costs of litter programs are more questionnable. Community litter
baskets in commercial areas can generally be supported by collections from
nearby businesses, especially if the baskets display advertising. Collection
from the baskets, though, is liable to cost $30/ton or more. The full ARM
program cost $30,000 in Macon, Georgia, an area of 143,000 people, for
administration and education only (ARM tends to use such funds as seed
money to convince government departments, citizens, and businesses to make
the necessary changes). Macon, for example, hired three inspectors, re-
modeled the public works building, and convinced businessmen to install
over two-hundred litter containers. The total costs of litter control in a
comprehensive system like this are high, but the seed money to get the program
started is fairly small. If the program is not a success, then the later
costs will not be incurred.
Burdens on the Residents and Community^
Changes in collection systems that reduce government effort generally
require larger portions of the cost to be paid by citizens. Curbside col-
lection requires that the resident move his own waste to the curb, and this
may be difficult for. the elderly. Decreased collection frequency means
that the resident must store twice the amount of waste, which involves
expenses in buying containers, etc. Pricing by the can means that residents
will do extra work to reduce the volume of waste, and gives them an incentive
to find alternate means of disposal. Private collection may increase
234
-------
productivity and reduce all costs, but requirements for bags or standardized
containers will mean large expenses for residents—$.05 per bag, on the
average, or perhaps $10/household/year. Inspection and permit systems will
require that pernit fees be paid, perhaps something on the order of $25/
permit for apartments or commercial structures, and $5/permit for household
compost piles on a yearly basis.
Recycling centers impose high burdens on community residents. The travel
required to transport wastes is expensive, and the storage space required in
each house could be used for something else. The burdens of separate collec-
tion programs are much lower: only separating and bundling the materials. Of
course, recycling centers may pay for aluminum, perhaps even enough to make
residents' trips profitable. Litter programs impose no burdens on residents,
except for violaters.
The main burdens to communities as a whole, then, come from extra
effort that residents must undertake to handle their wastes as collection
service is cut back. These burdens are generally not high for the average
household, but special provisions may be necessary for certain groups {the
poor, the elderly, etc.).
Implementation of Controls
Many of the improvements' suggested are expected to be easy to implement,
to the extent that any change in the solid waste system can even be called
"easy." If communities can be convinced of their value, then all of the
litter controls, recycling, and inspection programs can be implemented with
little difficulty. Legislation in the form of litter or solid waste ordin-
ances will be required in many cases, and money to cover the government
costs will also be required. However, the primary difficulty is in convinc-
ing people of the value of the approach; there are no vested interests
aligned against the programs, and there are no requirements for special
enabling legislation.
The situation is different for major changes in the collection
service. Often people have had their waste collected from a location on a
set of days at a given price for a long time, and any change in that (even
something as simple as combining refuse and garbage) will meet with resist-
ance. Still, the arguments for curbside collection and weekly frequency
are strong ones, especially if the community can improve service with the expected
savings. The same problem exists with requiring bags—the government savings are
large, but there are costs to the householders; combinations of strategies may
make it possible to reduce citizen resistance, by making a comprehensive change
for the better in collection services.->2
Conversion to private collection will require passing a solid waste
ordinance similar to the one developed by EPA, and will meet with extreme
resistance from employees, even if a no-fire policy is used, as is desirable.
Large amounts of data on expected savings will be required because many people
will wish to keep the public agency in operation; facts are the only defense.
An education campaign, advertisements, or other political approaches may be
necessary.
235
-------
Enforcement of litter regulations is probably the most difficult of all
the suggested improvements to implement. Instead of an arrest, a ticket for
litter violations, perhaps on the order of five dollars, would seem likely
to be effective, and might be used by police. In theory, exorbitant fines
sound good, but if the fines are never enforced, they are meaningless.
Thus, a smaller fine used more often would be an improvement. For this
strategy there would probably have to be an enabling act allowing the pro-
cecure. At the least, a municipal ordinance would be required.
ORDINANCES AND EQUIPMENT
This section is intended primarily for reference. Many of the sugges-
tions for improving solid waste management made above require special legisla-
tion, special equipment, or special technical knowledge before they can be
implemented; this section attempts to provide some guidance to those sources.
Equipment and Standards
Most solid waste management systems require significant amounts of
equipment. Trucks, containers, processing plants, litter boxes, landfill
liners, paper balers, and so forth must all be bought by householders or
local governments. There are good guides available for some types of equip-
ment; for others, it is necessary to contact people already working in the
field to get the necessary information. Probably the most valuable source
of data on large equipment is the Waste Equipment Manufacturer's Institute,
which has produced standards for trucks, storage devices, and other related
pieces of equipment.53 ^s secondary sources, the American Public Works
Association and EPA are valuable. The American Public Works Association has
recently finished a study of street sweepers, analyzing effectiveness, cost,
and maintenance requirements. 4 EPA, APWA, and others have been involved
in the analysis of which types of collection equipment are most effective for
various needs.55 The National Sanitation Foundation has developed standards
for paper and plastic refuse bags,56 and EPA has required similar standards.57
Consumer Reports has also rated bags for trash.58 Household compactors have
been analyzed in a study for the City of Atlanta, Georgia,59 and tests have
been performed on large permanent plastic containers for Scottsdale, Arizona.60
Solid Waste Management magazine provides a yearly equipment buyer's guide, and
may be valuable.61
Any of the organizations described above—WEMI, APWA, NSF or EPA—will be
happy to respond to questions about various categories of equipment and
standards for them. To get detailed information on performance, it may be
necessary to contact someone who owns the type of equipment of interest.
Design Information
The design of solid waste management systems, whether for collection,
recycling, or disposal, is a complicated problem. Engineering, economics,
public administration, and politics all have important inputs toward designing
how the system should operate. Some sources of guidance are as follows.
For collection, two books are predominant. The Decision Maker's Guide
to Solid Waste Management, by the Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
at EPA, considers all the basic choices for collection systems, and attempts
236
-------
to provide information on the trade-offs faced in each choice, with recommenda-
tions were appropriate.62 Solid Waste Collection Practice, by the Institute
of Solid Wastes of the American Public Works Association is a detailed
description of current practice among member communities.63 jt describes how
things are actually being done, and attempts to establish the best practice.
In addition, both organizations provide some measure of technical support,
and there are other trade organizations which will help. The National Solid
Waste Management Association represents the private collection companies, who
collect most of the solid waste nationally (and probably about fifty percent
of residential waste), The Government Refuse Collection and Disposal Associa-
tion is active in promoting acceptable solid waste management, and is based
in the Los Angeles area.64
Recycling programs have been the subject of much less interest, at least
as measured by the number of handbooks. The National Association of Recycling
Industries may provide some information, particularly about markets for re-
claimed materials, and the National Center for Resource Recovery will also
help. Compost Science, the Journal of Waste Recycling, has printed a few
how-to-do-it articles on recycling in communities; EPA has developed analyses
of existing programs, and a guide to them. The Decision Maker's Guide also
provides useful data on setting up separate collection programs, though less
on the recycling center approach. The major container producers and bottlers
have had a large interest in recycling programs and many have material to
distribute.65
The amount of information on processing and disposal is continually
rising. Sanitary Landfill Design and Operation, an EPA publication, is valu-
able but may become outdated if leachate standards are imposed. Sanitary
Landfill, a manual by the American Society of Civil Engineers,66 has been
recently revised and expanded, and is an excellent source. For processing
equipment, changing costs, environmental regulations, and successes and fail-
ures in existing plants make it difficult to get up-to-date information on
any system. The National Center for Resource Recovery is one source, but
it is necessary to have the services of consultants knowledgeable in the field
before making major decisions. There are 'likely to be a number of communities
incurring high costs because of poorly designed resource recovery plants;
any technical knowledge which can avoid that should be sought.67
Ordinances
Two ordinances are included in this section. The first is the litter
ordinance developed in Charlotte, North Carolina, as part of the ARM Litter
Reduction Program, and it is followed by the Model Solid Waste Ordinance
developed by EPA. The Charlotte ordinance is actually a general solid waste
ordinance, but is particularly concerned with reducing litter and spillage
in the storage and collection process. Its goal.is a cleaner city, and it may
aid in meeting these goals .68
The new EPA Model Solid Waste Ordinance is probably the first model ordin-
ance developed in the field. It provides for control of storage, permits
and regulation of collection and disposal, and administrative procedures.
237
-------
One reason for the lack of past ordinances in this area is the great municipal
involvement in the problem: as long as the community was handling all waste,
ordinances were often viewed as unnecessary roadblocks in getting the job
done.
The main thrust of the EPA ordinance is the procedures involved in con-
tracting for waste services and in regulating private companies involved
in solid waste management. Traditionally, these companies were small opera-
tions controlled in a fairly informal manner. . Within the past decade, though,
they have grown considerably, and formal procedures for contracting with them
and regulating them are necessary. While these procedures do not have any
direct environmental benefit, careful regulation will insure that the collec-
tion and disposal processes are carried out without any major harm to the
environment.
The EPA model ordinance has a variety of drafting problems (e.g., note
the multitude of definitions, many of which may well need to be modified to
conform to existing local law). The model also attempts to create a rather
complicated system, and in so doing, may well lose the thread of clarity for
the layman. Despite these shortcomings, the ordinance is broad, 'and addresses
most, if not all, of the issues a community would normally face in managing
its solid waste program. It can be expected that the ordinance will be
heavily modified to meet local needs and concerns, and to conform with exist-
ing local practice. In some ways, it is not a model for adoption by local
governments, but rather a goal toward which they should strive.
For specific purposes, it may also be useful t'o look at EPA's
Digest of Selected Solid Waste Management Ordinances or at the authority
available in various states for regulation.69
238
-------
Appendix VII-1
to
u>
(APPENDIX -B-)
AMZSDINC CHAPTER 10.
ARTICLES I and II
A.*: c!Oi::.'..'-'c; AX-NSISS CHAPTER 10 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF CHASLOTTE
IZ IT C-CAISTD by the City Council of the City of Charlotte, North
Carolina that:
Sectlea I. Chapter 10 la hereby amended by the deletion of Sections
10-S through aid Including Section 10-10 of Article I and Sections 10-13
O tV.raujb and iailudlng Section 10-16 of Article II In their entirety and sub-
• tltutir.g the following In lieu thereof:
"ARTICLE II.
COLLECTION A.ND DISPOSAL OF WASTE HATTER
Thlt article shall be known and nay be cited as the 'Titter Control
Criir-ance."
Sec. 10-i. In general.
It shall be ur.lavful for any person to trespass on the rights of
ansrher through the neglect of property by causing or ullovlng un-
sightly litter, foul odor, or potentially dangerous devices tp renaln
on or e=ir.ate froa the property, or to discard, abandon, or cause
such on F-jbllc property cr other's private property.
See. 10-9. Definitions.
For the purposes of this article, the following terns, phrases,
words 2nd their derivatives shall have the neanlng given herein.
W-ea not Inconsistent with the context, words used in the present
ter.se include the future, words In the plural rmaber Include singu-
lar 3-;=':5r, and vords in the singular number Include the plural
number. The vard "shall" Is aluays mandatory and not nerely
directory.
The following definitions shall apply In the Interpretation and
the enforcement of this article:
-2-
(1) "Building materials" neans any material such as lu-ber.
brick, plaster, gutters, or other substances accumulated as
a result of repairs or additions to existing buildings, con-
struction of new buildings, or denolition of existing structures.
(2) "Bulk container" means a necal container of not less than
six cubic yards nor larger than eight cubic yards, rade of
water-tight construction with doors opening on tvo sld^s and
top, and constructed so that it can be er.pticd mechanically
by specially equipped truck. Containers shall be kept covered
at all times. Hereinafter upon effective date of this section,
all new bulk containers shall neet these specificatlors.
(3) "Business trash" means any vaste accumulation of dust,
paper and cardboard, excelsior, rags or other accu-ulatior.s,
other than garbage or household trash, which are usually
attendant to the operation of stores, offices ar.d similar busi-
nesses.
(4) "Central business district" means the section of the City
bounded by Jtorehead Street on the south, the tracks of the
Southern Railway on the west. Ninth Street on the north, and
McDowell Street on the east.
(5) "City" means the City of Charlotte.
(6) "Commercial establlshnent" means any retail, eanufacturlnj,
wholesale, institutional, religious, -governmental, or other
non-residential establishment at which garbage or trash ray
be generated.
(7) "Detachable container" ir.eans a unit varying In capacity
between 15 cubic yards and 40 cubic yards which is used for
collecting, storing, and transporting building caterlals,
business trash, industrial waste, hazardous refuse, refuse,
or yard trash. The unit may or iray not use an auxiliary
stationary packing nechanlsm for conpactlon of raterials
into the container and nay be of the open or enclosed variety.
The distinguishing feature of the detachable container is that
It is picked up by a specially equipped truck and becomes an
Integral part of the truck for transporting the vaste raterials
to the disposal site.
(8) "Garbage" means the by-product of anlr.al or vegetable
foodstuffs resulting froo the handling, preparation, cooking
and consunption of food, or other natter vhich Is subject
to decomposition, decay, putrefaction or the generation of
noxious or offensive gases or odors, or which during or
after decay, nay serve "bs breeding or feeding caterial for
flics, insects or animals.
-------
-3-
10
**
a
(9) "Hazardous refuse" neang materials such as poison, acids,
caustics, chemicals, Infected materials, offal, fecal natter,
ar.d explosives.
(10) "Household trash" means every waste accumulation of paper,
sweepings, dust, rags, bottles, cans or other matter of any
kind, other than garbage, which is usually attendant to house-
keeping.
(11) "Industrial waste" means all waste, Including solids,
se-i-~?lids , sludges, and liquids, created by factories,
processing plants or other oanufacturlng enterprises.
(12) "Litter" neans garbage, refuse, waste materials or
ar.y otr.^r discarded, used or unconsuced substance which Is
tot handled as specified herein.
(13) "Loading and unloading area" means any stream, river
or lakeside or land dock, space or area used by any moving
vehicle for the purpose of receiving, shipping and transporting
goods, wires, cormjdlties and persons.
(14) ""jltiple residential unit" means any duplex, apartment,
grc-jp of arartrents, or condominium used for dwelling places
cf :?re than one fanily.
(15) "Person" ceans any Individual, firm, company, corporation
or association.
(15) "Portable packing unit" means a metal container not ex-
ceeding 4,500 pounds gross weight with a four (4) to six (6)
C'-bic yard capacity that contains a packing mechanism and an
internal or external power unit.
(17) "Refuse" means solid waste accumulations consisting of
garbage, household trash, yard trash, and business trash as
herein defir.ed.
(13) "Refuse receptacle" means a netal or plastic container
for refuse, of substantial construction, with tight-fitting lids
ar.d provided with wheels and/or handles sufficient for safe
and convenient handling. Such receptacles shall have a
capacity of not less than ten (10) gallons nor nore than
thirty-two (32) gallons and shall be kept in serviceable
condition at all tl^es. Plastic containers shall meet stand-
ards set by the Society of Plastic Engineers.
(19) "Single residential unit" means any dwelling place
occupied by one fanily.
(20) "Snail dead animals" neans cats, dogs, srall household
pets, and other animals of similar size.
(21) "Tree and shrubbery trimmings" means waste accumulation
of tree branches, tree limbs, parts of trees, bushes, shrubbery,
cuttings or clipping, or other usually created as refuse in
the case of trees or bushes.
(22) "Yard trash" means waste accumulation of lawn, grass or
shrubbery cuttings or clippings and dry leaf ratings, free of
dirt, rocks, large branches and bulky or nonco-bustiole material.
(23) "Yard trash containers" r.eans either refuse receptacles ov
two-ply kraft paper bags meeting the standards set for refuse
sacks by the Technical Association of Pulp and Paper Incustry
and polyethelyne plastic bags meeting the standards set for
trash bags by the Society of Plastic Engineers. S'-ch containers
shall be in good and serviceable condition and of such shape,
size and weight that, when full, they are capable of beinj
safely handled by one man. P.^.per or plastic bugs shall be
closed by a tight sealing method of suitable type, such as draw-
string, wire tie, or multiple folds. Containers shall be kept
covered or closed at all times.
Section 10-10. Administration and enforcement.
The administration and enforcement of the provisions of this article shall
be the duty of the Department of Public Works.
Section 10-11. Receptacles and containers required.
It shall be required of every person in possession, charge or control
of any place in or from which building naterials, business trash, garbage.
household trash, Industrial waste, tree and shrubbery trlr.-lnjS ar.d yard
trash is accuoulated or produced to provide and at all tires to keep In
a suitable place readily accessible to the City collection crews or private
collection agencies, adequate and suitable receptacles and containers
capable of holding all such waste materials which vould ordinarily accumu-
late between the times of successive collections. The Dspart-ent of Public
Works is designated as the agency to deterntne the cunntity and location
of said receptacles and to determine whether said receptacles and con-
tainers are serviceable.
Section 10-12. Receptacles and containers to be safe.
All receptacles and containers as required hereunder shall be of safe
construction and design and shall be raintalned in good and serviceable
condition at all times. Any receptacles or contjlr.crs which do not
conform to the provisions of this article, cr vhich h^\-e r^cr-.e.d or
sharp edges or any other defects likely to hamper or i.-jurc the person
collecting the contents thereof or the public generally, shall be
promptly replaced upon notice. If said container(s), after proper
notice, has not been replaced, the Department of Public "or'ss shall
have the authority to reirove said contalner(s) as refuse.
-------
-5-
K>
Section 10-13. Pre-collectlon practices.
(*) Scfust. All refuse (hall be placed and Mlntalned in containers
ai specified herein. All containers (hall be kept covered at all
tires vlth tight-fitting covers.
0>) Carba;*. All garbage being placed In containers for
collection shall have drained froa it all free liquid, and shall
be vrappid, bag;ed, or enclosed in paper or plastic material.
JO Kr-sehsld trash. All household trash shall be drained of all
lie-Ids prier to its deposit in refuse receptacles. Household crash
r.jy be ccrbir.ed with garbage or yard trash. Any items of household
trash v:-.ich are too large for receptacles and cannot be reduced to
a size vi-.ich cin be placed in a receptacle may be placed with tree
i.-.J sVrjbrery trir_->ings no earlier than noon on the day next preceding
tr.e ecll4::ion date for such caterial, provided such Items are covered
cr sec-jred 53 as to avoid unsightly litter condition.
(i) Lan.gerous trash itess. All dangerous trash items, and all waste
-it*r:al of »r. injurious nature, such as broken glass, light bulbs,
shirp pierces of r.etal, fluorescent tubes, anJ television tubes, shall
fc* Sic-jre!/ '-rapped to prevent InJ-ry to the collection crews.
(e) Karardus refuse and building materials. No hazardous refuse or
building -aterials shall be placed In any receptacle used for collec-
tion by-the City, nor shall the same be collected by the City.
(:) Yard trash. Yard trash may be stored for collection in suitable
receptacles a-d containers as described in this article. The con-
tents of sjch receptacles or containers shall not extend above the
tc? cf ri= thereof, and shall be contained by tight-fitting lids or
'sealed e.-;losjre to prevent the carrying or depositing thereof by
the elements upon any street, sidewalk, or public or private property.
"ecepticles and containers of yard trash shall be placed at curbslde for
collection no earlier than noon on the day next preceding the collection date.
(?) Tree and shrubbery trlr=lngs. Tree and shrubbery trimmings placed
IT. ref'.se receptacles shall be collected by the City when placed at
curbside no earlier than noon of the day next preceding collection.
Xj tree trucks, branches, limbs, or shrubbery larger thnn four (4)
ir.ches in diameter, longer than five (5) feet or heavier than seventy-
five (73) pounds shall be collected by the City. Tree and shrubbery
11-bs shall have protruding branches trir.-ed and nust be neatly stacked
and placed in an orderly r.anner at curbside. Unless such branches or
linbs are of a size not to be blown about and scattered by the elements,
tr.ty rh-all be effectively tied so as Co avoid wind-driven debris and
ur.sijfiEl;- litter conditions. Tree and shrubbery branches, limbs and
trlm.-ir.2s cut by landscape or tree service contractors or other cormer-
clal worJ'.msn or resulting fron land being cleared shall not be collected
ij t^.s City. Thorny vegetation shall be placed near the curb in snail
r.eat piles.
-6-
(h) Leaves. Leaves shall be contained in refuse receptacles or yard
trash containers and placed for collection at curbslde. Frorr October
fifteenth through January fifteenth, loose leaves nay also be placed for
collection in this location. At no other tine or location vlll loose
piles of leaves be collected by the City.
(1) Special collection of household furniture and appliances. I'pon request,
the City shall collect normal household discarded f'jrr.iture and appliances,
including sofas, chairs, beds, refrigerators, washers, dryers, hot vater
heaters, and similar items, but not including furr.ances. Per^c-ns req-estIr.g
this service shall be notified by the Department of Public '..'or>-5 as to the
dare collection will occur. Items for collection shall be placed at cu'rb-
side no earlier than noon on the day ner.t preceding the scheduled collec-
tion. This service shall be available to residential areas or.lv.
Section 10-1A. Storing of refuse and trash.
All accumulations of refuse and trash shall be stored or placed fcr col-
lection in accordance with the following provisions:
(a) Public streets and private property. So person shall place any
accumulations of refuse and trash in any street, -ediars strip, alley, ot
other public place of travel, nor upon any private property except as
stated herein.
(b) Blockage of storm drains. No person shall place any refuse, trash.
refuse receptacles or containers on, upon or over any storra drain, or so
close thereto as to be drawn by tne elements Into sa-e.
(c) Unauthorized accumulations. Any unauthorized accumulation of refuse
or trash items on any lot, property, premises, public street, alley or
other public or private place Is hereby declared to be a public nuisance
and is prohibited. Failure of owner or occupar.c to remove and correct any
such unauthorized accumulation of refuse shall be deemed a violation of
this article.
(d) Junk. It shall be unlawful for any person to place or leave o-tslde
any building or dwelling except as specified under Section 13-13Ci) any
dilapidated furniture, appliance, nachinery, ec.uicm.ent, building rateria.1.
or other item which is either in a wholly or partial'.'/ rusted, wrecked,
junked, dismantled or inoperative condition, and which is not completely
enclosed within a building or dwelling. Any such Item or items which re-
gain on the property of the occupant for a period of ter (10) days after
notice of violation of this section shall be presumed to be abandoned 2nd
cr.bject to being removed froi the property by the City vithcjt further
notice. This shall not apply to 2uthori;ed juni; dealers or e3tablifh.-enti
engaged in the repair, rebuilding, reconditioning, cr salvaging of ec.uip-er:t.
(c) Appliances. 1C shall be unlawful for any person to leave outside any
building in a place accessible to children any appliance, refrigerator or
other container of any kind which has an airtight snap lock cr sim.ilar
device without first removing the lock or door from, said appliance, re-
frigerator, or container. Tliis law shall not apply to any appliance, re-
frigerator cr container which h^s been pl.iced on or adjacent to the rear
cf thf building and is cratfd, strapped or locked to s;:ch an ex:er: tl-..ti
it is impossible for a chiid to obtain iccess to .iny airtight CO' rirtm^nt
thereof.
-------
-7-
Section 10-15. Scattering of refuse and littering prohibited.
(») It shall be unlavful for any person to: (1) scatter refuse about or
litltr ar.y public or private street or area or place; (2) cast, throw,
place, sweep or deposit anywhere vithln the City any refuse or trash
in sj;1! a -i.-.r.sr that it nay be carried or deposited by the elements
Ljor. any street, sidevalk, alley, sewer, parkway or other public place
or '."3 ir.y occupied or unoccupied premises within the City; (3) throv
or depi»i: ar.y refuse, tras!i or debris in any stream or body of water.
(b) It shall bs unlawful for any vehicle transporting loose materials
vithi.i the City to transport s;r.e without suitable covers. This section
s'-.ill r.;t •??!>' to the transportation of poultry or livestock or silage
cr other feed grain, used in the feeding of poultry or livestock.
(c) Ir. siiltion to other recedies, any person arriving at the City land-
fill »r.i operating an uncovered truck in violation of (b) above shall be
ill:v*J access to said landfill only after being issued a notice of
(O
it
to
5t:;ir:: IC-li. Ccr-erclai establishments.
All ;:nx«r;ial establishments shall store their refuse in containers aa
t;i;i'iti herein so as to eliminate vind-driven debris and unsightly
litter Ir. ar.i tiout their establishments. Approved methods of container-
ize:::.-. ir.:lv.i* refuse receptacles, bulk containers, and detachable con- •
tairers. Thi nu.r.b«r of containers necessary for each commercial estab-
lishr^r.t i'-all be is required to waintttin a clean, neat, sanitary premises
is dt:*ct«i by the- Departreot of Public Work*. Spillage and overflow shall
b* i—tiiitely cleared up when and as it occurs by said establishment.
S»;fi;r. 17-17. loading and unloading areas.
Ail la-iir.g «ri urJoadlng areas shall be provided with refuse receptacles
fir icist debris, paper, packaging caterials and other trash. The nuober
cf ccr.tiir.jrs necessary for each area shall be as required to oaintaia a
*=, nr co.ntalr.erizaclon. Such receptacles shall be weighted or attached
t? t.ne gro^rJ »s necessary Co prevent spillage. It shall be the responsi-
bility ;! :he s-.-er or the ranascr of the parking lot to collect the refuse
i~d trash i=-c>i:ed in such containers and store this material in an approved
lcc«:ic.T as r.eroi.-.atave defined.
-3-
i TOT any u*its«ji*««> ,"-•-' — ••- — -- .
.S lot, any refuse, garble, or trash of any «nd
an, a-»l«l»
ably
Htter-lree
ic:err.lr.eJ by the «!:•
^
, ,r,^
^^ -» '
te and distinct otfen...
occurs shall bea separa
Section 10-20. Pointy of collecjion.
Refuse
ltn«. shall be placed for coU«etl.n « grouni Ir^l c. rt.
- L-- c..-.. .
OntalrlKL 3 J.IBi* I * ** L'3lV*-l-
nroperty and with access without the need for <•"•-"•
oSer over, under or around sone £« °^°^ > ^^^ 9SnU8tl0,
shall be collected whore refuse con alners "»»« ; j.llir oV,t«i..
,Cr»onnCl without ualocklng or opening a d°"' !^.°'K,e iecMS bv r3rV.ed
encounter^ a doC> or otherwise being ^ J-^^ ^ reiuft
vehicles, yard tools and "^vT'rtored in Iront c£ • V« or In Ircr.t
receptacles or containers shall b^ «="«*/" l™ ^..V^^e-.t cf Public Works
location on private property.
SectionO- *"nken
underground receptacles .111 .* be collect,,
Section 10-22. r-.n^rtan practices,.
^,^1:%™^^ of' ™£%%«x
de«V:lsl^ *f •-— (3) »fu« «c.r»c
^
fuw contained in sunken or
by the City.
1.1. Carba«e .nd
shnll be collccccd tvo <
-------
-9-
(b) Cerr-.ereial establishments. Service to eonaerclal establishments
shall be two (2) tir.es cash week, except that collections in the central
buslr.ess district shall be three (3) times each. Such collections shall
b- li-!:eJ to a raxi-u-a of eight (8) refuse receptacles or one (1) bulk
csr.tzlr.ir y*r collection.
(c)
co
a
erviced V
rss
ill
lis--«T.
:•:• -Y.f
tainer. Any cor-r-erclal establishment that furnishes and
_;-: container suitable for handling by City equipment will
, the City as herein stated, provided that said container
i:ie:i: size as specified and be approved for collection. All
il-irs approved for service by the City shall be either
.i'.s units, or b-jlk containers. Said containers and units shall
:; kept In a place easily accessible to City equipment, and
:i-»s be V.ept clean, neat, painted, and in good state of re-
c s.-.all be discontinued to establishments failing to maintain
.i -nits appropriately. Establishments utilizing portable
cr bulk containers shall be responsible for preparing said
.i units for service; no service shall be given those estab-
ittir.j objects, obstructions, or vehicles to hinder in any
;lrj of the said container or unit. Cleaning up spilled
ll be the responsibility of the property owner or occupant.
U) li) I-.::.:r;il vaste. Industrial waste shall be collected, removed and
dlspisei -.' t/ ths operator of the factory, plant or enterprise creating
cr ca-sir.; si-e.
(*) Kizir'm refuse. :^> hazardous refuse shall be placed In any re-
c«-ta:le us*- for collection of refuse by the city.
(f) -jui er.lrjls. Srall dead anlnals will be collected by the City during
c:«ri:ir.; r.c-jrs of the city landfill provided the body Is in • location
a:c«»5i':l! to th* collector. Ovncrs of large dead animals shall be res-
fcr.s!bl« for their re-oval and disposal.
(g) S.iliirj -aterijlt. The City shall not be responsible for the col-
Itctirg or r.ajllrij of building naterlal originating fron private property
frtliriisry '.a, durln; or subsequent to the construction of new buildings,
il:er^:l:f.i or additions to existing buildings of whatsoever type or fron
it-:liticr. of existing structures. Such material shall be removed by the
c.r.sr cf the property or by the contractor. No new certificate of occupancy
5^;I1 r* issued until such material has been removed by the owner or con-
tractor.
(V) Hazardous or liquid waste or highly combustible Industrial waste
shall r.ot be disposed of in the City's landfills.
fe::i?n 10-23. Post collection practices.
F*f>: = * receptacles placed at curbside for collection shall be removed from
e-risi;* by ridnlght on the day of collection.
-10-
Sectlon 10-2*. Special refuse disposal problens.
(a) Contagious disease refuse. Tlie removal of clothing, bedding or other
refuse from hones or other places where highly Infectious diseases have
prevailed shall be performed under the supervision and direction of tj-s
County Health Department. Such refuse shall not b* placed in conta'-ers
for City collections.
(b) Hypodermic instruments. Xo person shall dispose of or discard a-v
hypodermic syringe, hypodermic needle or any instru-ffnt or dtvice for '
making hypodermic injections before first breaking, disjsse-bling, des-
troying or otherwise rendering inoperable and incapable of r^i-^c, such
hypodermic syringe, needle, instrument or device, and without safc—irV-
ing the disposal thereof, by wrapping or securing sare in a suitable"
nanner so as to avoid the possibility of causing injury to the collection
personnel.
(c) Ashes. Ashes that are to be hauled by the City nust have been wetted
and cool to the touch prior to collection. Ashes shall be placed In suit-
able containers of such size and weight that they can be handled by o-e
man.
(d) Cardboard boxes and cartons. Prior to depositing refuse for coll«--
tion in authorized containers or receptacles or in cor-orclal containers,
the person disposing of any such boxes or cartons or t!.e person In chi-ge
of the premises shall collapse all cardboard boxes, cartons and crates.
Section 10-25. Collection and disposal.
All collectors of refuse who desire to haul over the streets of the City
shall use a water-tight vehicle provided with a tlg'it ccver and so opera-
ted as to prevent offense odors escaping therefron and refuse froa belne
dropped, blown or spilled.
Section 10-26. Responsibility of owners and agents.
The owners or agents, tenants or lessees of all residential units and com-
mercial establishments shall be responsible for compliance with this article.
Section 10-27. Maintenance of property.
(a) Sidewalks, alleys, and rights-of-uay. All ovmen or occupants of
property shall maintain their property in a clean and litter-free ranner,
including sidewalks, grass strips, one-half of allays, curbs, or rijhts-of-
way up to the edge of the pavement of any public street.
(b) Snow removal. Every person shall remove snow, ice or other obstruction*
from the sidewalk in front of their premises within six hours after such
time as removal can first be reasonably effected.
-------
-11-
(e) Sweeping Into sldewjlks or streets. No person shall sveep Into or
deposit la any street or sldeva"- the accumulation of litter frora any
building or property.
Section 10-:3. Violations.
Any person violating or falling, refusing or neglecting to conply with any
provision or requirement of any section or subsection of this article,
l" i"i,ir"°n '"° arlX °ther re=edv' sha11 be punished by a fine not to ex-
ceed fifty dollars ($50.00) or inprisoned for not more than thirty (30)
days fcr each and every offense."
"ARTICLE II-A.
ABANDONED MOTOR VEHICLE!)
Section 10-29. In Central.
Aband
:le on
c-T.e:
rite:
a'-le
ccr.tr-lli"
**•*--• ?-* ?.'
c.ly
vehi:
rrent unlawful. It shall be unlawful to abandon any motor
i-.-f public street or public grounds or upon any privately owned
:-.d it shall be unlawful for any person controlling privately
r:y to abandon or to perir.it the abandonment thereupon of any
-e. Violation of this section shall be a mlsdeneanor punish-
e or lr.prlsonr.ant, or both; provided, however, that no person
privately owned property shall be criminally liable for the
cf r.Dtor vehicles thereupon by others if he shall assist the
ited officials and agents of the City in disposing of said
the -ar.ner prescribed in this article.
(b) Abandor.ed vehicles defined. For the purposes of this section, a
vehicle shall be determined to have been abandoned in the following cir-
(1) It
a
(2) T
(3) It
(4) It
tra
(5) It
pe
(6) It
o-
le
(7) It
a
has been left upon a street or highway In violation of
la-J or ordinance prohibiting parking; or
e vehicle fails to display a current license plate; or
Is partially dismantled or wrecked; or
is incapable of self-propulsion or being moved in the
cer for which It was originally intended; or
Is left on property owned or operated by the City for a
riod of not less than 24 hours; or
is left on private property without the consent of the
-r.er, occupant or lessee thereof for a period of not
ss than 24 hours; or
Is left on any public street or highway of the City for
period of not less than seven (7) days.
(c) Removal.
(1) Any abandoned notor vehicle iray be removed to a storage area
for safekeeping by or under the direction of the Police De-
partment or other person, fira or corporation so designated
by the City. Written notice by mall of such removal shall be
pro-ptly i[lvL-n to tlic rL-^isu-rcd owner of tin- vehicle and to
-12-
any holders of any lien of record in the office of the Depart-
ment of Motor Vehicles.
(2) No such vehicle shall be so removed from privately ovned presides
without the writtefl request of the owner, lessee or occupant of
the premises unless the sane has been declared by the City Council
to be a health or safety hazard.
(d) Disposition of vehicles.
(1) The owner of any removed vehicle, before obtaining possession
thereof, shall pay to the agent of the City storing said vehicle
all reasonable costs incidental to the re-oval, storage and
locating of the owner.
(2) Should such owner fail or refuse to pay the costs, or should his
identity or whereabouts be unknown and unascertainable after a
diligent search and after notice as herein prescribed, the stored
vehicle may be sold after twenty (20) days' r.Dtice his been given
to the Department of Motor Vehicles before the date of sale, and
after the vehicle has been held for not less than thirty (30) days.
(3) The vehicle may be sold by public or private sale, but no vehicle
may be sold until its value has been determined by three disin-
terested dealers or garage^ien.
(4) A vehicle of an appraised value of less than one hundred dollars
($100) may be disposed of by any means in the discretion of the
storing agent of the City.
(5) The proceeds of any sale shall be forwarded to the treasurer of
the City, who shall pay froT. the proceeds of said sale the cost
of removal, storage, investigation as to ownership and sale, ar.d
liens in that order. If, after the sale, the ovr.ershlp at the
tine of the rer.oval is established satisfactorily to the treasurer,
the owner shall be paid so ir.uch of the proceeds as regains after
payment of the foregoing costs and liens. Other-is*, any rerain-
ing proceeds shall be deposited in the general fund of the City.
(e) Junk motor vehicles.
(1) Any abandoned vehicle which is inoperable, dis-.antled or damaged.
five (5) years old or older, and worth less than or.e hundred
dollars ($100) shall be deeded a junk vehicle. A junk vehicle
shall be held at least fifteen (15) days, during which tir.e the
owner ray reclaim it by exhibiting proof of ownership and paying
all reasonable costs incident to reaoval and storage and adminis-
trative expenses.
(2) An unclaimed junk vehicle may be destroyed or otherwise disposed
of offer fifteen (15) days. Notice shall bo given within fifteen
(15) days after final disposition to the Depcrtrert of Motor
Vehicles that it was deemed a Junk vehicle and disposed of as
such. This notice shall fully and accurately describe »ald vehicle.
-------
-13-
-14-
NJ
Jk
U»
(3) Any proceed* derived trom the disposition of Junk vehicles
•hall be deposited in the general fund of the City.
(f) Diipotition with owner's consent. With the owner's consent, the City
cay remove ar.d dispose of any vehicle as a Junk motor vehicle regardless
of val-.t or cor.iition of said vehicle and without waiting the aforesaid
fifteen (15) day period.
(j) I—.r.lty. :.'o person shall be held to answer in any civil or criminal
• "Ian to any owner, lien holder or other person legally entitled to the
possession of any abandoned, lost or stolen motor vehicle for disposing of
It as ccnter.plated herein.
(h) Exceptions. This section shall not apply to authorized automobile
dealers cr to authorized junk dealers in the operation of their businesses.
(i) Pc-alty. In addition to and separate and apart from any other remedies
s»: firth ar.i established by this section, any person violating the provisions
cf -his section shall be assessed a penalty of ten dollars ($10.00), and each
a-- every diy during which such violation continues, shall be a separate and
distinct offer.se."
"ARTICLE II-B.
IMPROVEMENT
5e::ls-' IJ-33. Nuisances j designated.
It shall be unlawful for any person to create a nuisance on his lot or a lot
o::upie- by his, or to allow a nuisance to remain on his lot or a lot occu-
pied by hiz. Dead anlcals, stagnant water, decayed vegetables and fruits,
filthy privies and stables, or to pernlt the existence of anything causing
a= offensive odor, or anything that causes injury or damage to the health
or life of any other person, are declared nuisances.
S;:ti:r. 10-31. Trash and weeds; duty of person responsible.
(a) It sh.jll be unlawful for any person to maintain premises, Including
varan: lots or land, upon which trash, garbage or miscellaneous refuse is
permitted or caused to accumulate In any canner which is, or may become a
njisa-ce, or cause injury to the health or welfare of residents in the vicinity
or -i.-i Injure neighboring property. Drive-In restaurants and other food
establishments that permit carry-out food service shall maintain at all times
en their premises sufficient receptacles for the disposal of trash, garbage
ar.d riscellaneous refuse.
(b) It shall be unlawful for any person to maintain, cause or permit uncut
grass or vs-is on any property under such circumstances that the grass or
weeds are, or ray becoce a nuisance.
(c) In the event the person or persons responsible, refuse to remove
the trash, garbage, or refuse fron the property on which it Is allovsd
to accumulate, or refuses to cut grass or weeds within seven (7) days
after notice in writing has been given by the City to the person responsi-
ble, he shall be deemed guilty of a violation of this section.
(d) If the person responsible for the conditions r.jr.sd ibove has not
acted to correct the violation, the City Council shall hear and consider
all objections and protests, if any, to the proposed re-oval by the City
of the crash, garbage, or refuse, or to the proposed cutting of the grass
and weeds. The Council shall then issue an order to the supervisor of the
community improvement division of the City, and he, his assistants cr
deputies nay enter upon the premises vhere the violation occurs ar.d resove
the trash, garbage or refuse, or cut grass and weeds.
(e) If the owner of the property, after due notice, has failed or refused
to remove the trash, garbage, or refuse, or to cut the grass or weeds, and
the City has been authorised by council to do so and has so acted, in
addition to all other remedies, the City may assess costs incurred by it,
and this shall be a charge against the person responsible, ar.d shall be a
lien against the property fron which the trash, garbage, or refuse has been
removed, or the grass or weeds have been cut.
(f) In addition to and separate and apart fror-. the other re-.edies set
forth in this section and section 1-6, a violator cf any of the above prc •
visions may be assessed a penalty of ten dollars (S10.C?), ar.d each ar.d every
day during which a violation occurs shall be a separate and distinct offense.
Section 10-32. Community improvement division; duties and
responsibilities of supervisor ar.d inspectors.
The supervisor of the community improvement division ar.d those inspectors
assigned to assist him shall have the duty and responsibility of enforcing
Articles II-A and II-S of this article. The supervisor and his inspectors
shall enforce the provisions of these sections by the inspection of property
and by the observance of those persons who are seen to violate any of the
provisions. They shall be empovered to issue citations when in their opinion
any of the provisions of these sections cited above have been violated. Cita-
tions so issued may be delivered in person to the violator by the supervisor
or his inspectors, or they may be mailed to the person so charged, if he
cannot be readily found. Any notice or citation so delivered or railed shall
direct the alleged violator to appear at the violations bureau of the city
on or before a specific day and hour nar.ed in the notice; and the period so
specified shall be not less than seventy-two (72) hours after its delivery
to the violator.
Vhen a person charged with violation of the sections ad-inistered by the com-
munity improvement division shall appear before the clerk on duty at the vio-
lations bureau in response to a citation as hereinabov- provided, such clerk
is authorized, if the person appearing so desires, to allou- him to si^n en the
docV.ci which is kept in connection with violations and p.iy the civil penalty
assessed. Upon payment, the clerk shall Rive hin a receipt for the rcr.ey r^id,
showing the type of violation, and shall deliver the ~.oney to the collector
of revenue for the city. A copy of the citation shall be railed at the t ir.«
-------
-15-
ef issuance to the captain of the records division of the police departnenb.
Th« supervisor of the coeaunlty Improvement division shall cause all citation
3r=s to be serially numbered in triplicate and records with respect to the
sail citation forr.s are to be nalntalned so that all of then can be' accounted
fcr. The city accountant, or his representative, shall periodically Investi-
gate tr.e reccrds of the cor_-njnlly Improvenent division for the purpose of
dt:errinirj the disposition of the forms, and he shall report .the result of
su-h Ir.vestifcitlcn to the city nanager. For the purpose of making this in-
x-e»ti;a:l;n, the city accountant shall have access to the necessary records
of the ecrr.unlsy lrprove.-ent division.
If a violator of the provisions of these sections does not appear In res-
p.-.-.s* ta l!-.e r.9tl:e or citation at or before the date and hour named, a
ccr?l>!nt vill be filed and a warrant of arrest Issued against that person.
Stcti:^. 10-33. SeveraMltty.
!f *n>- provision of Articles II, II-A, and II-B of this Chapter is for any
reascr. held to be Invalid or unconstitutional by any Court of competent
3'jrlsf Icti^n, s-jch provision shall be deened a separate. Independent pro-
vision «r.' cuch holding (hall not affect the validity of any other provision,
trd to that t^.l, the provisions of this Chapter are hereby declared to be
severtble."
Section 2. This ordinance shall becom* effective upon adoption.
Approved as to fora:
City Attorney
-------
Appendix VII-2
K)
Suggested Solid Waste Management
Ordinance
for
Local Government
March 1974
Table Of Contents
SUBJECT
PACE
1. Shott Title |
2. Declaration of Policy ]
3. Definiiions |
4. AdminiMrative Department , J
5. Enforcement Agency ^ 3
6. Powers and Duties of the Administrative Department 3
6.01 Solid Waste Managemen! Plan 3
6.02 Solid Waste Management System 4
6.03 Rules and Regulations % 4
6.04 Permits 4
6.05 Bulky Waste Collection 6
6.06 Dead Animals ft
6.07 Conlrjcts (,
6.08 Solid Waste Management Districts 6
6.09 Private Contractor Regulation 7
6.10ServiceChargei,Non-ResidentiaISolidWast« 7
6.11 Exclusive Service 7
7. Permits for the Management of Solid Waste 7
7.01 Permit for the Storage. Transport, Processing and Disposal of Solid Waste by the Generator thereof. .... 7
7.02 Storage Permit £
7.03 Permit for Solid Waste Collection $
7.04 Permit to Locate and Operate a Transfer Station 9
7.05 Permit to Transport Solid Waste |0
7.06 Permit to Locate and Opera:e an Incinerator 10
7.07 Permit to Locate and Operate a Sanitary Landfill JO
7.08 Permit to Locate and Operate a Resource Recovery Facility 11
7.09 Permits to Issue j j
7.10 Permits Denial
7.11 Permit Number, Display
8, Powers and Duties of the Enforcement Agency
8.01 Rules and Regulations
8.02 Inspections
8.03 Notices ". '.
8.04 Citations 13
8.04.1 Hearings 13
8.04.2 Opinion |4
8.05 Injunction 14
9, Solid Waste Management Advisory Board 14
9.01 Appointment 14
9 02 Terms U
9.03 Organization-Meeting* 14
9.04 Duties IS
10. Time and frequency of Collection 15
10.01 Residential 15
10.02Non-RcsiJemial 1J
11. Sloraa 15
11.01 Residential 15
11.02 Son Residential lo
12. Conuintrs . . lo
12 Oi Siniuiion it.
. I2.o: IVfative O.n.'ji.iers 16
12 (It Kc.iiloim.ilC'tMtjincr LiK-aliun Prior to Collet tiyn lo
IV V,,n <'•".•• ,.,-rt..-l V/,.., ),.
-------
10
o.
00
14. B^'o. W.iit [[[ 17
15. DCJ! lcxf.it [[[ 17
1*. Cc':»;i-?n • Rtidmdil [[[ 17
17. Fts ..................................... • ........................ I7
17.01 ti:ib::i!--Ti«nt and Piymenl ............................................. "
17 0: Dsl:r.^ut«cy [[[ "
1705 Ir.-t;
IS. l-i-^-.-f
le.0! F«r:"j^jr.« Bondi
li.":P;>r.«niBonii . .
iO. ft—:: F' and p;o?*f re^jTaiioni for tK*
minasrment of solid waste; the establishment and collection of Tiiidential so!iJ ware rur.^ment $ir.:;e c7t2Tjei,ir.d
for other purpoies.
COMMENT: The preamble H a means of ititlicaaxg legislative intent, or iht probttmt fc-Afcfr Jed to rht
enactment of the tow. /t is not a port of the law itself.
1. Short Title
This ordinance shill be known wy may be cited as the Solid AVasw Mins^nwnt OitLnar.ce of ( \
COMMENT: This ordinance would be tpplieable to any politics! subdiviii&n of the S:ste ard c:^'J be uieJ.
wi/A modification. In o multi-jurisdictional agency tvherf appropriate /ejriirm-* cxtkorir.- fcjj tten prft.
2. Decbration of Policy
U « heitby dttlittd to be the purpose of this otfcnnce to Ttjjlaie the norjge, co''.s::;jn, irrispon, proctur.j.
recovery, tnd disposal of solid wtstc in order to protect ihe public safety, ^ti!th, and welfare *r.i to erj-^n;e :h!
environment of the people of ( ).
COMMENT: T^rii Is the official expression of the intent of the legislative boJv trufttK? the vdi^^Kt. A ecu.1
interpreting the ordinance. In wfiole or in part, would bt ob'.-.&ttd to cnive a: the intent of the l*$ifc:xre, in ite
fast, the protection of public safety, health, ana -welfare, end environment.
3. Definitions
For the purpcsw of this ordinanc*f the following woris and phrsi** ihaH hjv* ihe meanirj pvrn Serein unleu ihsir
use in the text of the ordinance dearly demons'.ratesa d iff ere m r.taninj.
Abandoned Vehicle - A vehicle that applicable Stale Isui deem to have been abandoned,
Adrr.ijj'strstive Dfpcrfrntnt — The Depart men! of thii rr.uaicipility charged *nh the aw~-^!ivtritive ni*ajemer.t of
this ordinance.
Agricultural Solid Waste - The solid wa?te that r*su!u from the reariaj and stau^terirj of ir.iirals tnj The
proc*>iirg of iniinil producti tnd orchard and field cropi.
Jhitty Waste - itemi whose large size precludes or complicate* their handlirg by nomiJ collection. proce»;rj.Of
disposal method*.
Co'ifcu'cn — The act of removing solid waste ftom the cenua! storage poiru it the iourct of jereriiicn.
Corwcreul Solid \Vaste - Solid waste generated by sioret, office*, and OLha activities thai do not actui!y turn O'Jl
j product.
Cownissioner — The duly qualified and appointed person in charge of th* Ajency »hi;K is retponiib'e for ir;*
enforcement of those aspects of ihii orjinance iclaicd £o the protection of ihe public »a:*ty. health, welfare, and
en*irorm*nt.
Dead Animate - Ani/nals that have died from any cause except those siiughtcttd fur hum in cor; turn ft ion.
Director — The duly qtulified anJ appointed perwrt tn charge of ihe d*;ar[meni *>..;h b re»poni:b!* fot ihf
•dminiitraiive manigement cf ihis ordinance.
A'jp^w/ - Th^ oiijcrly proccsi of Oiscarding us*!fii or unwanted r.aienal.
O-.4"\p • A hi;d site whcie solid vrastt «di^po>«d of in a ninr.ti ihii d-xsno- p:ou;l the environrr.ent.
fiiiffrccrnent Agency - The Agency of ihis municipality chj.ps:d wiih the enforcene^: of thowe as^cti of (hit
ordinance related to [he pruteciion of ihe public safety, health, uelUre and ftmi^nmciu.
Generation - The *cl at proceis i>f producing icl«i »•««.
-------
- The controlled proce* by which »olid. liquid, or gaseous combustible wutc uc burned tnd cruitjed
ia: 3 piet. ir.d the residue produced contains tittle or no combustible material.
7r.'uj.-'t:.' Srtil U'jf rr - SeM waite thit mulls from Industrial processes and manufacturing.
Ir.t:-^ .•:.-_•; 5.--'-' lurr* - Solid waste originating from educational, health care, and reiearch facilities.
Lc."! Co'.ff.".^! - A puWi; corpcniion, created by Government for political purposes, and having subordinate
ari Ixj! pikers of kgiilatiar: e.g., a county. town, city, etc.. or combination thereof.
A'.-r:-'.-.' £f j^arrrt - M j:ttti!s v-Iiich have useful physical or chemical properties which exist, unused, in future.
.V'r-.Rt-;-^-::;.-: S. '.J li ji/f - Solid waste from agricultural, commercial, industrial, or institutional activities or •
fc--jJi.~; cr ;:o'.p cf b'j.li.-ii cor^stirj of five or more due'Jing units.
Ir.::*fz:~r - An erpr.eersj apparatus used to bum waste substances and in which all the factors of combustion —
lt~?e:,:-:t. ret«-::^r. i;— ?. iurbu!er;e. and combusiion air - can be controlled,
Ptv. -- - Ar> rr-.MJ-ji!. pjrtr.rrship, co-partnerihip, firm, company, public or private corporation, association,
;::.-! i'x'. "-;;';.. I-LjT, estate or ny e:h« !ed by the presence in the environment of substances of such character and In such
q-art • e; -_l >: ^.e q-il.'.y of th.e envuonrnent is impaired or rendered offensive to life.
fr.fx: '/ - Ar> ne^oj". s>>:en, or oiher treatment deigned to change the physical form or chemical content of
u!-..J * js:?.
£t.-. ;.-"<•./ .*??;. i4f« - Material* whi;h still have useful physical or chemical properties after serving a specific
f .--;%« jr.J ,-j-. irt-ef^re. be reu»«J or recycled for ihe same or other purpose*.
A«"£;«"7. - The jr&cess of obtaining naierial or energy resources from solid w«te. Synonyms: extraction,
rr;'^-i:..'n. uV ;:r
£>."£•. F.ecc-.ry - The obtaining of energy available fiom the heat generated when solid waste b Incinerated.
/?;;>»:.'. -r - The po:esi b> -which if covered resources are transformed into new products In such a manner that the
C"-.J p-; J..-!t!-;>i their identity.
Kf.Js'i-.g - A procesi of covering faity substances from inimil part! by heat treatment, extraction, and
c*.>:.:.r.;-
Rr-le-.r^l St .';J hjsw - Ail solid v.aste (hat normally originates in a residential environment. Thlj definition b
iff' .;t-'e tj the sol.i »js:e fron abuildin|of four or less separate units.
Rerf."<:s::~t - Tne a;uon of chancing the condition of a secondary material.
J?t-jf - — t re..itrodu;uon of'a commodity into an economic stream without any change in Its physical
Ch.rj.-.er.: ;s
5-.'..-;# - The uiL'iutio.i of waste materials.
S»'--fr:f - Th* contrcllffi removil of watt* materials for utilization.
jjr.-.vf v /;--.-".' - A site *Jiere solid waste is disposed using sanitary landfill) ng techniques.
S^'-.'^r- I jrj. •?..";•!; - An enpr.eered method of disposing of solid waste on land In a manner that protects the
rrv.r :--.•.-: by ipresi.rg the waste in thin layers, compacting it to the imallest practical volume, and covering it with
sc.! t> tht e-i of ;a;h uertung day-
Scj.ft-t - The ur.;c4ttrc!:fd removal of materials at any point in solid waste management.
S.':? - D.wj:-tJ or rejected material or parts of material th-at result from manufacturing operations and are
r.:Tj*!f for re-fcvesiirg or rf.'} cling.
H.'-.f Scr:p - S~np that never teavn the manufacturing operation and tiroctlnely reprocessed. (Also referred to as
revert w*j?. rr.j;'rrc!\e. or tum-arourd scrap).
/Pro~?!> frj^i:^! Scrsp - Scrjp that is generated during the manufacture of a product.
$e:^~^, y.xen! - A material that i> utilized in place of a primary or raw material in manufacturing a product
Sffi'-"' T — The i\ >icrij:ic division of solid waste into designated components.
5.1-:*' lt.-:r< - Usele&s. unwm:sd, or ^ warded material with insufficient liquid content lo be free flowing.
S'':J h.'-v Ms'jffrertt - The purposeful, systematic control of the generation, storage, collection, transport.
s*;;*^:.:-.. pro^eii.r.j. recover) ar.d Jiipoul of solid »jjte.
Sr-^.'f - The ir:;r::n containment of solid ujiie, in an approved manner, after generation and prior to ultimate
i.r ,:.
T'.T.- r: - The no^enent of wild wjite subiequent to collection.
r*.'T>p'«r 5:-v';.'i - A s?te a! *hkli solid *aste is concentrated after collection and before processing or disposal.
COMVEM:
.r.'.'.tnm art important to clarify the meaning of termt whkh art not self explanatory, A
jn iniegrjl fart of a toliJ Hvf/f management ordinance. This ttftfon.ls important to tht
Ktmtntstntton end inttrprenrton of the ordinance. Oidufy retMcrtre or rogue definition!
Another purpose of 9 section oftteftnlttvm it to estitt anyone intfrprrtinf :he ortHr-snce or teeth*,
legislative intent. In the absence of definitions, the ordinary rneer;'':? of the kfifisge urJer scmrity
used. Srate legislation will centra! collection, storage crd disposal of aterJoneJ \ehides fcci'jJf.g i'-.£
definition, and must be the source of loce! authority for action. S^:e StJtn *»•« rfcfni'y er.xtci er^'.-.-.
legislation for municipal action In this field.
i'f et
J be
4. Administrative Department
The Department of (
_) shall be responsible for the administralive management of this orv>a
and the rules and regulations authorized in Section 6.03.
COMMENT: Solid Waste Management is normally the responsibility of the Off^rr^enr of fuc':c tt'^i-j. C'J
simitar agency, which may be headed by an executive c ailed the Director. Depending up.** ;/;* /.vi'f •>v(r-.~f.r
organi&tion or the services to be rendered, the responsibility for solid *-.a*te m^^j^tr^.f.! rr.;\ ct zii.frtJ .v^i
organizational unit within the Drparrrr.tnt of Public Works, or may be a sepsrate function oflocsi f.^f^-.'rf:.
There ere advantages and disadvantages to having a separate o^jri.v.'iC'Mf :i'::t. Ti:e eJ~jr.:^es ir^i-*e a
separate budget, more visibility to the public and tinted cfficuls. tout a:itrMt?n deiorej to :::e f-r^:--.. r..t
sJtaring of equipment and personnel, d irect responsibilt'ty to thee!ec:ed~efj~cij!i. aid a r..?her ~r.r~;\- u;:ut. T-.e
disadvantages include further fragmentation of loccl goier'.'nent, lackofcdorJ:rj:i(»i v.iih rttiud prcg*3*~.s ™.J
duplication of certain types of personnel [e.g. buJgtt. rtttjr'jh. accounting).
5. Enforcement Agency
The ( ) Agency shall be responsible for the enforcement of those ai?:;ti related to ihe pro:e;tii3n
of the publk ufety, health, welfare, and environment of this ordinance an4 the rules and refu'.atior.s a-j:hc:;z«d in
Section 8.01.
COMMENT: This is a responsibility that may be assisted to the agency in charge rf health relied scti\i^,\
usually ihe Department or Board of Health, under the direction of a Commiisionef. T'-.c trend at i':t 5:i:e !e. t!
end in large population areas is to create a separate agency charged *ith the re;por::bi!ify of en:irof.'^.t>-::l
protection. The development and enforcement of rules and regulations ftr;jirJnf to uffty. hesl;h. wdfsre f.J
the environment would be a function of that agency.
Administrative management and enforcement responsibility may be combined in ore agency *thert permitted
by law.
6. Powers and Duties of the Administrative Department
6.01 Solid Waste Management Plan. The Director, in co-operation »iih the Commissioner or the Enforce.ner.t
Agency, and with the advice of the Solid Waste Advisory Board, shall survey the so!id »a*:e mn2sen*.er.i p::;ti;e»
within the locality and prepare a Solid Waste Management P!,m to be compatible with the Slate p!i.n. showing therein
all present minajcment activities and recommended management activitirj for future u>e, taldrg into cors:-era:ii^n
population powth, solid waste generation.land development regulations ar.d overall i\s:em mar.a^rr.ent i.v!'ji-.{
organizational, financing, and regulatory capabilities. The plan shall corsiJer &s qua!itat;\e and quxi:::j:ivf incrf^sfs
In the solid waste expected to be generated within the area sovernfd fro" wsijentia!, comnerwia;. inJusinj!, ir.d
agricultural sources-, and shall be submitted to the State for re\iew and approval. The p!r» developed shojld rot cr.'.y
consider area wide approaches, but muit be designed to be operational anj when implemented must be an
environmentally acceptable jnd economically efficient so!ij waste nunagemcat system.
COMMENT: The primary sutmcs «»/''authority far Ivcdgovernment ectiiiiy are tf.t Suit C";I;.TJ.';.") J-J
(7wW»iv tcziilatinn. which sen out the area* where AVJ/ activity can tske pLre. A fur'.l+r rcwxr.t it in S:s:t
laws jetting standards which must be met by all injenvr units oj government. Before any Iff.ihtite sction it
-------
to
in
O
. that areas mutt bf audit* etrefuBy to *mre that // Is authorized. Otfierwfie.lfte legislation entered wtt
te •::..'/ _-r J i ciJ. which wit cause problems. Including legal teflon against the local government.
Tnr »if oftise HWJ "staff "in legislation usually imposes * mandatory duty upon the official Invoked. Here.
the D:v::sr *f the A^tmsmn-t Detriment has the duty to prepare a plan for solid waste management, hi
rrjrt **!f*e a J-vmVfun- duty is given Av legislation "may" it wed. A'o time limit it get here for
i^!e-'.r-.:;r:i ticMie cch governing body will have unique problem; which must be solved and it will be the
tr.t fuJ't flf j-y ntse rnrrjjnts. subject to those set forth by the State on the preparation and implementation '
of&fS '.J l-.-j.v .'firjsfr.rtt KM, which must not conflict with that of any higfier authority.
A::'-.-..J: .-'- D:*eet-yr is resrwubte for the Solid Waste Management flan, its development and
rr/v*Trr •,•:.• ••' mm! be co-orJtnjU'J with aU governmental units with a responsibility or interest in solid waste
r-_-r.v^-r.-::. r>.e r*-" /> .'.v'.-J wjfte wurjjcmcnf must scn-e five functions: (1) provide a technical and policy
r-.'-V-'Y '••' I'jc.'tr.-e s-'-'.iJ it Jiff njf:jj*mrn/; f2) provide e public-dirt:cted frame work of standards for solid
v.r;:e r..•*:;;;*•. cut p!;niir.t and tr.p'.t'r'.eitation; (3) provide fvr an integrated mcnjsfment system covertngatl
('t~:iT!t /*,.-: gtwiticn tfwugh ditpaul either through direct operations or regulated performance; (4)
e•.*:l'-1'-. •* -.: T- • J, a». J procedures for translating the ptsn into system design and direct operations; (5) serve as *
lif';::.e '.'**• i,n d-jcument for furthering the improved management of solid waste within the jurisdiction.
COVMENT: In srr.::nf it the dtiittsn to me public or private resources, or any combination of the two. heal
,.t'r~'--: *>.u;! cvnuder such fatten as capital investment, personnel resources, service to be rendered,
?« '.•;.-/ .- 1 ir^nXKjnct d'j.'i. and the revenue required to support the solid *vste management system.
I", s-.y f. 4 •-;;. ccnfst fr-.ni a-Van be reuinej by /uc at government wtiich can be accomplished by the use of
trnt •-.. i'-e f.t^'.i'Mf.eni offers, rate and regulation and the use of inspection powers,
F ,r fx;~.;!r, ;he locjl government could process or dispose of solid waste white the collection cotttd bt
•'.-: _V_' *•;. {"..xeentirfrite.
T' .; ::./;?;:« J -:r.i^r^e is designed to permit ttie local government to select either a public or private solid
;.V ~.;-2;t~ier.t system ot combination thereof and still operate within in provisions.
/f».Vj ar.J Ker-'Urions. The Director may adopt, reviie. revoke ind enforce rule* and regulations tpvernlnf tlw
tdrr.j.it'.Tt'.itt of ihi» orilian^e.
COMM E \T : Tne authority given here is limited to those rules md regulations applicable to administration tnd
dees *'t •*;!:* Jtthr ntles g*J regulations governing safety, health, welfare tnd environment which trc the
ret?'"-'*-- :•':.'.> of the Enforcement Agency. These rulex and regulations must be compatible wfth staff lew atd
*??'.. jt'e raits gtj rtguljtivns of the state.
6.0J Ftr*z». The Director U hereby authorized lo iuuc permiti for iH elementi of colid waste mmajement
trcljlri i!*r jtiun of exin:n| facilities or syilems. AH such permiti ihall be non-transferable, shall be for * term of one
ye-r j--d J-.*;i fc- wbjs:i to the fees sel forth in Section 20. AH permits so Hsued shall be conditioned upon observance
of tfi« L»< of this Stjie. the ordinances of this foveminj body and the rules and regulations authorized herein.
COMMENT: fcmirt ore needed even In a ptiMiety operated solid waste management system. By their use,
«£..'„•::. •: ii crttemt from Ucnttfliatinn of wjste at the pvint of generation through dnposat. Tfiis ordinance
r •*-'« ••'-*' j'tfrn^ni. other than thote storing thiiro^jt residential sttlit/^vste mint possess a folk! permit for
«,-• *i : ";• t'"f—*-*i tli'p>tut. with u\uing ou/hortn being revetl in the Director of the Admittittratire Department.
A-"-. .:, /: j.e a t-u-.g liiitory of use in the rrpiLmm of business t* professions. Mien used in a wrftt/ MVS/T
rr;-;;i"-.i>:t iii.vn t!u\ Utnttfy aU pcruwt iin^eJ in svtid *vste management, the type u/uvf/r being
fj-.^tej ;>.J i» et»ttft>t itt mt» cmcnt thnnigh dnp<>u! by tpprufaf methods.
7*.f f^"*.:\ ni''i-ri:et! in a* itdinance are supplemental to permits nxfuirej by either State *r locwl law. A
permit to operate an Incinerator \votitJnot excuse the holder from receiving clearance from t*;e S:ztt Air &t£ty
Act, as well tts the Wjter Quality Act wlierc quench *-a;en are involved. Loral buXJing permits OK& tvitJinf
codes would be prerequisites to the issuance of the permits euthori:cd here.
The permits are expressly conditioned upon observance ofatl ap?!::j$le h**s crj the m!ct yj ref.t^::*r:s
authorized herein. TJierefore. failure to observe either vtou'dbea vgitd fru'.tnd for swpensi.si orre.-ccz;: —.. 5a.*«
action may bf a drastic step, and should be wifJ only when ottemjti.-e S"l.d wane m>:2ielr.t*:t system: if
methods ore available. For example, if there is only one saniury lanJftH. relocation of tr-jt ?ir™.i: n-,-^:; :g thefctuiy er.J. ifcfe f.ir.or r^:^re,
taking no action.
Since the permit is not transferable, the purchaser of an activity controlled by a ptrmit **jtt!d be rtquirtd M
apply for and receive the authorization prior to continuing the regulated, activity.
There are fields of activity in solid \\vste management where the nnr^ber cf rfr^^t should bt li-r.i'.e^ in c'^er
to insure efficient and economical operation. In those jrcat.'fl:e Director u'.iu.'J l:*ie the r:;':t tc r.t to
entertain new applications. An illustration of this is in cu.7wm'«. \\-hi-ff the fl'tJ jf~.t(/ K;.'/ *;«(*:.'? iu.''"r.V*if
revenues to attract a limited number of qiulifttd applicants. In o:her iitvJ»\ tt'o^e /rj-:_STr.*";Y''~" |:.'*-/*t
ere in a limited area, there wilt be a duplication of routes nmttir.g in short cu:i it ier.::e, wc'-i ;rt n>t
compatible with proper solid waste management.
The governing body should establish the time ptriud the pem:t t'\:i!J be in force. M;ny h.";'^ft -re c-. a
me-year time frame curmponJing to the btulgtt period while o/'urj km :jr.v*i ^»pr *Ji u? tef:*e \c~ts h 3
rrulter locality where little poperwork is involved in renting permits, we \a-rrr.':':: le j j citiv.eft*; •-'. Fc r
i large locality with many permits in force the wcrk toJrr,av be ;.v>fTi.'_*,'pr *;*:•:..J rrnc-u^.'; r'.w.Vw j .'. ":cf*
nferval might be preferred. A permit term of one year is xt forth h\re 4nJ\*-:u!Jr.:eji£UiiJ£Wjl t::' to •
,he Director, who could refuse to renew the permit where a tutig history of r.invr i*$i:inj;rj ferfvmzr.ct a
Involved.
Application and permit fees are the nile rather thjn the exctpti-in. An ff^.V.vff^/t fee i»-.'x*J f^-.-e ro
accompany each application and would aid in meeting administrative c^j.'s,' there fart it ihw*'* w>t le n;^rrtJ. ft
wilt also determine the sincerity of the applicant. Apflication for the r?ne\\vl c/^n exisnrg ferr-.:t r.etd r?f
require a fee.
Initial or renewal permit fees should be realistic, A fee which exceeds the cost ofijiu;>:ce end s'^pt^:ifj^
should be avoided, as weil as one oft nominal amount. Tf'.e desirable figure vjuU bt one w*:i*k wc-^J "i;ke thf
permit system self-supporting.
77ir Director should evaluate the Information given in each application. In doing !:us they can ii'pect ?*:;.iicjl
facinsies to assure compliance with the applicable standards and. et :l:e une tir-.e. weigh ir.^n^les. inch a
personnel qualificatioM.operational-pfor,. financial responsibility, eh'.
Once the inspection is completed the Director has open three eounes of action He cjn issue the pcr^.::; he
can deny the permit, in writing, stating the reasons therein or; he can infcrm the cpflicznt of the crar.yfs r.ttlti
to allow the permit to issue.
Any substantial alteration\. modification or enlargement must be by ptnrJt, t rr.x:er which cv. bt co\ treJ 5>!
the omnibus clause in each section setting forth application form cMtents. Tfiesirtt cbuse c;t be uscJf,* crktr
needs peculiar to the user municipality, such as fcrfonrjnct bvnds.
In any denial of application, the action of the Director m:o; not be crbitryrr.
The ntla and regulations for the administration of the ordiwnce sJisuU set ait ajfiinuxxirf pr^cfJurei fcr
the prtn'cssing of apptii'atiina, inctuJins the lime fvrittj /V/uv.vr r^vi/1/ r/ t!it s^/vj.vn C*:J t'nt i-.*i.ii
authorized in Sectitw 7. Tlte Director should hate an interval which will*.'Mwe cmfulrfriew. keying ;t r-.-.rJ
that there will be other oppHcations and duties which must reictie cticntitfn. Ts a.'!.**1 :*u*-n>i /».> refuse t
positive approval or disapproval within a time J'rjmc ttu'itlj ^t• jr.';./••»/. 1»V« -•*: .•^r'»"-'"'"» i* '*'.'"«*''«'J. frf
applicant lias the right ta utilize flic appeals prt\\-J;ircs set forth i" 5i\7i\1T ?l.
-------
«.M *W*jr Ka* CoMacslcm. The Dinner ahd etoMtti A. i
MIU ft*n midmial nta with* Ah locality.
>tocoBectead<
COMMENT: 8*.ty KOSH is defined* Seetvi* 3 and wemlttncivdaawsoMwtstt which eo& not be pvd&
*? f-Jirg rou.iw roHerriOK. If a pics^mxk is used, the sia of the opening would be the limit on bulky waste,
r-v w^f »-a:;ir Kss/r MouU include "whin goods. * rter b Mom. refrigerators or washers. Hjai* »ui be preh&iled from uting bulky Hem to ai approved processing or disposal facility. Under
Ike fO*tn ii Section 6.02 this could be either e, public operation or It couU be ilora by contract.
t.'.l DaJ .4r:-li. The Di.ictcr shall provide the necessary equipment and personnel to mum dead numb
»-:;-.-^ '-..I ! jrt.^- »d iha!l schedule such collections to provide pick-up with i minimum delay. This Section dud net
*}?,-/ ll isil »riT. i'i. or pirn thereof. from my conuntrciil or agricultural ictivity within tlili locality.
COMMENT: This Section it designed to provide the unitary collection and disposal of dad antmats within OH
br;.':.?* ~f-J to present the ute of normal solid waste collection service for dad animal ttispostrlon. Such senfee
«:».'..' K.-.V.V :-.UKii tilled in traffic. Disposal would be throat* existing facilities. men at an Incinerator or a
6.0* O-.rrjrrt. All conicicii m It ted into by the Director under Ihb ordinance duU meet the foltowlnf rabiknam
«;^.-fr;cia:
M >. B<«::h ft« coateaiaT the Ufidaiivt Body of this locality.
Ul b. Pr .- >;;;«il of the chief l«.« Cuiitioni M nuy be let forth in Inltntctiam to bidden or other necesury a ~lxJ totemiif body. It inouU be tpprond by the chief leret officer, who vttt hnt been tetlfe In
la dr;frji C'-**&1 It f^4>ul/ be kept In mind thit changei in technique! mayretutt In lower coin: therefore, a
cki~.lt n t'.t cottrsct prlcei AoaU include thii fxtor, which can alto be invoked in a deflationary period.
/m'rtre cl»:Jt are r/QMreJ by Section IS and are limited to performance and payment bonds and liability
iK'jrzr.ct. Tne foment bond would include premium liability and equipment liability. In those States where
private in.urtnce companies handle worhnen's compensation, that requirement would be included in the
cr~f!zve.
frUe a'.-jne is not a toodcritrrionfor the eun/ of a contract since hiffi standards may be expensive. Another
fxior it be considered is that the lowest bidder may be forced to reduce serrices in order to make a profit.
«/>f 5>/.J h'iste Sbratement Districts. The Diiectoi n hereby authorized to create one or more loiid mate
nAr.-.'tr.r'.t di>:nctk »i^iiti the boundaries of this locality in order-to ptovide efficient and economical solid waste
r.i.'i;s~tr.t.
COMMENT: Tmt teciion and the folowint lections wUI enable the Director to obtain efficient and
A . *: — :~-[ tsltj wjste njnjfemenl by the creation of districts and the regulation of private contractors to serre
at. h district ta crejled.
Reflation, Omnrrh permits, of the optimum number of prtitte person wU ettmtnait Intffcianer. meha
duplication of mats.
6.09 Frlratt Contractor Refutation. The Director thai determim the number of contrutors needed to effirier .iy
•enethelocalityoran districts created under Section 6.0S and ihill Usue permits to the ccnirsctor o: cortra::?:i »^.o
. an found to be qualified until the needs of fte locality ire net. Nothing in this ord Juiwe shall preven: one cc.v.rulor
from senini the locality or an districts created under Section 6.0S.
COMMENT: This wit give the Director the needed authority to exercise control oierpri*3:e Cf^nmctors *lo
are managing solid waste within the locality. The goal to be achieved is efficient anj tcfjnrj~.iczl ler.ice to s3
generators of solid waste and it may be achieved through the use of one or r-.ore conrrxtrn T':il secric-n i* ' ^.'J
also allow the use of one or more contractors for collection and one or more cr j.;p?j£ c' b^:*t
collection end disposal could be combined under one cor.trsct. If the system used ir.ic!:es olr.tr acn\iry. s-M.-'r ts
processing or resource recovery, that could be includfd in csch district c~Jihtjri:ed by this stetson.
6.10 Service Charges. Nort'Rcsidential Solid Waste. The Director shall not set or reflate any sennce charges for
non-residential waste management by private contractors.
COMMENT: This section is directed to contractors sening non-residential solid n^rre sfntrces. who ere '(ft
free to negotiate for the fees charged thctr cuitoricrs. This section wo-jjl not be utej :t snv sm w>er*ji.vjl
government monopolises solid waste management. This suggested ordinance is dnipied /. ruse in a kx&ty *'.re
non-residential solid waste may be managed by pmcte industry urder the tor.iril of'- .v.'f ••'. trr-:trr; the-:?, re.
alt non-residential waste a classified as commercial. A buMir.g or gro-J? of tu:!Ji-.fs c-;~.ii;?rf cf fi-.e rr *-.;*e
dwelling units is classified as a commercial enterprise ««? vill notte ser.ej as a f -•/? eft'te m:Jer. Hi! t-:j K .-, rr
management system. If solid waste management is refilled as a utility, rfc; section *m!J not crrly.
6.11 Exclusive Service. All generators of solid waste, other than those cper^tinj ur.'er p:rr^ts as au^.:rl;ej in
Section 7.01, shall use the services of the local government or contractor for the tn:i in »hi;h the solid »jsa is
(eneraied.
COMMENT: The restriction on the number of conmctors ser,icir.f a district, counted with tpo>al caiMtrrplaftd:
h. Information as required to indicate compliance with :be Occupational Safely and Health, and Emircrrrentil
Piotection [ .awj of the federal and/or state government*.
COMMENT: CtinsiJtraliun of safely anJ the cntir,nsinent are rf pr-"ic inspfrtjnfe. A perry::,-* sstxi!J te
required to indicate what tanj of safety manures wulj be Kkrn in his ptvrstio-.s. jnd hjw he wr.Y-.Ji w
-------
to
y
to
tomfft- *ii>i the in,. Cortiderarton should bt'prm m the preptnttoit of tit Environmental Impact Statement by
the zjfrtv. ir.e ptrmiiret would be required to respond with measures toward mitigating wry impact*.
I'll S.v.-,-» ffrmit. The Director is hereby authorized to prepare application forms for permits for the storire, OB
pre- : >tt. cf a'.'. vot:J %»jv.e generated and retained thereon for more thin twenty-four continuous hours. Provided.
t.r*r-t>. 0--» sr;l:on shi'.l not apply to l resident of a building of four or less separate dwelling units. Such ipptication
^•..Te;-.,«: -
i T-; r;-t in J jid-t>i of the applicant, showing its legal identity (individual, partnership, corporation, etc.); and
tr>: b .i_:;»> a.!J:e*i4>l* ihe appli^jnt;
b. Tre ;'i.j.:":;j::OB. an:i.-ip:ed iota-He ind weir?it of ill solid waste to be stored;
c. Tht b;r.. i. df*rrp::c>n ind owner of all slorac.: containers and ancillary equipment;
d. Frr^.s'Uk o:\-j!'?.'tion, pro:e»i:r:j or dispoial. ihowinjail permit numbers thereof;
t. AH c:r s: i:/o:ni:ii.-a rcaionibly required by the Oir*;tor lo fulfill Ihe intent of this ordinance.
COMMENT: Cfftttwt solid »»itt mcnagtment begin at the point of generation. Since the act of producing
u:.J i.^;e c;tnvt ke totally controlled. the first element of management to be placed under a permit h storage.
T-:£ Z~-'. *' nf.t hmit II jr.Srrjrv anj mjy be varied lo suit the solid waste management plan of the heat
t -1I-! -.r.: S:i:<: 3 me l:*ut unit to stimulate tiie movement of solid mate bel\fteit thi point of storage and
/...-^- -:.--,-.-:.•«
T'l jr,-'..-.1'.'.-.'i of Mi section P/ S or more residences generally Is the division between residential mi
c--:— -T.-. .-.';. :iu:ia. C/fcient slcrage at such facilities *vulj result in the use of bulk containers vrhicts must bf
rcm-iJ.
T'.i f.«-yn.-» cf rwnjf taxnehvlj vvste frjm a building of four or tea dulling units «« be toed to
ft. (•::•• t -.•- f.JKon of taut Kick as iwperau-t rtaicla and bulky mste on sxh premises.
A i ,--••' cf t::r IL-.I;J »Jjff rr.jiiftv.ml pb*. thr DJnlor will classify the waste by its component peris. Thl
i\7;::.::.-.-: 1 1'/i.'.'if"--.'.!"'"' *M Jefetl vpivi tin acli'-'ly fonjticteil vitlun llit locality. Estimateilfolumttni
»»(./•: : ;'t ".tiesur, f.* comrrth wsrVr tn^fuffir.^fttofall solid v-vste from the locality.
r-:fr^^.^^^tffikel^ir:c'npfitoa^mnrii'iin^i!ti!l . . :. i i --:.:i:. -i ;'l cnt'itlics miuf tt enlwtJ. If interior locations are invahetl. /iff haunts mat ibo be
J.i;f!.lt';/ r't* fjntMen the aft'^ini neej only ipecify Ihe number and type, me* as bulk
e. *.:x-.:r i • ?Jj,.':.- >.-fi. A-jxtlurr t^aipKem. sticli « compactors, shreilden ami baten should be listed bf
T'.t rtf..f!*u*3i of sut-sKtion lal »•:// enable f'lf Director to ttatmte adequacy of pnsent collection
:i r:tvt .'•:-' :v crr-ii-cr:tck other arm-try requiring a permit.
T't i" .••::fc N-.-.» ;-• J :^u:f >. of the applt:anl. shonrinj its k|a) identity (individual. partnership, corporation, etc.);
o. Tr.e t-i:' f»i £^Jre>» of the applicant;
c. T:-f J;-.ly of the r.or.-teiiJ:ntul cvuonni viiin| the collection servke and alt stonje permit ramben of aam*;
l'«i:it-: i. -<>::f:ii->n. ihe arei Kned. hours of collcciwr and type of collection service lobe prodded;
t. The r:i::> -j,tl for the ratAernent of solid »j«e between collectvon and further management;
«. Ar. i:..;rv:c:>- of ill moionied e-^uijmcnl to be u>ed in such collection, including ill permits required by law;
f. Pr . ;:' uf jH miu:jr.;{ requireil by this ordininct. (Sine Financial responsibility limits for motor vehicles. Me.);
I A; oiei of j:r.aux> tuurub'.y requiKd by the Director 10 fulfill ilie intent of this ordinance.
: Tin n wthtr aep in the remit process ofUentifrinf and rtfulatint solid vttre mancreinent.
I: •» :..'j -v,-i' *'••••» fr^ite ir-'!is/n n tnrjjcJ in cntlection of salhi twslc. ranfinf from a contract operation
f •' .*': t'::.*i' « JM -*r c- >u«iri tjl'ihim jr J M tf edUtvt-if who mar strff • pjrtii'utor type oj industry.
T".< '..• '• ••; «•-••.'•' t\'«t r.W.'iirft J is in-.porUK! siixe i! tall enable imMgriii rcfulmivn by lac enforcinftrm
i-fl'i ! -.'f .; if.'W.tr H'.'Wf. surkneriit. suteinJ mortar. xvM nrcJ In/If funtvl. -u+mai *vstr from a
^•j/:'> tjt.-J*tfil. «x/«N/u»ifirr\rjWj(iJiMiIwl *'*ilj fftfHirr (li'^cnfuiatiim t>i minimise ktitlrh problems. Tmt
ttentlty of the tear of ihe cotlrcrim intern would alto* i crosscheck for observance* of otter irvurt-rrn cf
the law.
Supptfinf Ihe Director vitti the names ofcuslumen fillal'ov f. erchatio«C'fthi core area traffic afJ to frcienl t-.tjry rr:;'f:c C". »Yii.',xr';.' s:rrf:s- T':e r>-f r/
sen-ice wiiM range from curbsule bags to inking t'te filcJ coniairer to tht ci'iliciipx -.cr.x'.c 3rd rt-.j-v.-; i'.t
emp'.y container to its proper location.
Once a collection vehicle lies been filled, the D'ireaor slioulJ tw the rvft cr ruu:et to te mcj :t ?~-:'-.fr
management, stich as delivery to a fnnsfer stjtijn. an inaneriicr. 3 rccoitry i:;::^n or a ^:i-i.;j/ j;.v. r:.f•:•;•/
prodding another tool in pbnnirg soliJ wasfe ir.snigtncKt, suc'i «I *';crr*i'ire r ju:a f(> "V- :-V ejj;.'.:-.t .*"J.'^
flow and lilt location needs for trzmftr stations.
The equipment inventory H;;'/ mrb.'e ttie Director to nr.'yj.'f t>ic fbi':r^. cf the cc;'..z:t to /-.';"-'.' '::J
commitment as outlined to this point. Authority urftr /'':M nrjiturce J.jei not excuse coTt'zrxe »T.'.;: s:j:e cr
other licensing laws or permits, nidi aia ptib!:C uttiir.rs cor*i'nnstc-ri.
Insurance requirements are r\wfi>[J in rat^rt- proiecr.on of rr^trty anJ pfn?t ar.J ?r{ :«rrr'..i cf:':e ,':*•;/
government. The former is acltie-ed lhro:t&h liabiti:y policies, it^i.i-^i'if t'fjse on rrtn^r if'tidfS and l-.e L:ier
through performance bundl
The last subsection could be used to rtouire the app'.iwt to file ci>p:tl of eiur.Kg centrxtt se tr^t
overlapping contracts can be eliminated.
7.04 Fcrmit to Locate and Operate a Transfer Station. The Director is h-rety au:ho:izi4 lo prepj:! a;;'.:r.»
forms for perrnits to locate and operate transfer stations in thj> lojjlity when applicable. teqji::^g the ^.ICA:'|
. information. ,
l. The name and business address of the applicant,
b. A full legal description of each site, including the name ar.d address of each owner of record. If not owrieiVy :h«
applicant, documentary proof of the right to use each site, with appropriate site p'.uu;
c. Clear evidence of approval by alt other «gulaiory agencies;
d. Operational plan including c^siification. anncipilej volume ir.l neijifls of so'.ii wane.hours of CferatiM, arl
resource recovery activity or rxMen:ial;
e. Applicable permit numbers of persons using each facility;
f. Inventory of all fixed equipment;
(. The method or methods of transporting, ihe solid waste from the transfer suUon for further iruruter-.ert, •_•»
destination,route, and identity of the carriers involved;
h. Ccrtiftcales of all insurance tequtrej by this utduunce;
\. All other information reasonably required by the Director to fulfill the intent of tin ot&iaeee.
COMMENT: Generally, (no facton determine ike use of trsr.^'ir siiriort. i'c!x-te iiJ : It in tt-.e a?;^M. »«,> KJV A.nr te'.eJ .-':?
premise or iiVio may laie an option to b:iy or rV.-ir the properly. T-:; iki.-ilt <«/' tl:-: tile F'-'S «l u.'J J.-r-^ •'?**
the requirements itf irflter regulatory btxtiet. *-l:ich *v:ilj imlnjt ep^nn-j/ ^v a ;cn:-:f 5->jn/ As me-.ri--:cj
vrliir. the user of this ordinance slioiM lai'k to Star.statutes fir >:n a'jA'rir. M ect Fir—.j rzinctr: ofu.crs
ecu be irteil bv the authorities ai a crvt*.c n;.';i /•':ei"-';'.-*:iV r^i:J *j:.?~:c':t. iu.'-. _-i j
corttpucfor tir itiifrt. v.^T r;:c :^*:-.\''i';-. •:
M»- be by Inict barge cr niitharl aid imit hjie rJh'iupjii'.'i It' fount !*>•!•£•! ir.nrrCirf/'.'": .-'..• ^-.•_•'.-
station.
Iflhr larr vMtrs In inelujr alientlu-n
-------
Sa*iu&% feMnf period* mmt »f* vfirf w*u» Jbr eteaxlxft*efmr1Tirr.wotitde«t*tc*ttnt**rutet
t enfofcrment *ttnty.
rO
U1
t*>
7.01 ftr—.it to Trjraport S0M VjtK. The Dtitetoi b nerrty authorized to prepare implication forms to transport
let;3 »-uis. orjrit.nj in this locality, by any method notcovered byany other provuion of thi« ordinance, requiring
a. I!:* rurr.e .-J b-jjnni addteu of Ihe applicant (individual, partnership, corporation).
b. The r!:!-Ji> of transport, unit volume, schedule of movrnunl routes used ind the identity of the penons la tht
e AJ *v'-.e: i-iomalion reasonably required by the Director to fulfill the intent of this ordinance.
COMMEN T: Tkt primary ihnat of Mi section it footed to the nmement of sclid waste other trm by the
<_-:.Y.-.-;."1 irt:.-.'f. nit wuU include movement from the tntnfer station, residue for incinerator* or
nz'VTCi.fir'.e rts:J-je from resource recovery attitiriei. Wtten t contract operation'is involved • tool
f^.tr-.r^..~t V- IO.-ITS anJ o-xnle m:inernor> or to operate txjumg incineriton in this locality, requiring ihe Ibllowinf
r.'orr..::.-i.
a T>: r^-.i Jni iJJrenof the J??!k.-anl. thowinj ill lejd identity (injmduil. partnetihip, corporation, etc.);
b. \:'.:. rr.i ;^-:;,»tfthe»pj!:cont.
c. A !"_:: l-'-il Jr'.-nri.orofeichiite, mcludinj the nime ind addreu ofeach owner of record. If Ml owned by th*
jpr"•;..-.:. jT..-e.--j:> p'oofof L'K nil to u« lh( site. «nih the ijproprule JIK plam;
(!- C :jf ;-.rJe-;e c:":p;roval by all olher ie2u!atory agencies;
e C; ;•:::: ~il p'i-^. r'c'.'ji^s c^iiificilion, anlicipaled volume amd^etsXt of solid waste to be incinerated, houn
cr cre-;!.^"1.. --.I.jipjleJ \i*'ar-.< ir.J wei^Si cf residue", and resource recovery activity;
f V" ; .'.t^. - or t'iripofling L*ie resniue from the incinerator, the destination and identity of the earrlerx Involved;
J. Cert :";i:;i ,: J! i"»urince lequired by thu ordinance;
h. .-C c::.sr L-.fcr.Tijtion reasonably requtred by the Director to fujllll the intent of this ordinance.
COMMENT: i'nJer the def:ninora in Section 3. this lection rtrubtet all tolid vmtc incineration within the
Li;'-'*. p:--'uj.rr c^.'Ly&J b:imen and of. life activity by kwineaa. therefore each user must hare Ihe prior
s;;r-..:! f-J' c:r f:l!jMi contra* authcriry before tie permit »itl be issued. Vie two positive stepi aulttorticd are
if. *>: jrcr rKOvry jff:i:0' anil reiidue dispotsl
r.c MI of tkn i:,,yesitJ orjirjncc rray visri to inciuiit design and performance iltmdardi for the
irc."ur.Vi'-T fjiew anJ i)tt*indL'tgof*3ste. inctujirtx trie residue, inall facilities comtntc red after its effective
dire. T::: {•-• SJ J.'io te requirej in increasing Ihe qiulify of performance of easting facilities.
l.'t? ?::::: j-:. focuntntary proof of Ihe rijhl to the site, with the site plans which conform lo the requirements of
ip reporlr prepared by an erpneer licensed to practice that piofcssion in thisSl£le,incIudina;
t-':.-: :. :• '•:' u i!.i fo'ioai^g-
I. M.. J- '-ry anJ vlrnsttil jfflf
5 £•.-.:<• '. • f iej.h:n;anj gai movement
6. Surface and proundwater protection
7. ^Completed use
8. Locaiion of residences snd structures
9. Access streets, roads and highways
f. Operational plan which shall include, but not be limited to:
1. }lours of operation
2. Classification of waste
3. Anticipated volume and weight of waste
4. Hazardous waste handling
5. Equipment to be utilized
6. LamJfiUing methods
7. Availability of cover material
B. Anticipated life of the lite
t All other information reasonably required by thi Director to fulfill the intent of (hH ordinance.
COMMENT: In designing the permit form, the user wiS have to act wtkfa tkeco^i.fyfnts of spptieAh S:*t»
law end ttie nttes and regulations authorized therein. Utoro'jfH pfannirf end the app'ics^on f*f SMI* n/:"f:ffr>/
principles to alt stages of site selection, design, operation of-d fcrtpktt* u,e **.." rn^'; in » s^ccf:,f^' :r.J
efficient sanitary IanJf:{f. In order to meet this objective, it is eitf.^jt ih:t i!:t r^'es erd res'^:iy.i te
comprehensive so ffiat the director can evaluate the apptiejnt's design enJcperjrion p^~.s.
7.0S femrff to Locate and Operate o Resource Recover? Facility, Ths Oi:t;ior h J.srrty r:*>or.itd to prepare
application forms for permits to locate and operate fa;iljtiej to recover nuiehal or enet£- iescur;cs from sol;* *_>:e
within the locality, requiring the following information:
a. The name and business of the applicant;
b. Clear evidence of approval by al! other repjktory ajeruies;
c. A full !e£i] description of each site. inctu-;{J it
Section 7.01 So 7.GS will not excuse requirementl of Ot'ter regttktcry b"-HfS wfts-t ;':e tccs'.in- Or f-.,^r /t-t-rf
within the State. All permit provision! hire *vttfil apply to both public mid private acti-'ity, tbtrefcre :hcse uifn
who want a public activity excluded must do so.
7.09 Permits to Iswe. If the application for any permit required herein shows that the arp!icuit will perfonn the
services or operate the facility, or both, for whiJrthe permit is sini;Ju. in cenfomi:> *:th ihf 1a»i of th:j State.
locality and the provisions of this ordinance, including all rj[;» and re£i:!i!io-.i author^-,! herein. :he prrrr:: or ;:r~::t
shall t»v,ic. !f. in the opinion of the Uirccior of the Ail.Tiin:i!rjti%< Dfp^rir.e^:, r:oj.:';j;iori c^r. te rr..*? *l•,.^ ^.11
bring ihe app'ncjlion wiihin the invent ;nii puipjx of vhn otdmjnrt. h* ^hili r.oiif> :l:e 377'.:±"' ci :^;',:.^"'.s. in
wriTinj. ^cllinj; forlli llie correction* to be made jnt! :!'.* n~i* in ".hi^li su.h jo/Kwiu-ni jhul! he k.'r^'fTfJ.
COMMENT: In £it maancet wtttfrtalt icgairebuffrr.enn err met. />v Ofrrcr,* n c-Mts'.cJ M u>xe t*t ?cr~:;:t .
fat \vtiith ai'phcjtitw M mwlt: If t'n-rc arf fttrrcflitias »\-Wrft vitiU M*:.f tffrcur faitccrr.plince then thts )*:•'*!J
-------
10
in
tttrxif>a ti> ihe attention of the applicant and a specific rime limit set for eompOoKt. The desirable count to
f;Zj*r km way be an «*.** nwlrf inconnff appucann 10 upgrade their iffHation to meet the standards
set n; in fre crJir-SKce. nt time Unit should be realistic. No pmrislon ha tern made for an extension of the
C'F'jl r; -:* perim because iliis could lead to procrastination. Ha permit should be issued until full compliance
fc»fV«iit.v.i
7,10 Ptr~.i'.\f Der'jl. If the apc'icant fails to make the corrections pursuant to the notice given under Section 7.10
»::h-n th; t;— * -.r.i: specified herein, or, if the application does not clearly show that Ihe applicant will render services
or c^rrrr tre ii;.'.::y without health hazard or ajverie effects on the environment, ihe application shall be denied and
ths i-j'.-.iir.! r.r.i:'ed. in wnur.j. staling therein the reasons for the denial. Nothing in this section shall prevent my
a?p!:.-2-.: tvrr. Kjpp!} in i *'*'si ihe rejection of his appUcilion, proviocd die requirements of this ordinance are meL
COMMENT: Tie intent of the ordinance includes the identity of alt solid wcste sources and assurance that
r.vj* —-z-.^e—.i-r.t *»*.'.' r^h-^ce tt:e ewiiunmtr.l a^J protect ttte health, safety and velfare of the infiabirants,
i*e-i< •! in ^-'.ic;nv! + kicr. does not assure full compliance with those requirements must tt denied, even
fr-*?i H r-.:: dmirjn I Quoins. Ftvbusintssetvtt refuse to meet any reasonable requirement and ¥101 be In
efi-i:'*1! fc> j: •: J j:k.er tutctitful zpplicsntt for temporary waste management.
I.It r.r-j .\'ui*.icr. Dnflty. All motor vehicles operating under any permit required by this ordinance shall display
the ?f:— i: r^r>«i or r^t-trs on each side, in colors which contrast with that of the vehicle, such numbers to be
c!fi-:> I:;:!; ;-.Jnoi!«xi thin i: uvhes hi[h.
COMMENT: T ^.£ hraTtf;; ufety, «etfjrt tnd en^ironmmu] aspects of solid waste management within thia locality. Thest
rein ^-i :t i-lj-xTi r.-Jit be conpinble with uiu hw if.t applicable state rain and reptlaliont.
COMMENT: TV succas of effectire solid xisie Kmaterntnt trill depend trpon ihe rutet oral rtfulittom
' *»•*•• '•!.-.-• kin. Jlte intent h to eJtow fttxibiin in drifting rules by the enforcement agency rather than hiring
L-p&r.t -. ••:•'" for this purpose. It is ar.ticipneJ that sane iota of this attested ordinance via also be area
»-'w watt »-J Ix nxzfed- but not tenerated. therefore a brood minority it eiren and includes ttonte.
-i. la order to in«ue complan• pcr.i? is the lea ff :he
unacccptlbte container.
The surrounding circumstances Kilt include tht nature of the tiobricn. Iri tturan--r. ctJ Aether It *a
Intentional or inadHriant. All these must be eonsidmd by the Com-.'-.-i-ma in dn iJi-.g * hit at'.yi ir. r^e. ^
Due process requires that the ptmtnec receives a derailed list of ike c.'.V,v J >/...'-•:. ins. A.';.' w«:i...:f,-:<.:::.
•the permittee may decide whether to appeal, correct the noMoru. or Jj ne.'bXf.
The notice, by including the corrections netnsan to avnd fcrmii n:-ja!ir*i f-es the f:"r.:::ie irr
oppurturity 10 correct the thLliuns. Ten daft is t surfeited note, anj it rcssonslib f'«i
Sim tin permittee did not request a hairing wirliin provided, he (us *«•*/ his nfta. Thta t':e KSXZW n
final anj the only passible recourse left la the permittee is tht cpurtt.
After the revocation of the permit. Ihe en-pemitiee is Iftbte for the faaliies. Tat «i«s.-:« «id fer-.:y
provision of this ordinance art not mindly exclusive. The Dfwrw las the fftiva ef inve^Kf eiAT.n«l. anJ preaM Us «:J?-.-«.
Ihtoudi the 0!ief Upl Officei. of ihe.viobiion. chjrgej. The peimit h.-:Jer .n.J BU> jpr*rf v. pe:«n o: frto^. ..a
atwmey and may cro»KMimne the Enforcement Agency .itnesvev pn.w lu prerfntn; e»Jer.-e on bt t.ha.f.
-------
KJ
Ul
in
COMMENT: TJ* * t sdnpttflat trororW matter lit which tht Enforcanert Afeney h reprint to brtfy la
triintt in nfftn cf At c*a»i» let fen* ai the iKMtre TWi At cited permit noUer tx opporntnlry K>
tms-tamint prior lo pmentint hss etidem*. The sautl fdmlnistraclre hearing wOl fofim ludici* procedure!
but n ii.' be a i« tar formal bests.
12 Opix'wn TT.e Oiiector of the Admiwitralive Department dull decide the issue and shall, within _
ef ifce ;or:!-iion of the healing, render in opinion in wrillflt. ta which opinion he may suspend or moke the permit or
pemi:s '.-ivoStd in the htannj.
COMMENT: A rrsljXc tint limit shoulJ be it I. to thai Ihe appeal can be considered pr.3i
lir.g :;-.e irtenjt ikoutd be evaded u t'r wouU encourage procrastination.
•'-e decision. 4
f.CS t-^vrivn. In all fun where Itie vitiation of thii ordinance or ihe rules and regulations authorized herein, or
thtli.i cf th.i State create an immediate threat to the safely, health, welfare rx environment of the resident! of thll
lo:j!:ty, tr t Er.fOKe.-nenl Agency shall cite the violator, stating therein the necessary corrective measures to be tajcen.
lT:i £a!l aitt ur.t la tejn forthwith. If luA corrective measures ire not taken forth, the Enforcement Agency shall
r.y..y i>.t C!-.* f Lejal Officer of this locality who ihall immediately »ppiy to Ihe Court for in Injunction
ejtrf-.l: .:-.r.| fu::^.«r Mcljlion » shown «the notice luthorited in Section &.01. tlw provision o( this section shaV b« in
«iiLun 10 ar. J -01 in uibsliiution of >ny other section or sections.
COMMENT: nil it ittinJid at an aJJeJ uftfaarj »-nnr action or inaction mi? ctntttn immediate threat
to thi ii/r.-v, AiLif;A. »«T;j«, or rni ironmml of l>tr population. An injunction may l>t obtaintsl so compel Ktlc*
»>:tre c?m:::o'x ore not tnJtruha 'mmtdulely. nil action ymild not prtcluife citation to a court when
ptnj!;'J jr pmf.izry ptrjltio cwUbe attsstd.
9. Solid Waste Management Advisory Board
Ml Affontnmi. Die mijorily of the Uptlsiive Body of the locality shall appoint -residents of this
nvji-:.;.-':; to a bojrj. to be known as the Solid Wisie Marugtmenl Advisory Boird, and shall fill all vacancies,
howevff ;:t:i;J Any u:h appoinuc thjl lervi out the unexpired term of the person who is replaced.
COMMENT: TV mr fftn ojj nimbn it tlainttt lo tvoid * tie lit ootlnf. The ideal board would be made up
of t et-.b'j::!"! of profmionjt and lajf people, Jntwint upon wen frofaiiora as medicine, ent/neerfnf,
fl-r -. rf ; -J ^-»-. Ljyrte-tt. mjy revi«w (wrmil .pplicition form, and recommend revisions hereof, which shill be comiiten: with At terms
of .this ordinance.
c. shall attend all hearings ca'kd under this ordinance for the aioptiM. reviiicfl or relocation o. rules and
regulations authorized herein. It nuy make such recommend: lions to the Dlrtctor 31 rt avrto-uedby Uiby-!a»s.
-
the cause of such complaints.
In all such hearings, the Advisory Board shall parlicipate through the Director only and all recorrmeniaL^s stali be
In wriling.
COMMENT: TJie Ad'isory Board is designed lo dt> just »nji lire ifrle iinplies. I: i; a vjHuH* as It t! fenj'.iei
to be and should represent a cross section of the locality vhlch It sma A'o prcntion r-i been n-^ie for
coinpt nation so that anyone using the ample would be free to sit out their OHTT schedule I'rjzt'.y, a b •-•»* of
lllis type will tet either t nominal alary for nrh day sened or the membtn nil be paid c.'( acfal c*?e-. co'.'.tctiont ftr yeet
Minimum cofecrion frequency of twice within 7 days ii recep:i:«l at disrupts the common bo-jse fly f.fe c.v.'.V.
The time of collection is designed lo prevent nolle or other ertr.o)anccs at times *hen the majority of the
population wilt be resting.
10.02 Non-Residential. All non-resider.tia! solid waste ihall be collected al sufficient irite.-vals to protect the
environment as set forth in the rules and regulations authorized herein. All such collections shall be whedjKd so thai
collection vehicles do not interfere with rush-hour traffic.
COMMENT: Tlie rariery of non-residential *vstc prevent! detailed reruhtion as to (requite.? ol coHecrlon.
Ewironnrrtal >u:ar
-------
rO
in
"Afprend ewiuinert" ft left open for definition by rules end regulations. Such eontairmcaiUbtoftrit
«"nvr.->a; si:t. rustproof, and durable rmaeriil, viOl tvo handles to facilitate emptying, etc.. mil should
Iret-jJe fiiHt p'atie or piper bags. Hap ft rerticukrly nluablt taring the summer monthl. "Securely "would
requ»e r-.rht ilmurt at ell times other than when plating watte in or emptying noire from e container.
// C' .VonRcs^itnnil. Alt occupanu of r.on-tesidcntiil premises »ha!l provide a. sufficient number of opprored
Kf.:-r tr. !?• \:.t r.Kigt of solid waste which they generate and shall place ill wch wild waste therein, other thin
those vu:e$ w!-:.h .•' k JJ.-« x hxh cm be Moral in the open. Jane two sections illustrate methods affixing responsibility
l) F-X..V ;-;rr:tt ccnuirers tor storage prior to collection and leave la the one rcsponsiblethcrcfore, such is
F*rchue or '.-~se.
12. Containers
/ * fl &•::.•.•.•!'."!. The o»nm of all reusable approved containers shall maintain (hem and Ihe adjacent area In a
t jli-.;e j--.i iijt free condition.
COMMENT: TV t*Jinji:te requires the ute of approved containers for all \witet requiring such storage.
F.~^r.'.t i:-^:ikief-ng inoald result in dean containen used for aongt of solid vasie. TnntKlim would be
r..s:.-i V .-s K tr.frmr'.nt tool for those fen n*o will te careless In their housekeeping and alto to Irarlnite
*.'v.**i#:-Jtvr ^r.Jr^Jfnt i-ontrpl procedures.
12 ?: t>efi:Kfi Containen. AJ! r«uuble conuineri incipable of meeting the definition of»pptov«l containen stul
kt tf.y.it-.ti »j*:e jnj iMU be pticed in the collection vehicle by the collector!.
COMVENT: .'•/-••i>- lori/inei Asve trial a tag mertodo/ control of container condition witn little success. The
lex;.1 ».-. it n uset kjmi>| KJ, x*«i ft ancchrd to the container. If the container is reused, then a red ugls
::::: :i_*. ;v.. 'T:-:J r':f ^^.Ttt-^Hv:^ ;/i.-; it a illicit i-( r.ci r.ote Ciin hours before collection Ail reusable containen ihill be removed from the curb (or
•!!*> »_____ ho^rs after collection.
COMMENT: Ru ucriori lenes tvo purposes. It rtituires ttt-out by the homeowner and also serves to regulate
r::ci-.f.: offr.l cftrjiners end the rtnoial of empties wthin a reasonable time so that full containers Mill bt
tt.t 1:1., .V n te Ufa! by anrrjls or vanclilt anj empty containers nit! be re/noted promptly by the residents,
thrit; t~rf.ir£!ini an unsightly row of cans before each house.
S^-t'uj .•« tsKcijl by ftte reuJtnt is the mat economical process. The availability of funds and distance to
the ti.ZtiSv* p::nt vould determine the use of this system. If used, same consideration must be given the
kir.l-fjpftj f.J tlitrty. Sone etries *il protvle t set-out scrricefor that category. Others ma? lave It to each
lr.J..:J-j£ »j irjie his ou-n imnttment. If bulk cantamen are in use there may be a need for some variation.
P£'.l*~j!;rty M *tpre the collection truck enters the property for pick up.
13. Non-Conuinerized Waste
S'j-.-t.:,,)' v.).-ei »hi,h do not piuvitie food or hirburige for iosects uid rodents may be placed at ihc curb Tot
Cw^s^1; -• f:'-'..-*:J the) art secured to prevenl lilienrf ard do not exceed Ibs. in weijhl.
COMMENT: Tall Section Is sufficiently broad If Include such items a r.fwr-^ffr
etc. jlif vouU be vithin limits set by collection trucks H'ri'if tim'ts stu'-.-'J be *.-f so t;::r :l:e «T.'.V.-;wr crev
will nor be injured in lifting the bundles. Rules and refutations foalJ beiaetllw adJeJ &:::!. if r.tiM.
14. Bulky Waste
AM bulky items shd! be stored within Ihe residence of the o*r.er. The Dits;w shjl! be rst.M by ei,-h revi;rt of
the lype and location of items of bulky wastes to be collected anil shall nuU i2Te r.j:!jt'.e for pi^i-^p r;ge f. >' la
pick up. Cnclosurf in a ptelic bag wouW oe an Kutr.plc of such e require'ri.-:.'. .'•'tui'.as tli ~.i. pick uf l^«.!i.'J te
made a; stvn a possible after notice is meired from the raiJtrt by the C.ra: ».
TTie street department would remove dead animals from the streets.
16. Collection - Residential
All residential solid waste shall be collected by the locality or Ihe collector under contract »v.h the !jci:ir>'.
COMMENT: Tills section Is for use in local collection as no other stcii- "i covers resiJsvri:! co.Ver.'wn ether
titan the permit requirements far a eenrrator vlia will dispi'.e of his ox« \^:te.
If private contactors arc used then the cpmran btr^ctn the (nrj.'iri- c-.J tl:c eontr.-:tpr H-c'j'l set out ia
detail the duties and tiffin ofll'e parties. In such use. t>:c perrr.i; settipr.s r:J tin ri~j:jt\ci ox'j.'J ;?r>y.
17. Fees
/ 7.0! Establishment and Faymeiit. The Direcior shall establish such fees for rjiiien:iil K'.-i »astr .-olit:ti« is art
necessary to meet aTl costs of operating and ma:nlaining the residential solid wjite rr.jij«r-er.t iviier-v All s-^:h fees.
including subsequent revisions theieof, shall be paid by the resident or owner of te.-ot J of lie f loysrty sen rd. »rj s^l'.l
be paid to the order of the applicable agency on a quarterly basis, not more than thirty da>l after the exjirjuoa of
each quarter.
COMMENT: In establishing fees it is essential tlat accurate cost figures he used. Of thte fifj'rs. ta*r ar.l
equip-nmt vill represent the erealcr percentage, with ortrhaJ «"* as u]fn-c !?Jf>". tufern.vy u.'.-rfrs. i.••.•.•::,>«
and tick per enj retirement ter.cfas bcitifrcpresentatht t'fj'ac lu'iKct. frf j.-'irj.-r'i h:.:'g s.vs.'t-: is is..'a S
ftflloivs must voter supply anj n-atte itafrr pilling pn^eJurts. TTioc AVS cwlj cv cJJi-J w th^si s.V*-.-Jv in
fr>rc*.
The fees could If fviJ into the general fund or told I specific accnun: tin:V..' ft' s,'lij n.'i.T r-^ -:j jr-rrrf.
If ream! tar funds ere the wrmrf o[meaue [or solid *iste muuff.C':!. this sett**: r/Mi'.'tV ditir^tcj.
17
-------
liqntirt upon tht eatplrarlon of the tint specified hi Section
17.91 DclintfaKty. AD unpaid fen shall b«c
17.01 ani sfca.1 heir Interest n 5 per annum until paid.
COMMENT: This It • ttrp In the proeea offoretd collection fta lot solid wore tnmtajtmtnt. TV fea at
llrfrrj Jt r; ,trt after ikt expiration of tht thirty toy period frets in tht preceding; section md coRlcttai h
AV^"'^- t". *;-v K.5s*juenta'rion.
Th; ,"'i :.-j:"T for interest it inttnded to bring to the attention of the dttinqutnt account ttiffact that tatf
ffj".tr.t eJji fa tat cot! of bit ut-Jiiittal solid »«« manatemenl fid lo encourage promfl payment. Current
ll*;'jl i-.ttnt: rj.-er caulj be uiej is t guide here and. in no me. should the legal rate be exceeded
17.03 £<•''«; rVi. The Director shall notify the Chi:f Legal Officer of all delinquent accounts not more than ____
&>i af:er the tr.i of each quarier and the Chief Le-al Officer dull lake the necessity iction (ocolleclume. Each
de!:%:.er.l amount shall be Lable lo the governing body for court costs and all cost items involved in Its collection.
COMMENT: ThU section woutdaltov/ tome time for out of court collection activities within tht time limit let
km. 5«:r:.'? n.OI cream a d^'in^uinc* 30 fart after tlie expiration of a quarter, thereby automatically
k".:r.r.f the t.".e f.*r wit. An eld.tionat thirty day period vould not be too lonf to allow the Director to prefer*
hts J^ii^r"^-.-Its'. Present leminclefj-pbcet a mandatory duty upon theOiiefl.tfftl Officer tocollect.
7>-:> ,-• :^,"i n :':e only one in lite sample rebrivr ID Minquency of payments. Health consiJtratioat male
it *r^ri:. n- ihji jt-.':J i»aste mm$er\ertt be continued fve'i thoufjn user feet are not paid. Added provisions
tt.'*.l it c?*.<:lereJ. incliijxiif aceJ lilt of rest or personal property.
h'e^s'e /-•> -tenit rrjy have to be aJf.isted w include jhtsefees.
Ifi-l i'r.;:::;ctfj. All un^ollected frei, iftet juJa:menl. >hi!l be plieed on record in the locilily wh«re th»
pr:^*rty i.-rui » Eb^jteJ. is any o:h#r juJ^ement lien, and shall be released as paid.
COMMfNT: fr?pern- euwn. as i rule, are t stable and nlaUefwup. They, in turn, can protect thtmutta
by sJ-.f-T t':e c?tt efso!i Jessie nantigfnent to tht rental charge to their tenant!.
J'r-.trf a usx-~v a il*'t>l li'niur.on iwippjft/ on local govemmtfntat unin \diich prevents the use of tax fund
in.'^i :w -..k;.':-.! hjswf t.-en KjcheJ. Tti use oft fte v.i!lpmenl mirKtiara imputed by the debt ceiling.
r-.i't »..'/ te i-j.-Micet *>irre j fij^cmsnt may be obtained and collection may be delayed or It may be
i".^tt.y.e. 8} rtcon!:r.f the /Kt/ferre/if the possibility ofpayment vill be increased.
n.':} tvnuu. So feei au-Jiohled in this otduiince shlll b« increised unlil the Ditector has held one public hearing
C.f.tm. No hear:rt shall be helj before one nonce thereof has been published in a newspaper of general circulation
wihin r.'iiiloiiliry. TTiere shall be not leu thin riaysnotmore than days lapse beitreen such publication
uj hesn-i
COMMENT: At presently tales, no hearint would berequired lit the event that a decrease la fea vould be
fouit'.e-
A «M:t is rtf siimf to advise tht mtn of tkt system and permit holders that a rate intrust Is proposed to
rtj; Ji.v inlcreaej person can appear and be heard. Tht time inttntl between publication anil hearing should be
offjff.'tfnt ihtrs'.ion to tllowfultpsrtKipntion.
A •> :Je pib'.icarion of the fnposed rate change is desirable. Added me- informed public.
not Hidings. The Director shall prcud* al all hearings concerning fee increase] and shall open and clou the
hei::r? *.-> i>.'«m uvri or peimil huldet preienl and wiihinf lo be heard shall be re-jojmicd by the Director, who
s>aJ' i^e &e us^r or permit holder lh< opportunity to make a comite statement presenting his views.
CO^^tNT: 7*;J sech"n is inlcnjfj lo provide tome order lo the hearing by authorizing the Director to open
tnJt'A.e tl'C M-.U'"! He n.vulj alw be authoriseil in rtcofiilt Ihost vho nish la be heard end lo rtpiltte the
r.r~.e j'.lfC^ltd f'-ra concise statement.
IS. Iiasunflce
1S.O.I Performance Bonds. All ptnom who contract with this |o«trai«| body to nunjp solid wuw shjfl furr.hh
performana bonds cxMditlooed upon th« faithftil ptrformaiiM of their tgreemtna. A'J su.-S Ixxids s.\a3 *« »Ti:«- by
in iniurance complny licensed to transact buiineis in this State and shall b< for a sura of no: iest thia orte ha! f of i!»
annual sum paid to each such contractor. No such bond shil exceed IOCS of the annual contact p:>nent to »a:h
contraclor. Each performance bond shall Be for a period equal to I*; initial contract term, or t-,y exteruon lAtKof.
COMMENT: Performance bcndl are usually required by Sl;te lav to protect the [orrm:rf boJv in tt-.e etent m
contactor defaults. Each performance bond will haft a tint limir set out in whch a c .'Jim ntnibt rt;»n;l to the
company. Failure lo notify the company in that time trill ro.'if the policy. All .murjrcr po'.icics tr.cM be
relieved f tricdically so that the rieha cfthe locality can be frfltcttd.
Tliis section could be expanded to require a performra boa! ofctlpfnr.it hclJen *ho Zxrati-M t'.tir
activities lefore the expiration dale of the permit, thereby aairir.f continuance of the ccti..'Kel covered irirrbt:
18.02 Payment Bondt. Each contraclor referred to above sria!!, not less than :;n (10) days alter the execj:ion cf
each contract, deliver to the {overnipg body proof of a p>;.-men! bond exceed by a surety corrpjny l.;e-s«c; to
transact business in this Slate, guaranteeing payment of ncft lo all employees of the contractor and i-.e cost of a3
supplies, materials and insurance premiumi required in fulfilling each contract.
COMMENT: Thit section ts intended to safeguard all vnfet due employees of* contractor, as HY//O tht
payment of materials and supplies used in the performance of tht contracl.
15.03 LiaMiry Instance. All contractors and permit holders under the provisions of this ordinance iWJ *crn;s!i
proof lo the governing body of liability insurance covering all aspects of thsir a;m-mes ur.ier thii o:i:ni-.ce. N»
personal injury policy shall be for ksi than S _ rjtr person or S _ pet aiciJni. So'pt^ty iirr-.i;-
policy shall be for less than S _ per accident. All policies required by th:i erd:ru.ve shiil have i rirur.uri
eincellation period of not less than _ days after receip: in wnting of the notice of canc
-------
f. 7.06 S
~
f. 7.06 5
to
Wl
00
h. 7.0i S
_(lncineration)
_ (Sanitary Landfill)
(Resource Recovery)
Ali fees r?c,-j.-e4 ^y [his section shall be placed In the
_fund of this governmental agency.
COMMENT: Fees should be realistic end should bear a reasonable relation to the expenses Incurred by the
f.'vV'n-ieT.'j' cjrrc> for processing applications. It may be desirable to provide at added clause making all such
fit, rcr.-riK.r-.jr.e.
21. Appeals
Ar.y p:r:jn who feelsagjrievedby any action of the Director of the Administrative Department or the Commlsslone
)f the E.-fctr.-er-.em Asency may within days of the act for which redress is sought, appeal to the Advisor]
8M:J. 1.1 wr-:rz. senir.g forth in a concise statement the act being appealed and the ground for its reversal.
The AcVsc-ry B.?ird shall, wi'.hin days following the receipt of each written appeal schedule a hearing date
a."- r.^t.f> the j?-e:l>nt and the Director of the Administrative Department or Commissioner of the Enforcement
Aisr.cv :.i wr.::?£ of the date and time of the scheduled hearing. The appellant may appear on his own behalf, or
th:c->h Cv jr.*;!. ar.J may present his »itnes>es. The Director of the Administrative Department or Commissioner of
Lv.f Er:'-r.r~e.-.r Xjericy ruy pre>ent rebuiul testimony and witnesses.
The A:".-.:.-;> B-jr« shall within days after the hearing notify (he Director of the Administrative Department
cr Ccr-.r^.c'er of 'J*.e Enforcement Croup of its decision and recommendations and shall forward one copy to (he
i;r<-ir.:.
The D.:e.-:or cf the Adniniitrative Department or Commissioner of the Enforcement Agency shall within ___
di>s c:" C.e :;ce;pt of the decision of the Advisory Board, either approve or disapprove the decision and
re..~-«r\i.-_ cm of the Advisory Board and shall forward a copy to the appellant.
COMMENT: A(?rJt to an Adviic*? Board should be encouraged a this couU help relieve congested courts of
t^e-r c.-.f .'---i j-:J priivide for rapij resolution of the question. It should be emphasized, however, that any
AVI-:-* »•/ :>\e B.'yJ it tXiJmj uyon the governmental agency. In the proceeding, the Administrative
Df;;r-.,-.: -.sites the fr.jl dxisinn. aujrcntoe.es of such appeals are the absence of power of I board to
c^ T-f; :'•:•: i::er.J"~:ce of witnesses or the production of evidence.
22. Appeals. Alternative
Ary person who feels aggrieved by any act of the Administrative Department or Enforcement Agency may waive tin
prov-cc-n of Sect-.on 21. and within (he lime limit specified therein, appeal directly to the Court of
Durtr j a" appeals authorized herein, the opinion of the Director shall remain in full force and effect.
COMMENT: The Administrative fntedum Act of the Stale should be consulted and followed for the details
ofifft^i prxeJ-jres. inclitjing time restraints Each Slate wHI have * court of broad initial jurisdiction which
sr.-xi'.l be n:>iun:ed to hejr afpeils from administrative action.
23. Computation of Time
The ume wiihin which an KI b required by law to be done shall be computed by excluding the first and Including
the t^s: dr.. except that when the last day falls on Sunday or a legal holiday, then the Act may be done on the next
suc:»ein; '-> »-^.h is not Sunday or a legal holiday.
Uhrr: j p.bl:c crVue m which an act, required by law, it to be performed is closed to (he public for the entire day
»v. ."• ..-,: :.:ti th: hit day for doing such act. or before its usual closing time on such day. then such act nuybe
f eif«.T!« J on !h.t r.e\! succeeding day which is not a Sunday or a legal holiday.
COMMENT: 7?rii ttcaun wit set a slaniiinl fur lelual lime internals as til nuticel to correct deficiencies witt
A_'.r- ;.• i jrrf t J(pn:n ume limit Other prumiont. is In permit ipnluilMas raiuire a definite lime period for
_(Incir.eration)
_(Sanitary Landfill)
(Resource Recovery)
h. 7.0S S
All fees required by this section shall be placed [n (he
_fund of this governmental ajency.
COMMENT: Fees sliould be realistic and should tzv a rea!or:i!e reijrfon to t'-se aperses I'.rjTtl >/ f:t
governmental aj-r.cy for processing applications. It nsy bedesirjb!e to fm-ije v. cdiid C'.;MCr^'-i-r;:- su:lt
fees ron-retitrr.able."
21. Appeals
Any person who feels aggrieved by my action of the Director of the A&iinistrative Department or the Cer-Tjstiorer
of ths Enforcement Agency may within days of the act for which redress is sought. :??eal to the Aivisory
Board, in writing, setting forth in a concise statement the act beir.g appealed nd ths grcjr.i fcr ::s revenil.
The Advisory Board shall, within days Mowing the receipt of each w::::-.-. :;;eal sjhjiu'.t a ynri.ij dit«
and notify the appellant and the Director of the Aininistralive Di?}:'jr\cm or CcTjn^ior.sr cf -J-.e E-frr:»rr.e-t
A;ency in writing of the dale and time of the sched^ed hearing. The ap?e'Jint rsy :?^;r on hj own 'c::-.a!f. of
through counsel, and may present his witnesses. The D-.rector of th: A'lT.ir.istrative Departrr.er.: or Cc.TjrJ/Jcner of
the Enforcement Ajency may present rebuttal ttstimony and witne»es.
The Advisory Board shall within days after the heirinj notify the Director of ths Ad.TL-.is:ra:i'.-e De^vtr.ent
or Commissioner of the Enforcement Croup of its decision and recorrrr.sniiations tii shall fo:ward one ccjy 13 tr.8
tppelllnt.
. Th: Direct'- of the Administrative Department or CoTnissiontr of the Enforce-:-.: Ac;r!:y jhil! »-;;1-._i ^^^
days of the receipt of the decision of the Advisory Coaru. ei'.her approve or d;isppr>e As di::;:cr. ir.i
recommendation of the Advisory Board and shall forward a copy to the :;>;-ri!irtt.
COMMENT: Appeals to an Advisory Board iho'j'.d be tncmniid a this mJJ ht'.f relieve cer.gnted ecvrnof
tfieir case loads and provide for rapid resolution of the question. It sluxtid be er-.;*:xl:cj, rtoHtrtr. t\it ciy
decision of the Board Is binding upon the pverr.rr.enta! cs:r.cy. In the preceding, the Ai-r.w.r-:i;t
Department makes the final decision. Disadvantages of such appals are the ibs'tct of power of f tt&t) to
compel the attendnace of witnesses or the production of evidence.
22. Appeals, Alternative
Any person who feels aggrieved by any act of the Administrative Department or Enforcement Ajercy may waive th*
provision of Section 21, and within the time limit specified therein, appeal directly to i>.« Court, of
During all appeals authorized herein, the opinion of the Director shall remiin in full force and effect.
COMMENT: Tfle Administrative Procedures Act of the Stale shou'.d be consulted end followedfor thl detail
of appeals procedures. Including tine reslrsints. £cch Stste will ran t court of bro:d initial faislicr'.on *h!ck
should be authorised to hear appeals from administrative action.
23. Computation of Time
The time within which an act fa required by law to be done shall be computed by excluding (he firs! and IsJudirf
the bit day; except that when the last day falls on Sunday or a legal holiday, then the Act may be done oa the next
succeedingday which is not Sunday or a legal holiday.
When a public office in which an act, required by law, u to be performed Is dosed to the f uV:: for the entire d:y
which constitutes the last day for doing such act. or btfore Its usual clo.ir.g time on s-^-h day, then s'ich act nay be
performed on the next succeeding day which is not a Sundjy or a legal holiday.
COMMENT: TWj section will sel a stanJjrd for actuj time intcrnh at alt naiittt to cornet itflcifnclet »iV7
rare to carry a definite time limit. Olhrr pnnitivns. as in perm/I affHiittijiu riquit t Jefinilt limt ftr^Jf.-r
aciion.
-------
10
24.TittetolV«$tt
In CM >tim.-« »f an ajteentnt to A* contrary, title to th« solid wtste shin mt In tht owner of each rasmpmut
UL»-:t> c: f::;;^ n »hJ;h the solid waste U pb.:ed.
COMMENT: 77:.'j sttrfo/i a intended to pat lille la \aste from Hit generator U an IdenriflaHt person
tbry-j}''.'. -a i:t r;r.:*ment. Tlus trill help fix mpor.sioility for mancgeirent ami wcB mid confusion ts to
cr*'.n'::f c-f recr.errlinns, h »;.'/e.'*>areidconfticnnf ctemi in tht erent i resident inadvertently Includes m
iurt c-' s—M in hit Ki,te. as r-th item wou/J be neither unwanted. discarded or listless. Resource refevery win
fit diet e»v*—« m tht r.etd for legal title to solid wile, particularly when lerft volumes en invoked.
thfif-'rt :i::t iKr.'nctizrty fixes ownership at eny mar.jgement step.
25. Prohibited Activities
1101 Did A-.-fJi. It i>/J b« unlawful to plact my dtad animal, ot fnrti Ihsreof, In a container for collection
»-.•>.;;: t>.: co.-.itnt of Lhc &^ctor. ftantet. howtnr. ihb section ihiO not apply to animal para front food
prt;:.-i~ci foe ^.-jn consumption.
COM V EM: P-.ii uetijm It to eneourti* iht lot of the dad aiimal toUtcrton required hi Secriora 6.06 mt
IS. T'.ftx:'.-, ic i i-~:--la e.1 food frtftntioa. Incladinf rtxleritat and commercial actttiry. such at nstaurmtt.
75 C2 Li:ttr>.f. \: sSi3 be unlawful to place, or iSow to be placed, any solid waste upon the toadi. street*, public or
rrints j.v;tr% w:vi;n :>.;»nv-nkipatity contrary (o the provisions of this ordinaire.
COMMENT: f**;'tr jotil wjirr rrvnartmert requires rejutated disposal This section tad Section 25.08.
^c^:;.".T*rj £•*"•&. ere in:er.ded fo t'.minare Utter end promiscuous dumping. The penalties provided in Section
*$ t;-. .l* •-.:! /.• ±,»eur;ft ttihtr p wtite. "Allow" it irutudfdfor the protection of a property ownvr wftoi f
?S. $3 .-!.•.•? Co-.wy iy Ori:*sxct. It that! be unlawful to »lore, collect, t™«port. transfer, recover. InclruraU. or
dip jw cf iny tv!; d wu:t withji ihf boundirin of this locality contrary to the provision! of this ordinance.-
COVMrNT: T^.'i 5«T"^« deckrtsetl aspects cf solid H-ojrt rroKogement Illegal unJest done in conformity wfth
• &e ?•»*••:/;';•« O/ /^f O'&rznce. Any ptno* who Horn, collects, transports, transfers, recoren, Incinerates, or
tat.'prrrr o/i^'il H^JW mwf nwe Mr required permits end must conform to State and local laws and the nda
cf.* rf-,'ir.crj s'j:reri:rd it this ordinance. Although residential solid waste has minimal regulation here,
///;i;.*i.f t?J.es rry HO.*:/ to go integreater de?jit.
lr. trt r.tr.t ihzt a f meets or acti>;ty for solid waste management is introduced in the locality, the userwffl
A.- /1.^ sti u? 3 pfrrr.it cp?l.csr.on and inchdt it in this and other applicable sections,
25fsf Vehicle Conitrjction. It ihaJl be unlawful to transport any solid waste in any vehicle which permits the
tor.:tr.:s to £';>••». nfi. Uik or fat! therefrom.
COMMENT: This is the only provision which sets standards for vehicle construction and Is a requirement
icx.'.V> f&-J in State bws.
25 05 .'•'a fcrerffrenee KithAuihvrticdSolid Waste Management. It shall be unlawful for any person to interfere with
art t~~'..fte cf th..i lo;i!ity or any employee of a contractor while in the performance of their duties as authorized by
CO'-I^IENT: ln'.ptrn<>n\ before end after issuance of permit art r.cccuary to injure compliance w'rA the
orj. •i.-r.r Ti-Ji SecHtin is iht buis for perjl<;jitg interference with any person acting under the authority of tht
^
^
«»''°"><-^^<°rW^o,,edin,hc.^^
V.OS Dump, rroHMtcd. „ M be ^^ ,„ My fmm ^^ ^ f ^
M.nton does notp^i, '^ of a ^
^
26. Penalties
-------
to
o\
o
COVMENT: The Court enforelnf an ordinance vill have llmln In pecunisry- end perat punishment, therefore
fc: kmi::rion rr. wr be considered in setting for A turns er.d sentences, Fenal Institutions may be a county fan. *
Brjri:;;.'/.^.' cr c wof»e»ue. The maximum range sho'j'd be high enough to discount* violation end a penalty
iecr.?n :*r~- ^'ow some discretion to the judge.
27. Repealer
The fc"3*irjer.lr.ir.ces of thislocality are hereby repelled: .
COM VENT: A'! ordininca which ere to bt replaced by this ordinance should be specified!)' listed, based upon
c^'-:'jl r-. j.'aj-'jt of each to be repealed. The use of an omribus repealer should be avoided as it may prove too
£*~'-*
28. Savings Clause
Nci'u.*! l.i ihj criininct shaH b« deemed to affect, modify, amend or repeal my provisions of in ordinance
ain.--i:::td by £-.« Ai-niniuntivt Department or Enforcement Agency or any other department, board, commission
or v"-y *' '~"> '-x£:y.
COMMENT: /;' n ctiis'nf ordinances an to be ripaled end if the Solid Waste Management Ordinance 13 not .
to ::'•:•: ; v e*ii.-'if (yrfinoncn or authority created by existing ordinances, the above provision would be useful
i". &~ *>>/ r~ch i".ter.t.
29. Several"Jity Clause
T>.t r:ovi.oii of thh ordinance arc severable. and if any provision or pan thereof shall b< held Invalid or
ur::r/::.:iotl or ir;j^icablc lo tny ptnon or circumituice, wch invalidiry, unconititutionalty or inapplicability
ilu:: r.j: tifts'. cr irjiir ths remiin;n| provliionj of tkii ordinirxe.
COMMENT: ffi cc'jrt itnka cat a pan of the ordinance prompt lefslatire action should be taken to enact.
frc:a,•'-*i to/.7 the tcid.
30. Effective Date
' T>J A:t i> hcrtt'y iccbred in cmtr^ncy pro\-tsion to protect the health and welfare of the Inhabitant! of thli
lacur, ari iSi:! t>x« efftet immedij:ely upon in pauate. provided, however, thow iccUoiu requiring perrnlu shall not
•f j!y 13 «\J»'Jr.j fi:i.V.:e« for a period of rronihi aft:r uid effective date.
COMMENT: In eitsbUlhirs en effective due for the oriinzncc sufficient time must be given so that extsttnf
f::i..r.es c:t ti brctiht wrtw the term set forth. Dumps could be closed In * short rime but would require t
ttfiet ptrioJfcr con-erston to a sanitary kr.dftl.
J)
24. Title to Waste
In the absence of an agreement to the contrary, title to !he solid waste sh-'j vest in the owner of eich rr.jnspr:»t
activity or facility in which the solid waste is placed.
COMMENT: Tills section is Intended to pass title to nosre- from the generator to an Uen*f:&e ?fs.T
throughout ils management. Tim will help fix responsibility for n:jr.:;tr-.ert and KL'( a-.oid •...'.'
give added emphasis to the need for leg-jl title to solid waste, r^rticuhrly »%<•« l^rge vol-j~.es are ir.tol-.-fJ.
therefore this section clearly fixes ownership at any mar.2strr.ent step.
25. Proliibitfd Activities
25.01 Dead Animals.^ shall be unlawful to place any deaJ animal, or p.srTs tfsicof. ir. a cor'.tner for co::r;::cn
without the consent of the Director, provided, however. Ihis section shj'J not apply to ar.irrol parts from fooi
preparation for human consumption.
COMMENT: This section is to encourage the use of the dejd animal co"ect:.on required ir. SKi:*,r.s f.tf :'.!
15. The exclusion Includes all food preparation, including midtnltel and ccrrmerciil actintj; >uch a rcswv.is.
25.02 Uttering. It shall be unlawful to place, or a'Jow to be placed, a.iy s->::3 »:sie upon the roiii. «:e::s, pjilis or
private property within this municipality contrary to the provisions of this i>ri:-in:e.
COMMENT: Proper joffc waste management requires resulted cfis-cwf. Tnis K.-.-IW er.d Section 2!.f-*.
prohibiting dumps, are intended to eliminate litter and ftrorr.ixuou! r. Thepcmlaei ?rm!dtfm Seer:.*
26 can be used to discourage either practice. "Allow" is included far the f.-election oft proptry o»Tfr v«:.-!f
consent is no: given to a person dumping or littering.
25.03 Acts Contrary m Ordinance. It shall be unlawful to store, collect, trim-*.-!, trir.ifer. rj.-ortr, i.i;i-!ri:e. 01
dispose of any solid waste within the boundaries of this locality contrary ti \~: prcviviom of thil cid:nr.:«.
' COMMENT: This Section declares all aspects of solid vasie management i".epl unlesi done In c. -,fcm'.:y M'r»
the provisions of the ordinance. Any person vtha stores, collects, transports, rrjnsfers. recoten. i-.c:-.er;ns. (,r
disposes ofsulid \*ule must have the required permits and must conform n S.M.'e and Ixsl I;*! aid :he rJ.es
and regulations authariied In this ordinance. Although residential solid »-Ji« has mi-.i-jl reunion here.
legislative bodies may want lo go Into peatcr detail.
In the event that a process or activity for solid vaste rrunjfement Is introduced ir. the locality, the user wjr
have to set up a permit application and include it in this and other applicable sections.
KM Vehicle Construction. It shall be unlawful to transport any solid waste in any vehlde whkh permits the
contents to blow, sift, leak or fall therefrom.
COMMENT: This is the only provision which lets standardl for tehkle construction end Is a reauirmerj
usually found in State laws.
25.05 No Interference »ithjluthori!tdSolid Waste Management. It shall be unlawful for any person to Interfere »ith
my employee of this locality or any employee of a contractor while in the performance of their duties as authortjej by
this ordinance.
COMMENT: Inspections before and after issuance uf permit are nee-entry la iniart tumplitn'e »i(* the
irjiwicc. This Seen-* is the basis for penan:int inKrfcrent «rt tny cm* Wt •"•>« "" a!^"tl\ of Ihl
ordinance.
-------
to
IS.et Sagging rrohittred. !l diiB U iraU»f«l for toy pencil to scamp my trMi vntt within UK bovtidarfa at
this locally.
COMMENT: ieM »«« mtnvrmnf rannet Je effective If casual ptekea an permitted la my tttf In lite
. process, i» keiher prt-foHefrio* activity from containers at the curb or at an Incinerator or sanitary landfill.
Cv.:rr,"ed rtco-.ery should be encouraged a arty logical step of proper solid vote management.
2.' 07 f.:.t Information. It ihin bf unlawful for my person lo nuke my false statement in any application required
by Cui or^ance.
COMMENT: This lection provide* g penalty for false information given on «ny application required by the
or.'-'^rct. C-.'r.-.icrion KOuU require i thawing tier the false Information wot provided deliberately but would
*••; irr.'-.V innctent or erroneous infomation. Vie Administrative Department would itso lute the inherent
f.f-: ic te.iii iiy permit or permit imolted in ike applications, a i false statement vitiates such matters.
2iM Duiyr tfohiHttJ. It shall b« unlawful (or any person to use « operate i dump.
COMMEN T: The inten: of iht ordinance is let forth in Section 2 end witt be defected unless iff dumps ft
Ctttentil .v un:;jry kndfMs ortrt eliminated.
r.*.r9 /f-jT.'nf. Frr+itited. It that] tx unlawful for any pcnon to bum colitt watte in any minner other- than In a duly
t-*^.:r:*J :r::^era[jf.
CO^IVENT: Air pctlutifn control can not be effective unless open burning Is ettmlneted. The ordinance
rr.:- 'ii ; ;-:m:: fcr jll incinerators, thereby tnrjrinf the installation and tee of pollution control measures^
i'..-:~J.-} t'.e ii[-nj/ of incinerator residue and proper treatment of quench waters. The ban here Mould Include
lezf t *~.r'f,. thfrefc-re the aided *sitc volume will hr.e to be considered in the p!an requirements of Section
fj. :'l. T'.. : se:T."n don not prohibit the use of a ftrcplice or outdoor grill of residences, unless barred by a
«tV":-j;.-l.-v.
?) I } A'.i~J rieJing. It ihall be unlawful for in> ptrson to engige in the feedint of food waite to anlnuli Tor
eor-.-;r.Tjl ;_:pj^*i.
COMMENT: S:nt b discount* tlolaZan tr.d* pevln
section should oRo*f some discretion to theHidge.
27. Repealer
The following ordinanea of this locality are hereby repealed:
COMMENT: All ordinances which are to be replaced bf tliis ordinance thcu'd bt spccifa/ly tilled. b:sed uffi
areful evaluation of each to be repealed. The use of an omnibus repealer should be avcXed cs It my frme too
broad.
28. Savings CUuje
Nothing In (his ordinance than be deemed to affect, modify, amend or repeal any pnwulons of n otth« depsrjnwl. board, ccrranluion
or agency of this locality.
COMMENT: If no existing ordinances are lo be repealed and If the Solid Vale Mir^femer.t C*4ni*ce It not
to affect any existing ordinances or authority created by eiis ting ordinance!, the etcn-e pro'.isicn wj!d be useful
In sfiowing such intent.
29. Sererabilily Clause
The provisions of this ordinance are severible, and if any provision or part thereof ihiU be t"'J lma.':J or
unconstitutional or inapplicable to any person or circumstance, such Invalidity, iinfnuiiuTioniliy or fcuppticiKity
shall not affect or impair the remaining provisions of this ordinince,
COMMENT: If a court strikes out t pan of the ordinance prompt lepslaite action should bt taken tv enact
provisions to fill the void.
30. Effective Date
This Act Is hereoy declared an emergency provision to protect the heiiih ind welfare of the lnhibiur.il of th!«
locility and shall take effect immediitely upon its passage, ptovided, however, rtoie sections retjuiri.".| pemiitl shall not
apply to existing facilities for a period of months after std effective dart.
COMMENT: In rslablisliing an effective date for the ordinance sufficient time must te glten so thst existing
facilities can be brought within the terms set forth. Dumps could be closed In i shnrt time but would require i
longer period for conversion to a sanitary landfill.
25.12 H:-jrJvjs Kme. No peison shall place any hjurdou) wiite In any container for collection, transport.
PTOL:,S:-.J cr d:!y«al un:il ihe Enforcemenl A(en;y his approved the method of Horace, transport, processing, or
£i;oui.
COMMENT: This srcri<-n is nler.dtj to identify erd regulate havdous wale to protect the health of the
f«-TT--r. -rj /j protect people enyisfd in solid waste management. Experience wilt allow some
jf,-T.'j/j:jr:_ n in prvper fnjnjgeT.ent ofhitarduus wanes.
26. Ptniltiei
j of a violation of this o:difa.Tce, or the rules and regulations authorized herein, shall be subject
-.-jn 5 or imprisonment in the :oun:yjail fornol more than months, or both.
-------
FOOTNOTES
1. J.F. Hudson, P.P. Gross, D.G. Wilson, and D.H. Marks. Evaluation
of Policy-Related Research in the field of Municipal Solid Waste
Management. Research Report R74-56, Department of Civil Engineer-
ing, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1974.
2. American Public Works Association. Solid Waste Collection Practice.
Chicago: Public Administration Service, 1975.
3. Office of Solid Waste Management Programs, U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, Decision-Makers Guide in Solid Waste Management.
Washington: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1976 (SW-500).
4. J.F. Hudson, et al. op.cit.; American Public Works- Association, op.cit.;
Office of Solid Waste Management. Ibid.
5. E.S. Savas. "Municipal Monopolies vs. Competition in Delivering
Urban Services." _in^ W. Hawley and D. Rogers (ed.) Improving the
Quality of Urban Management, Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1974.
6. J:M. McFarland; C.R< Glassey; P.H. McGauhey; D.L. Brink; S.A. Klein;
and C.G. Golueke. Comprehensive Studies of Solid Wastes Management.
Final Report. Report 72-3, Sanitary Engineering Research Laboratory,
College of Engineering and School of Public Health, University of
California, Berkeley, 1972.
7. J.D. Sartor and G.B. Boyd. Water Pollution Aspects of Street Surface
Contaminants. EPA-R2-72-081. -Washington: U.S. Government Printing
Office, 1972.
8. R.M. Wolcott and B.W. Vincent. The Relationship of Solid Waste
Storage Practices in the Inner City to the Incidence of Rat
Infestation and Fires. EPA/53-/SW/150, May 1975.
9. J.F. Hudson. Demand for Municipal Services; Measuring the Effect
of Service Quality. Research Report R75-21, Department of Civil
Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1975.
10. Office of Solid Waste Management Programs, op.cit. (hereafter
OSWMP).
11. D.R. Brunner and D.J. Keller. Sanitary Landfill Design and Operation.
Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972 (SW-65ts). ~
American Society of Civil Engineers, Sanitary Landfill, ASCE Manual #39,
New York: ASCE, 1976 (new edition, revised).
12. D. Brunner and D.J. Keller, op.cit.
ASCE, op.cit.
13. See the EPA Model Ordinance included at the end of this chapter.
262
-------
14. National Association of Counties. Basic Issues on Solid Waste
Management Affecting County Government. Washington, D.C.: EPA, May
1973.
15. SCS Engineers, Inc. Analysis of Source Separation Collection of
Recyclable Solid Waste — Volume 1. Separate Collection Studies and
Volume 2. Collection Center Studies.EPA/530/SW-95c, 1974.
16. Ibid.
17. J.C. Curry, and J. LaBella. "Authority of Municipalities to Regulate
and Finance Solid Waste Management." Unpublished mimeograph, n.d.
may be available from OSWMP.
18, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1971. Personal experience. Program was
never implemented, but did consider such variations as price supports,
to insure that the waste was collected for recycling under all situations.
19V For example, Pasadena, California, requires inspections before issu-
ing certificates of occupancy after any change in tenant or owner
of a property. Solid waste inspections could easily be included.
20. Stone (Ralph) and Company, Inc. A Study of Solid Waste Collection
Systems Comparing One-Man with Multi-Man Crews.Public Health
Service Publication No. 1892. Washington: U.S. Government Fringing
Office, 1969 (S.W.-9c; AIM 65).
21. Compost Science, Journal of Wast.e Recycling. Emmaus, Pa.: Rodale
.Press. 18049
22 Hudson, Gross, Wilson, Marks, op.cit. (hereafter MIT)
23. OSWMP, MIT, American Public Works Association, op.cit. (hereafter .APWA).
24. OSWMP
25. M. Stragier and D.L. McGaw. Mechanized Residential Solid Waste
Collection. City of Scottsdale, Arizona, 1973.
26, OSWMP, MIT.
27. D.E. Ecke and D.D. Linsdale. "Fly and Economic Evaluation of Urban
Refuse Systems — Part I. Control of Green Blow Flies (Phaenicia)
by Improved Methods of Residential Refuse Storage and Collection."
California Vector Views 14(4); 19-27, April 1967.
D.E. Ecke; D.D. Linsdale; and K.E. White. "Migration of Green Blow
Fly Larvae from Six Refuse Container Systems." California Vector
Views 12(8) ; 35-42, August 1965.
263
-------
28. E.S. Savas, op.cit.
29. S. Woodley. "Metered Bags: An Answer to Rising Refuse Collection
Costs." Public Works Magazine 105(8): 81, 98, August 1974.
30. J.F. Hudson, op.cit.
31. SCS Engineers, Inc. oplcit.
32. Ibid.
33. OSWMP.
34. MIT.
35. MIT.
36. w.C. Finnie. "Field Experiments in Litter Control." Environment and
Behavior. 5(2): 123-144, June 1973. ~~ '•
37. Keep America Beautiful, Inc. Final Report: Action Research Model.
New York: Keep America Beautiful, 1975.
38. MIT.
39. Stone (Ralph) and Company, Inc. Forecasts of- the Effects of Air and
Water Pollution Controls on Solid Waste Generation. EPA/670/2-74/o95,
1974.
40. B. Thompson and I. Zandi. "Future of Sanitary Landfill." J.Env.Eng.
Div., Proceedings ASCE. 101(EEl), February 1975.
41. F.P. Gross. Issues in the Regionalization of Solid Waste Management
Planning. Research Report R75-26, Department of Civil Engineering,
MIT, 1975.
42. c. Binkley. "Regional Environmental Management: Case Study of a
Resource Recovery Operation." Presented at the Northeast Regional
Science Association Meeting, April 19, 1975.
43. J.F. Hudson, op.cit.
44. Wolcott and Vincent, op.cit.
45. J.F. Hudson, op.cit.
46. OSWMP.
J.V. Compton. Effort and Incentive Determinant of Trash Recycling
Behavior. Unpublished Ph.D., Claremont Graduate School, 1972.
264
-------
47. R.P.' Lowman. Recycling Refuse: The Effect of the Foot-in-the-Door
Technique on Attitude and Repetitive Behavior. Unpublished Ph.D.
Thesis, Claremont Graduate Schoo, 1973.
48. Keep America Beautiful, Inc. op.cit. (hereafter KAB).
49, OSWMP.
50. SCS Engineers, Inc. op.cit.
51. OSWMP.
52. National Association of Counties Research Foundation. Guidelines
for Local Governments on Solid Waste Management. Public Health
Service Publication No. 2084. Washington: U.S. Government Printing
Office, 1971 (SW-17c).
R.M. Clark and J.L. Gillean. "Systems Analysis and Solid Waste
Planning." J. Env. Eng. Div., Proc. ASCE lOO(EEl): 7-24, February
1974.
53. National Solid Waste Management Association, 1730 Rhode Island Avenue,
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036.
54. Write Richard Sullivan, APWA, 1313 E. 60th, Chicago, Illinois 60637.
personal communication.
55. MIT; OSWMP; APWA; and
ACT Systems Inc. Residential Collection Systems Study. (Final Report
to Systems Management Division, OSWMP, U.S. EPA). Winter Park, FL:
ACT Systems, Inc., 1974.
National Solid Waste Management Association. 1972 Annual Listing of
NSWMA-Rated Apartment/Institutional Stationary Compactors.
Washington: NSWMA, 1973. (annual updates)
55. National Sanitation Foundation. Standard 31, Polyethylene Refuse
Bags, and Standard 32, Paper Refuse Sacks. Ann Arbor: NSF, 1970.
57. EPA, Final Guidelines for Storage and Collection of Residential,
Commercial, and Institutional Solid Waste (40 CFR 243), February 1976.
58, Anonymous. "Refuse Bags." Consumer Reports. 43(1); 18-21, January 1973.
59. Bradbury Associates, Inc. The Atlanta Household Refuse Compactor
Demonstration Project. Atlanta: Bradbury Associates, 1973.
(Available from Whirlpool Corporation, Benton Harbor, Michigan 49002.)
60. Stragier, op.cit.
61, Solid Waste Management, 461 Eighth Avenue, New York, New York 10001.
'62. Office of Solid Waste Management Programs, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460.
265
-------
63, American Public Works Association, 1313 E. 60 , Chicago, Illinois 60637.
64. Governmental Refuse Collection and Disposal Association, 2333 W.
Third Street, Los Angeles, California 90057.
65. Contact them directly through the Yellow Pages.
66. American Society of Civil Engineers, 345 E. 47th St., New York, NY 10017.
67. National Center for Resource Recovery, Inc., 1211 Connecticut Avenue,
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036.
68. Keep America Beautiful, Inc., 99 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016.
69. M.D. Powell; B.P. Fiedleman; M.J. Roe (NACo), Digest of Selected Local
Solid Waste Management Ordinances, Cincinnati: U.S. EPA, 1972 (SW-38c).
266
-------
SECTION VIII
SUBDIVISION ORDINANCES FOR LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REVIEWS ON THE LOCAL LEVEL
In 1969, Congress passed the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA),
which for the first time established environmental concerns as a high priority
in the review of all federally funded actions affecting the human environment.
The major tool of NEPA is the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), which must
be written whenever a project is likely to have "significant" environmental
impacts. The EIS analyzes the project's expected environmental impacts, as
well as those of the available alternatives. Many states have passed environ-
mental-policy acts modeled after NEPA, extending the requirement for preparing
EISs to projects not covered under the federal law.
Seven years after the passage of NEPA, the EIS process is still contro-
versial: while on the one hand it has raised the level of understanding of
man's impact on the environment, and has cuased unwisely planned projects to
be revised or cancelled, its procedural requirements are formidable, and the
expense of creating an EIS can be large. Although the Council on Environmental
Quality, which reviews EISs prepared under NEPA, has frequently called for more
succinct without needless detail, most EISs remain exceedingly complex:
agencies preparing statements tend to use highly detailed analyses in an
effort to shield themselves against any legal challenge that their analysis of
controversial issues might be inadequate. Thus, because of the procedural,
financial, and techni-cal difficulty of producing a good EIS, they are under-
taken with reluctance.
Increasingly, local governments are showing an interest in long range
community planning that takes account of natural resource limitations, but
they are often discouraged from modeling environmental reviews of their own
development projects after NEPA. The benefits of environmental reviews tend
to be outweighed in their minds by what appears to be an intimidating amount of
technical and legal analysis.
Each of the improvements to municipal environmental ordinances described
in the previous chapters can be of value if implemented alone, but communities
may wish to go beyond a piecemeal approach to improving the environment and
attempt to design a comprehensive process. Unfortunately, a study conducted
by EPA has shown that local levels of government generally prefer not to embark
on long term review processes—they prefer, whenever possible, to p![s~s a one-
shot ordinance aimed at a specific purpose, something that will not require
updating or case by case reviews.2
267
-------
The natural resource inventory and subdivision review process described
here is designed to gain, for local governments, many of the benefits of full-
scale environmental impact statements with minimum expenditures of time and
money—both on the town's part and on the developer's. It* enables several
spheres of environmental concern to be brought together efficiently; used in
conjunction with the approaches to environmental quality developed in the
previous chapters of this report, it can make enviornmentally sound land
development better understood and easier to attain.
In essence, the technical content of the process it twofold, being com-
prised of (1) a natural resource inventory, and (2) performance standards
based on the capacity of the land to sustain various kinds of local develop-
ment. Together they form a "cookbook" EIS process, combining, in a simplified
way, the first stage of the federal EIS process—the environmental impact
analysis of a project—with essentially ready-make answers to how a particular
project will affect the long term community goals. Rather than have the
developer conduct the entire process of the environmental review, this process
puts the relatively small burden of research on the town, and allows the
developer the opportunity to improve the quality of the research he desires.
Goals and Methods
Communities experiencing significant growth are aware both of the costs
of servicing new development, and of the despoiling of environmental amenities
that often accompanies it. Traditional land use controls such as zoning
often fail to optimize service provisions and environmental values because
they are not linked directly to the physical conditions on site, conditions
that .influence the costs of development both to the community and to the
developer. Environmental impact assessment processes seek to correct this
by requiring review of actual site conditions whenever development occurs.
•
The most direct and practical way to design useful local environmental
impact assessments so far identified is through the use of a natural resource
inventory, supported by locally adopted performance standards or environmental
regulations in a subdivision or site review process.
The natural resource inventory is a mapping, to varying degrees of pre-
cision, of environmental factors of concern to local officials, planners
and citizens. While the number of factors that can be mapped in a local
ordinance is nearly unlimited, only a few are usually necessary to identify
areas of potentially major environmental disturbance, or to locate areas
where development can best be supported. Perhaps the most important factors
to be mapped in most areas of the country are'those having to do with water
pollution control, both sanitary waste management and stormwater management.
Maps of soil types, bedrock formations, aquifer recharge areas, min-
imum depth to groundwater, and local surface hydrology are valuable for
determinging where on-site waste disposal is practical and efficient, and
where it is not. Maps of soil types, vegetation and land use, slope, and
surface hydrology are necessary to determine where surface runoff is likely
to cause erosion and sedimentation problems. Maps of flood plains (100 year
268
-------
boundaries) , identify where development shbuld be most stringently controlled
to prevent flood damage.^
Performance standards or environmental regulations must then be defined
to control the impacts of development on the environmental factors identified
and mapped by the natural resource inventory. It is essential that towns not
only decide what they want to map, i.e., what environmental factors are mean-
ingful in reviewing projects (and they ought to be as simple as possible), but
also develop performance standards or environmental regulations that give firm
and clear guidelines for review (again, the simpler the better).
The natural resource inventory and the adopted performance standards form
a document used directly by developers in the preparation of their environ-
mental impact assessments. In the process suggested here, hardship cases and
special circumstances can be taken into account in enforcement and for granting
of variances.
The following procedures are typical for a subdivision review process.4
In order to get his plat approved, a developer first locates his property on
a full or partial set of environmental maps, as required by the board, over-
laying their information on his property. He then reviews the regulations
to see if his plans conflict with any of them. He is free to hire experts to
determine if the data on the maps is accurate for his site—many do, especially
if development restrictions seem indicated. He then presents all this data
to the board. The developer is not being asked to develop original information,
unless he wishes to, and his burden is minimized.
The Planning Board (or other review body) then reviews the submission.
If necessary, it adjusts the maximum extent of development (square feet of
floor, impervious surface ratios, number of dwelling units, etc.) to be in
compliance with standards, and it makes sure that performance standards are
observed (septic tanks installed properly for soil condition, homes built at
proper place on slopes, vegetation preserved where indicated, etc.). If all
is in order, it then approves the plan.
The value of the inventory in making environmental impact assessments
work on the local level are many. First, explicit base data is available free
of charge to the developer (or perhaps for the cost of copying). Second,
explicit review standards based on the ability of the land to assimilate
development are available. These standards are determined by the community.
Third, the review process is simple and judgements can be rapid and well-
informed, based on preserving observed physical (and sometimes cultural)
resources. In this regard, the process works to the developer's advantage,
since the environmental assessment review carefully avoids becoming involved
in political and social value judgements.
The costs a community can save through an environmental impact assessment
process can be substantial, and can justify the time and expense necessary to
create an inventory many times over. For instance, implementing higher stan-
dards for developers' handling of surface runoff in relation to site conditions-
such as having scattered parking areas rather than central ones on sites with
steep slopes, or retaining stormwater on-site and releasing, it at controlled
269
-------
rates—can obviate the necessity to build major culverts, stormsewer systems,
and the like, at community expense.
The fact that a natural resource inventory is necessary for the operation
of the recommended local environmental review process compensates for the in-
dependence with which the planning board can operate in setting up the sub-
division review process. The town has to vote the funds to conduct the
inventory, and must vote or otherwise reach agreement on what natural or
cultural factors are to be included in the inventory. The planning board does
not have direct control over the ultimate content of the review process, and
cannot force developers to take account of environmental factors to which the
voters have not agreed. For instance, if the town thinks control of develop-
ment in historical areas is not important, the inventory will not identify
such areas and the planning board will not control them. While this may be
objected to by some, the process is at least democratic.
Applicability of the Process
Much of the work done in the field of local environmental reviews has been
by well-do-do suburbs on the fringes of metropolitan areas. -* These suburbs
face rapid development, are becoming aware of the hazards of unplanned growth,
and have often had the resources and leadership to find innovative solutions
to their problems. These solutions are broadly applicable to a wide range of
communities.
Urban Areas; A review process may be designed to identify important
historical and cultural areas, land that has potential for recreation and
parks, areas that may be profitably converted to exclusively pedestrian use,
etc. Over time, future development could be guided toward "performance"
goals that make best use of an area's physical and cultural environment.
Some incomplete urban renewal projects have left substantial open tracts whose
future is in doubt. The aim of an environmental review process would be to
go beyond the design and development stipulations commonly found in zoning
ordinances to a more complete evaluation of alternative future uses of an area.
Such an application of the process would, admittedly, be experimental.
Developed Suburbs; Many older suburbs exist where virtually no undeveloped
land remains. However, certain areas of such suburbs often are "underdeveloped"-
older structures often stand on parcels that are larger than the minimum re-
quired under current zoning. These parcels may face economic pressure for
demolition and redevelopment, especially as their structures deteriorate. The
redevelopment of such areas may have significant impacts on the natural systems
of the local environment; as is the case with urban areas, the social, economic,
and historical impact of development will also be highly important.
Developing Suburbs^; Developing suburbs, which have both the most to gain
and the most to lose from growth, have been the most active communities in using
local environmental reviews. Since they often have large traces of undeveloped
land, implementation of a review process is usually based on natural resource
factors alone. Most of the work done so far concentrates almost exclusively
270
-------
with evaluating the impacts of new subdivisions on undeveloped areas. Be-
cause most of the base data on which such inventories are built is available
at low cost from government sources, setting up an environmental review pro-
cess in such areas is relatively inexpensive, technically straightforward,
and administratively simple. Resource analysis can be done either through the
use of contour maps as described below or through computer grid mapping.
Rural Communities: Rural communities, like suburban communities, can
also conduct natural resource inventories to identify sensitive areas within
their boundaries that should be protected from exploitation by inappropriate
development. Unlike suburban communities, however, rural ar"eas often have
fewer financial and professional resources with which to develop a complete
inventory and analysis. They also face a lower level of risk from future
development simply because they will receive less of it. The solution may
be to use the broader brush technique of a large-scale grid analysis, such as
that developed by Bucks County, Pennsylvania, also described below. This can
be done on a county level. The use of a large scale analysis may also be
particularly appropriate for the planning goals that are typical of many
rural areas—i.e., the preservation of large areas of land for specific
single purposes, such as farming, wildlife habitat preservation or forestry.^
Scope of Review
Implementation of a local environmental review process can be done either
through the subdivision permit system, in which case the developments affected
will be exclusively residential, or through the zoning ordinance, which would
permit a general site review of all projects, commercial and industrial as
well as residential. There are advantages to each approach.
Implementation of the process through the subdivision permit system
affects fewer properties in a town, although in developing suburban areas
it is mostly residential construction that needs to be controlled. Imple-
mentation of the review is administratively easier, since the subdivision
process can be amended by independent actions of the town planning board
without recourse to a vote on amendments to the general zoning ordinance.
Since the planning board may act on its own, this has the disadvantage of
being a less "democratic" way in which to bring about change, but the clear
advantages of simplicity and speed of action. And, since only subdivision
permits will be affected, not zoning as a whole, the community may be more
amenable to the change: in some areas, innovations in the zoning code, parti-
cularly for planning options such as PUDs, are unpopular. Environmental re-
view of subdivisions, even when coupled with cluster zoning options and other
flexible siting provisions, does not represent the same perceived threat to
existing land use patterns as does the introduction of PUDs, which can mix
commercial and other land uses into previously residential neighborhoods.
271
-------
NATURAL RESOURCE INVENTORIES AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
A local environmental impact assessment need not, and probably should
not, follow the outlines of a federal Environmental Impact Statement. Such
extensive documents have been called for by a few communities,? but their
preparation is probably an unreasonable expense to require of developers in
the town.
There are two general ways to approach the natural resource inventory.
The first is to map natural characteristics on a large scale, with only enough
precision to make broadly valid community planning decisions. It is then up
to developers themselves to map their sites for natural characteristics
and present this data to the review board. The second approach is for all
factors to be precisely mapped by the communities, relieving developers of
that responsibility. Both approaches actually rely on the same primary data
sources.
Inventories Based on Grid Cells
One approach, used in Bucks County, Pennsylvania, has been to map natural
features on grid cells, in this case 1000' x 1000'. Average characteristics
for each cell have been identified and coded into a computer. On a county-
wide scale, this has provided a valuable basis for general policy decisions,
but the information has little meaning for site by site review.
The virtues of the system are twofold. First, it is naturally less
expensive to produce, per- acre, than more detailed studies. Second, it has
greater flexibility than contour mapping both for updating and for distribu-
tion, since it is computerized. Its proponents also defend it on the basis
of the accuracy of the source data from which it is taken: Geological
Survey and Soil Conservation Service information, the two major sources for
locally produced natural resource inventories, are often only roughly accurate
for specific sites, but are accurate for the comparatively course grid cells.
There are three circumstances in which grid cell inventories may be the
most desirable approach to take. First, where general county-wide environmental
planning is desired, detailed information is not necessary and the flexibility
of computerized mappings is a major advantage. Second, if local towns are
either unwilling or unable to undertake detailed inventories, the grid cell
approach is better than nothing, and its data may be useful to local environ-
mental commissions or citizens' groups in analyzing local growth. Finally,
where the performance standards or environmental regulations have a single
well-defined target, such as the preservation of prime agricultural land, the
coarse-grained approach is fully adequate; in these situations, the lands to
be protected are usually easily defined and accurately mapped, and they must
be protected on a large scale basis for the program to be worthwhile.
272
-------
The Bucks County study, completed in 1972, used a computer grid system
to map nine categories of natural development limitations:'
o prime agricultural land
o forests
o slope
o wetlands
o lakes and ponds
o floodplains
o scenic areas
o seasonal high water tables
o sewerage limitations.
An example map is shown on the following page (Figure 16) . A composite
natural resource protection map was also prepared (Figure 17) , describing
in graphic terms the development policy desired for the county on the basis
of an interpretation of the several base maps. The relatively small number
of mapping categories, and the coarse-grained approach to mappin^ it, reduced
costs and was appropriate for its prime goal—the protection of prime agri-
cultural lands in the County.
While this approach does not allow a direct evaluation of each development
site, communities can enlarge their own section of the mapping and use it for
general planning purposes. This approach is most useful where allocation of
growth within a large area is the planning objective, rather than site by
site review of development impacts. As Figure 18, an enlarged section of
the grid, shows, detail is not adequate on the site level to permit meaningful
specific reviews of developers' plans.
Contour-Mapped Inventories
In a contour-mapped inventory, all environmental factors of concern are
directly represented on maps of the town or county. Base information, drawing
heavily on data from the U.S.G.S., the SCS, Corps of Engineers and the like,
are used in conjunction with field checks and local expertise to produce a
document that describes environmental conditions on every site of concern in
a local jurisdiction (already developed areas might not be mapped). The ac-
curacy of such mappings is, of course, open to constant review—both by the
town and by developers or landowners.
The prime benefit of a contour mapped inventory is that, despite its
inevitable inaccuracies, it can legally be regarded as presumptively valid.
Since it is based on the best available sources—in most cases, federal docu-
ments—it is up to developers to demonstrate to the town's, and presumably
to the court's, satisfaction that the restrictions it may imply for a parti-
cular plot are based on inaccurate data. Once a contour mapped natural re-
source inventory is completed by a town, the burden of proof is on the
developer to show that his property is being excessively restricted.
Contour mapped inventories are appropriate for site reviews of subdivisions
(or all new development projects) in most suburban areas, and in rural areas
experiencing residential growth.
273
-------
Figure 16
Computer Map of Bucks County, Pennsylvania
SEASONAL HIGH WATER TABLE
Above 1.5 ft.
BUCKS CdUNlY.
8
lij
9*1 Of Mil
0
!:MI: 12
f!il.' 3-4
mm
79
9
SOURCE: Bucks . County, Natural Resources Plan,.
May 1971.
274
-------
Figure 17
Composite Computer Map of Bucks County, Pennsylvania
NATURAL RESOURCE
PROTECTION MAP
BUCKS COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA
1972
I 0 • 1!% OPEN SPACE or URBANIZED LAND
Minor rasourc* limitations, good
•lit pfenning ind control of •ration
Mid njnoll rw*d*d
I 15 . 10% OPEN SPACE NEEDED
PlwMMd Unit Development often
may b« us«d to prolaet nktoum*
1 (0 - 70% OPEN SPACE
I 70 - 90% OPEN SPACE
90 . 100% OPEN SPACE
COUNTY or STATE PARK. STATE GAME LAND
SCENIC AREA
10% Open SOM* >nd Cluitartng
Of Structures
I I PRIME AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT
Source:
Bucks County, Natural
Resources Plan, May 1971.
275
-------
Figure 18
Enlarged Computer Map, Showing Loss of
Usefulness on Local Level Site Reviews
FLOODING
Severe Flooding
•Pooling or Ponding
Source: Bucks County, Natural
Resources Plan, May 1971.
276
-------
They can be used as a basis for revision of zoning maps where there are
strong inconsistencies between the suitability of land for development and the
type of development allowed under the zoning.9 They can be used as the
basis for overlay maps of sensitive lands, if that is the mechanism by which
such lands are to be protected.10
The Department of Landscape Architecture and Regional Planning at the
University of Pennsylvania undertook a seven year study of one town in Penn-
sylvania (by coincidence it also is in Bucks County); assembling nine primary
coutour maps:H
o geology
o slope
o surface hydrology
o aquifers
o soils
o runoff management units
o potential soil loss
o land use
o prominent physiographic features.
Geology; The geologic map showed lithographic and structural features,
the names of rock formations, and the rock types. Structural features and
rock types are important in determining suitabilities for local bearing capa-
city, and for mineral and water resource values. The map was colored in such
a way as \.o show the most unpredictable and unstable formations in high con-
trast to the stable crystalline formations. The map was adapted from a pre-
vious Geologic Map of Bucks County.
Slope; This map was developed from commonly available U.S.G.S. topographic
maps (scale 1:24,000, 201 contours). The slope grades were divided into five
ranges:
o 0-3%
o 3-8%
o 8-15%
o 15-25%
o 25%+.
These ranges are consistent with Soil Conservation Service soil types, and are
generally used in determining suitabilities for roads, large structures, areas
of pavement, and drainage systems. The steepest slopes were indicates in the
darkest colors.
Surface Hydrology; This map was a composite from the same U.S.G.S. 1:24,000
map, the Bucks County Interim Soil Survey Report's delineation of alluvial
soils, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' floodplain data. First order streams
(the source areas of streams into which no tributary streams flow) were high-
lighted, since they are sensitive to degradation'because of their low and some-
times intermittent flows, and often contained saturated soils or marshes. Flood
prone areas were identified because of the obvious hazard present to life and
property.12
277
-------
Aquifers: The water bearing potential of geologic formations in the town
were marked, with the darkest color given to areas of the greatest potential
water yield. These data are important for determining the availability of
groundwater for wells, the potential for groundwater pollution, and the need to
protect areas of groundwater recharge. The source was a report entitled,
"Ground Water Resources for Bucks County."
Soils: Using the Bucks County Interim Soil Survey Report, a complex map
was prepared showing soil composition, drainage (range of soil permeability),
and depth to seasonal high water table. Subsoil textures were shown on an
overlay. The wettest, most poorly drained soils showed up as darkest, with
well-drained soils rendered light. Permeability and drainage are important
for planning roads and utility systems, buildings with basements, and agri-
culture. Soil texture influences stability, bearing capacity, erosion potential,
and agricultural workability.
Runoff Management Units; This stormwater runoff map was a composite of
soils and land use maps, and was based on a Soil Conservation Service formula
contained in the SCS, National Engineering Handbook. Runoff is a .function of
rainfall intensity (which varies by region), land use, and soil properties.
The map shows five classes of infiltration time, and an accompanying table
shows changes in this time according to development densities. A more elaborate
and detailed table is shown on the following page, showing for a specified
storm how much additional runoff is generated by each soil class as land use
becomes more intense (see Table 43).
Potential Soil Loss: Susceptibility of land to erosion can be calculated
from another SCS formula,'and it was mapped in ranges of tons/acre/year. Ranges
were:
o 0 tons/acre/year
o <25
o <50
o <100
. o <250
o <500
o >500.
Land Use; This was a general map, and included vegetation types. Most of
the information was interpreted from aerial photographs. Undeveloped land
was categorized as:
o cropland
o pasture
o orchard
o successional meadow/forest
o forest/woodlot.
These categories are sufficient for land suitability analysis, except where for-
ests are of economic value or where rare species or wildlife habitats exist.
Developed lands can be grouped into:
278
-------
Table 43
RUNOFF MANAGEMENT CHART
EXISTING CONDITION
COVER TYPE
1 All Forests and
thru Upland Successional
4 Meadow
5 Lawns. Parks etc.
6 2 Acre Residential
7 Pasture
8 1 Acre Residential
9 H Acre Residential
10 Firmilead .
11 % Acre Residential
12 Cropland
SOIL
GROUP
A
B
C
D
A
B
C
A
B
D
A
A
c
D
A
B
C
D
A
B
C
0
A
B
c
D •
A
B
C
0
Elcesi Runoft In Inches produced during (he
and the percentage of iJlc area required lor w
molt Intense hourol 10 year recurrent 24 hour rainfall by a prospective land use;
thhclding It, to allow its Inllllerallon locally within threo hours
PLAYFIELD £ACRE 1 ACRE -A ACRE '/.ACRE CROPLAND INTENSIVE
ETC. RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL URBAN
tlNFILTERATIONtlNFILTERATIONu-INFlLTERATIONtlNriLTERATlONjilNFILTEnATIONU-INFlLTERATION^ INFI' TERATION
§ CLASS 0 CLASS 0 CLASS § CLASS O CLASS O CLASS O CLASS
a ' " "I IV i I II III IV 3 1
000 000 00
002 0 0 1 012 1 2 6 0-16 1
004 127 0 18 3 8 27 024
0-04 } 000 5 024
000 00
010 1 2 S 014 1
0 12 3 6 20 020
005 3 020
0 0
004 0
008
0-15
0 0
008 0
0
• o
" "' IV5? ' » "1 IV i 1 II III IV £ 1 II III IV j 1 It III IV
0 0020 0 0121 2 0201 3 30010 33
3 8 0 20 1 3 10 0 40 2 7 21 0 44 2 7 23. 1 00 10 32 100
4 13 40028 5 15 47043 7 23 72043 7 23 72158 ?G 83 26J
13 029 10 047 25 064 107 144 76
0 0-02 0 0 01?0 2 020 1 3 200 10 33
2 7 018 1 3 9 0382 6 20 0422 7 22 189 10 3! 100
3 10 33024 4 13 40039 6 21 65030 6 21 05 1 54 CO 81 207
10 025 13 043 23 060 100 140 74
0 0020 8 0121 2 0201 3 20010 33
1 2 0161 3 8 0281 5 15 0322 5 17 170 S 30 94
1 4 13012 2 6 20027 £ 14 45027 5 14 45142 'M 75 237
8 0-20 10 038 63 0 55 92 1 35 71
0 0/020 0 012.1 2 0201 3 20010 33
1 4 0121 2 6 0221 4 12 02G2 4 14 1 72 9 :•> 86
0 0 0004 1 2 7019 3 10 32 0 19 3 10 32 • 3< 23 71 223
0 °« 3 023 12 040 21 : JO 63
002 0 0 0120 2 0201 3 2 00 10 33
0040 1 2 0241 4 13 0282 5 15 '74 9 29 93
004 1 2 7 019 3 10 32 0 19 3 10 32 1 34 22 71 223
005 3 0-23 12 040 21 1 20 63
OMO 1 2 0 18 1 3 1 95 10 33
0201 3 11 0241 4 13 170 9
-------
o Urban—extensive open spaces (institutional/
recreational areas)
o Urban—without extensive open space.
Other land use categories were not felt necessary for developed land, as they
had minimum significance for natural resource analysis.
Prominent Physiographic Features: This was a visual interpretation of
scenic values in the township done by a landscape architect on the basis of a
visual survey of his own, together with interpretations of the topographic and
land use maps. Taking views, vegetation, development, and other factors into
consideration, the map showed those areas where the existing development was
more compatible with physiographic features, and where, therefore, the
greatest scenic value had to be preserved. (The more brilliant colors indicated
greater scenic value.).
The resulting natural resource maps then served as a base for two com-
posite maps, showing development constraints and development opportunities.
Finally, a synthetic map was prepared from these two. The rules used to inter-
pret the data were complicated, but in general the process used a series of
overriding rules: some categories of land—such as flood hazard areas, first
order streams, and quarries (typical of the area)—were considered as constrain-
ing development no matter what opportunities were available; other less re-
stricted categories were traded off against development opportunities in a sort
of sliding scale, ending up with recommendations for development where con-
straints were minimal and opportunities great. Opportunities include desir-
ability of location (scenic values), low slopes, adequate depth to bedrock
and seasonal high water table, and some minor features such as frost-heave and
shrink-well potential, stability and drainage.
Comments:
While the study described above was done at a university, much of the work
is straightforward enough to use relatively unskilled volunteer labor, pro-
vided there is qualified professional oversight (which, of course, could also
be volunteer). For instance, mapping of slopes and soils, if done from well
documented and well presented source material, is not difficult. Some maps,
such as those requiring the use of interpretation formula, must best be left
to professionals. Synthetic maps showing general suitability for different
kinds of development may be done with a combination of professional and lay
staff, according to the complexity of the process.
For comparison, two other sets of natural factors that might be in- .
eluded in natural resource inventories are listed on the following pages. The
first list was published by the Bedminster Township Environmental Commission and
the Upper Raritan Watershed Association, and includes many more social and land
use factors than the project described above. The other was compiled by the
Center for Ecological Research in Planning and Design at the University of
Pennsylvania, and the Department of Environmental Resources, Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania. It presents the level of detail reported in the study of Medford
Township, New Jersey, by the Center for Ecological Research (Tables 44 and 45) .
280
-------
Table 44
Guidelines for Municipal Resource Inventory
1. Maps and Diagrams Portraying data for all pertinent parameters
including but not limited to:
A. Bedrock geology
B. Soils
C. Topography
D. Vegetation
E. Water resources
F. Flood plains and wetlands (including state delineation)
G. Surface water quality
H. Existing land use including roads, public and private
open space
I. Zoning
J. Historic sites
K. Sight lines
L. Natural features
M. Drainage and runoff
N. Erodibility
O. Public and private utilities
P. Depth to bedrock
Q. Permeability
R. Climate—graphs
Mean max.- temp. F
Mean min. temp. F
Max rain density/hr.=inches
Mean annual precipitation
Average annual snow fall
Average annual fog days
S. Tax map
T. Wildlife habitat
II. Interpretative maps for all pertinent parameters including
but not limited to:
A. Soils limitations for:
1. Septic systems
2. Road building
3. Buildings
B. Adequacy of transportation facilities
C. Assimilative capacity of streams
(continued on following page)
281
-------
Table 44 (continued)
D. Critical Areas
1. Steep slopes
2. High water table
, 3. Flood plains
4. Shallow bedrock
5. Mature woodlands
6. Historic archaelogical
7. Unique natural features
E. Agricultural capability
F. Estimate of highest and best use of land
III. Maps and diagrams depicting the municipality in the region,
including but not limited to:
A. Geographic location
B. Transportation systems
1. Roads, rails, etc.
C. Regional zoning
D. Regional planning
E. Existing regional land use
F. Utility systems
G. Water Resources
H. Sewage disposal systems
IV. Interpretation
A. Analysis of resource capabilities vs. existing resource
use
V. Bibliography of references and sources.
SOURCE: Ashmun and Larson, Municipal Land Use Decisions: The
Tools and Methods, Bedminster Township Environmental
Commssion and the Upper Raritan Watershed Association.
282
-------
Table 45
Natural Factors
A. CLIMATE
Temperature
Precipitation
Wind
Climatic Hazard
Air Quality
B. GEOLOGY
Calcareous Rocks
Other Rocks
Economic Minerals
Unique Geologic Features
Seismic Activity Areas
Unstable Formations and Features
C. PHYSIOGRAPHY
Slope
Inversion Zones
Poor Ventilation Areas
Fog and Frost Areas
Prominent Physiographic Features
D. HYDROLOGY
Hydrography
Surface Water Quantity
Surface Water Quality
Floodplains
Wetlands
Groundwater Quantity
Groundwater Quality
Aquifer Recharge Areas
Groundwater Recharge Areas
Areas with High Water Table
W. SOILS
Drainage
Texture
Nutrient Exchange Capacity
Potential Biologic Productivity
Bearing Capacity
Permeability
(continued on following page)
283
-------
Table 45 (continued)
Erodibility
Shrink-Swell Potential
Thermal Conductivity
Extractable Soils
Distance to Bedrock
F. VEGETATION
Forest
Shrub
Grassland
Marshes and Bogs
Aquatic
Rare Vegetation Communities
Vegetation Sensitive to Disturbance
Fire-Prone Vegetation
Hazardous Vegetation
Commercially Valuable Vegetation
Change in Vegetation types due to Ecological Succession
G. WILDLIFE
Terrestrial Habitats
Aquatic Habitats
Rare Species
Species Sensitive to Disturbance
Beneficial Species
Hazardous Species
Nuisance Species
Game Species
Commercially Valuable Species
Movement Corridors
284
-------
Inventory Analysis and Development of Performance= Standards
Once the inventory has been completed, it is necessary to develop standards
for development activities within the mapped areas. These must be based first
on an understanding of how various human activities affect natural systems, and
second on how much disruption to these syspems should be tolerated.
The Center for Ecological Research at the University of Pennsylvania has
developed a series of matrices to demonstrate the reltionships between physical
development activities and natural resources (Matrices I-V are Figures
19 through 23, respectively.) The first three trace the direct relationships
between land use and natural environmental factors (no secondary effects or
interactions are considered); the fourth matrix relates natural factors to human
values, and the fifth backsteps to relate land use categories to values. It is
worth examining these steps briefly to demonstrate their usefulness in rational- ,
izing the use of environmental information in reaching specific decisions.
Matrix I presents (aggregated) classes of land uses in terms of the develop-
ment activities necessary to create them. For instance, in a specific commun-
ity, low density residential development is seen to involve (solid dot):
siting,- construction activities, paving and building, on-site water supply and
waste disposal, and solid waste disposal. In certain circumstances, it may
also involve (empty dot) clearing of vegetation, excavation, filling, site
drainage, irrigation, harvesting, and air-borne waste disposal.
Matrix II shows the relationships between the development activities of
Matrix I and the processes through which they affect natural factors in the
study area. For instance, supplying water on-site (digging a well) may induce
land subsidence and may alter the storage and movement of groundwater; providing
site drainage will always alter evapotranspiration characteristics of the site
and will always alter the storage and movement of groundwater.
Matrix III relates the processes discussed in Matrix II to the natural
factors they affect. For instance, subsidence (e.g., caused by on-site water
supply in low density residential development) is seen always to affect soils
by altering their bearing capacity, permeability, and thermal conductivity.
The arrow symbol used on this matrix refers to the following Matrix IV, and
states in this case that while subsidence will not alter the shrink-swell po-
tential of the soil, if activities associated with development cause soil subsid-
ence the shrink-swell potential will become a problem to human activities on the
site.
Matrix IV discusses a wide range of similar interactions between human
values and natural factors. While many of the relationships are readily evident
(e.g.,seismic activity areas are clearly hazardous to life and property), the
process of evaluating the interrelationships will keep track of interrelation-
ships often dismissed in planning decisions, such as the value of unstable
geologic formations for education (arguing for their inclusions in public
parks). A solid dot in this case means that a specific decision must be made
285
-------
Figure 19
Matrix I
mr
Dll*ct Relationship
Conditions! RalstlonsMp
r"
O
e
m
-------
Figure 20
Matrix II
Direct tL.lttLon.Mp
Conditional R»L»tlon»Mp
1
• • y «
X M DC
g^
"si
Ul <
S z z
V) o »-
"J -J 0
(J UJ ul
O > u.
C UJ U.
a. Q <
DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
EHlnq
Clearing of Vtcjttatlon
Excavation
filling
Sit* Drainage
Construction Activitlea
Paving and Bulloinq
Water Supply, on-aite
'Water Supply, off-alt*
WorKliuj Ota Soil
Planting
Irriqat inq
Harveat ir>9
Applying r«rtllltt< Olipoaal: o((-ait>
Solid Wj*t« Ot^poial
Air-Born* Waati Oiapoaal
Extraction
j
a •
C 0
a c
A Lt^rti
Prflec
o
o
o
o
&
0
e
•4
0
5
j
O
6
0
Q
O
O
0
-H
2
o
f
a
8.
»-*
O
C
0
V
O
O
O
0
0
tion of AJ-T QuAlity 1
u
3
O
0
—
o
0
3
I
u>
w
0
c
0
a.
u
o
O
o
O
o
0
.
o
o
o
1
t
&
a
a
c
0
a
^
oo
e
X
c
TJ
T)
O
0
3
0
O
0
0
o
o
o
*
i
m
o
o Erosion ' I
4
a
O
0
0
0
0
—
0
o
0
o
o
o
tr
3
c
2
O
o
o
—
o
o
I
u
o
o
o
o
o
o
0
jo
o
o
o
c
-» 0
S o
-* ^
o »;
c c
0 C
u
*J 3
*~
C 0
0
•c i*.
O
O
o
o
0
0
p
o
o
c i
o
0
o
0
0
0
—
0
V
-
0
o
0
0
o
0
if
\
0
C n
-i,
_..
o
o
o
o
o
c
o
o
\
0 *
3
c_u
u C
* Support
.4
o
e
o
-* fc
*• t
^>
D
o
n
•o
c
•M
0
c
0
n
^
f.
0
'C
0
a
5
0.
JO 00
00
o|o
0
o
0
0
Q
IQ
o
a
0
o
88
1
0
6
o
o
Ol
0
o
t -•
oo
o
o
0
o
b
id
b
g
t®
1
8
8
o
—
—
o
o
o
287
-------
Figure 21
Matrix III
nr»
» Biract lul.tlonahly
) Conditional R»latlonahIp
Vo deUtlonahlp but Valu* Af/act«d
III
X CO CC
J UJ O
1 \i
a: < < „
U) UJ <
en c. z ^
to o »- u
IU _1 O
U Ul UJ
O > u.
C UJ U.
a. Q <
NATURAL FACTORS
CLIMVTE
T.mp.ratur. Q
Ptaclpltktlon
Kind- Q
Climatic lltiard
Aic Quality
CtOUDCr
Othac Kocki
Economic Mlnirala
Unlqua Ceologlc reaturea
SeLanlc Activity Urea.
Unatable rortutlona and rraturca
PHYSIOGRAPHY
S lop«
Foor Ventilation Area*
Foq and Troat Araaa (^
rioolnant phya loqraphlc r«.tur»«'
HYDRO LOGY
Hydroqcaphy
Surfjca Watac Quantity
Surf act vtttt Ouallly
rioodpi,^.
Watlandi
Croundwatar Quantity
CrounJuatar Quality
Aquifvr a_ochar«j« Araaa
Crourtdi^atar Olachar-|«* Araaa
O
S
"
V
a.
o
c
o
a.
u
!
c
a
41
a.
J;
1
c
2
•o
c
Q
u
S
ll
o
u
c
T)
•§
EroalOA I
u
a
?
c
u
*
:j
u.
o
;;:,
r1 '-
-^ t
lj
•o
^- c
O n
C E
O U
-1 t-
GO
0
4-
©
4-
4-
4-
$
4-
o
0
0
o
o
O
o
4-
0
4-
—
4-
4-
4-
4-
4-
—
4-
ion o i i» t o r -i g e a n<3 ' 1
.t. of Crouncjwater |
t/
k
-. Q
C
- K
4-
4-
O4-
O£-
21
-------
Figure 21 (continued)
^ plrcet Halation.hip
Q Conditional. H»latton.hlp
«£. »o H«l»tior.ihip but V»lu* »,tf«ct«o
1 "•""
f
g
3
a
e»
PROCESSES THROUGH WHICH
DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
AFFECT NATURAL FACTORS
SOILS
Drainage
Texture
nutrient exchange Capacity
• Fount Ul Biologic Productivity
•earing Capacity
•ecneabUlty
Erodtbility
Shrlnk-Swell Potential
Thermal Conductivity
Cxtractaol* Sclla
VEGETATION
Forevt
Shrub
Cra**land
Har*hei and Boq*
Aquatic
Vegetation Senaillve to Dleturbance.
fir*-*ione Vegetation
tUiardou* Vegetation
Cor,'nerclaLly Valuable Vegetation
HILDUrr.
Terrestrial Habitat*
Aquatic Habitat*
. R*re Specie*
Specie* Senaitive to Oieturb«nce
lenedcial Specie*
Haiacdou* Specie*
Mulaanc* Specie*
Cap* Specie* ,
c'oiwerclal ly Valuable Specie*
tfevc-went Corri'Jore
Alteration ox duuace H
We fleet nine*
Alteration or Dcpoiuro to Vino . 1
Alteration ox Air Quality I
Occupation or Sp*co
I
A \
Ocplctic
4-
0
1
<-
4-
|
4-
4-
4-
O
4-
•
Q
1
Additior
c
0
u
§
o
U
•o
w
aCroilon
•
u
4
Wi
u
3
t/1
Vi
V
rt
X 3
6
©
4-
O
e
—
4-
4-
4-
4-
<5
t>
c
L. -
V *
> t
o
TJ
C
o
u
'c -
•— -,
O
0
4-
4-
c
c
• 4
t C
: r
L,
1
(.
n
-» i, -
c c. *
i
>
r
.
i
i
i
*
i
c
O
0
o
4-
4-
X
;
1
.
) *•
i
< 0 '
•
4
II
|
: -c
3 -
3 13
- C
U •»
j
4-
s«
ion of Landscape Quality
1 Mterae
X
*<
U
m
0.
m
U
eat
C
W
L
Q
O
>
e
Q
*M
O
c
0
••
i
4-
|
-<:
O
0
0
Q
0
O
o
o
0
0
o
o
o
o
e
0
0
o
b
4-
4-
4-
—
—
O
O
O
0
O
0
o
c
c
c
o
c
o
0
0
c;
o
O
O
o
o
0
o
o
o
o
c
0
o
0
6
o
0
0
Q
O
o
0
o
o
o
o
0
o
o
C
0
—
u
o
c
o
c
c
L
c
c
4-
4-
0
4-
)4-
)
^
_
4-
c
—
V
—
o
--
c
C"
r-
c
c
c
c
c
c
)tC
)C
o
c
c
p
v>
c
u
o
0
o
c
c
c
c
iC
c
6
o
4-
f-
<-
4-
4-
)
o
o
o
o
o
o
0
c
o
0
o
-------
Figure 22
Matrix IV
ranr
Dir«ct Kxlitlonihlp
Conditl >•! K«l«tlon«Mp
IV
OT
IU
§
NATUJUL FACTOR?
CLIMATE
Temperature
Precipitation
Wind
Climatic Hazard
Air Qual ity
GFOI.OGY
Calcareous Rock*
Other Pocks
Seismic Activity Areas
pirYSiocruM-iiY
Slope
Inversion Zone*
Poor Ventilation Area*
FO'j and front Area*
Prumincnt Physiographic feature*
IfYDPOLOGY
Hydrography
Surface Water Quantity
Surfac* Wntcr Quality
FlooJpla in*
Wetland*
GrounJwjt CT Quantity
GrounJwjtvr Quality ,
Aquifer R«rJtarq« Ar«a*
Groun;« Ar«««
SOCIAL
Hazardous
V
«M
•tl
j
0
^
To Proptriy
j:
•-4
M
V
X
•o
V
u
o
u
o
H
Valuable
«
b
«j
M
7.
U
n
VI
&
c
D
&
r>
o
c
o
o
(J
u
u
1
&
c
0
hetic
a
<
u
"
'J n i cru «
INDIVIDUAL
t)«» i reftbl e
c
*j
^
K
0
a
»j
o
a;
u
o
o
H
3
k4
o
a
u
o
L
3
O fl
o
o
O
Q
o
o
0
o
o
o
o
0
o
o
o
o
—
o
o
o
o
o
o
0
6
Oj
O
O
o
0
o
0
o
o
0
o
o
o
o
o
6
0
._-
Q
o
0
O
O
O
O
o
o
o
p
0
o
Q
o
o
o
0
0
o
o
—
o
o
o
b
o
0
o
—
0
0
—
0
O
o
o
0
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
1
o
o
o
o
0
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
O
o
0
o
0
o
o
o
°0
o
Q
o
o
o
Q
O
o
o
o
o
o
0
o
2
o
o
o
o
o
o
(continued on the following page)
290
-------
Figure 22 (continued)
nr
MUlloitolilp
Conditional *»
V
1 W
NATURAL FACTORS
SOI.I.K
Dralnjqo
Texture
tlutrient Ejcchanq* Capacity
fottntial Biological Productivity
Bearing Capacity
Parnoabllity
CroOlblltty
Shrink.-Su«U Potential
Tharval Conductivity
CxtrtctabL* Sol la
VIOLATION
forcit
Shrub
a
Grauland
Karah*a an4 109*
Aquatic
R»r« vtqttttlon Conmunltlti
V*9tt*tion Sanaitiv* to Disturbance
Fi*i-*ron» Vaqvtatlon
Cor/rare li I ty Valuabla Vaqatatlon
wn.nt.ifc
Tcrrcacrial Habitat*
Aquatic Ilibitata
tar* Sjjccira
Spec In Sctifiittva to Diaturbane*
•cnctickal S|>pct««
H»»,k.u. S|..-ri«
Huiaanc* S|*rciea
C'M Sprcla*
ComnviclaUy Valuabla SpacU*
H.v«(-«n» Corridor*
SOCIAL
Maiardou*
M
—
—
O
To rrapccty
Itinuad Haalth
5
Va.u.bl.
"t
**
m
I
y,
t
g.
e
9
>rc« Cultural
X
i
&
5
irce Economic
a
t
e
c
9
re* Acithrtic
VI
g.
e
3
JKDIVTD1AL
b*alr»abt> '
§
' Hibitl
O
«*
\
1
o
k
e
o
• Edue'at
£
V
a
£
nanco at Preparty
C
2.
O «
0
o
o
o
Q
o
O
G
O
O
—
O
o
o
o
o
o
0
0
o
0
—
—
O
O
D
0
0
O
0
o
0
0
o
o
o
6
—
—
-
o
o
Q
0
o
o
o
6
o
"
O
o
e
6
6
o
0
—
—
O
O
0
o
o
0
0
o
G
O
o
o
o
o
o
0
o
o
o
o
0
o
0
o
o
c
o
o
oo
o
o
Q
%
o
o
o
6
0
o
o
0
0
o
o
0
-
o
Q
0
o
o
0
o
c
9
O
o
Q
o
—
^
o
o
locoooooooo
8
0
o
o
o
o
d
o
0
Q
o
o
o
0
o
o
—
o
0
o
o
o
0
o
o
o
o
o
Q
o
0
o
1
0
o
o
Q
s
o
0
0
o
o
o
0
0
o
o
o
o
0
o
o
o
o
o
0
291
-------
Figure 23
Matrix V
KET
Critic*! Relationship
Foanlbli relationship
Land Uac Muat n«; Rngulat^d
to Maintain Value
i <
o
c
VI '
m
w
VALUES:
OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS
Parkfl, ri iy<] rounds , etc.
Ag ricultuc c
W.itcr Iinpoundmcnta
Utility Corridor«
Transport .it ion Corridora
Inat itut iona 1
Low Dcnnity R^nidcntial
Medium Density Pcaidential
Hiqh Dcnnlty Residential
Convncrc la 1
Indaatrial
Land rill
Mining
SOCIAL
lazardoui
«
<*4
H
^
H
S=^
^
Propcrc
H
U
/^>
^j
0
0
£
,-«
V
.x
u
Cont inu
H
U
o
o
o
OOIO
opo
ooo
ooo
ooo
boo
oop
n
o
o
o
o
ValuAbl «
n
u
*j
r,
u
u
u
VI
o
J
3
O
6
o
t
o
0
1s
^
1^
f
f
^
-r
fl
b
p
-t
u
II
u
•X
i
u
&
3
»
Q
O
t
o
o
-t
t
t
'T
1s
t
u
8
o
u
u
(J
u
in
o
&
3
O
Q
b
o
^~\
o
o
o
Q
r >
w
0
f
TO
Set ic
r
<
ti
U
M
1
U
&
C
D
®
>^
T
1s
1s
T
t
T
T
t
INDIVIDUAL
Dec I r»ble
t ion
*vJ
.a
o
p
^_>
O
O
o
^s
'vJ
o
-f
^
c
o
r Rccrt-j
p
O
0
O
T
O
o
o
o
o
u
T
t
o
c
o
o
'J
p
•y
u
o
b.
(J
Q
0
o
0
o
b
o
0
o
o
o
r Health
0
tw
U
0
0
t
T
o
o
o
o
o
o
f
b
0
V
u
c
r
b
t»
c
?
V.
.2
vv
^~s
s^
x— \
vJ
o
v>
\_y
o
o
o
L)
0
292
-------
about an interaction in making a land use decision (e.g., "is the land too
erodable to be used for recreation?", or "will development wipe out commer-
cially valuable wildlife species?"). An open dot shows that the relationships
are' not critical, but are present.
Finally, Matrix V summarizes the conclusions to be reached, relating
land uses to opportunities and constraints founded on social and individual
values. A solid dot indicates that decisions concerning that land use will be
made with respect to that value, e.g., low density residential development
will be conducted to take account of any possible hazards to life, property,
and continued health, as well as to the desirability of that development for
individual criteria for habitations. Performance criteria to protect
against such hazards can be based on scientific evaluations. An open dpt
represents conditional constraints, e.g., low density residential development
decisions may have to consider alternative uses of the land for recreation,
education or maintenance of other property values according to the presence
of certain natural features. Finally, the arrow symbol indicates that society
or the individual must regulate land use decisions to protect a value, for
under certain circumstances society has found its community values to be of
higher priority than individual. The matrix indicates, for instance, residential
development may pre-empt valuable natural, social, or esthetic resources that
should be preserved for continued appreciation by a wider segment of the commun-
ity, and, therefore, that regulations should be written to make the community's
judgement on these matters explicit.
The so-called performance standards developed from the analysis of the
inventory can take a variety of forms. One type of standard could be referred
to as a natural performance standard:13 the most common example is from storm-
water management, where maximum permissable rates of runoff from developed
land can be spelled out. Here, the standard can be written entirely in terms
of natural functions, and development activity on the land is theoretically
not constrained at all so long as it permits the natural systems to per-
form as specified. Other natural performance standards could be written
for groundwater recharge (e.g., the land after development must remain capable
of absorbing X gallons of water per acre per day), permissable erosion rates,
water quality in streams, etc. The use of natural performance standards is
limited, however, by lack of knowledge of what standards are appropriate,
difficulties in measuring performance, and administrative problems, i.e.,
enforcement.
One step removed from a natural performance standard are regulations
about maximum disturbances permissable to a natural environment. For instance,
the Runoff Management Chart, presented as Table 43. also contains Medford's
performance standard for runoff: it shows what percentage of land should be
left open under various conditions to assure that groundwater recharge is pro-
tected and that excessive runoff is prevented. Since it is nearly impossible to.
measure the rate of recharge of rainfall into the ground at a particular site,
approximations must be made, and developers must conform to what the town
estimates to be required. Whereas a natural performance standard for groundwater
disposal might imply the acceptability of an underground disposal field beneath
buildings, the adopted performance standard is more prescriptive in terms of
293
-------
allowable techniques. In fact, most environmental performance standards are
prescriptive of just how development is to occur on a particular site, with
reference to a particular environmental parameter. Setbacks of septic tanks
from streams or wells, application rates for pesticides and fertilizers, over-
all building densities and impervious surface ratios, and many other quanti-
fiable restraints on development activity are best expressed in terms of pre-
scriptive standards rather than in terms of natural systems.
The intent of all performance standards is to impose the minimum restric-
tion possible on development activity, but the limits to this are quickly
reached. Certain intense land uses, such as office and commercial centers, and
industrial facilities, simply cannot comply with many performance standards and
are, therefore, excluded by them—an example would be trying to locate parking
for a regional shopping mall where percentage of land cover must be kept low to
protect aquifer recharge. For less intense land uses, conformance with stan-
dards may drastically raise the price of construction—for instance, buildings
might be permitted in a floodplain so long as they stand on stilts above the
high water mark of the hundred year flood. Such standards amount to land use
restriction wherever the cost of complying with them is higher than the pos-
sible return to the developer.
The strength of the review process proceeds frora the logic of its develop-
ment. So long as the performance standards adopted by the town are reasonable,
both in their environmental goals and in their constraints on development, they
provide an efficient and practical method of enhancing local environmental
quality.
Sample performance standards and land use restrictions covering a few
basic mapping categories are reproduced as Table 46. These are taken only
from the Medford Township Study, and are meant to be illustrative.
294
-------
Table 46
Selected Performance Standards
MAP
MAPPED ZONES
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Flood Hazard
Floodprone Areas
Water Table
Seasonal High Water
Table 0 to 1 Foot
Seasonal High Water
Table 1 to 5 Feet
-No permanent habitation
-Nc structures or other
artifacts permitted which
are likely to cause liability
to the Township or any other
property or persons during
floods.
-No structures or other arti-
facts permitted which will
impinge upon the flood&ble
cross-section area at any
point along the v/ater flow
channel.
-No permanent habitation
-Application of fertilizers
restricted to those types and
amounts which will ensure
their ready absorption by the
local vegetation. In no case
shall the concentration of
nutrients in the groundwater
over these areas be allowed to
exceed the acceptable standards
for adjacent surface waters.
-No disruption of the free flow
of water from these areas
to adjacent surface waters.
-Application of fertilizers
restricted to those types and
amounts which will ensure their
absorption by the local vegeta-
tion and soils to ensure no
increase in concentration of
nutrients beyond present levels
at a depth of one foot below
the ground surface.
-No development of septic
tank drainage fields.
-Sewers required to have leak-
proof joints.
(continued on following page)
295
-------
Table 46 (continued)
Erosion Management
Over 25/Tons/Acre/
Year
5 to 25 Tons/Acre/
Year
Up to 5 Tons/Acre/
Year
Scenic Resource
Enclosed Area
SOURCE:
-No disruption of the free
flow of underground movement
of water.
(all)
-Soil loss restricted to 3 tons/
acre/year at all times including
all stages of development. All
remedial steps such as check dams,
silt trapping levees, terracing,
etc. to be located outside of
the Surface Water Features
(stream, lake, marsh, flood-
plain) identified on the
Hydrology Map.
-In areas of Qualified Soil
loss, no alteration of the
existing water table permitted,
unless provision of erosion
control listed above is ensured.
-No disruption permitted of the
physical and visual continuity.
-Thinning of or clearing within
the wooded parts permitted only
if it maintains the visual
integrity of existing woodlands.
-No disruption permitted of the
visual continuity along the upper
rim of these enclosures.
-No disruption permitted of the
visual continuity of skyline
and upper slopes of these hills.
-No visual obstruction permitted
of the base of these hills.
-No disruption permitted
of the physical and visual
continuity.
-No obstruction permitted of
the long views from these
slopes.
Narendra Juneja, Medford, Performance Requirements for the Social
Values Represented by Natural Environment of Medford Township,
New Jersey, Center for Ecological Research, Univ. Of Penn., 1974.
Areas of Regional &
Local Prominance
Terrain Interest
296
-------
COSTS OF IMPLEMENTATION
Municipalities traditionally resist spending money for planning purposes
because planning often has little direct benefit. Planning monies available
through HUD Community Development Block Grant program may, however, be used
for conducting the environmental review process recommended here: under the
provisions of the Act, funds for planning are released unconditionally follow-
ing approval of a community's application. This can act as a bootstrap pro-
cedure: use of a subdivison or site review process as recommended here can
be an efficient way to expedite the environmental reviews for other projects.
The result can be cost savings in the reviews for federally-funded projects,
and a system for low-cost environmental analysis of all development.
Public Costs
As emphasized above, the success of the recommended local impact review
process stands on the willingness of a town to undertake a valid natural
resource inventory and develop or adopt explicit performance standards for
development. The costs of these vary widely according to the depth of the
analysis undertaken and the number of performance standards desired. If a
large scale gridmapping is done of a region, performance standards may be
left up to local towns to develop.
Although the costs of implementing a review process may seem high by the
standards of many communities, the direct dollar benefits associated with an
environmental review process are also substantial, and may be worth far
more in the future than the $6,000 to $8,000 a town might spend on a simple
inventory and analysis, using some volunteer labor. In the case of Medford
Township, whose elaborate experimental inventory cost $150,000, costs have
almost been recovered only two years after its completion.14 Medford's situa-
tion was unique in some-respects, however. Because of pit iron mining along
streams in the Nineteenth Century, artificial lakes were formed in many loca-
tions around town, making attractive housing sites for subdivisions. When
houses located along these artificial lakes began to pollute them with runoff
and septic tank effluent, the lakes eutrophied and became smelly and turbid.
Reclaiming the lakes meant substantial expense for the town, and residents
saw environmental controls on new development around the lakes as a benefit
for the town. Other communities without such special circumstances may realize
fewer direct cost savings as a result of conducting an environmental inventory,
but on the other hand, their inventory costs need not approach those that
Medford incurred.
The method used by Medford officials in convincing residents of the
value of this expenditure is instructive. The proponents of the plan used
recent development projects in the town to illustrate monies that could have
been saved by effective environmental review. They pointed to roadways
built at town expense to serve sprawled out subdivisions—not only did these
represent an unnecessary capital expense, they required continuing operations
and maintenance expenses: roads must be refinished and repaved periodically;
city garbage trucks are forced to travel farther to collect wastes; school
buses must make longer daily trips. Stormwater facilities illustrate another
major category of unnecessary costs to the community: proponents convinced
297
-------
voters that environmental reviews could remove the necessity to build town
facilities to accept drainage from poorly designed parking lots and housing
developments. Furthermore, the public costs incurred through the construction
of culverts, stormsewers, and other unnecessary "infrastructure" are only
half the problem, for insensitively sited subdivisions can expose homeowners
to private property damages from flooded basements, backed up septic tanks and
land subsidence.
Grid Mapping: One computerbased land inventory was conducted in 1971 by
the Bucks County Planning Commission and cost between $75,000 and $80,000^^
The inventory covered all of the county's fifty-four municipalities.
Contour Mapping; The production of contour maps is necessarily more
expensive than theproduction of grid maps, since more manual labor is in-
volved. The Town of Medford, New Jersey, was one of the first to produce a
natural resource inventory for planning purposes, and their study cost
$150,000. This project, however, produced some seventy-five maps, and was it-
self a pilot project. A number of other towns 'in the state have also produced
inventories, and their costs have averaged about $6,000 to $8,000, .the range
being from $2,000 to $12,000.16 While many of these towns have used volunteer
labor extensively, others have used the services of private consultants with-
out any major increases in total costs to the community. The product of the
inventory process, whether produced professionally or not, is a set of maps
and a, descriptive report.
Private Costs
Data are not available on the costs borne by private developers in comply-
ing with an environmental review procedure such as presented here. Although
there is no obligation for them to incur any costs for independent research on
existing site conditions, most do so^ to be sure that any restrictions on the
use of their property are in fact valid. Their basic costs of compliance with
the system—identifying their property on the relevant maps and any performance
standards that may affect their development plans—are low, however.
Possible Market Impacts
It is possible that the use of performance standards within existing zoned
areas might raise legal challenges of inverse condemnation from current owners.
While not all performance standards would increase costs of development signi-
ficantly, some raise it. For instance, one could go so far as to require that
buildings in flood prone areas (i.e., areas that would experience minimal flood
levels on a very infrequent basis—say every fifty years on average) be built
on stilts above the high water mark. Other performance standards might lower
the desirability of a site. For instance, setback requirements for housing
near streams could lower the scenic value of a site for development. Owners
of previously unrestricted property might feel that the value of their land
was being unreasonably diminished, or even destroyed. Land zoned for a certain
use may actually be physically unsuited for that purpose or physically suited
for a prohibited use, and the action of performance standards in correcting
such mistakes may be controversial.
298
-------
Apparently, no such legal challenges have occurred in Medford, New Jersey,
where an environmental review of subdivisions has been underway for over a year,
nor have their been any informal complaints.*8 It seems inevitable,
that the very compilation of synthetic maps showing the most environmentally
suitable development areas would eventually channel market interest into those
properties, possibly at the expense of other property values. At present,
however, developers are not aware of the potential of the system to guide their
selection of properties to those with the lowest development costs, and until
this happens, no conclusions can be drawn about the net impact of the environ-
mental review process on local land markets. If market values do not depart
dramatically from existing values, and if serious inconsistencies do not
exist between the zoning of land and its physical ability to support develop-
ment, the legal issue of inverse condemnation should not be serious.
SAMPLE ORDINANCES
The implementation- of environmental impact statement (EIS) ordinances
has become rather widespread in recent years. Ordinarily, the EIS requirement
is appended to an existing subdivision control ordinance. In that case, the
community's planning board is charged with review of the EIS in the course
of subdivision review and approval. There is no obvious impediment to extend-
ing the EIS process to local activities and developments other than subdivision,
although this may well require the creation of a new community review board
to receive and respond to the EIS.
The first model EIS ordinance included below (that of Lincoln, Massachu-
setts), is representative of the majority of such ordinances now in place.
Its language cuts a rather broad swath, and the guidance provided for the
actual preparation of the EIS is minimal. Nevertheless, this ordinance would
assist a planning or zoning board in upgrading the informational base upon
which it makes its decision.
The second EIS ordinance included below has been implemented by Medford
Township in New Jersey. It will be noted that the ordinance is drafted in
far greater detail that the Lincoln model, and is intended to accomplish a
much more carefully designed process of environmental review. The foundation
of the Medford approach is an extensive and detailed inventory of the town's
environment and resources; communities wishing to adopt its format would have
to undertake a similar inventory.
Except for the EIS provisions, the Medford ordinance represents a fairly
straightforward subdivision control law, and is designed to be included in
Medford's subdivision review process. Note, however, that unlike the
Lincoln EIS ordinance, Medford succeeds in giving the developer detailed
guidance regarding the preparation and expected contents of the EIS, and the
data to be used.
A noticeable quirk in the Medford approach is the incorporation of the
Ecological Planning Study (with its regulations) in the "statement of pur-
poses," but not in the actual operative ordinance provisions dealing with
control processes. It would be advisable for a community following the Medford
approach to incorporate the inventory by reference in the entire ordinance,
and especially in those portions of the ordinance which deal with the submis-
sion of plans, the permitting powers of the planning board and enforcement.
299
-------
o
o
ORDINANCE OF THE TOWS OP LINCOLN, MASSACHUSETTS
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
Yhe applicant shall also submit an environmental impact statement,
the purpose of which is to enable the officials of the Town to
detemine what methods are used by the applicant to promote the
environmental health of the community and to minimize adverse effects
on the natural resources of the Town.
In preparing the statement, the applicant should refer to the,
sets of Environmental Quality Maps, Town of Lincoln, 1971, and to the
Soil Survey Kaps ard Kanual. preparation for Lincoln by the Soils
Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, on fila at the
Town Hall. . The statecent should include specific references to the
appropriate pla-ts and naps. The statement should be a technical.
document with references for all statements whenever possible.
In reviewing the statement, the Town boards will consider the
degree to which water is recycled back into the ground, the maintenance
'and improvement of the flow and quality of surface waters; the
preservation or pronotion of wildlife refuges, historic sites,' unique
geological botanical and archaeological features, existing or potential
trails and accesses to open space areas; and the health and safety
of the inhabitants of the area.
The Planning Board nay waive any section, or sections, of the
Staterwnt which it deeas inapplicable to the proposed project. The
developer should discuss the requirements with the Board prior to
preparation of the Stateoent, preferably prior to the submission of
• tentative plan.
The Statement shall include the following!
(1) Physical Environment.
1. Describe the general physical conditions of
the site, including amounts and varieties of
vegetation, general topography, unusual
geologic, scenic and historical features,
trails and open space links, and indigenous
wildlife.
2. Describe how project will affect these features.
3. Provide a conplete physical description o? the
project, and relationship to surrounding area.
(2) Surface Water and Soils.
1. Describe location, extent and type of existing water
and wetlands, including existing surface drainage
characteristics, both within and adjacent to the
project.
2. Describe the methods to be used durir.3 construction
to control erosion and sedimentation; i.e., use of
sediment basins and type of culching, nattir.g, or
temporary vegetation; describe approxif-at* size arid
location of land to be cleared at any given tice and
length of tine of exposure; covering of soil stock-
piles; and other control methods used. Evaluate
effectiveness of proposed methods on the site ar.d on
the surrounding areas.
3. Describe the permanent methods to oe used to control
erosion and sedimentation. Include description of
a. any areas subject to flooding or pond ing j
b. proposed surface drainage systeai
c. proposed lard grading and permanent vegetative
cover;
d. methods to be used to protect existing vegetation;
e. the relationship of the develop=ent to the
topography;
t. any proposed alterations of shore line». marshes
or seasonal wet areas;
g. any existing or proposed flood control or wet-
land easensnts:
h. estimated increase of peak run-off caused by
altered surface conditions, and methods to ie
used to return water to soils.
-------
4. Coapletely describe sewage disposal methods.
Evaluate impact of disposal methods on surface
water, soils, and vegetation.
(3) Sub-surface Conditions.
1. Describe any limitations on proposed project caused
by sub-surface soil and water conditions, and methods
to be used to overcome then.
I. Describe procedures and findings of percolation tests
conducted on the site.
3. Evaluate impact of sewage disposal methods on quality
of sub-surface water.
(4) Town Services.
1. Describe estimated traffic flow at peak periods and
proposed circulation pattern.
2. Describe locations and number of vehicles acconmodated
in parking areas.
3. Describe effect of project on police and fire
protection services.
4. Describe effect of project on public works department
services.
5. Describe effect of project on educational services
6. Describe the effect of the project on the town
water supply and distribution system.
(5) Hunan Enviro.-jr.ent.
1. Provide » tabulation of proposed building by type,
size (nuaber of bedrooms, floor area), ground
coverage, and a suraary showing the percentage of
the trace to be occupied by buildings, parting and
other paved vehicular aceas, and usable open space
(Section VII-C-3-b of the Zoning By-Law).
2. Describe type of construction, building materials
used, location of common areas, location and type
of service facilities (laundry, trash, garbage •
disposal) .
3. State proximity to transportation, shopping and
educational facilities.
4. Describe proposed recreational facilities. Including
active and passive types; and age groups participat-
ing, and state whether recreational facilities and open
space are available to all Lincoln residents.
(6) General
1. Summarize briefly environmental inpact on entire
town with supporting reasons.
SOIL SURVEY
Where appropriate, the Board may require soil surveys to
establish the suitability of th- land for the proposed storn
and sanitary drainage installations.
-------
TOWN Or KEDFORD: ORDINANCE NO. 1974-11
AN OaDIXANCE ESTABLISHING RULES, REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS GOVERNING
THS S'.-33IVISIOS OF LAND WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP OP MEDFORO PURSUANT TO THE
AV7HOXI7Y SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 4 33 OF THE LAWS OF 1953. AND AMENDMENTS
A.-O S-TPLBSNTS THERETO; SETTING FORTH THE: PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED
BY THE rLA-'.'ilNG BOARD AND THE GOVERNING BODY IN APPLYING AND ADMINISTERING
TH-SE R'JLES. REGULATIONS ASD STANDARDS; AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR THE .
VIOLATION THiRZOf.
BE IT OSEAINED AND ENACTED by the Township Conlttee of the Township
of Mtiliord, as follow*,
U>
o
to
ARTICLE I - TITLE
Section 1. Thi* Ordinance (hall b« known and Bay b« cited as The Land
Subdivision Ordinance of the Township of Medford."
ARTICLE II - PURPOSE
Section 1. The purpose of this ordinance shall be to provide rules,
relations end standards for land subdivision in the Township of Medford
in order to promote and protect the public health, safety, general welfare
of tV.e Dunlcipality in such a nanner as not to affect adversely the •
• environmental Integrity of the ecosystem continuity of the auniclpality,
and where reasonably possible, to etaintain or to enhance both.
It shall be' administered to Insure the orderly, fair and equitable
growth ar.a development, conservation, protection and proper use of land
.ar.d all other natural and nan-nade resources of the municipality and
•liquate provision for circulation, utilities, services and other
elements essential for naintenance and provision of a good environment
ac-i fjaUty of life within the municipality and to ensure compliance with
•11 pertinent laws of the State of Hew jersey and the United States
of Aaerica.
To assist in accomplishing these purposes the municipality has caused to
be prepared an Ecological Planning Study of the Municipality which has been
reviewed ar.J approved by the governing body of the municipality and this
orJinar.ee has been amended to adopt and reflect in large measure the con-
clusions and recosnendations of such Ecological Planning Study.
The Ecological Planning Study has been published and has been deposited
with the Municipal Clerk, and is available for public inspection.
The texts, naps and reconnended regulations of the Ecological Planning
Stuiy are incorporated here by reference as considerations and findings
of fact in the contemplation and legislative history of this ordinance.
In addition the Township Connittee incorporates the following statement.
The residents and the government of Medford Township have recognized the
inevitability of growth and have coraitted their Township to responsible
absorption of that growth. The residents and governnent also recognize that
by virtue of the Township's unique and invaluable naturll resources the
Township is exposed to a high degree of ecological ard fiscal vulnerability
to irresponsible land use. Further, the Township has studied the failures
and abuses of conventional lar.d use and land planning ar.d fir.ds t!yit
irresponsible land use, even in less vulnerable areas, has re-^-jlt^d in
severe destruction and.degradation of natural resources, ines^inaiile public
costs and social inequity. Open space, clean watetr, vegetation and visual
and aesthetic delights having motivated choice of housing location, those
attributes often are progressively eliminated by progressive housing
construction. In addition, the Township finds that inaie-ruate ar.d inflexible
controls of layout and design and ignorance of ecological values have
encouraged housing uniformity, unnecessary ecological costs and isolation
by nonintegrated and unitary development.
The Township further finds that property conceived development nay offer
ecological preservation, variety of design and layout, retention of open
space and vegetation, and connunity integrity and orientation without
excessive cost. In particular, the Township Coiadttee finis in the State
and Judicial statutes an expression of public policy ar.d a1 high municipal
duty to preserve and protect the ecological systees of the Tcwnship and
its region.
ARTICLE III - ADMINISTPATION
Section 1. The approval provisions of this ordinance shall be administered
by the governing body after favorable referral by the Kedford Township
Planning Board In Accordance with Section 14 of Chapter 433 of the Laws af
1953.
ARTICLE IV - DEFINITIONS
When used herein the following words or phrases shall be deeaed to have
the meanings indicated:
Section 1. Subdivision. The division of a lot, trace or parcel o* land
into two or more lots, sites or other divisions of land for the purpose,
whether immediate or future, of sale or building development; except that
the following divisions shall not be considered subdivisions; provided,
however, that no new streets or roads are involved; divisions of land for
agricultural purposes where the resulting parcels are three acres or
larger in size, divisions of property by testamentary or intestate pro-.
visions, or divisions of property upon court order. Subdivision also
includes re-subdivision and where appropriate to.the context, relates to
the process of subdividing Or to the lands or territory divided.
-------
Section 2. Plat. Means a *ap of • subdivision.
Section 3. Sketch Plat. The sketch map of a subdivision of sufficient
accuracy and detail to be used for the purpose of discussion and classifica-
tion rveeting the requlreraents of Article VI of this ordinance.
Section 4. Kinor Subdivision. Any subdivision containing not wore than
two lots fronting on an existing improved street, not involving any neij
street or road or the extension of municipal facilities, not creating a lot
ot lots whose natural characteristics would render difficult or impossible
uses of the land and not adversely affecting the development of the
rerjinier of the parcel or adjoining property and not in conflict with any
provision or portion of the master plan, official nap, zoning ordinance or
this ociinar.ee. Any application to re-subdivide any lot or parcel of land
previously subdivided pursuant to this or any previous subdivision ordinance
of this Towr-ship shall be deemed to be a major subdivision unless the
Planning Board expiessely waives this requirement.
Section 5. Major Subdivision. All subdivisions not classified as
dinar subdivisions.
Section 6. Prelininary Plat. A preliminary map indicating the proposed
layout of the subdivision which is submitted to the municipal clerk for
plar.-iirg board consideration and tentative approval, together with-such
sufple.-iental wterials as may be required herein, or which may be filed
with a preliminary plat ar.d accepted for filing, including anendments
thereof or supplements thereto later filed and accepted for filing, and
eeetir.9 the requirements of Article VI o£ this ordinance.
Section 7. final Plat. A final map of all or a portion of the sub-
division, together with the supplemental materials filed (and accepted
for filing), with tJie preliminary plat, which are presented to the
planning board for final approval in accordance with these regulations
a.ii --hich, if approved, shall be filed with the proper county recording
officer.
Section 8. Subdivision toaaittee. A committee of at least three
pla.-i.ning board nerbers appointed by the chairman of the board for the
purpose o* classifying subdivisions in accordance vith the provisions of
this ordinance and such other duties relating to land subdivision which
rjy be conferred on this committee by the board.
Section 9. Subdivider. Any individual, firn, association, syndicate,
co-partnership, corporation, trust or any other legal entity commencing
proceedings under this ordinance to effect as subdivision of land
r»reu-ider for hietself or for another.
Section 10. Owner. Any Individual, firm, association, syndicate,
co-partnership or corporation having sufficient proprietary interest In th«
land sought to be subdivided to convenes and maintain proceedings to sub-
divide the sane under this ordinance.
Section 11. Performance Guarantee. Any security which nay be accepted
in lieu of a requirement that certain inprove.-ents be cade hi fore" the
planning board or other approving body approves a plat, ir.cluiir.g
performance bonds, escrow agreements, and other similar collateral or surety
agreements.
Section 12. Master Plan. A composite of the mapped and written proposals
recommending the physical develop:nent of the municipality, which shall
have been duly adoptedt by the planning board.
Section 13. Official Map. A map adopted in accordance with the Official
Hap and Building Permit Act. Chapter 434 of the Laws of 195J, or any prior
act authorizing such adoption. Such a map shall be ceened to be conclusive
with respect to the location and width of the streets, public parks and
playgrounds ana drainage right-of-way shown thereon.
Section 14. Lot. A parcel or portion of land separated froa other
parcels or portions by description as on a subdivision or record of survey,
map, tax map, or by metes and bounds for purposes of sale, lease or
separate use.
Section 15. Street. Any street, avenue, boulevard, road, land
partway, bicycle or pedestrian path, alley or other way which is an existing
state, county or municipal roadway, or a street or way shown upon a plat
heretofore approved pursuant to law or approved by official action or
a street or way on a plat duly filed and recorded in tV- office of the county
recording officer prior to the appointment of a planning board 'and the
grant to such board of the power to review plats and a street or wjy shown
on the official map, and includes tte land between the street lines whether
improved or unimproved, and ray comprise pavement, shoulders, gutters,
sidewalks, parking areas and other areas within the street lines. For
the purpose of this ordinance streets shall be classified as follows:
(a) Arterial streets are those which are used primarily for fast
or heavy traffic.
(b) Collector streets are those which carry traffic froa nlnor
streets to the major system of arterial streets, including the principal
entrance streets of a residential development and streets for circulation
within such a development.
(c) Minor streets are those which are used primarily for access to
the abutting properties.
-------
to
O
(d) Marginal access streets are streets which are parallel to and
adjacent to arterial streets and highwaysi and which provide access to
abutting properties and protection frora through traffic.
(e) Alleys are ninor ways which are used primarily for vehicular
service access to the back or the side of properties otherwise abutting
on a street,
(f) BicycZe Paths and Pedestrian Paths. Those paths which are to
be used priori ly by bicycle riders or persons for walkways.
Section 16. Drainage Right -of -Bay. The lands shown as drainage rights-
of-wiy upon the official ciap or lands required for the installation of storm
water sewers or drainige ditches and swales for retention, holding or
rech-rge or required along a natural strean or water-course for preserving
the^chj-irel and providing for the flow of water therein to safeguard the
P'-^iic against flood danage in accordance with chapter one of Title 53
of the Revised Statutes.
Section 17. Ecological Planning study. A study commissioned by the
rvr-.icipality in 1970 by the Center for Ecological Research in Planning
and c-ssign, Dep^rtrent of Landscape Architecture and regional Planning,
University of Pennsylvania, including:
(11 * document entitled 'An Ecological Planning Study for Bedford
To--ship, New Jersey" availaMe for inspection at the office of the
Xedford Township clerk.
(2) A document entitled "An Ecological Planning Study of Medford
Township, Bedford, New Jersey. Draft: Suraary Conclusions:" and
(3) The Ecological Hap Atlas as herein defined.
. (4) The findings and recommendations of the Center's research staff
ar.i its consultant as contained in the Technical Reports on each subject
Investigated, as described in the introduction to the "Draft:
Conclusions » • and
(5) Photographic elides of each of the nineteen maps identified
in (aid draft as described above and numerous related photographic
slices depicting naps, charts, graphs and associated ecological data
ar.d available for public use and inspection at the office of the
Bedford Tow-ship Clerk.
Section IS. Ecological Mjp Atlas. An atlas of maps at a scale of
1" - }000' designated "Ecological Hap Atlas" available for public us«
and inspection at the office of the Bedford Township Clerk.
Section 19. Environmental Inpact Statement. This shall Man a
stagnant with respect to Environmental and Ecological Itpacts of the
prctased subdivision prepared and filed as provided in Article VT
APnCLE V - PROCEDURE AND FEES
Section 1. Submission of Sketch Plat.
(a) Any owner of land within the Township of Kedford shall prior to
subdividing or resubdividing land, as defined in this ordinance,
submit to the Secretary of the Planning Board (or other designated
official) at least two weeks prior to the regular neeting of the Board
a sketch plat and six copies thereof of the proposed subdivision for
purposes of classification and preliminary discussion, as well as the
submission of proof that no taxes or assessr-e.its for local improvement!
are due or delinquent on the property involved.
(b) (1) If classified and approved as a ainor subdivision by
unanimous action of the subdivision cory-j-ttee, a notation to that
effect will be made on the sketch plat.
The plat will then be forwarded to the Kayor and the Municipal
Clerk for their signature and returned to the subdivider within one week
following the next regular meeting of the governing body. IJo further
governing body approval shall be required but no such certification
shall be construed to constitute a waiver of any requirement for the
subrrdssion oi" subdivision applications to tha County ?la.i.ii~g Beard
for review and approval as set forth in P.L. 1968, C 285, See 43:27-6(6).
(c) Before the Municipal Clerk returns any approved sketch plat
to the subdivider, the clerX shall have sufficient copies nade to furnish
one (1) copy to each of the following:
(1) Municipal clerk
(2) Municipal Engineer
(35 Building Inspector or Zoning Officer
(4) Tax Assessor
(5) Secretary of the Planning Board
(6J County Planning Board
The cost of the copies will be charged to tha subdivider and
shall be collected before the return of the original sketch plat to the
•ubdlvider.
• (d) Either a deed description or plat map drawn in corplianc*
with Chapter 3SB of the Laws of 1953 shall be filed by the subdivider
with the county recording officer within 90 days froc the date of
return of the approved sketch plat.
(e) If the plat is classified as a major subdivision, a notation
to that effect shall be made on the plat which will be returned to the
subdivider for compliance with the procedure in Section 2 and J of this
Article.
-------
ent of roney expended against the account.
Section 2. Submission of Preliminary Plat of Kajor Subdivision
for Tentative Approval.
(a) At least ten black on white prints of the prelir.i.-.ary plat
and one transparency on cloth, together with five copies of ar,y other
docurents retired in connection therewith shall be submitted to
the Municipal Clerk who shall irnediatcly notify the Secretary
of th= Planning Board upon receipt of a prelirunary plat. The
Municipal Clerk shall retain one copy of said prelimnary plat and
forward the remaining copies of the Secretary of the Planning Board.
At the tine of the suboission the subdivider shall pay the fees
as established by the Planning Board above.
(b) Copies of Jhe prelirdr.ary plat shall be forwarded by the
Secretary of the Planning Board for cor-.-r>ent and report to the following!
1. Secretary of the County Planning Board
2. Municipal Engineer
3. Secretary of the Board of Health
4. Burlington Coanty Soil Conservation Service, UEDA
5. Chairr.an, Enviror.-ep.tal Commission on the Townsh-'p of
Bedford
6. Medford Township Ecological Consultants (if ten or Bore
lots are involved)
7. Zoning Officer
8. Municipal Sewerage Engineer.
9. Such other municipal, county or state officials as
directed by the Planning Board.
(c) Upon receipt of the reports froai the appropriate bodies as
. required by the Planning Board of those set forth above, the Secretary
of the Planning Board shall notify the applicant in writing that""
the Planning Board is prepared to hear the natter em an agre-d date
within sixty-five days unless extended by agreement with the applicant
and shall advise the applicant*to notify by certified or registered
mail, at least five days prior to the hearing, ell property owners
within 200 feet of the extrene limits of the subdivision as th--ir
names and addresses appear on the municipal tax record. Said notice
shall state the tize and place of h-saring, a brief description of
the subdivision, including the asiount of acres, ru.-.ii~r of" lots proposed
and the block and lots involved, and that a copy of said subdivision
has been filed with the municipal clerk for public inspection. The
applicant shall also cause notice of the hearing to be published
in the official newspaper or a newspaper of general circulation in
the municipality at least ten days prior to the hearing. Proofs
shall be submitted by the applicant of compliance prior to the hearing.
-------
00
o
(d) The Planning Board shall act and notify the applicant on
the prelininary plat within sixty-five days after public hearing, but
in no case bsfore the expiration of the thirty day period within
which the County Planning Beard nay submit a report on said sub-
division. In all cases the recommendations of the county board shall
be given careful consideration in the final decision of the local
planning board. If the County Planning Board has approval authority
pursus.-.t to R.S. 40:27-12, its action shall be noted on the plat,
and if disapproved two copies of the reasons for disapproval shall
be returned with the plat. If either the Planning Board or County
Placing Board disapprove a plat, the reasons for disapproval shall
be remedied prior to further consideration.
(e) If the Planning Board acts favorably on a preliminary
plat, a notation to that effect shall be made on the plat, and it shall
be raferred to the governing body for action. The governing body
shall act within two regular r.eetings. Its action shall be noted
on the plat, signed by the Mayor and be returned to the subdivide* for
compliance vith final approval requirements.
(f) Preliminary approval shall confer upon the applicant the
following rights for a three-year period from the data of approval!
1. That the general terms' and conditions under which the
prelininary approval was granted will not be changed.
2. That the said applicant may submit on or before the
expiration date the whole or part or parts of said plat
for final approval.
Section 3, Improvements or Guarantees Prior to Final Approval.
Before consideration of a final subdivision plat, the subdivider will
have installed the irproverents required under Article VII or the
'.Planni-g Board shall require the posting of adequate performance
guarantees to assure the installation of the required improvements.
Section 4. Submission of Final Plat of Major Subdivision.
(a) The final plat shall be submitted to the municipal clerk
for forwarding to tha Planning Board for final approval within
three years fron the date of tentative approval. Upon its receipt
the Municipal Clerk shall forthwith forward all but one copy of
said final plat together with related docunents to the Secretary
of the Planning Board. The Planning Board upon receipt of the final
Plat and its related documents shall act upon the final plat within
forty-five days fron tho date of submission for final approval to the
CJ-.icipal clerk. At the tir* of the submission of said final plat to
the municipal clerk by the subdivider, the subdivider shall pay the
fees to be'usod to offset tha cost of professional service and other
incidental expanses connected with processing, reviewing and checking
the naterial submitted.
(b) The original tracing, one translucent tracing cloth copy,
two cloth prints, 10 black on white prints and three copies of the
application form for final approval shall be submitted to the
Secretary of the Planning Board at least ten days prior to the date
of the regular Planning Board meeting. One cloth print shall beccr.e
part of the Township's permanent file and one translucent shall be
forwarded to the Township Engineer. Unless the prelininary plat
is approved without changes, the final plat shall have incorporated
all changes or modifications required by the Planning Board1.
(c) The final plat shall be accompanied by a statere.it by the
municipal engineer that he is in receipt of a r^p showing all
utilities in exact location and elevation identifying those portions
already installed and those to be installed and that the subdivider
has complied with one or both of the following:
' 1. Installed all improvements in accordance with the
requirements of these regulations, or
2. A performance guarantee has been posted with the Kunicipal
Clerk in sufficient amount to assure the completion of
all required improvements. No such bond shall be released
until receipt of a nap showing all utilities in exact
location ar£ elevation.
(d) Any plat which requires county planning board approval
pursuant to R.S. 40:27-12 shall be forwarded to the cojr.ty p J.ar.rir.g
board for its action prior to final approval by the governing body.
(e) If the planning board favorably refers a final plat to
governing body, the governing body shall take action not later than
the second regular meeting following the referral, noting its
action.on the plat and the Mayor affixing his signature thereto if
said action is favorable.
(f) Failure of the planning board and governing body to act
within the alloted time or a mutually agreed upon extension shall
be deemed to be favorable approval and the municipal clerk shall
issue a certificate to that effect.
(g) If any person
planning board, appeal i
taken within ten days af
board. A hearing th.erco
in interest who shall be
parties in interest shal
hundred feet and all car
the governing body nuy a
board by a recorded vote
The findings and reasons
stated on the records of
shall be giv.cn a copy.
shall b« aggicved by the action of the
n writing to the governing tody r.jy be
ter the date of the action of the planning
n shall be had on the notice to all parties
afforded a.-, opportunity to be heard. All
1 include all property owners vithin tvo
ties previously notified. After s-ch bearing
ffirm or reverse the action of the plar.-i.-j
of a rjjority of the total rs-.T-.be r s thereof.
for the disposition of the ap;eal shall be
the Governing body, and the applyi--; party
-------
U)
o
•J
(h) Upon final approval, copies of the final plftt shall be
filed by the planning board with the following:
1. Municipal Cleric
2. Municipal Engineer
3. Building Inspector
4. Tax Assessor
S. County Planning Board
6. Official issuing certificates for approved lots.
7. Site Plan Officer
8. Plurbing Inspector
9. Superintendent of Sewage Treatment Plant.
(i) The final plat after final approval by the governing body
shall be filed by the subdivider with the County recording officer
within 90 days fron the date of such approval. If any final plat
is not filed within this period, the approval shall expire.
(J) Ko plat shall be accepted for filing by tho county
recording officer unless it has been duly approved by the governing
body of Kedford Township and signed by the Mayor.
ARTICLE VI - CONTENTS OF SUBMISSIONS
Section 1. Sketch Plat. The sketch plat shall be based on tax
nap information or some other similar accurate base at a scale of
not less than 400 feet to the inch to enable ths entire trace to b«
shown on one sheet and shall show or include the following
indorsation:
(a) The location of that portion which la to be subdivided
in Delation to the entire tract.
:ea
Jersey. The plat shall be designed in corpliance with the provisions
of Article VIII of this ordinance and shall show or be acccr-sar.ied
by the following information:
(1) A key map showing the entire subdivision and its relation
to surrounding area at a scale of one inch equals two
thousand feet.
B. The tract name, tax niap, sheet, block and lot nunber, number
of proposed lots, date, reference meridian, graphic scale and the
following names and addresses:
(1) Nane end address of record owner or owners
(2) Kane and address of subdivider
(3) Name and address of person, who prepared rap.
C. Acreage of tract' to be subdivided to nearest tenth of an acrer
square footage of each proposed lot.
D. Contours at 2-foot intervals for entire area of property as
well as lands inaiediately adjacent thereto of sufficient scope to
determine the effect upon the relationship of the adjoining property.
E. Complete topographical data showing all natural and ran rude
features within or adjacent to the tract, including but r.ot limited
to such features as streets, buildings, water-courses and water tables,
lakes, wood lands, field, meadow, marshes, hills, general types and
location of vegetation and trees, culverts, stom sewers, water lines,
sanitary sewer lines, gas and electric and telepho-e lir.es.
F. Complete outbound survey of entire tract, including any excep-
tions and easements affecting the subdivision.
G. Plan or plans showing layout to scale accuracy of proposed
property lines, streets, sanitary sewers, stora drains, ditches,
water lines, buildings, relocated streans, proposed fire hydrants.
street signs, easements or covenants, and any other features con-
nected with the subdivision of land ar.d construction of irr>rover.«nts
thereon.
H. Copies of design criteria and calculations; complete specifica-
tions covering materials and nethods of construction for all irprove-
ments; typical details for all appurtenances and typical cross sections
of streets.
-------
OJ
o
oo
1. When an individual water supply and/or sewerage disposal system
is proposed, the plan for such system must be approved by the appro-
priate local, county or state health agency. When a public sewage
disposal systen is rot available, the developer shall have percolation
tests rrsJe and submit the results with the preliminary plat. Any
subdivision or part thereof which does not meet with the established
require-ents of this ordinance or other applicable regulations
shall rot be approved. Any renedy proposed to overcome such a situa-
tion shall first be approved by the appropriate local, county or
state health agency.
J. Probable impact on municipal services, including water, storm
severs, sewerage disposal, schools, police and fire protection, roads
and traffic, sanitation and trash disposal, with supporting data,
to show how conclusions were determined.
K. Effect of the proposed development upon the ecological balance
in the lar.ds and waters (both surface and ground) of the township
and neighboring townships, the lands and waters in proximity to the
proposed subdivision and the lands and waters within the tracts
of lard enconpassed by the subdivision.
L. An environmental impact statement containing:
1. Nineteen rjps of the subdivision derived by the applicant from
each of the nineteen naps of the Ecological Map Atlas.
2. The recorr-erded regulations appropriate to the subdivision
as indicated by tha naps of the Ecological Kjp Atlas and derived
by the applicant from the re cor--r ended regulations and summary
conclusions doscribed in Article IV, Section 17. hereof.
'3. Such additional Ecological Data as the applicant nay desire
to suir^it.
4. A staterent describing and explaining the iirpact and effect of
the proposed subdivision upon the ecological systeras and environ-
ment of Bedford Township's lands and waters, giving consideration
to the applicable natural processes and social values of:
a. Geology.
b. Aquifers.
c. HydroIcgy.
d. Depth to seasonal high water table.
e. Run-off management units.
f. Soils.
g. Potential soil loss
h. Soil nutrient retention
i. Vegetation.
j. Recreation value of vegetation.
k. Terrestrial wildlife habitation
1. Historic value
n. Physiography
n. Microcliiate
o. Scenic units
p. Limnology
q. Wildlife - high value areas
r. Wildlife - hazardous and nuisance species
s. Wildlife - rare and beneficial species.
5. By reference, to the summary conclusions and recorm^nded recom-
mendations, the statement shall identify specifically which of the
four categories and subcatcgorics of regulation described below
are, or are not applicable to the proposed subdivision, and where
a category of regulation is deer.ed to be applicable? a description
shall be furnished of the action proposed to be taken or avoided
to minimize any adverse effect on envirorj-ont or ecology, or to
benefit the environment or ecology. The categories and subcategorie*
involved are those set forth below designated categories A through
D, as follows:
a. Category A - regulations to avoid ha:a--l to life and
property from:
Subcategory 1.
Subcategory 2.
Flood
Fire.
b. Category B - regulations to prevent hazard to life and
health resulting from human activities related to use of:
Subcategory 1.
Subcategory 2.
Subcategory 3.
Surface waters
W^.ter table
Nutrient application.
c. - Category C - regulations to
scarce and valuable resources:
loss of unique,
Subcategory 1.
Eubcategory 2.
Subcategory 3.
Subcategory 4.
Subcategory 5.
Subcategory 6.
Historic
Vegetation
Wildlife
Scenic
Water recharge
Geologic.
d. Category D - regulations to minimize social costs by
proper management of:
Subcategory 1.
Subcategory 2.
Subcategory 3.
Subcatcgory 4.
Subcategory 5.
Subcategory 6.
Aquifers
Soil loss
Vegetation
Recreation use of vegetation
Wildlife, habitats
Land use.
522
523
-------
o
vO
K. In nvi.cwi.n9 an Environmental Ii^act Statement, the planning
board ri*y refer the statement to * qualified, consultant at applicant*
expense to obtain content! and suggestions with respect hereto,
and tar consider such information in deciding whether to approve,
request •edifications or foraulate general turns or conditions
subject tMkMch approval nay be given, or reject the applicant. .
N. Specific plans proposed by the »ubdivider to alter, preserve
or enhance existing vegetation, including landscaping and topo-
graphical and natural features of the land vithln the proposed
subdivision,
O. hreas proposed to be reserved as open space delineating those
areas to be preserved in their natural state or for recreation
purposes such as playing fields and playgrounds, and proposed
Mthod of ovnership and maintenance of the areas.
P. Sufficient nuaber of borings, to be a depth of not less than
eight f«et below the proposed finish grade to indicate soil
types and depth and elevation of the water table on the entire tract.
p. Submission of proof that.no taxes or assessments for local
icproveoents are due or delinquent on the property Involved.
Section 3. Alternative Procedure for Preliminary Environmental
Icpact Assessment. In recognition of the substantial engineering
and other costs of preparation of the preliminary plat, and to
encourage flexibility of design for ecological and open space
purpoi«», tt\e following procedure is established for preliminary
assessnent of environmental impact.
1. At any tine prior to the submission of th« preliminary plat
t>.e sabdivider ray submit a preliminary Environmental Impact
Statcr«nt to the Planning Board for its review and recommendations
at public hearing together with such single or alternate tentative
plans showing tentative design and layout of a subdivided tract' as
the subdivider nay desire to submit.
2. rite Preliminary Environmental Inpact Statement shall contain
all data required by Article VI, Section 2L of this ordinance except
subsection 2M4).
3. In lieu of Section 2LM), the Preliminary Environmental Impact
Stat-rrs.it ray contain a staterent of the prospective ecological impact
ar.d of the ecological advantages and disadvantages of the tentative
plan or plans subnitted.
4. At the expense of the applicant the Preliminary Environmental
Inpact Statement and the tentative plan or plans shall b» submitted
by the planning board to qualified consultants for review, consents
and suggestions.
5. The planning board shall conduct a public review of the
Preliminary Environmental Iirpact Statement at which the applicant
and the public may offer cement, discussion and suggestions. Such
hearing shall be held within two regular nestings of receipt of the
consultants report.
6. In the event the applicant chooses the alternative
Environmental Procedure here provided, he shall cause to be published
in the official newspaper of the Township, at least five/ays prior
to the hearing, a Notice of Preliminary Environmental Irpact Review
identifying the tract or tracts of land by reference to lot and
block number as designated in the official tax records of the
Township and giving the date, time and location fixed by the planning
board for the public- hearing.
' 7. neither the planning board nor the applicant shall be bound
by the cements, findings, suggestions and reco=n-nJations derived
from this alternate procedure, nor shall use of this procedure be
deemed compliance with the provisions of Article VI, Section 2L
hereof.
Section 4. Final Plat. The final plat shall be dra^n in ir.k on
tracing cloth, or its equivalent, at a scale yt no* 1'ess ^han or.s
inch equals 100 feet and in compliance with all the provisions of
Chapter 358 of the Lai's of 1953. *he final plat shall shoa or be
accompanied by the following:
(a) Date, name and location of the subdivision, nase of owners,
graphic scale and reference meridians.
. tb) Tract-boundary lines, right-of-way lines of streets,
street names, casements and other rights-of-uay, land to be reserved
or dedicated to public use, all lot lines and other site lines with
accurate dimensions and bearings and radii, arcs and central angles
of all curves.
(c) The purpose of any easeraent or land reserved or dedicated
to public use shall be designated, and the proposed use of sites
other than residential shall be rated.
[d) Subdivider to use lot and bloc* numbers designated by
the governing body.
(c) Minimum building setback line on all lots and other sites.
-------
1*1
t->
o
(f) location and description of all scnuments.
(9) Manes of owner* of adjoining land.
(h) Certification by engineer or surveyor as to accuracy of
detail* of plat.
U) Certification that the applicant is agent or owner of the
land, or that the owner ha* given consent under an option agreement.
(j) Nhen approval of a plat is required by any officer or body
of the municipality, county or >tate. approval chair be certified on
the plat.
(k) plan* and profile drawing* accurately drawn to a scale
of not IH* than one inch equal* fifty (SO) feet showing proposed
construction of off-site improvements and grading of lots complete
in every detail.
(1) Copies of all other data, not included In submission of
prelininary plat, necessity to completely and accurately delineate
and describe the construction of off-lit* improvements.
•In) Certificate fro* tan collector that all taxes and assess-
ments ,ar* paid.
(n) Executed and acknowledged easeaents to the proper govern-
mental unit {or all sanitary sewers, storm sewers and drainage
rights-of-vay required together with a certificate of title thereto
•ad* to the unit by a competent Mew Jersey Attorney or a reputable
title coapany.
to) X final Environmental Impact Statemnt or the original
staterwr.t plus any asendnents or supplements.
(p) All conditions of preliminary approval must be
shown or noted on final plat.
ARTICLE VII - IHPHOVEMEHTS
Section 1. Prior to the granting of final approval, the
subdivider shall have installed or shall have furnished performance
guarantees for the ultimate installation of the following, if
required:
a. Street*
b. Street signs
c. Curbs or curbs and gutters
d. Sidewalks
e. Street lighting
f. Shade trees of a type, sire, quality and quantity •
as recoiraended by the Shade Tree Commission
g. Top soil
h. Monuments
i. Water sains
j. Storm sewers
k. Sanitary sewers
1.. Such other improvements a* may be required to properly
develop the subdivision, including the Installation
measures required to prevent erosion and siltation during
and after construction. '
m. Aquifer recharge basin*
n. Pire hydrants.
All of the required improvement* shall be Installed in accordance
with the rules, regulations and specifications es adopted by the
planning board and such other regulations, ordinances or requireaents
of appropriate county or-nunicipal bodies having jurisdiction over
the subject matter.
Section 2. No final plat shall be approved by the planning board
until the completion of all such required improvements has been
certified to the planning board by the- appropriate county or municipal
bodies or officers; unless the subdivision owners shall have filed
with the municipality a performance guarantee sufficient in arount
to cover the cost of all such icprovenents or ur.corplctei portions
thereof as estimated by the municipal engineer, and assuring t-v.s
installation of such uncompleted improve-ients on or before an ocreed
date. Such performance guarantee may be In the fora of a perfo—inee
bond which shall be issued by a bonding or surety conpaf.y approved
by the governing bodyi a certified check returnable to the subdivide
after full compliancei or »ny other type of security approved by
Such performance gua
planning board but in no case for a tern of more than three years,
which term, however, may at the discretion of the planning board
be extended for an additional period or periods not to exceed th»
naximum period permitted by law but in no case for more than an
additional three years. The anount of the performance guarantee
may be reduced by the Tovnshlo Cor^ittee for those portions of
the required irprovenents after said improvements have been
installed and accepted.
-------
AWICtE VIIT - STANDARDS
The subdlvidtr shall observe the following requirements and
principle* of land subdivision In the design of each subdivision
or portion thereof.
Section 1. General. The subdivision plat shall conform to design
standards a* adopted by the Township Committee September 21, 1960,
as ar.er.ded from tine to time, that vill encourage good development
patterns vjthin the municipality, whether either or both an official
•Lip or caster plan has or have been adopted the subdivision should
conform to the proposal and conditions shown thereon. The street
drainage rights~of-way, school sites, public parks and playgrounds
shown on an officially adopted master plan or official map should
be considered in approval of subdivision plats, where no raster
plan or official nap exists, streets and drainage rights-of-way
shall be shown on the final plat in accordance with Section 20 of
Chapter 433 of the Laws of 19S3 and shall be such as to lend them-
selves to the harmonious development of the municipality and enhance
the public welfare in accordance with the design standards provided
in the Environmental lopact Statement as approved, the terns of any
conditions of the approval of the preliminary plat, or provided
elsewhere herein.
Section 2. streets.
(a) The arrangement of streets not shown on the master plan
or official nap shall be such as to provide for the appropriate
extension of existing streets where deeaed necessary.
(b) Minor streets shall be so designed as to discourage
through traffic.
(c> Unless waived by the planning board a system of bicycle
and pedestrian paths generally unrelated to and separate fron
streets used for vehicular access shall be shown. Design shall
be oriented to ecologically suitable areas and shall be so designed
as to require the minimum initial cost and maintenance costs
necessary to provide safe and convenient pedestrian and bicycle
access to lots.
-------
(n) D«»d-«nd streets (cul-da-sacs) shall not be longer than
800 feet and shall provide • turn around at the end with a radius
of not less than 75 feet and tangent whenever possible to the
right side of the street.
If a dead-end street is of a temporary nature, a similar
turn around shall be provided and provisions made for future exten-
sion of the street and reversion of the excess right-of-way to the
adjoining properties. •
(o) No street shall have a name vhich will duplicate or so
nearly duplicate as to be confused with the names of existing
streets. The continuation of an existing street shall have the
SUM name.
(p) Acceleration and deceleration lanes shall be provided
where deened necessary.
Section 3. Blocks.
(a) Block lengths and width or acreage' within bounding
roads shall be such as to accommodate the size of lot required in
the area by the zoning ordinance and to provide for convenient
access circulation control and safety of street traffic.
(b) In blocks over 1000 feet long, pedestrians cross walks
nay -be required in locations deened necessary by the planning
board. Such walkways shall be 10 feet wide and be straight from
curb to curb.
(c) For commercial group housing or industrial use, block
size shall be sufficient to neet all area and yard requirements
for such use.
Section 4. Lots.
(a) Lot diaensions and area shall not be less than the
require-ents of the zoning ordinance, unless waived by the
planning board pursuant to the provisions of the zoning ordinance.
(b) Each lot must front upon an approved street at least
50 feet in width except lots fronting on streets described in
Section 2(e)5 of this article.
(c) H^ere extra width has been dedicated for widening of
existing streets, lots shall begin at such extra width line, and
all setbacks shall be measured from such line.
(d) Where there is a question as to the suitability of a lot
or lots for their intended use due ,to factors such as rock forea-
tions, flood conditions, drainage or other adverse enviror.rer.tal
impact factors the planning board Bay after adequate investigation
withhold approval of such lots.
(e) Each lot shall have designated a street nur-ber for ease
In identification.
Section 5. Public Use and Service Areas.
(a) Easements along rear property lines or elsewhere for
utility installation and maintenance and/or bicycle ar.d pedestrian
access icay be required. Such easorents shall b* et least 15 feet
wide ar.d located in consultation with the companies or Bur.icisal
departments concerned.
(b) Where a subdivision is traversed by a water course,
drainage way, channel or stream, there shall be provided a stora
water easement or drainage right-of-way conforming substantially
with the lines of such water course, ar.d such further width
or construction, or both, as will be adequate for the purpose.
(c) The subdivision shall be designed to enhance and
preserve the ecological and social values of the subject lands
as reflected in Ecological Planning Study of KedJord Tovr.ship.
(d) The subdivider shall be encouraged to devote sufficient
amounts of open space to secure reasonable ecological, natural,
esthetic and recreational values to the inhabitants of the
subdivision and the Township.
Section 6. Electric and Telephone Utilities. The subdivider
shall require the serving utility to install its distribution
supply lines, services ar.d street lighting supply facilities,
underground in accordance with its specifications and with the
provision of the applicable Standard Terns and Conditions in-
corporated as a part of its Tariff es tha sare are then on file
with the State of New Jersey Board of Piilic Utility Ccrrr-iss loners.
Provided, however, that lots, which, in such subdivisions, about
existing streets where overhead electric or telcch&r.e distribution
supply lines have heretofore been installed on any portion of
the street involved, ray be supplied with electric ar.d tel-r.hone
service from those overhead lines, but the service corrections
from the utilities* overhead lines must be installed underground.
-------
ARTIC1E IX - VIOLATION
If, before favorable referral and final approval has been
obtained, any person transfers or sells or agrees to sell, as
owner or agent, any land which forma a part of a subdivision on
which, by ordinance, the planning board and the governing body
is required to act, such person shall be subject to a fine not
to exceed two hundred (5200.00) dollars or to imprisonment for
not nore than thirty djys and each parcel, plot or lot so disposed
of shall be deer-ed a separate violation.
In addition to the foregoing, if the streets in the subdivision
are not such that a structure on said lard In the subdivision
would r-eet requirements for a building permit under section
three of the official nap and building permit act (1953) the
municipality nay institute and maintain a civil action:
(•) For injunctive relief.
(b) To set aside and invalidate any conveyance made
pursuant to such A contract or sale if a certificate of
cor.pllance has not been issued in accordance with section tventy
four of Chapter <33 of the Laws of 1953, but only if the
municipality har. a planning board or a corcnittee thereof with
power to act and which:
1. Meets regularly on a monthly or more frequently basis,
and
2. Whose governing body has adopted standards and pro--
cedures in accordance with section twenty of Chapter
433 of the Laws of 1953.
.In any such action the transferee, purchaser or grantee shall
t» entitled to a lien upon the portion of the land from which
the subdivision was made that renains in the possession of the
subtiivider or his assigns, or successors, to secure the return
of any deposit made or purchase price paid, and also a reasonable
search fee, survey expense and title closing expense. If any.
Any such acttion mist be brought within two years after the
date of the recording of the instrument of transfer, sale or
conveyance of said land, or within six years if unrecorded.
ARTICLE X - EFFECT OF APPROVAL
Section 1. Approval of a plat shall not constitute a finding
of corpliance with or a waiver of the pertinent provisions of any
zoning ordinance, building or sanitary code or other ordinance
of the Township of Hertford and it shall be the responsibility of
the subdivider to obtain all necessary certificates of
occupancy, building permits or other licenses from the official
charged with their issuance, nor shall it constitute acceptance
of any street, easement or utility or drain or sewer or other
proposed public area or facility.
Section 2. Tentative approval shall not authorize the filing
of the plat with the county cleric, the sale of lots In referer.ee
thereto, neither of which shall be undertaken until final-approval
and posting of the guarantees required Sf a condition to final
approval.
ARTICLE XI - UNDUE HARDSHIP
Section 1, These rules, regulations and standards shall be
considered the minimm requirerw.lts for the protection of the
public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the Tov.ship
O* Bedford. Any action taXer. b/ the governing body er.d -_l.e planning
board under the terns of this ordinance shall give prirjry con-
sideration to the tbove nentioned natters and to the voljare of
the entire community. K-yvever, if the subdivider or his aoe.it
can clearly demonstrate that, because of peculiar conditions
pertaining to his land, the literal er.forcerer.t of ore'or acre
of these regulations is impracticable or vill exert u.-.iue hard-
ship, the planning board and governing body ray perr.it sjch
variances as may be reasonable and within the general purpose
and intent of the rules, regulations and standards established
by this ordinance.
Section 2. The planning board shall have the authority to employ
an attorney of its own choosing to serve at the pleasure of said
board as well as a duly licensed and qualified er.9ineer, other
experts and a staff also to serve at the pleasure of the planning
board, and pay for their services and for such other expenses as
Bay be necessary and proper, not exceeding in all, exclusive of
gifts the aaount appropriated by the governing body for its use.
Section 3. If any article, section, sub-section, sentence,
clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be.
unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the
remaining; portions of this ordinance.
Section 4. All ordinances or parts of ordinances other than
the Zoning Ordinance of the Township of fedford which are in-
consistent with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby
repealed to the extent of such Inconsistency.
section 5. This ordinance shall take effect imediately
after final passage tnd publication according to law.
-------
FOOTNOTES
1. Council on Environmental Quality, Environmental Impact Statements An
Analysis of Six Years' Experience by Seventy Federal Agencies.
Washington, D.C.: CEQ, March 1976.
2. Kaiser, et al., Promoting Environmental Quality Through Urban
Planning and Controls, Washington Environmental Research
Center, EPA, Washington, D.C., 1973/
3.
This is also necessary to the HUD Flood Insurance program, so
data is likely' to be more readily available in the future.
4- This is basically the process used in Medford Township, New
Jersey.
5. Many communities in the state of New Jersey, and several in
Pennsylvania, have been active in variations of this review
process, as has Dallas, Texas.
6. Carter, et al., Environmental Management and Local Government,
Office of Research and Development, EPA, Washington, D.C., 1974.
Richard E. Galantowitz, The Process of Environmental Assessment -
Options and Limits, North Jersey Conservation Foundation,
Morristown, New Jersey, Vol. 5, p. 11.
7. The Upper Raritan 'Watershed Association and the Bedminister
Township Environmental Commission have published a highly detailed
guidelines for an environmental impact review program, which in
our view is too complicated ever to be implemented properly. Overly
complex procedures may be worse than none, since they can create
a general hostility to all environmental programs. Reference:
Ashmun and Larson, Municipal Land Use Decisions, the Tools and Methods,
December 1974.
8. Bucks County Planning Commission, Natural Resources Plan, Phase II,
Bucks County Pennsylvania, December 1972.
9. Galantowitz, op.cit.
10. ibid.; c.f. ASPO, Performance Controls for Sensitive Lands, EPA, 1975.
11. Center for Ecological Research in Planning and Design, and the Depart-
ment of Natural Resources, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, "Guidelines
for Land Resource Inventory and Analysis for Planning," 1975.
12. often flood "prone" areas are distinguished from usual floodplain
areas on the basis of the frequency and severity of flooding.
A flood prone area is usually on the "shoulders" of a floodplain—
when it floods, the soil may be only under a few inches of water,
and this may be rare, such as during a 100 year flood. The distinction
is useful for planning purposes, since property damage in a flood
prone area may be tolerable for certain land uses, or if certain
design and planning precautions arc taken.
314
-------
13. E. Selig, "Regulatory Dimensions on Nonpoint Source Control,"
Abt Associates, Cambridge, Mass., 1976.
14. Conversation with Gerald Haughey, the attorney who developed
Medford's subdivision ordinance. Some town officials are more
optimistic, saying costs were fully recovered in less than
two years.
15. Conversation with Lane Kendig, Bucks County Planning Commission.
16. Conversation with Ann Morris, New Jersey Association of Conservation
Commissions.
17.. Conversation with Robert Pearson, Center for Ecological Research,
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
18.. Conversation with Gerald Haughey.
315
-------
APPENDIX I-l
The following pages present a review of various local applications of
the police power affecting environmental policy objeptives. The aim is not
to give a complete analysis of these legal tools, but rather to indicate their
potential for making a substantial contribution to environmental programs.
The reader is referred to individual chapters of the report as appropriate.
This section of the Appendix should be used as a background for the second
section, in which the interactions of individual ordinances and regulations with
specific aspects of environmental quality are discussed.
316
-------
ZONING
General Districting
Mode of Implementation: Agricultural Zoning, Holding Zones, Large Lot
Zoning, Open Space Zoning.
Description—
Conventional district zoning may have a limited positive impact on local
environmental quality if carefully done. The premise of such districting would
be to zone areas for uses which are environmentally compatible. For instance,
agricultural zoning is sometimes employed as an open space protection measure
or as a holding category pending completion of development in established areas.
Similarly, large lot zoning may be undertaken with the same principle in mind:
the government may be unwilling to provide water and sewer service and will
thus zone for densities which can use groundwater sources and septic tanks.
Large lot zoning is sometimes also construed as open space zoning.
General districting is, however, a gross tool for managing environmental
quality, and it often has negative results.
Large lot zoning, although it may often be upheld by courts if it is
tied to health considerations (such as minimum lot sizes for septic tank use),
may in the long run defeat environmental quality objectives. It can aggrevate
leapfrogging of development beyond the large lot zones, and ultimately develop-
ment within the zone will probably have to be serviced with municipal water and
sewer facilities, at substantial expense—large lot zoning usually produces
scattered upper income units which locate on the most attractive sites in the
area. Furthermore, once -large lot areas are developed fullv, little open
space is actually left-each lot is privately held and developed, and the
integrity of natural areas is destroyed.
Urban/Rural Context-Large lot and agricultural zones are appropriate
con's/" TH ^ ^ SUbUrban areas' As indicated above, they may be
corrldorJ. * " eXClusi°narv' especially if they lie within major growth
. With the exception of authentic agricultural use districts, conventional
district zoning is a weak tool with which to protect environmental quality.
Legal Issued—courts have frequently overturned agricultural zoning where
it is tound to be a disguise for open sapce zoning, or a holding category. Suc-
cessful agricultural districting, such as New York State's agricultural district
program set up in 1971, is explicitly planned for farming only in well defined
districts with a minimum acreage. The programs include preferential assessment
to make fanning economically viable, and the farmer should also make a legal
commitment to agricultural land use over a specified period (usually eight
years) with annual renewal and penalty clauses. It is useful to tie agricul-
tural zones to prime agricultural land, ascertained by a soil survey.
Administrative Issues—No special administrative issues are associated
with the attempt to use purely conventional zoning techniques to achieve
environmental quality.
317
-------
Sensitive Area Protection
Mode of Implementation; Wetlands Conversancy Districts, Hillside or
Steep Slope Development Regulations, Groundwater Protection Zoning, Stream
Bank Protection Ordinances, Woodlands Protection Ordinances.
Description—
A number of zoning approaches comprise the overall category of sensitive
area protection.
1. They usually overlay existing zoned use districts,
although they may drastically limit otherwise
permissible activities.
2. Their environmental benefits are similar, having
most to do with local water management problems
and wildlife/aesthetics issues.
One of the major forms of sensitive area protection is discussed below. For
a full discussion of the subject, see Charles Thurow, William Toner, Duncan Erley,
Performance Controls for Sensitive Lands (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C. 1975) .
Wetlands Conservancy Districts—Wetlands Conservancy Districts are written
to encompass most of a community's wetlands. They seek to maintain the eco-
logical integrity of wetlands by restricting development to non-intensive uses
and by restricting dredge and fill operations. A permit procedure is set up
by which all development activities are reviewed for their environmental
impacts.
Legal Issues: Most communities which have instituted wetlands conservancy
districts have not had legal problems. The central issue legally is the problem
of inverse condemnation—the denial to the landowner of a reasonable return
on his land. Courts are becoming increasingly sympathetic to environmental
protection ordinances of this type, since valid community objectives are served
by wetlands preservation, including such immediate benefits as flood control.
A leading case in the field of wetlands regulation is Just v. Marinette
County.* In that instance, the court made the following important point:
An owner of land has no absolute and unlimited right to change
the essential natural character of his land so as to use it
for a purpose for which it was unsuited in its natural state
and which injures the rights of others. The exercise of the
police power in zoning must be reasonable and we think that it
is not an unreasonable exercise of the police power to prevent
harm to public rights by limiting the use of private property
to its natural uses. (emphasis added)
This appears to be a crucial distinction. The court, in effect, is saying
that the zoning ordinance protecting wetlands is.not depriving an owner of
value since there .is no value (for development) intrinsic in the land. It is
*56 Wis. 2d 7, 201 N.W. 2d 761 (1972), 4 ERD 1841.
318
-------
only after the land is filled, i.e., changed to something other than its
natural state, that the issue of taking of value can be legitimately raised.
Such a distinction cannot be made with other sensitive areas a community
wishes to protect—wetlands are the only sensitive areas commonly protected
which are unsuited for development in their natural state (see below).
Administrative Issues: (1) Landowners must initiate application for
permits to alter wetlands, and, due to the vagaries involved in mapping wetlands
boundaries, may independently decide that their land is unaffected by the ordin-
ance. It is, therefore, preferable, although comparatively costly, for the
community to undertake a formal mapping of wetlands within its jurisdiction
rather than to define wetlands in descriptive terms in the working of the
ordinance.
(2) Mapping of wetlands is not always possible: wetlands may fluctuate from
year to year depending on rainfall and other natural and man-made disturbances.
Some communities have set up tentative mapping procedures which can be adjusted
as more accurate information becomes available> or define wetlands based on the
presence of specific plant varieties.
(3) Some of the generally permitted uses may actually cause wetlands
damage—farming is the prime example. The use of pesticides and fertilizers
associated with many farming activities is generally detrimental to the wet-
land. This raises the legal issue of taking once again, for wetlands in their
natural state are appropriate for certain agricultural uses (e.g., cranberry
farming) which are not covered by the wording set forth in Just (discussed
above).
Comments: (1) Flexibility can be built into the wetlands ordinances by
means•of a special use permit, allowing uses with specified environmental
performance. This can reduce the taking in most cases. Where a property lies
only partly within a wetland, and if environmental circumstances permit, a
density bonus for development on the buildable sections of the land may be
appropriate. Most communities have also developed special tax and assessment
policies for districts affected by wetland regulation to offset the hardship
of the limitation on development.
(2) Some means of restricting activities occurring at the boundaries of
the wetlands district is necessary to maintain adjacent compatible development.
Buffer zones protect wetlands from runoff, sedimentation, biochemical degrada-
tion and thermal pollution. Often fixed or variable buffer zones can be
established in which environmental controls are exercised over a list of
permitted or special uses larger than that permitted within the wetlands dis-
trict.
(3) The control of wetlands may be ineffectual without considering the
natural processes within the watershed. As a watershed becomes more developed,
the capacity of the wetland to deal with erosion and runoff is overwhelmed.
The design of the wetland regulation should only occur in the context of larger
controls over the watershed.
319
-------
Performance Zones
Mode of Implementation: Effluent Allotment Ordinances.
Description—
Direct regulation of residuals discharge (performance control) is unusual
in zones which are not sensitive areas per se. The most familiar performance
controls in such areas have to do with noise, which is essentially an outgrowth
of nuisance legislation. Local control over the production of environmental
residuals is not extending to both air and water pollution.
Effluent allotment ordinances control effluents from local subdivisions,
particular •- from "package plants," which are a common source of water pollu-
tion. Most water pollution control has been preempted by the state and federal
governments in the United States, and is keyed to ambient water quality in-
• directly through the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES),
which specifies minimum levels of treatment for all discharges, and requires
more stringent treatment for all discharges, and requires more stringent
treatment where water quality standards would not be met otherwise. While local
communities are not permitted to lower the standards of water treatment pro-
vided; they may require more stringent standards to meet special community
objectives. Effluent allotment ordinances fulfill this function: where it is
felt that local stream quality considerations demand more stringent controls
on effluents than federal of state agencies 'require, higher performance
standards may be enacted. Streams with low flow may be protected from all
discharges, and other streams may have maximum effluent flows specified at
some fraction of total streamflow at any time.
Legal Issues—Effluent allotment ordinances may, in effect, create new
perfo.rmance zones within a municipality—areas in which effluents to streams
must follow special standards. The idea of effluent zones has not been widely
used'in this country because of national policy to clean up all streams and
waterways to minimum standards of purity. In Europe, a different policy has
been followed—certain streams are designated as pollutable, and have become,
in effect, open sewers; other streams have been protected, and effluents which
they formerly received are diverted to the pollutable zones.* Effluent allot-
ment ordinances are similar to effluent zones in that they control residual
production by districts, but they do not simply shift effluents from one
stream to another.
Package plants have been a serious pollution problem in many communities
because most of the time they simply do not work up to specifications. The
effluent allotment ordinance quoted here explicitly states that standards
must be met at all times.
*The Eurscher River in Germany is a case in point. Some wastes from the
Ruhr area are pumped over into its watershed; the river itself has been fully
lined with concrete and serves as an open sewer.
320
-------
Administrative Issues—Actually testing plants to conform with stringent
standards is a difficult and expensive task. It is not known how effective
these new ordinances will be in actually maintaining higher standards of treat-
ment in local package plants.
Flexible Zoning Alternatives
Mode of Implementation; Planned Unit Developments, Cluster Subdivisions,
Regulations and Others.
Description—
It is an old complaint that zoning imposes a sterile monotony on the
landscape, and in many communities attempts have been made to make zoning more
responsive to the aesthetic needs of the community. Uniformity of lot size,
set back, and separation between houses has been relaxed under special zoning
amendments to allow more rein to the designer's imagination in siting and
design. Going a step further is the concept of relaxing restrictions on uni-
form activities within a development, allowing necessary support facilities
to be included within the subdivision development.
The two main tools in achieving these ends have been Planned Unit Develop-
ments, which allow flexibility in siting and design as well as a mix of uses on
site, and cluster development, which merely varies the siting requirements of
housing in conventional residential districts.. .Both of these tools have environ-
mental quality implications that may be as important as their aesthetic and
practical value.
_ The immediate reasons for implementing clustering and PUD ordinances are
mainly aesthetic; their environmental benefits are scarcely discussed in the
literature, though in the past two years, more interest has appeared. Fortunately
aesthetic and environmental goals are .closely similar when it comes to pre-
servation of open space, where the principal advantage of both PUDs and cluster-
ing options lie. In general, the only modification of clustering and PUD
ordinances necessary to optimize their environmental benefits is to kev site
planning to the preservation of environmentally sensitive areas, which^are
possibly distinct from the most aesthetically valuable areas.
Te rmi nology—
There is a good deal of confusion in the terms used to describe various
flexible design alternatives. Planned Unit Developments are sometimes called
"planned unit residential developments," "design integrated development dis-
tricts," "planned cluster developments," and even "cluster development." In
general a PUD is any development composed of separate elements that has been
designed from the beginning as a unit. It may include entire new towns, such
as Reston, Virginia, or may apply to a shopping center, industrial park, or
commercial district.
Cluster subdivisions may also be called "cluster development," "cluster
zoning," "open space developments," or the like, but they are purely residential
in character. On a given tract, instead of dividing the land into conventional
sized lots, houses are located on lots of reduced dimensions and the balance
of the -land is left open. In order to maintain the overall density limitations
321
-------
of the zoning district, the open land is legally reserved in some form of
ownership or easement so that it can never be developed.
In practice, PUDs and cluster subdivisions in suburban areas are similar
in appearance, the PUDs also holding a significant portion of their land open
in perpetuity. This accounts for much of the confusion in terminology.
Legal options for holding the open land in cluster subdivisions include:
o Holding the land in nonprofit ownership for
the use of the subdivision residents alone.
Dedication of the land to'the community for
as parks, open space, or playgrounds.
use
o Donation of the land to a conservation commission,
water department, or other public body which
maintains it in its original ecological condition.
o Easements on the land which permanently restricts
its development rights, whoever the owner is.
Significantly, both cluster subdivisions and PUDs are optional to the
developer. In Chrinko v. South Brunswich, N.J., 1963, it was established that
the optional feature of cluster zoning makes it available to all developers and
thus a uniform regulation throughout a residential district. Being optional,
they may often be underutilized. Many benefits are claimed for flexible zoning
and subdivisions—for the developer, they may lower construction costs; for
buyers they supposedly bring lower maintenance costs and a better natural atmos-
phere. In practice, however, many communities, developers and buyers are still
wary of variations on the conventional development scheme.* Increased amounts
of planning time are required to put these options into effect, and as a result
it is probably necessary to include bonus density provisions for developers
who adopt the PUD or cluster subdivision options.
Legal Issues—
Planned Unit Developments require state enabling legislation, but this
is now available almost everywhere. Cluster subdivisions may be undertaken at
local initiative, and are legally simple to implement. The optional feature
of both approaches appears to be legally necessary safety valve.
In some states, PUDs may come close to being "contract zoning," zoning
that is so drawn as to meet the situation of a particular developer. While
the terms of a PUD are meant to be flexible, they are being revised toward
a more limited density and conventional layouts in some states to prevent them
from being a back-door method for developers to avoid zoning restrictions al-
together, and to allay public fears of same.
*In one study (Lansing, Marans, & Zehner, Planned Residential Environments,
Ann Arbor, Michigan, Institute for Social Research, university of Michigan,
1970.), it was found that many families prefer privately accessible open
space to publically provided "green belts," though it is possible that all
requirements may be met by sensitive architectural and landscape design.
322
-------
To a great extent, public wariness of PUDs has tended to undermine their
potential. Originally, it was hoped by some that PUDs would enable towns
to-escape zoning altogether, and negotiate development on a case by case basis
in a manner which would result in a superior product for community, developer,
and consumer. This is not happening, for any number of reasons. One of the
most important is that towns may decide to permit PUDs in practice, and then
object to the specific case. Insofar as PUDs are potentially floating zones—
not specifically located on the zoning map until they are privately proposed—
what seems like a good idea in principle may be a bad idea in practice when
it is built next door. The suburbs appear to be retaining a highly con-
servative stance on most flexible zoning alternatives.
Administrative Issues—
Administration of flexible zoning alternatives is definitely more expen-
sive than conventional subdivision approval processes, in that both town and
developer are obligated to address specific issues and facts when siting and
designing the project. In the long term, these administrative costs can be
a good investment for all concerned, as the more sensitively designed projects
can result in lower public, private, and environmental costs. However, since
developers inevitably focus on short-term returns, bonus and incentive plans
must often be adopted to encourage private participation in flexible zoning
alternatives.
Comments—
Most of the difficulties in implementing flexible zoning alternatives
are social and financial in origin. The controversy which still surrounds
these techniques tends to-eclipse the importance of their environmental
benefits, which can be highly significant. It seems likely that to reduce
public contention, future applications of flexible zoning alternatives will
tend towards the conservative side, and departures from the conventional
suburban housing format will be minor. While major environmental benefits
may still accrue through the use of these tools—particularly in the preserva-
tion of open space and protection of environmentally sensitive areas—some of
their potential is likely to be foregone for the present.
A number of other zoning tools are often mentioned as having environmental
benefits. In practice, they are not markedly different in environmental effect
from those we have discussed above. They are discussed briefly below.
Conditional Zoning—Conditional zoning is a method of rezoning whereby
an applicant agrees to abide by specific conditions before zoning, usually
to a higher use. The purpose of conditional zoning is to assure more specific
control over zoning and it sometimes is called "site plan zoning." Often a
developer will be required to submit specific site plans showing the exact
characteristics of his proposed development. He will be required to adhere
to his site plan before rezoning is granted. This gives the community an
opportunity to consider in detail a rezoning to a zoning category which may
permit a variety of uses or developments which are undesirable. Conditional
zoning is often used for commercial rezoning where the community wishes not to
over-zone but finds a particular use v/ith conditions established beforehand
serves a surrounding neighborhood. There is a fine line between conditional
zoning and contract zoning. Conditional zoning also assures that a developer
will abide by the timing of development he proposes (i.e., that he will not
delay in the use of his new development right).
323
-------
FloatingZone_s_--We have ^. -ussed PUD as a potential floating zone.
That is, specific locations have not been determined ahead of time for the
district although certain minimal criteria (e.g., minimum lot size) must be
met before an applicant can utilize this procedure. In some states, floating
zones are illegal—considered "spot zoning." Wetlands conservancy districts
which are not mapped can be'floating zones. A definitional approach is used
to identify potential wetlands areas where controls may be applicable.
A transit-impact zone without specific boundaries (because transit stations
have not been finely established) is another form of floating zone.
ii-iiiti^^--^^^-— - zoning refers to the practice
of building incentive provisions into the zoning ordinance so that the developer
will take advamtage of certain techniques or provide certain amenities. Trade-
offs are often made within a given development. For example, a developer is
permitted a higher density in return for stricter development standards such
as enclosed parking or plazas or developed open space. In a broader sense,
incentives may be built into the ordinance so that developers will take advan-
tage of certain techniques such as permitting a slightly higher density for a
subdivision if the developer choses PUD rather than traditional developement.
Transitional Zpnejs — Transitional zones are often used to protect low
density"^eTidential"uses from adjacent commercial uses or high density residen-
tial uses. An example of a transitional zone is an Office .Conversion District,
where single family homes abutting a commercial district may be converted to
.office or institutional use if their exterior is maintained.
SUBDIVISION REGULATION^
Sanitary Sewage Requirements^
Mode_of^mj^^ejitation: Subdivision Regulations (Health Code Enforcement)
or Municipal Ordinance (Septic Tank Ordinance).
See Chapter IV.
Stormwater Management
Mode of Implementation: Subdivision Control Ordinance.
See Chapter V.
Street Design
Mode of Implementation: Subdivision Ordinance
Description—
The layout of streets in subdivisions must conform to certain
design, usually laid down in a public facilities manual which inco
general subdivision regulations. Although little has been done wi
to improve environmental quality, it is possible that sensitive street
can aid environmental objectives by reducing automobile, trip length
destinations, and perhaps by functioning as emergency stormsewer over
channels (e.g., by inverting the crown) where heavy rains are common
324
-------
and designs might also be coordinated with water and sewar planning to lower
the penalty costs of future expansion of these utilities, and might thus reduce
the costs of implementing phased capital facilities programs to achieve
environmental quality and control community growth.
Legal Issues—The control of streets design by subdivision regulations
generally raises no legal problems.
Administrative Issues—Revision of standards for street designs would
probably entail little if any additional administrative obligation or expense
if appropriate model ordinances were enacted.
Environmental Impact Statements
Mode of Implementation; Subdivision Regulation.
See Chapter VIII.
ACQUISITION
Less-Than-Fee Acquisition
Mode of Implementation: Eminent Domain, if necessary.
Description—
Less than fee land acquisition implies the purchase, or if necessary, the
condemnation, of rights to land which amounts to less than the fee simple value.
the principle is well established in law that easements and covenents are proper
means of limiting and controlling land uses. Most commonly, easements are
purchased to permit permanent or limited rights-of-way across property, such
as for roads, local utilities, gas and oil pipelines, and high-tension wires.
'Applying less-than-fee acquisition of land rights is now sometimes used by
conservation commissions for preserving natural areas for wildlife or bird
sanctuaries, marshland preservation, and the like. In effect, such easements
amount to a purchase of all or most of the development rights to a property;
the acquisition of development rights exchanges the property owner's right to
develop or change the use intensity of his land for the full compensation of
that interest or right. For example, if a farm was worth X dollars as farm
land and Y dollars if developable under the zoning or other regulation in
effect, the airport would purchase or condemn the development right by paying
Y-X dollars.
The term of such an acquisition is usually about twenty-five to thirty
years for a conservation easement, and may be permanent in the case of the sale
of developable rights. The prospects of selling permanent development rights
to a property naturally causes the price to rise, often practially to the
full market value of the land. Indications are, however, that in areas with
moderate land speculation, the prices paid for such easements are, in fact,
higher than they are worth.* Owners overestimate their property's value—in
*This was found to be the case in a recent program intended to protect the
Brandywine River in Pennsylvania—attempts to purchase easements were unsuccessful,
even when as much as 50% of the land's value was offered. Owners instead asked
for condemnation proceedings to take their land in fee simple.
325
-------
essence minimizing the perception of risk. Land prices actually may rise because
of the easement since the natural amenities of the area are not protected and
values stabilized.
Legal Issues-—One legal issue which is of prime concern to the success of
easement programs if preferential assessment of property whose development
rights have been limited to a significant extent. Preferential assessment
programs in some states have been purely voluntary on the part of land owners,
and have not involved the use of easements.
Land Banking
Mode of Implementation; Eminent Domain
Description—
Since no method of land use control is as effective as outright ownership,
land banking * is increasing in importance nationally on all levels of government.
*Land banking is usually defined as acquisition to full title to land,
but easements for conservation or environmental protection purposes are also
landbanking in a practical sense. Various less-than-fee-simple purchase options
are also available to communities to achieve the same results as immediate
cash purchase, including ultimate possession of title to fee-simple. They are:
Remainder Interest: The purchase or condemnation of a remainder interest
gives the purchaser title to the fee-simple after a specified number of years.
The value of the remainder interest is equal to the present fair market value
less the value of the use of the land over the intervening years. Over a medium
term (ten to fifteen years), this may represent a savings—over the long term
it might be cheaper to pay the entire fee immediately. Of course, while the
land remains in private hands and continues to generate tax revenue over the
interim, there is no guarantee as to its interim use. It is assumed, however,
that the land would not be developed, since all improvements would become the
property of the purchaser without additional payment. This alternative is
probably inappropriate for protection of sensitive lands.
Option Purchase: An option may be purchased or condemned to buy land at
its present market value at a specified future date, the option value being the
estimated appreciation of the land in that time, discounted to the present and
calculated in present dollars. Meanwhile the land remains in private hands.
Since the land may be developed in the interim, option purchase may be in-
appropriate for the protection of sensitive lands. Also, calculating the
option value is something of a gamble.
Installment Purchase is possibly the most favorable option to the seller
for tax purposes, but has the disadvantage that in most states it cannot
legally be used for land acquired by condemnation. Payment for the land is
simply distributed over a specified time period in exchange for an increased
total price. Installment purchase may be a reasonable way to acquire larger
tracts of land for conservation purposes in communities without heavy develop-
ment pressure, and where the town can cooperate with present owners to further
conservation objectives.
A land banking program should assume the use'of the fee-simple purchase,
but should also allow the use of these less familiar techniques where appropriate.
326
-------
It has been used or suggested as a useful adjunct to
o urban renewal
o highway development
o provision of low- or moderate-income housing
o industrial development
o advance land acquisition for public facilities
o urban growth control strategies
o open space acquisition
o sensitive area protection.
The use of land banking to improve or protect environmental quality is
covered by the last four options. An examination of its role in general urban
growth control strategies is beyond the scope of this study, however. We are
more concerned with land banking as a means of advance site acquisition for
public facilities, and its use in open space and sensitive area protection.
Advance acquisition of public facility sites is the most widespread appli-
cation of the concept. The most recent study of advance land acquisition by
local governments was conducted in 1966. A HUD-sponsored study found that
about one-third of the cities with populations of over 50,000 had land banking
programs (defined as acquisition of land three years or more in advance), though
county-operated programs were found to be uncommon. The objects of these pro-
grams were most frequently to acquire sites for schools, parks, fire stations
and other government buildings. The term of such land banking ranges from
about two to ten years, and sites average only a few acres.
Larger scale land banking has often been undertaken by state highway
departments to minimize acquisition costs—land is often over a third of total
project costs. Since 1968, the Federal Highway Administration has conducted
an active landbanking program involving a revolving fund for interest-free
loans. Airports also bank land, for use in future expansions and as noise
buffer zones; water companies use the process to acquire and protect watersheds.
Up to 10,000 acres are sometimes banked and the land is held from as little
as two to five years in the case of highways to as long as ten to twenty
years for airports, and permanently for watershed.
The difficulty with land banking for environmental protection is that it
is a last resort, turned to when regultations such as zoning and subdivision
control are found to be unreasonable restrictions on a landowner's rights to
beneficial use of his land. Condemning easements on limited development rights
is theoretically a cheaper way to achieve the same purpose, but in many rapidly
growing areas, where land speculation is intense, the cost of an easement may
327
-------
amount to a substantial fraction of the entire value of the land, and the owner
may demand a taking in fee.*
Legal Issues—I.andbanking is necessarily founded on the sovereign power
of the state of eminent domain*, a power which is implicit in both state and
federal constitutions. Constitutional provisions merely limit and define a
power which is otherwise limitless. State courts aqree that land taken
by eminent domain must be for a "public use," and the fifth amendment states
"nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation."
The concept of public use is more closely defined by settled practices
and social necessities of the people of the state in which the question
arises than by philological considerations. In essence, the concept of
valid public use can change, and it is now changing toward an interpretation
which allows land to be acquired well in advance of use, and even without
intent to develop it.
In the only major case on landbanking in the United States, the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico v. Rosso, the use of eminent domain in land banking was strongly
upheld. Rosso, whose land had been condemned by the Puerto Rico Land Administra-
tion, argued that "...the public use doctrine—under both the United States
and Puerto Rican Constitution—prohibited the Commonwealth from condemning
private property until there was a specific plan for the land and a clear
public necessity for doing so." The Supreme. Court of Puerto Rico rules against
Rosso, saying the taking was a "legitimate use of the police power in protection
of that which a community of 2,712,808 human beings existed in a territory of
3,435 square miles sees as a most precious value for survival: vital space."
* Beginning in 1962, Bucks County, Pennsylvania, launched a
comprehensive program to protect and enhance the water resources of
the Neshaming Creek involved acquisition of both flooding and
conservation easements from a large number of owners. When the land-
owners refused to sell easements, the county moved to condemn the
property in fee. The conservation easements sought to regulate
agricultural uses of land, limit erosion to three tons per acre
per year, keep all land under vegetative cover, and limit impervious
cover to 15%, and owners were initially offered three to four percent
of the value of the whole parcel. In many cases, owners insisted
that the land be condemned for a fee taking, even if as much as ten
percent of the land value were offered for the easement. This is
probably due to the owners' perception of the immediate drop in
the value of the land which would probably be significantly more
than the long term loss. Nevertheless, conservation easements
averaged ten to fifteen percent of land values, flooding easements
(with more drastic restrictions of land uses) about 50% of land
values. Strong & Keene, Environmental Protection through Public
and Private Development Controls, EPA, Washington, D.C., May 1973.
328
-------
the relevance of this decision to conditions on the continental United States,
where space is certainly not at such a premium as in Puerto Rico, may be
challenged, but it seems probable that landbanking for public purposes, in-
cluding preservation of open space and sensitive areas, will not be challenged
as exceeding the constitutional bounds of eminent domain.
Administrative Issues—The administrative issues of landbanking are com-
plex whenever a major project is undertaken. Full treatments of landbanking
mechanics and financing are readily available from a number of sources, some
of which are listed below under REFERENCES.
Undeniably, landbanking is an expensive way to achieve environmental ob-
jectives such as preserving open space or sensitive areas. The costs of
achieving the objectives may be lowered substantially, however, by reselling
the land for development with a variety of necessary restrictions on its
use written permanently into the deed. If the restrictions are written as
leniently as possible while still consistent with the environmental objectives
of the project, the resale value will be maximized.
Where landbanking is used in its most common form to acquire a site for
a necessary facility such as a sanitary landfill, significant cost savings are
involved. Since the optimum sites for public projects are usually optimum
for private development as well, advance acquisition can yield major savings
over the short and medium term, depending on the appropriate rate of discount
and the pressure of land speculation in the community.
CODES
Construction Codes
Building Codes
Health Codes
Mode of Implementation: Codes (See also Chapters III and IV).
Description—
Three groups of codes have impacts on local environmental quality. Present
codes often integrate all three together, or make some other, equally artificial,
division. Codes, however, have three basic environmental functions:
o They control the impacts of construction;
o They influence the design of buildings; and
o They insure the building is maintained and
continues to meet standards.
All of these functions are included in present codes, and the best place to
include modifications will vary from community to community.
329
-------
Construction Codes (11) cover control of the short-term but often large
impacts of construction, such as erosion of the bare sitef equipment noise,
and sanitation for the workers.
Building Codes (12) are concerned only with building design and materials.
Plumbing codes and insulation standards are important examples.
Health Codes (13) are the third stage. New buildings can be designed to
meet standards," but too little upkeep can lead to major environmental problems,
particularly for solid wastes and heating. As standards change, previously
good designs may become unacceptable (for example, small apartment incinerators).
The health codes are used to ensure that standards are met, so that the building
remains fit for use.
All three parts of the problem are important. Construction impacts are
temporary, but "temporary" soil loss in developing areas can lead to sedimenta-
tion, poor drainage, and expensive dredging or other repairs. Without good de-
sign caused by building codes, builders may use cheaper methods, resulting in
buildings with low first cost but large environmental impacts and even hazards
to residents. However, the codes must also provide for continuing use and in-
spections to insure that the garbage is collected, the windows are not broken,
the heat works, etc. Protecting the residents and the environment in this way
• is the role of health codes.
Legal Issues—The community has the right to protect its inhabitants. It
has the right to set standards for buildings to do this, as long as the stan-
dards are based on good reasons. Construction codes look at the impacts of con-
struction on the community: noise, traffic congestion, soil loss, and other
problems. Since being able to build at all is a privilege, controls on construc-
tion are a reasonable use of the police power. Building and health codes are
similarly important to protect the public, and building and occupancy permits
can be revoked if necessary by the community.
Administrative Issues—Code inspection can either be regular or on complaint.
In most areas, design and construction are inspected for each building, and health
code 'inspections are made when people complain. A few communities are requiring
regular health code inspections, with a new Certificate of Occupancy at each
.change of title or occupant.* Some special hazards are regularly inspected for
maintenance, such as elevators; others, such as package sewage treatment plants,
should be. The problem with inspecting only on complaints is that people may
accept below-standard buildings without complaining, particularly if the impacts
are off-site.
*For example, Pasadena, California, requires occupancy inspection.
330
-------
REGULATIONS/ORDINANCES
Flood Control Ordinances
Mode of Implementation: Amendment or supplement to existing Subdivision
Ordinances, Zoning Ordinances, Building Ordinances, and related ordinances
related to drainage.
Description—
Flood control is enacted to minimize or prevent damage to property and to
protect public safety. Whereas the other programs examined here are enacted
to protect the environment from development, flood control tries the reverse—
protecting development from the environment. It is a central concern of
local environmental management in areas vulnerable to flood.
Recently, under regulation promulgated by ,the Department of Housing and
Urban Development under the National Flood Insurance Act, local flood control
planning is becoming increasingly crucial to community development.* Communities
must demonstrate that they have undertaken comprehensive flood plain management
programs in order to be eligible for federally assisted flood insurance, and
federally insured banks will not be permitted to issue mortgage money to housing
built in flood hazard areas. The impact of this program nationwide will be to
prohibit intensive urbanization of flood plains and the amortize existing in-
compatible uses wherever possible.
Section 136A of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1974
contains the relevant clauses, in amendment to Title XIII of the
HUD Act of 1968, the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968:
"Notice of Flood Hazards"
"Sec. 1364. Each Federal instrumentality responsible for
the supervision, approval, regulation, or insuring of banks,
savings and loan associations, or similar institutions shall
by regulation require such institutions, as a condition of
making, increasing, extending, or renewing (after the expira-
tion of thirty days following the date of the enactment of
this section) any loan secured by improved real estate or
a mobile home located or to be located in an area that has
been identified by the Secretary under this title or Public
Law 93-234 as an area having special flood hazards, to notify
the purchaser or lessee (or obtain satisfactory assurances
that the seller or lessor has notified the purchaser or
lessee) of such special flood hazards, in writing, a
reasonable period in advance of the signing of the purchase
agreement, lease, or other documents involved" in the
transaction."
331
-------
Flood plains are attractive building sites. They are flat, have fertile
soil, and are easy to build on. In previous years, extensive flood control dams
and levees have often been build to permit flood plain development or protect
unwisely planned projects from further flood damage. Not only are such projects
expensive, they are oft.en injurious to local hydrology, reducing downstream flow,
increasing upstream sedimentation, and disrupting river basin ecologies in both
directions.
Current practices for flood control commonly follow a two-prong approach
of (1) limiting runoff from development as much as possible to the pre-development,
"natural" level, and (2) preventing incompatible land uses from being established
in the flood plain.
The first approach has been covered under Runoff Control Ordinances, Sedi-
mentation and Erosion Control Ordinances, and Building Codes. This section will
concentrate on defining and controlling compatible land uses within the flood
plain.
Since the HUD Act refers to the 100 year flood plain, flood plain planning
is now oriented to that future. The one-hundred year flood plain is that area
which will be inundated, on average, no more than once every one-hundred years—
*'continued)
"(e) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any community
that has made adequate progress, acceptable to the Secretary,
on the construction of a flood protection system which will
afford flood protection for the one-hundred year frequency
flood as determined by the Secretary, shall be eligible
for flood insurance under this title (if and to the extent
it is eligible for such insurance under the other provisions
of this title) at premium rates not exceeding those which
would be applicable under this section if such flood protection
system had been completed. The Secretary shall find that
adequate progress on the construction of a flood protection
system as required herein has been only if (1) 100 percent
of the project cost of the system has been authorized,
(2) at least 60 percent of the project cost of the system
has been appropriated, (3) at least 50 percent of the
project cost of the system has been expended, and (4) the
system is at least 5O percent completed."
Regulations have concentrated attention on controlling flood plain
land use rather than on dams and other capital projects.
AS of July 1, 1975, communities in designated flood hazard areas
which do not have a flood plain management plan are not eligible
for any form of federally-related financial assistance for
acquisition or construction of structures in a flood hazard area.
332
-------
i.e., that area which faces a one percent chance of flooding every year. The
shape of this flood plain depends on climate, topography, soils, local hydrol-
ogy, and existing and future urbanization. New development which increases
runoff from its site over pre-existing levels tends to increase the size of
the flood plain.
The following land uses may be permitted in a flood plain without a permit
if there is no conflict with other environmental considerations,*
o Agriculture
o Loading areas., parking lots, airport runways, and
other non-structural industrial/commercial uses
o Private and public recreation
o Gardens, play areas, and other non-structural residential
uses
Other uses should be contingent on a permit, and may include:
o Uses or structures accessory to other permitted uses
o Transient amusement enterprises
o • Drive-in theatres, signs, billboards
o Sand, gravel extraction
o Marinas, water-related uses
o Streets, right-of-ways, bridges, overhead lines
o Storage yards
o Structures supported on stilts above the 100-year flood
level
o Dams and drainage structures
Legal Issues—Inverse condemnation has been the main legal obstacle to flood
plain management; courts may rule than an ordinance is so severe as to deprive
*Agricultural uses ought to be carefully evaluated to see if
they might tend to eutrophy streams through increased sedimentation
and additions of chemical nutrients.
333
-------
a property owner of any reasonable beneficial use of his land, and find it,
therefore, unconstitutional. However, courts do rule quite closely on the facts
of each case where taking is indeed found. In general, flood plain zoning has
been sustained, courts finding that the protection of the public health, safety,
and welfare take precedence over the burden to individual landowners.*
Administrative Issues—Towns are now virtually compelled to set up flood
plain protection programs. Administrative issues of the new program are not
yet clear.
Sa n i t a t i on Ordinance
Mode of Implementation; Separate Municipal Ordinance; some state pre-
emption .
See Chapter VII.
Tree Ordinance
Mode_of Implementation; Separate Municipal Ordinance, also may be incor-
porated into zoning, subdivision controls.
Description--
Tree protection and landscaping ordinances are enacted as separate ordin-
ances, and may apply to all trees within a municipality. Usually, however, they
are designed to protect and- care for mature trees of native species along public
rights-of-way and on private property. They may also protect particular valua-
ble specimens of trees for historical or aesthetic reasons. They do not pro-
tect forest lands per se as sensitive areas.**
Generally, tree or landscape ordinances prohibit the cutting of any tree
over a certain size, usually abou4 4" diameter at breast height, without a special
*Cit.y of Welch v. Mitchell, 121 SE 165 (W.Va. 1924);
American Land Co. v. Keene, 41 F2d 484,(1st Cir., 1930); McCarthy v.
City of Manhattan Beach, 41 Cal. 2nd 879, 264 P2d 932 (1953);
Vartelas v. Water Resources Commission, 146 Conn. 650, 153 A2d 822
(1959); Speiglfc v. Beach Haven, 46 N.J.479, 218 A2d 129 (1966);
Turnpike Realty Co. v. Town of Dedham 284 N.E. 2d 891 (1972).
** Tree and landscaping ordinances do not protect the important
understory of shrubs, herbs, and tree litter and debris which are
important in forest ecology and help moderate runoff and erosion.
Such concern may be written into an ordinance such as it has been
in Hayward, California, (see Addendum I), but this may increase
administration costs.
334
-------
permit. Some ordinances specify different minimum diameters according to whether
the tree is a hardwood, softwood, or decorative species. Some ordinances require
the planting of trees where deemed necessary to maintain a specified number of
trees per acre, prior to subdivision approval.
Legal Issues—No one ever challenges tree ordinances, yet their legal
standing may, in fact, be questionable: they infringe on property rights for
what is basically an aesthetic purpose. Environmentally related statements of
purpose are a recent innovation, and are often tenuous in fact, but do tend to
tie the ordinance to factors with a direct effect on the health, safety, and
welfare of community residents. This is probably unnecessary from a practical
standpoint, since the ordinance's effect of neighborhood property values makes
them popular anyway.
Alternative implementation of tree protection is possible through zoning
ordinances and subdivision regulations.
Administrative Issues—Administration of special tree protection ordinances
may be discharged by a building inspector, a parks division, a city engineering
department, a planning board, a town forester, an environmental administrator, etc.
Burning Ordinance
Mode of Implementation; Either as part of air pollution regulation, as a
separate ordinance, or with fire codes on sanitary ordinances. Usually involves
a permit requirement from the fire department.
See Chapter VII.
Parking Ordinances
Mode of Implementation; Separate ordinance for health and safety.
See Chapter II.
Noise Control Ordinances
Mode of Implementation; Separate Municipal Ordinance
See Chapter VI.
Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance
Mode of Implementation; Separate Municipal Ordinance (also may be imple-
mented through amendments to zoning or subdivision ordinances).
See Chapter V.
335
-------
Runoff Control Ordinances/Regulations
Mode of Implementation: Separate Municipal Ordinance (may also be incor-
porated into subdivision or zoning ordinances)
See Chapter V.
336
-------
REFERENCES
American Standards Association. National Plumbing Code. New York:
The American Society of Mechanical Engineers and the American
Public Health Association, 1955.
Bryant, William R. "Adapting the Agricultural District Concept to
Virginia." In Land-Use Issues. Proceedings of a Conference,
Extension Division, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University, and Virginia Water Resources Research Center,
November, 1974.
Burchell, Robert (ed.). Frontiers of Planned Unit Development, A
Synthesis of Expert Opinion. New Brunswick, New Jersey: The
Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University, 1973.
Callies. "Commonwealth of Puerto Rico v. Rosso: Landbanking and the
Expanded Concept of Public Use." 2 Prospectus 199, (1968).
Carter, et al. Environmental Management and Local Government. Prepared
for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1973.
Crawford, F. "Model Ordinance for Effluent Allotment." Chester
County, Pennsylvania.
Flechner, Harvey L. Land Banking in the Control of Urban Development
New York: Praeger Publishers, 1973. ~~~
Iowa Water Resources Research Institute. Flood Plain Management
and Implementation Strategies for FPM~Programs. Iowa State
University, December 1974.
Kaiser, et al. Promoting Environmental Quality through Urban Planning
and Controls. Prepared for the Environmental Protection Agency.
North Carolina University, June 1973.
Kamm, Sylvan. "The Realities of Large Scale Public Land Banking."
In Id., Volume III: p. 86.
Kulmala, Katherine. Cluster Zoning in Massachusetts. Cambridge, MA:
The Planning Services Group, 1970.
Lewin' S> Law and the Municipal Ecology. Washington, D.C.: NIMLO,
•L^y * .L •
Massachusetts Association of Conservation Commissions. Massachusetts
Conservation Commission Handbook. Boston, MA, 1973"!
337
-------
Nichols, P. The Law of Eminent Domain. 2nd ed., 1917. Discussed in
Fishman. "Public Land Banking: Examination of a Management
Technique." In Management and Control of Growth. The Urban
Institute, 1975.
Puerto Rico v. Rosso. Civil No. E-63-1652 (P.R. Super. Ct. 1964).
Scott, Randall (ed.). Management and Control of Growth. Washington,
D.C.: The Urban Land Institute, 1975.
Shoup, Donald, and Ruth P. Mack. Advance Land Acquisition by Local
Governments. Washington, D.C.: O.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development, 1968,
Strong, A. and John Keene. Environmental Protection through Public and
Private Development Controls. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. University of Pennsylvania, May 1973.'
Thurow, C.; W. Toner; and D. Erley. Performance Controls for Sensitive
Lands: A Practical Guide for Local Administrators. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington Environmental
Research Center, March 1975.
Urban Systems Research & Engineering, Inc. Buy Now, Fly Later: Land-
banking for Airport Development. Prepared for the Federal Aviation
Administration, Department of Transportation. Washington, D.C.,
1975.
330
-------
APPENDIX 1-2
The table on the following page is a notated version of Table 1, which
appears in Chapter I of the report. The shaded areas have been assigned
code numbers that refer to the content of this section of the Appendix.
Where a direct relationship exists between a particular legal tool and some
factor of enviornmental quality, a code heading is present. Where an indirect
or conditional relationship exists between the two, the code appears in
parentheses. Discussions of particular interactions are given under the
various code headings, but each entry also has a descriptive title. For
example, "A.I THE AIR POLLUTION IMPACTS OF GENERAL DISTRICT ZONING" discusses
those interactions between legal tool A, general district zoning, and enriron-
mental factor 1, air pollution.
A.I THE AIR POLLUTION IMPACTS OF GENERAL DISTRICT ZONING
The use of large lot zoning, agricultural zoning, and various holding
zones to preserve open space and lower overall community densities will tend
to reduce the density of area source emissions, which are primarily due to
household space heating. This will lead to improved ambient air quality (pri-
marily lower levels of sulfur dioxide and suspended particulates) in regions
where background concentrations of pollutants are low, due to the dispersion
•of sources.
By lowering zoning densities, a smaller number of housing units are
emitting pollutants within a given district. If, however, the same total
number of units is to be built, and the choice is between spreading them
out in large lot zones or clustering them in higher density areas with open
space between, the impact on air quality is less clear (see A.4). If zoning
densities are increased and total population within the town is also increased
over the levels associated with low density, large lot zoning, then emissions
due to space hearing will increase and ambient air quality will deteriorate.
The interaction of housing densities and automobile emissions (carbon
monoxide, hydro-carbons and oxides of nitrogen) must also be considered.
While spacing housing out will tend to disperse air pollutants emitted by
furnaces, more automobile travel is necessary. However, in the densities
associated with suburbs today, it is likely that the low density option will
yield higher ambient air quality locally than higher densities—automobile
emissions themselves may become sufficiently spread out to yield net ambient
quality improvements overall.
References:
—Real Estate Research Corporation. The Costs of
Sprawl. prepared for CEQ, EPA, HUD, April 1974.
—Hagevik, G.; D. Mandelker; & R. Brail. The Con-
tribution of Urban Planning to Air Quality.
EPA, February 1974.
339
-------
Table- A-l: Applications of the Police Power to Improve Environmental Quality
AIR A
POLLUTION Non-Point
B
Mobile
C
Point
WATER D
QUALITY Non- Point
E
Point
F
Groundwater
WATER G
QUANTITY Flooding
H
Supply
SOLID WASTE I
NOISE J
OTHER Toxic K
Substances
Energy : ' L
Energy : M
Buildings
Soils N
ZONING
General
Districts
Lot Specs
1
A.I
B.I
(B.4)
D.I
(F.I)
F.I
(D.I)
(D.I)
(1.4)
(J.19)
M.I
(B 1)
_\£.__'.__-
Sensitive
Areas
2
A. 2
B.2
(B.17)
D.2
(D 21, D. 22)
(H.2)
G.2
H.2
(J.19)
Performance
Zones
3
E.3
G.3)
G.3
Flexible
Zoning
4
A. 4
B.4
(G.4)
•
1.4
(J.19)
L.4
M.4
SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
Water s
Sewer
5
A. 5
D.5
E.5
F.5
(G.3)
H.5
K.5
Stomwater
Management
6
D.6
(D.20_,D.2D
E.6
F.6
(F.21)
G.6
Streets
• 7
B.7
(B.4)
EIS
8
A. 8
(A. 8)
(A. 8)
(A. 8)
(A. 8)
(A. 8)
(A. 8)
(A. 8)
(A. 8)
(A. 8)
(A. 8)
(A. 8)
(A. 8)
(A. 8)
ACQUISITION
(Eminent Domain)
Less-than
Fee
9
(A. 2)
(D.2) t
(G.2)
(G.2)
(H.2)
(J.19)
Land-
Banking
10
(A. 2)
(D.2)
(G.2)
(G.2)
H.10
(H.2)
1. 10
(continued on following page)
-------
Table A-l (continued)
AIR A
POLLUTION Non-point
B
Mobile
C
Point
WATER D
QUALITY Non-Point
B
Point
P
Groundwater
WATER G
QUANTITY Flooding
H
Supply
SOLID- WASTE I
NOISE J
OTHER Toxic K
Substances
Energy: L
Transportation
Energy: M
Buildings
Soils N
'Construc-
tion
11
1. 11
Section VI
N.ll
•CODES
Building
12
A. 12
(D.5)
(D.5)
G.12 .
(G.21)
1.12
Section VI
K.12
(A. 12)
(H.12)
Health
13
(E.13)
Section VI
Section VI
(K.12)
M.13
Flood
14
fD.21)
(F.6)
G.14
(G.21,K.2)
(H.6)
K.14
Sanitation
15
(P. 15)
Section VII
J.15
K.15
Tree
16
B.16
(A. 3)
G.16
J.16
REGUIATI
Burning
17
A. 17
(1.4)
ONS/ORDINANC
Parking
18
(B.1B)
D.18
(H.21)
Section II
Section II
ES
Noise
19
J.19
Erosion/
Sedimenta-
tion
20
-------
A. 2 THE AIR POLLUTION IMPACTS OF SENSITIVE AREA ZONING
The protection of sensitive areas provides open space which can theo-
retically serve a community as air pollution buffers and sinks. The distance
which such buffer zones place between a source and a receptor serves to dis-
perse pollutants. The intervening vegetation of a buffer zone can serve as
a filtering device, and to a limited and as vet an unquantified
extent, it can lower local concentrations of pollutants by absorption. Trees
remove some aerosol (particulate) and gaseous pollutants through their
leaves, and coniferous species are found to be the most efficient in doing so.
Air pollutants also injure vegetation in high concentrations, a factor which
mitigates total effectiveness of a buffer. Probably the most effective
pollution reduction by trees is of ozone, dust particulates, and solid and
gaseous radioactive substances. Taking the dispersion and absorption effects
together, buffer zones such as protected woodlands and wetlands can improve
ambient air quality in comparatively low density areas (suburbs, rural
areas), but in those cases, total pollution concentrations are fairly low
anyway.
Site-specific conditions of various geographic locations and pollution
problems makes specific recommendations on the use of buffer zones impossible,
however.
References:
—Hagevik, et al. op.cit.
—Thurow, D. ; W. Toner; K D. Erley. Performance
Controls for Sensitive Lands. Washington
Environmental Research Center, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., March 1975.
A. 4 THE AIR POLLUTION IMPACTS OF FLEXIBLE ZONING MEASURES
The clustering of single family units in subdivisions probably has no
effect on ambient air quality as it is affected by residential space heating
requirements. The immediate concentrations of air pollutants would theo-
retically be marginally higher in the housing area itself, since they would
be located on smaller lots and be closer together, bur the clustering allows
undeveloped open space to serve as a buffer between subdivisions, tending to
disperse air pollutants. Gross densities and gross emissions are unaffected.
Planned unit developments, with their permitted mix of housing units,
may tend to result in lower area emission of pollutants associated with space
hearing. Shared walls between units result in lower heating requirements,
and consequently lower emissions.
References:
—Hagevik, et al. op.cit.
—Real Estate Research Corporation, op.cit.
342
-------
A.5 THE AIR POLLUTION IMPACTS OF WATER AND SEWER REGULATIONS
Septic Tanks: Malfunctioning septic tanks can produce obnoxious odors
throughout a community, and are a common cause for complaints in areas where
on-site disposal has been installed in inappropriate places (e.g., in un-
suitable soils). Where the local water table is high, septic tank
effluent may not percolate into the soil but may saturate the land or fill
up ditches by the sides of roads.
Package Plants: Package plants, too, may cause odors when they are not
properly operated.
Sewer Systems: Conventional sewer systems create no odors unless they
clog and backup, or break. Combined sanitary/storm sewer systems (common in
older cities) may create odor problems.
Indirect Land Use Effects; Since the use of septic tanks requires lower
density development than is usual in sewered areas, it follows that for a
given level of population, an area served by septic tanks may rely more heavily
on the use of automobiles—opportunities for transit are fewer, and average
automobile trip length is higher. It would appear to follow that with in-
creased auto use would come higher emissions and lower ambient air quality,
but the latter cannot be demonstrated conclusively. On the one hand, air quality
may well deteriorate in a central city area surrounded by low density
suburbs: the congestion of cars commuting daily to the city would be greater
than if extensive transit facilities supported a large fraction of the commut-
ing population. On the other hand, ambient air quality in suburban areas is
consistently higher as density declines: the marginal increase in vehicle
miles traveled per capita is more than outweighed by the marginal increase
in spatial volume available to disperse pollutants.
A-P.8 THE IMPACT OF SUBDIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS ON
GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Local environmental impact statements can contain data on the impacts of
a subdivision on all environmental parameters of concern here. The statement
usually is directed at what impacts the project will have on the physical
conditions of the site, including amounts and varieties of vegetation, general
topography, unusual geologic, scenic and historical features, trails and open
space links, and indigenous wildlife. Data may be required on the location
of local sensitive areas, especially wetlands, and on what measures are to
be taken to protect these, what techniques will be used during construction
to control erosion and sedimentation, what sewage disposal techniques will be
used, what impacts on subsurface conditions are expected, and what impact
the project will have on town services, including traffic flow, fire and
police protection, educational facilities, etc. Information on the popula-
tion characteristics of the residents of the subdivision may also be included.
If the planning board finds that the developer has not adequately con-
sidered the environmental impacts of his plan, and does not amend his project
343
-------
accordingly, subdivision permits may be withheld. Thus, the local EIS may
be a powerful instrument for maintaining environmental quality while allowing
growth to occur.
References:
—See Section VIII, Local Environmental Impact Review.
A.12 THE AIR POLLUTION AND ENERGY IMPACTS OF BUILDING CODES
Standards for design of large buildings, for Heating, Ventilating and
Air Conditioning Systems (HVAC), and particularly for insulation can have
a major direct impact on the heat loss from buildings, and thus on the total
energy use and indirectly on the air pollution from space heating and cooling.
Higher investment costs in materials for insulation are quickly repaid in
savings in energy use, but the incentive for developers is to reduce invest-
ments and increase operating and maintenance costs, since they are not involved
in that part of the process. Thus, there is a need for standards to aid
developers in achieving society's goals. Ordinances can require certain thick-
nesses of insulation, and can also require that heat losses not be more than
a specified amount per square foot of floor area, as part of the building
codes. It is also possible to list acceptable materials and thicknesses, but
performance standards are more suitable, especially since there are manuals
which given the performance of available materials and which are updated more
often than would be reasonable for a standard. Insulation and seals can
also reduce interior air pollution concentrations far below exterior levels.
Problems
Legal: Finding a suitable level of insulation or heat loss or window-
door design standard for the area.
Administrative: Including the insulation inspection in already over-
worked code inspectors' workloads.
Cost: Costs of inspection, explaining the standards to builders. Costs
to the industry of more complex designs.
References:
—Technology and Economics. An Overview and Critical
Evaluation of the Relationship between Land Use
ancf Energy Conservation^ Federal Energy Administra-
tion, March 1976.
—Abt Associates. rn__the Bank or up the Chimney.
HUD, 1975.
344
-------
A.17 THE AIR POLLUTION IMPACTS OF BURNING ORDINANCES
Burning ordinances arc an established way of controlling smoke and parti-
culate air pollution front individual burning of wastes. They also aim at
odor control and reduction of forest fire hazards.
A.20 THE IMPACT OF SEDIMENTATION AND EROSION CONTROL ORDINANCES ON
AIR QUALITY
In arid areas, wind erosion contributes large amounts of particulate
air pollution. This reached an extreme during the dust bowl years of the
1930s, and efforts to improve agricultural practices to reduce wind erosion
have been successfully conducted since then by the Soil Conservation Service.
The incorporation of standards for mulching of lands during construction
periods into sedimentation and erosion control ordinances is a standard
practice to prevent water erosio-n of soils; it may also be used to prevent
wind erosion where this is a major concern. Other regulatory practices
would include requirements for the covering of open piles of grains and
other agricultural products, industrial chemicals, and highway deicing
salts; requirements of windbreaks around areas of high wind erosion potential;
and other appropriate restrictions on construction.
References:
—Soil Conservation Service. Windbreaks for
Conservation. U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Agricultural Information Bulletin 339, Washington,
D.C.
—Agricultural Research Service. Mulches for
Wind and Water Erosion Control. U.S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture, ARS 41-84, Washington,
D.C., July 1963.
B.I THE IMPACT OF GENERAL DISTRICT ZONING ON MOBILE SOURCE
AIR POLLUTION
The use of large lot zoning or various holding zones may result in greater
dispersion of development over a community. Vehicle miles travelled per
housing unit thus will increase, resulting in increased emission per housing
unit of air pollutants associated with automobiles—carbon monoxide, hydro-
carbons, particulates (from cars with catalytic converters), and oxides of
nitrogen. The dispersion of development, however will result in a dispersion
and possibly increased absorption of the automotive pollutants; general com-
munity ambient air quality may be no worse, and possibly better, than if the
sane population is concentrated in a smaller area, assuming present trans-
portation technology (see B.4). Since the total population of a community
zoned in large-lot districts is likely to be lower than if smaller lots are
permitted, the total emission density (total emissions divided by total area)
in the large-lot areas will be substantially lower than in higher density
areas.
-------
Though auto emissions tend to be greater for the longer trips associated
with low density areas, the relationship of emissions to trip length is com-
plex. Cars pollute most when they are cold (after starting) and when they are
driven slowly and must accelerate repeatedly, as in areas of heavy traffic.
This tends to reduce the difference between emissions generated by longer
trips in low density areas and shorter trips in high density areas. Both
trips involve the same start-up pollution, which is a major part of the
pollutant emissions of a local trip, and cars operating in congested higher
density areas give off more pollutants per mile.
References:
—Real Estate Research Corporation, op.cit. (hereafter REC)
—Hagevik, et al. op.cit.'
B.2 THE IMPACT OF SENSITIVE AREA ZONING Oil MOBILE SOURCE
AIR POLLUTION
Buffer zones are useful for the dispersion of air pollutants from roads
and highways, but roads and highways are incompatible with the protection of
sensitive areas. Tree ordinances are more appropriate means to establish air
pollution buffering on major local roads (see B.18).
References:
—Hagevik, et al. op.cit.
—Briggs, T.; M. Overstreet; A. Kothari; &
T. Devitt. Air Pollution Considerations in
Residential Planning. Prepared for EPA and
HUD, July 1974.
B.4 THE IMPACTS OF FLEX-IBLE ZONING ON MOBILE SOURCE AIR POLLUTION
Cluster subdivisions and PUDs tend to concentrate housing units together,
and siting can be done in such a way as to reduce the average auto local trip
between home and frequently used local facilities, such as shopping centers.
This tends to reduce the total vehicle miles traveled in such communities,*
with consequent reductions in total automotive emissions. The reduction in
vehicle miles traveled is probably not large, however, and when high cold-
start emissions factors are considered, as well as the "hot-spot' problems
of the increased local density of traffic in cluster developments or PUDs, the
savings are probably negligible.
*It is not know how significant such reductions are. The provision of
shopping opportunities in PUDs is supposed to enable residents to avoid long
shopping trips, but some studies suggest that residents still prefer to shop
at major regional shopping centers where prices are lower and merchandise
selection wider.
346
-------
The real benefit of planning for cluster developments and PUDs does not
lie in present emissions reductions or ambient air quality improvements, which
are probably small, but in the increased compatibility of such developments
with future forms of transportation. Dispersed sprawl development is almost
prohibitively expensive to serve by public transportation, but increased
clustering of housing is much more compatible with dial-a-bus, conventional
bus, rapid rail, commuter rail, and other forms of public transportation which
are likely to become more popular in the future.
References:
—RERC. op.cit.
—Christensen, Kathleen. "Social Preferences and
Urban Form." The Urban Institute, Washington,
D.C., 1975.
B.7 THE IMPACTS OF STREET DESIGN ON MOBILE SOURCE AIR POLLUTION
The design of streets within subdivisions may affect localized auto-
exhaust pollution levels. Cluster subdivisions offer an opportunity to
shorten street lengths with a view to reducing average auto trip distances
and to making housing patterns more compatible with changing transportation
technology (see B.4).
References:
—Hagevik, et a1. op.cit.
B.16 THE IMPACT OF TREE 'ORDINANCES ON MOBILE SOURCE AIR POLLUTION
Trees along the sides of major roads may serve as a buffer for some
air pollutants, but their function is minimal. Some ordinances allege the
air pollution benefits of tree ordinances in their statements of purposes,
but insofar as they accrue to all, such benefits would require very large
buffers (see D.2, WOODLANDS PROTECTION ORDINANCES). Statements of purpose
alleging the oxygen generation capacity.of trees as a benefit to the
environment are also found, but in realistic terns, such arguments in favor
of tree ordinances are unfounded.
References:
—Thurow, et al. op.cit.
—Briggs, et al. op.cit.
D.I THE IMPACT OF GENERAL DISTRICT ZONING ON NON-POINT
SOURCE WATER POLLUTION
Large-lot (or "open-space") zoning results in less sedimentation and
erosion than does higher density zoning, but probably more than flexible
zoning alternatives, on a unit by unit basis. Large-lot zoning with minimum
347
-------
lot sizes of one acre and above usually implies upper income housing only,
except in rural areas. Homes are likely to be built in scattered locations
across a district, according to the location of ,the most attractive sites.
It may be difficult to regulate the erosion and sedimentation control practices
of such piece-by-piece development. Where development does in fact fill in
large lot zoning districts completely, one may expect that the development
will have more of an impact on local stream water quality than will the same
number of units in flexible zoning configurations (clusters or PUDs), since
little or no area is left in its natural state, unlandscaped and undeveloped.
Lawns, for instance, are less permeable than land in its natural state, and
will generate more runoff and consequently more erosion and sedimentation
in streams. Areas which are naturally sensitive to erosion (hillsides,
stripped woodlands, etc.) are often the first sites developed, because of
their aesthetic qualities, with serious adverse impacts on erosion and
sedimentation problems.
Large-lot zoning-is less effective than flexible zoning alternatives
in reducing runoff, and maintaining groundwater recharge,'holding the
number of units constant. It is superior to high density zoning con-
figurations under conventional development practices, however, since it
results in fewer units built )lower overall community densities). This
raises controversial legal and social issues over community population
ceilings which are beyond the scope of this report.
References:
—RERC. op.cit.
—Tourbier J. Water Resources Protection Measures
in Land Development. Delaware University.
Prepared for Office of Water Resources Research,
April 1974.
D.2 -THE IMPACT OF SENSITIVE AREA ZONING ON NON-POINT SOURCE
WATER POLLUTION
Wetlands Conservancy Districts:
Wetlands trap and store nutrients from upland runoff, and serve as a
settling basin for silt from upland erosion. Removing wetlands by filling
will thus immediately affect adjacent waters by increasing the flow of
nutrient laden runoff into them. The turbidity of adjacent streams will also
rise, as sediments from runoff no longer filter out by the wetland. The
dense plant communities of wetlands also slow the speed of upland runoff,
thus decreasing its erosion potential.
Wetlands are extremely susceptible to eutrophication from urbanization.
Increased sediment loads from adjacent lands can seriously disrupt the natural
ecology of wetlands, and exhaust their capabilities for acting as natural
filters and sediment traps within a few years. Thus, wetlands protection
should be coupled with measures to control runoff, sedimentation and erosion.
(see below; see also D.21 and D.22)
348
-------
Hillside or Steep Slope Development Regulation
Hillside development regulations decrease runoff and erosion by protect-
ing the underlying geology,of slopes through grading restrictions and by
maintaining the vegetative cover of slopes through restrictions on clearning
and stripping. With these restrictions, development of hillsides can greatly
increase sediment loads in streams, and stream eutrophication can become a
serious water quality problem.
Steep slope protection is especially important in coordination with
wetlands conservation. Development on slopes can so increase the nutrient
and sediment load reaching local wetlands that the wetlands themselves
will eutrophy within a few years.
Streambank Protection
The establishment of buffer zones along streambanks protects streamwater
quality through avoidance of thermal pollution and excessive sedimentation.
Thermal pollution can be a problem when the roads and other impervious
surfaces associated with development increase the maximum and decrease the
minimum temperatures of water runoff reaching the streams. Natural ground-
covers next to streams do not react as quickly to ambient variations in
temperatures, and stabilize stream temperatures throughout the year.
Buffer zones beside streams also limit sedimentation of streams, and,
therefore, reduce stream eutrophication.
Woodlands Protection
Woodlands protection may greatly reduce sedimentation of streams. Forest
soils are highly erodable, and destruction of trees or the forest floor
covering can greatly increase sedimentation from woodland areas.
References:
—Thurow, et al. op.cit.
D.5 THE IMPACT OF WATER AND SEWER REGULATIONS ON NON-POINT
SOURCE WATER POLLUTION
Septic Tanks can be a serious source of water pollution in streams: clogged
seepage fields or malfunctioning or improperly installed systems are at fault.
Septic tank failures do not commonly occur on such a scale as to constitute
chronic non-point source water pollution, except where the land is entirely
unsuitable for their use in the first place: unincorporated areas not sub-
ject to sanitation codes have sometimes been developed with septic tanks
even though water tables are too high or soils insufficiently permeable to
allow them to -function properly. For the most part, however, septic tank
failures are less of a threat to areawide water pollution than they are to
public health locally.
349
-------
Package Plants do not contribute to area source pollution.
Sewers do not contribute to area source pollution unless major breaks
occur. The use of combined sewers, with their automatic overflow mechanisms,
might be considered an exception.
References:
—See Section IV, On-Site Wastewater Management
D.6 THE IMPACT OF SUBDIVISION STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS ON WATER QUALITY
Though rainwater itself is clean, stormwater picks up debris, litter,
chemicals and soil sediments before it enters a stormsewer system. Conven-
tional stormsewer systems have a negative impact on water quality in
receiving streams. The most common problem is combined sewer overflows in
older systems, with consequent bypassing of raw effluent into receiving streams
and possible backup of raw sanitary sewage onto the streets of communities.
This problem occurs when storms of greater than design frequency occur or in
overloaded sections of the city collection system.
A less obvious problem occurs with both combined sewers and separated
systems and is due to chronic underflow rather than occasional overflow.
Since stormsewers are built to handle large storms, they are comparatively
oversized for small ones. Runoff from average storms travels slowly through
the pipes, and much, if not most, of its pollution load may settle out and
remain within the pipes. The runoff from a large storm will scour out the
sediment left from many smaller storms, and discharge it into streams along
with its own pollution load, resulting in occasional massive pollutant
dosages to streams from stormsewer discharge points.
Conventional stormsewer requirements reduce non-point source pollution of
local streams, but do so at the expense of point source pollution downstream.
. References:
—Process Research, Inc. Dorchester Bay Study.
Prepared for the Metropolitan District Commission,
Boston, Massachusetts, 1972.
—U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Water Quality
Management Planning for Urban Runoff. Washington,
D.C., December 1974.
350
-------
D.18 THE IMPACT OF PARKING ORDINANCES ON NON-POINT SOURCE
WATER POLLUTION
Parking ordinances permit more efficient street cleaning and consequently
are a valuable tool for reducing water pollution from urban runoff.
Reference:
—See Section II, Transportation and Parking Management.
D.20 THE IMPACT OF SEDIMENTATION/EROSION CONTROL ORDINANCES ON
NON-POINT SOURCE WATER POLLUTION
A major object of sedimentation and erosion control ordinances is to
protect surface water quality, especially in streams. As higher quantities
of sediment are carried in streams, the sediment's organic content will
deplete stream oxygen, resulting in depletion of fish population and
proliferation of algae.
The increased turbidity of the water will also cut off light to the
deeper waters, killing off many species of plants and fish. The biological
depletion of a sediment choked stream will seriously alter the ecology of
the waterway. High temporary sediment loads, such as those associated with
single large construction projects, may be just as damaging to stream
ecology as chonic lower levels, and possibly more so.
Massive doses of sediment may wipe out major sectors of biological
communities, which may .then require years to recover. Thus, sedimentation
and erosion control measures are valuable to water quality even if they affect
a small number of projects.
Reference:
—See Section V, Stormwater Management.
D.21 THE IMPACT OF RUNOFF CONTROL ORDINANCES ON NON-POINT
SOURCE WATER POLLUTION
Urban runoff pollutes streams both because of the substances it carries
and because of its temperature.
Many pollutants are carried into stormwater, such as street litter, soil,
fertilizers, pesticides, and other toxic substances (especially from local
industrial operations). These may represent BOD (biological oxygen demand)
loadings higher than those of raw sewage.
351
-------
Thermal pollution of streams can also be a major problem. Because im-
pervious surfaces such as paving and roof tops gain and lose heat quickly,
their maximum and minimum temperatures are greater than those of the vegetated
ground surface that they replace. Sheet runoff from these surfaces may,
therefore, alter the annual temperature extremes of streams, with major impacts
on biological communities. Thermal pollution may also be caused indirectly
by widening of the stream channel due to increased peak flows: as banks are
eroded and undermined, trees which shade the stream are removed, causing
stream temperatures to rise.
Reference:
—See Section V, Stormwater Management.
E.3 THE IMPACT OF PERFORMANCE ZONES ON POINT SOURCE WATER POLLUTION
Effluent Allotment Ordinance: Effluent allotment ordinances may place
discharge quality and quantity standards on package plants* which are more
stringent than the standards imposed by federal regulations. This will yield
higher water quality in the controlled streams. The ordinances may also
prohibit any discharge at all to certain streams deemed by the community
to be too fragile to .assimilate any effluent. (See G.3)
References:
—See Section IV, On Site Wastewater Disposal.
E.5 THE IMPACT OF WATER AND SEWER REGULATIONS ON POINT
SOURCE POLLUTION OF STREAMS
Septic Tanks do not have a point source impact on streams.
Package Plants may contribute substantial pollution from their out-
falls (some package plants are designed for use with seepage fields, however)
Although most such plants are designed to operate at so-called secondary
treatment levels (the same standard as applies to most municipal facilities
built today) they seldom approach their design standards in actual field
operations, and may actually be performing negligible treatment, in some
cases. For this reason, they are often prohibited by local ordinances,
or allowed as only interim measures prior to the availability of a con-
ventional municipal sewerage system.
Sewers (and their associated treatment plants) may also have a substan-
tial negative effect on streams below their discharge point. Conventional
plants often operate well below their design efficiency (usually expected
to achieve ninety percent removal of biological oxygen demand). Even when
operating to standard, a conventional plant will degrade a stream to some
352
-------
extent unless it is already so polluted that the stream water is lower
quality than the plant effluent. In addition, the present trend toward
regionalization of sewage treatment is resulting in major single
point plant discharges replacing a multitude of smaller ones. What the im-
pact of such large discharges is on stream water quality and ecology is not
known.
Reference:
—See Section IV, On-Site Wastewatgr Disposal.
E.6 THE IMPACT OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS ON
POINT SOURCE WATER POLLUTION
Conventional Stormsewers: Managing stormwater entirely through con-
ventional stormsewers tends to reduce groundwater recharge, since it removes
substantial amounts of rainfall from the site which under natural conditions
would infiltrate the ground.
Reference:
—See Section V, Stormwater Management.
F.I THE IMPACT OF GENERAL DISTRICT ZONING ON GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Large-lot zoning enables communities with adequate soil percolation to
permit the use of septic tanks for new development, since sufficient land
is available to each unit to dispose of wastes through drainage fields.
This can help maintain groundwater recharge and will not diminish groundwater
quality if the systems a±e properly designed and maintained. The soil acts
as a highly efficient filter and absorbs virtually all wastes. The use of
septic tanks enables communities to limit their sewerage systems to
those areas which cannot dispose of waste on-site, and if the large-lot
zones comprise a sufficiently large sector of the community, this will sub-
stantially reduce point source discharges of streams, with beneficial
effects on stream water quality.
Reference:
—Galamar Builders Corp. v. Tuttle, 29 N.Y.
2d 221, 325 N.Y. 2nd 933 (1971).
353
-------
F.5 THE IMPACT OF WATER AND SEWER REGULATIONS ON
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Septic Tanks may have a degrading effect on local groundwater if the
bottom of the seepage field (below the surface) is too close to the water
table: in that case, bacteria, viruses, chemicals, and nutrients, can
contaminate the groundwater. The definition of "too close" depends on the
permeability of local soils and their filtering capacity, but is interpreted
differently in different states. On the eastern seaboard, septic tanks
may be used if the water table is about five feet below the lowest depth
of the tile field—in the west, some states specify fifty foot separations.
Seepage fields may become less efficient with age, and may become too
clogged to use. For this reason, they are often viewed as an interim
waste management technique in suburban areas, where lot sizes are too
small to permit construction of a replacement seepage field. In rural
areas where lots tend to be large, seepage fields may be replaced and
septic tank systems may be an efficient and environmentally sound method
of sanitary waste disposal over the long tern.
Package Plants which use seepage fields present the same danger to
groundwater supplies as do conventional septic tanks.
Sewer Systems and Municipal Treatment: Conventional sewer systems do
.not contaminate groundwater except under unusual situations of old systems
in areas of high groundwater.
References:
—Patterson, J.W., et^ al_. Septic Tanks and the
Environment. Illinois Institute of Technology,
June 1971. NTIS: PB-204-519.
—See also, Section IV. On-Site Wastewater Disposal.
F.6 THE IMPACT OF SUBDIVISION STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ON GROUNDWATER
QUALITY
Groundwater quality is generally not affected by stormwater management
pograms, except where infiltration of pollutants associated with urban
surfaces occurs in areas where outcroppings of groundwater are near the
surface.
Reference:
—See Section V, Stormwater Management.
354
-------
G.2 THE IMPACT OF SENSITIVE AREA ZONING ON FLOODING
Wetlands Conservancy Districts; Wetlands offer important flood protec-
tion to communities. They are able to stabilize water levels by holding
excess water in peaty soils, and by retarding the speed of flood flows.
The exact ability of wetlands to hold or retard flood waters varies according
to the wetland ecology and the local climate.
Hillside or Steep Slope Development Regulations: The development of
hillside's can influence local flooding problems since it can greatly increase
the volume of runoff from the slope, and reduce the lag time between rainfall
and flood peak. Regulations which maintain vegetative cover restrict both
runoff volume and runoff speed.
Streambank Protection; The creation of buffer zones adjoinina streambanks
acts in two ways to lower flood hazards. First, by reducing development on the
immediate floodplain of the stream, these zones reduce the amount of
property damage a flood can do. Second, by reducing the velocity of runoff
to the streams, the buffers protect the natural configuration of the stream
channel. In some cases, changes in the stream's configuration can increase
the peak flow of the stream during floods, increasing the possibility of
property damage.
Reference:
--Thurow, Gt al. op.cit.
G.3 THE IMPACT OF PERFORMANCE ZONING ON FLOODING
Effluent Allotment Ordinances: Effluent allotment ordinances may regu-
late the volume of discharge into the receiving stream of a package plant,
defined as a fraction of the total stream flow at any time. Some streams,
because of their low and/or variable flow volumes over a year, may be pro-
tected from receiving any effluent at all. These ordinances have only a
marginal effect on community flooding per se, but they do tend to maintain
small streams within their natural channels.
Reference:
—See Section IV, On Site Wastewater Disposal.
G.6 THE IMPACT OF SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS ON FLOODING
Conventional Stormsewer: Stormsewer systems prevent local flooding
within subdivisions, unless the design storm frequency is exceeded—thus,
the tendency is to require capacity to handle larger storms, with possible
negative secondary results in terms of reduced reliance on on-site disposal
of stormwater, and underemphasis of .runoff reduction and other non-structural
methods of flood control.
Flooding problems downstream of a subdivision may be compounded by con-
ventional stormsewering, since flood peaks are accelerated by the efficient
removal of stormwater from large urban areas.
Reference:
—See Section V, Storrowatcr Management.
355
-------
G 12 THE IMPACT OF BUILDING CODES ON FLOODING
Building codes may involve the use of innovative roof designs and gutter-
ing to hold stormwater on buildings for a prolonged period, retarding the
development of flood peaks and reducing their intensity.
Reference:
—Tourbier. op.cit.
G.14 THE IMPACT OF FLOOD CONTROL ORDINANCES ON FLOODING
Runoff Control: (See G.21)
Floodplain Management: Floodplain management controls permissable land
uses in the floodplain, seeking to minimize potential property damage. By
reducing the level of development allowed, not only does floodplain manage-
ment reduce the total value of property vulnerable to floods, it reduces the
total amount of impervious surface in the floodplain. This, in turn, tends
to reduce the maximum flood stage, since it retards flood peaking and allows
greater absorption of water into the ground.
By restricting permissible land uses to non-structural and temporary
commercial uses, floodplain management preserves open space, wildlife habitat,
and recreational opportunities. (See K.2 and G.21)
Legal Issues
The passage of the National Flood Insurance Act has given strength to
controls on new development in the floodplain. The most difficult problem
to address is that of non-conforming uses. Temporary structures, such as
billboards, can be removed after they are amortized, but even then courts
tend to examine the peculiar facts of each case in making their judgements.*
Furthermore, temporary structures are much less of a problem then permanent
ones. Basic policy on floodplain management under the HUD Act is to simply
require insurance of non-conforming uses, and to place at least the following
additional requirements on them:
o The use cannot be expanded in such a way as
to increase it; non-conformity.
o Structural alterations should not exceed a
stated percent of the value of the use.
o If use is discontinued for a certain period,
future use shall be in conformance with the
ordinance.
o If more than fifty percent of the-structure
is destroyed by flood, it shall be removed
or reconstructed in confornance to the ordinance.
*Minnesota's statute requiring amortization of billboards over a four year
period was challenged in Khicker v. State of Minnesota, 197 N.W. 2d 434 (1972).
The plaintiff won the right to a full hearing on the facts, despite the clear
requirement for billboard removal after amortization.
35G
-------
Administrative Issues
The mapping of 100-year flood contours may be a major problem. Technical
assistance is available through the Soil Conservation Service, the Army
Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. Geological Survey. The extent of alluvial
deposits can be used as an approximation of the plain. Maps indicating peak
flows may be useful but are likely to exceed the 100-year flood; existing
flood plain maps are often seriously defective for site planning purposes.
The Federal Insurance Administration is proposing to distinguish
"floodmaps" and "flood-fringe" areas within the 100-year floodplain. Once
federally supported studies are issued to communities with this information,
a local mapping of this distinction would have to amend the simpler 100-
year floodplain definition recommended above. In addition, the permit pro-
cedure for allowing compatible uses would be amended to broaden possible
uses in the flood fringe, where velocity of the flood water is slow, pro-
vided proper protection is provided.*
References:
—Debo, N. Survey and Analysis of Urban Drainage
Ordinances and Recommended Model Ordinance.
Prepared for the Office of Water Research and
Technology, February 1975. NTIS: PB-240-817.
—Iowa Water Resources Research Institute. Flood
Plain Management and Implementation Strategies
FPM Programs. Iowa State University, December
1974.
—Tourbier and Westmacott. Water Resources Pro-
tection Measures in Land Development. Prepared
for the Office of Water Research and Technology,
April 1974.
—Robinson, M. Flood Control in Community Planning.
Prepared for the Office of Water Research and
Technology, June 1972.
—See also, Section V, Stormwater Management, and
Section VIII, Subdivision Ordinances for
Local Environmental Review.
*This protection might include permanent landfills, elevation of structures,
and structural floodproofing such as watertight construction, reinforcement,
added mass to resist flotation, mechanical pumping, and sanitary and
stormsewer protection valves.
357
-------
G.16 THE IMPACT OF TREE ORDINANCES ON FLOOD CONTROL
Insofar as they tend to retard runoff, trees protected by these ordinances
may have a limited positive impact on flood control, but it is certainly a
marginal one.
Reference:
—Thurow, et al. op.cit.
G.20 THE IMPACT OF EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS ON FLOODING
As sediment levels rise in streams, some begin to settle out: heavier
particles (such as gravels and sands) are deposited first, and fines (clays,
silts, fine sand) later. This raises the bottom of the stream, and increased
flood levels. In some cases, such alterations of the stream bed may cause
changes in the stream channel itself, in the source of which additional
erosion and sedimentation will occur from streambanks.
Reference:
—Thurow, et al. op.cit.
G.21 -THE IMPACT OF RUNOFF CONTROL ORDINANCES ON FLOODING
Runoff from developed areas is greatly in excess of that for natural
areas. A study in Nassau County, New York, -showed that the mean annual flood
may be from 1.1 to 4.6 times greater under conditions of urbanization under
different intensities.
Rainwater falling on the ground is redistributed in four ways. Part of
it infiltrates the ground and recharges deep groundwater formations. Another
faction achieves only shallow infiltration and travels slowly across the land,
eventually seeping into streams, lakes, or the ocean. A substantial amount
(usu'ally 30-40%) evaporates directly into the atmosphere again. The remainder
travels across the surface rapidly in the form of runoff.
Development lowers the average permeability of the land surface, alter-
ing the original balance between evapotranspiration, shallow infiltration,
deep infiltration, and runoff. The following table presents the basic
distribution changes found by one study.*
Thus, the impact on stream water flow is severe: not only is a sub-
stantially increased percentage of total rainfall being discharged to streams
directly, but the rate of discharge also rises. Under most natural conditions,
rainfall is absorbed into the soil until saturation; impervious surfaces shed
their runoff immediately, increasing flow peaks. Minimum stream water flow
*Tourbier, op.cit.
358
-------
may also be altered by increased runoff; because development reduces shallow
and deep infiltration, recharge of streams from groundwater is reduced during
dry season, for many streams draw major portions of their flow in this way
Impervious
Surfaces
0% (natural
condition)
10-20%
35-50%
75-100%
Evapo-
transpiration
40%
38%
35%
30%
. Shallow
Infiltration
25%
21%
20%
10%
Deep
Infiltration
25%
21%
15%
5%
Runoff
10%
20%
30%
55%
Reference:
—Thurow, et_ al. op.cit.
H.2 THE IMPACT OF SENSITIVE AREA ZONING ON WATER SUPPLY
The fundamental impact of sensitive area protection on water supply will
be on groundwater recharge. Groundwater recharge protection ordinances have
•this object as their prime concern, of course, but the other sensitive area
protection zones also tend to expedite groundwater recharge.
Wetlands Conservancy Districts; There are several different kinds of
wetlands. Some are perched above a water table on a layer of impervious clay-
protection of the zone, therefore, does not aid groundwater recharge. Others
constitute groundwater discharge zones, where the water table outcrops
at the surface and does not receive a net inflow; these are generally re-
stricted to the arid western regions of the country, they do not fulfill a
groundwater recharge function. Where part of a wetland extends below the
water table, a significant groundwater recharge area may form; it is able
to recharge the groundwater. If the water table of such a wetland declines
during part of the year—for instance, if the wetland is a sedge meadow or
shallow marsh (a "temporary wetland")—then its groundwater recharge function
may be particularly important. The vegetation of such wetlands is able to
hold a great deal of moisture from a rainfall, which it gradually returns to
the water table. These areas can be drained and filled relatively cheaply to
obtain buildable homcsites, and so are usually the first lost to development.
Hillside Development Regulations; While hillsides are not prime ground-
water recharge areas—and the intent of regulation is mainly to control
drainage and erosion—they nevertheless can have an adverse effect on grc
water recharge if not protected. Development significantly increases r
of water which would otherwise be held in the soil and run slowly downh
359
-------
at a short distance beneath the surface. The lag time increases the tine
available for areas at the foot of the slope to return water gradually to the
water table. Thus, where runoff is accelerated off of slopes, recharge
areas at the base of slopes may quickly become'saturated and shed surplus
water into streams.
Woodlands Protection Ordinances: Woodlands generally have a porous
soil which is good at holding water. The forest canopy and low shrubs of a
forest break the form of rainfall, decreasing its erosive power and allowing
more of it to be absorbed into the soil. However, a great deal of the water
held in forest soil is transpired by trees and evaporated again into the air,
causing forests to be areas of comparatively low groundv:ater recharge. If
clearcut, groundwater recharge of the woodland area can be increased by more
than twenty percent, although irresponsible clear cutting can result in sub-
stantial net damage to water resources through the erosion of soils and
severe sedimentation of streams.
Groundwater Recharge Area Protection: As is clear from the discussion
above, groundwater recharge may be a partial purpose of protection of a variety
of environmentally sensitive zones. Where recharge is a particular problem
in terms of community water supplies, groundwater recharge areas may be
designated as an overlay zone on developed areas to dictate recharge per-
formance standards on a lot-by-lot basis. These controls generally place
an upper limit on the amount of impervious surface allowed on a given site,
and may require retention and disposal of stormwater on site, though the soil.
Stricter limits limiting or excluding development altogether may be imposed
if the groundwater would also be sensitive to pollution (such as in areas with
particularly high water tables). Such a protection measure virtually becomes
wetlands protection with a single purpose—to protect groundwater quantity and
quality.*
Reference:
—Thurow, et al. op.cit;
H.5 THE IMPACT OF WATER AND SEWER REGULATIONS ON WATER SUPPLY
Septic Tank systems often are an environmentally sound way to recharge
groundwater supplies. There has been considerable recent interest in the
use of the land itself as a filter to achieve high degrees of wastewater
treatment at low cost. In a properly managed system, the earth can extract
virtually all the impurities of wastewater, including toxic metals and
viruses, allowing purified water to return to aquifers. The same principle
is used by a septic tank. If property maintained, septic tanks are one of the
best methods of recycling water supplies.
*Such a case is found in Florida, where the Volusia County Water Recharge
Ordinance states its purpose as "to protect the water resources of Volusia
County, (and to) prevent the development or use of the land in the Potential
Recharge Area in a manner tending to adversely affect the quality of water."
360
-------
Package Plants using seepage fields may also be comparatively beneficial
to groundwater maintenance if they are properly operated.
Sewers remove all effluent off-site. Water extracted from local wells
is, therefore, riot returned to the ground, but is discharged into streams.
In some areas, this has*had serious consequences in terms of groundwater
depletion.*
H.10 THE IMPACT OF LANDBANKING Oil WATER SUPPLY
Landbanking, in practice if not in name, has historically been used by
public and private water companies to protect watershed lands from development.
Watersheds have not received much attention lately as environmentally sensitive
zones, since those areas of the United States that consider them so have long
since purchased them. Watershed protection has traditionally .been an issue
in the Northeastern states, where public water supplies were first established.
These and a few other states,** with clean and abundant surface supplies
available within an acceptable distance of major cities, have opted for
watershed protection as their major mode of water quality safeguard—other
states, with lower quality water, have from the start relied on filtration
and disinfection techniques to achieve high-quality water.
To an extent, the use of landbanking to protect watersheds used for
drinking water production is a moot issue—very few states now have the
option to increase the watershed lands held-out of development, since land
prices are rising prohibitively and the option has usually already been pre-
empted by developers. There is also debate over the necessity of protection—
it is argued that treatment capabilities exist to process the lowest grades
of raw water into safe drinking'water. Since the passage of the Safe Drinking
Water Act, this point is reopened for debate. While it is true that treatment
is readily available to protect against bacterial and viral contamination—the
only form of pathogenic contamination for which there are generally acceptable
standards—new contaminants are entering water supplies for which standards
have not yet been formulated. Therse are the products of industrial society—
the pesticides, industrial effluents, domestic and toxic wastes which were
unknown when public water supplies were first set up.
Public watersheds, then, should remain protected from urban development
wherever possible, at least until treatment standards applicable to such sub-
stances as chlorinated hydrocarbons and heavy metals have been formulated,
*The City of Venice, Italy, is one of the most dramatic examples of the
penalties paid for groundwater depletion: hundreds of private wells have
been withdrawing excessive amounts of fresh water from beneath the city for
hundreds of years, causing the city literally to sink into the ocean. Recent
provision of remote fresh water supplies has stopped this process, and the
city is rising again.
**Washington State is the primary example, as well as others in the
Pacific Northwest.
361
-------
and processing machinery is available. Watersheds are compatible with some
valuable land uses such as recreation, conservation, and open space protection,
and as such may possibly be zoned as sensitive lands. Until scientific and
legal grounds for this protection are widely recognized, however, communities
wishing to preserve the option for watershed protection may be obliged in
the interim to acquire the land outright.
Reference:
—Urban Systems Research & Engineering, Inc.
Recreation on Water Supply Reservoirs. Pre-
pared for the Council on Environmental Quality,
Washington, D.C., 1975.
H.16 THE IMPACT OF RUNOFF' CONTROL ORDINANCES ON WATER SUPPLY
Trees do improve soil permeability, and, therefore, improve groundwater
recharge locally. Their benefits would be related both to the location of
groundwater recharge areas and to the number of trees protected. The
groundwater recharge benefits of tree protection are seldom, if ever, alleged
in tree ordinances.
References:
—Roy F. Weston, Inc. A Manual on Storm Water
Management for Evaluating and Mitigating the
Effects of Land Use Changes on Runoff.
The Maryland National Capital Park and
Planning Commission, (undated).
—Coughlin, R., ST. Hammer. Stream Quality
Preservation through Planned Urban Development.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Research and Monitoring, Washington, D.C.,
May 1973. EPA-R5-73-019..
H.20 THE IMPACT OF SEDIMENTATION AND EROSION CONTROL ORDINANCES
ON WATER SUPPLY
The sedimentation in local streams of fine silts and clays may clog their
connections with major groundwater formations, depleting community water
resources. Correction of sedimentation problems can lead to a re-establish-
ment of these corrections, to the benefit of groundwater recharge.
References:
—Thurow, et al. op.cit.
362
-------
H.21 WATER QUANTITY: SUPPLY/REGULATIONS/ORDINANCES:
RUNOFF CONTROL ORDINANCES
Runoff control ordinances can have a positive effect on water supply
sources because they tend to maintain groundwater recharge. Measures which
enhance infiltration of rainwater into the earth not only maintain subsurface
water sources, but also tend to maintain minimum flows in streams to a higher
level than might otherwise be the case in developed areas.
1.4 THE IMPACT OF WATER AND SEWER REGULATIONS ON SOLID WASTE
Conventional municipal treatment requires disposal of large amounts of
sludge produced by the treatment process. This solid waste may either be
buried or incinerated, but both processes create secondary environmental
problems.
Septic tanks and package plants also create solid wastes which must
be disposed of though it is generally felt that with them the problem is
less severe.
Reference:
—See Section IV, On-Site Wastewater Disposal, and
Section VII, Soild Waste Control.
I.10 THE IMPACT OF LAND BANKING ON SOLID WASTE
The disposal of solid waste is and will continue to be primarily by
landfill. However, particularly in urban areas, acquisition of land
suitable for disposal sites is difficult. Citizens are understandably dis-
tressed by the prospect of a "dump" near their homes; wetlands and other
areas with poor soils or high water tables are unsuitable because of
environmental damage to the ground and surface waters from leachate and
runoff. Incinerators and similar methods which reduce the amounts of fill
are expensive and environmentally damaging in their own ways. The problem
of solid waste disposal has been rated as the most important issue facing
cities by the National League of Cities. Untried and expensive resource
recovery technology is supported because it meets with public acceptance,
while environmentally safe landfills can be designed at significantly
lower costs and impacts. Methods are needed of choosing and acquiring
sites for landfills in urban and suburban areas.
Prime land is necessary, so the cost will be high. The main costs,
though, are in the negotiation process necessary to get and use the site,
and in the design of a fill which will meet standards.
Legal Issues
None, except the cost of the likely court battle, and issues of whether
fills can be put in land zoned (usually) as residential. A change in zoning
to allow sanitary landfills in residential areas might be reasonable as
363
-------
an aid in finding sites. However/ traffic and other impacts make it really
unsuitable for residential areas.
Administrative Issues
The siting problem is a key issue in solid waste management, and there
is no easy solution to it. Public hearings are required, major battles
will occur, and if the site cho'ice is ever moved,the whole process starts
over again. Rcgionalization as a solution has not worked in practice,
because of the political issues involved in receiving another community's
garbage. Eminent domain powers can be used, but these only lead to sites
Where land is cheap and the population is disadvantaged—and even there,
difficulties occur. Aids to siting might include zoning residential areas
fr landfills; requiring land dedication in developments so that dedicated
lands can be combined in suitable landfill, and growth management controls
where the site of the landfill is chosen ahead of the development around
it.
Local environmental impact statements ^and other such requirements delay
siting, leading to a major environmental harm since the siting process
traditionally starts only after the situation is desparate.
References:
—National League of Cities. Cities and the
Nation's Disposal Crisis. Reprinted from
Nation's Cities, 1973.
—National- Association of Counties Research
Foundation. Guidelines for Local Governments
on Solid Waste Management. Public Health
Service Publication No. 2084, 1971.
—Colonna, R., & C. McLaren. Decision-Makers
Guide in Solid Waste Management. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1974 (Report SW-500).
—Vincent, B. "The Opportunity and Impact of
Land Use Programs for Solid Waste Management,"
EPA-OSWMP Issue Paper, November 1974.
—Hudson, J.; F. Gross; D.G. Wilson; & D.H. Marks.
Evaluation of Policy-Related Research in the
Field of Municipal Solid Waste Management.
Report R7456, Department of Civil Engineering,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1974.
—Gross, F. Issues in the Regionalization of
Solid Waste Management Planning. Civil
Engineering Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, 1975.
—See also Section VII, Solid Waste Control..
364
-------
1.11 THE IMPACT OF CONSTRUCTION CODES ON SOLID WASTE
Building demolition generates large amounts of fairly inert fill. The
construction code should contain provisions for removal and, if possible
recycling of these materials. Special care should be taken of toxic materials,
such as asbestos insulation.
Reference:
—Hudson, e_t al. op.cit.
—See also Section VII, Solid Waste Control.
1.12 THE IMPACT OF BUILDING CODES ON SOLID WASTE
Storage should be provided in a sanitary manner; this can be covered in
sanitation ordinances or in building codes. Design of buildings for easier
recycling when demolished is possible, but minor.
References:
—Hudson, e_t a^. op.cit.
—See also Section VII, Solid Waste Control.
J.15 THE IMPACT OF SANITATION ORDINANCES ON NOISE
Noise from collection operations can be a problem and collections should
be scheduled for daytime hours unless traffic conditions make it impossible.
The use of disposal containers and plastic cans should be encouraged. (see 15)
Reference:
—See Section VI, Noise Control Ordinances, and Section
VII, Solid Waste Control."
J.16 THE IMPACT OF TREE ORDINANCES ON NOISE
Noise control is also alleged as a benefit of tree ordinances, with more
justification than air pollution control. Generally, it is felt that trees
form a noise barrier between traffic and other land uses, making them parti-
cularly valuable in residential neighborhoods. The noise attenuation capa-
bility of trees is related to the species in question, the density of planting,
and the season. It may also be inferred that most trees will be more effective
blocking the noise reaching second stories of houses since little of their
foliage is near the ground.*
References:
—Thurow, et al. op.cit.
*Clearly, deciduous trees lose much of their noise control effectiveness
when they have lost their leaves, making them definitely a questionable
element- in any comprehensive community noise control program.
365
-------
—Urban Systems Research & Engineering, Inc. The
Audible Landscape. Prepared for the Federal
Highway Administration, Department of
Transportation, Washington, D.C. 1972.
J.19 NOISE REGULATIONS/ORDINANCES: NOISE CONTROL ORDINANCES
Standards can be set on vehicles and equipment sold in communities or
used for government work. Building design requirements can reduce sound pro-
pagation from outside, or from other rooms inside. Subdivision layouts can
be required to provide barriers or bersm, or simple open space to attentuate
sound from sources such as highways. No.ise ordinances related to fixed
sources can be either technical, involving measurement of sound levels, or
judgemental. The technical ones are more accurate and less discretionary,
but require equipment and trained personnel, who may not be available when
needed. The judgemental ones are open to charges of capriciousness.
Zoning controls may be used to keep noisy and quiet uses separate, or to
require certain levels of performance at the property line, which can be
enforced by the community.
Reference:
—See Section VI, Noise Control Ordinances.
K.5 THE IMPACT OF WATER AND SEWER-REGULATIONS ON TOXIC SUBSTANCES
Sewage effluents from residential areas contain comparatively few toxic
subtances. Where seepage fields are used, there is little danger that toxic
wastes can be a hazard to human health. However, introduction of some chemical
solvents or other chemicals into septic tanks can disrupt or destroy the
bacteriological processed which break down sewage and cause septic tank
malfunction. Similarly, with package plants,- toxic effluents from one house-'
hold can damage the plant process and disrupt the system's entire operation—
one reason such plants are held in disfavor.
K.12 THE IMPACT OF BUILDING CODES ON TOXIC SUBSTANCES
The use of toxic materials should be prohibited in building design.
Classic examples are lead paints in interiors, lead pipes in water supply
systems, and furiable asbestos insulation. It may also be desirable to
prohibit the use of certain pesticides or other substances in buildings,
either under the building codes or the health.codes.
366
-------
K.12 THE IMPACT OF BUILDING CODES ON TOXIC SUBSTANCES
The use of toxic materials should be prohibited in building design.
Classic examples are lead paints in interiors and lead pipes in water supply
systems. It may also be desirable to prohibit the use of certain pesticides
or other substances in buildings, either under the building codes or the health
codes.
K.14 THE IMPACT OF FLOOD CONTROL ORDINANCES ON TOXIC SUBSTANCES
Floodplain Management: Floodplain management should restrict the storage
and use in the floodplain of materials which are buoyant, explosive, soluable,
expansive, flammable, or toxic to humans, animals, or plants. This is done
for obvious reasons of safety and health. Other material may be stored if it
is not subject to major damage by floods and owners file written state-
ments assuming any and all damage in the event of flooding. In addition,
public utilities such as sewers, electrical lines, and gas lines should ]:>e
located, designed, and constructed in such a way as to minimize the possi-
bility that they would become a threat to public safety or health if sub-
jected to flooding.
Reference:
—Debo, T.N. Survey and Analysis of Urban
Drainage Ordinances and a Recommended Model
Ordinance. Office of Water Research and
Technology, Georgia Institute of Technology,
February 1975. NTIS: PB-240-317.
K.15 THE IMPACT OF SANITATION ORDINANCES ON TOXIC SUBSTANCES
The sanitation ordinance should provide for the separation and disposal
of toxic substances such as chemical wastes at a state approved disposal site.
Reference:
--See Section VII, Solid Waste Control.
367
-------
L.I THE IMPACT OF GENERAL DISTRICT ZONING ON TRANSPORTATION ENERGY USE
Large-lot zoning, although it results in little significant reduction in
auto emissions by housing unit {see B.I), does result in an increase in energy
demand associated with automobile travel. Vehicle miles travelled are
definitely greater if development is spread out than if it is compact—
not only is each trip longer, but virtually all trips are, by necessity,
auto trips. If large-lot zoning has the effect of lowering the community
population ceiling, it may also happen that potential residents who cannot
find housing in the community will be forced to travel farther to a more
distant town, increasing the total automobile energy requirement for a given
number of people.
Over the long term, large-lot zoning has the further defect of making
it less economical to switch to more energy efficient local transportation
modes, such as "dial-a-bus" or other public modes—housing units are so
far apart that the personal automobile becomes the only logical' service
vehicle. Although automobiles in general are being made more fuel
efficient, the largest potential transportation energy savings appear to be
in a shift away from the automobile to a more energy efficient mode.
(see also M.4).
Reference:
—RERC. op.cit.
L.4 THE IMPACT OF FLEXIBLE ZONING ALTERNATIVES ON ENERGY USE
Although the air quality improvements associated with cluster sub-
divisions and PUDs are probably not significant in most instances (see A.4),
the energy saving associated with reduced automobile use can be important.
Distances travelled between housing and work and shopping detinations are
usua.lly shorter with flexible zoning options, since housing can be located
on shorter streets, ancj in the case of PUDs, support facilities can be mixed
with residential land uses, enabling residents to do at least part of their
shopping by foot.
As mentioned in A.I, local shopping in PUDs may turn out, in fact, to
be supplementary rather than a substitute—people still seem to prefer
larger shopping centers to small local shops for reasons of convenience
(one-stop shopping), price, and merchandise variety. However, the flexible
zoning options are almost always more compatible with the shortened route
requirements of public transportation options such as "dial-a-bus," currently
under consideration for use in suburban areas. In the long run, replacement
of a significant portion of auto trips by these energy efficient options
will result in major energy savings, especially in such repeated trip types
as the daily journey to work. While in the short term, flexible zoning
patterns may result in only minor transportation energy savings, the long
term savings are likely to be very important.
While few cluster developments or PUDs put much emphasis on alternative
non-automotive transportation, it is clear that part of the common space
36G
-------
wh'ich occurs within a site could be used for bicycle paths, or as routes
for small electric or muscle-powered cars. In Reston, Virginia, perhaps the
largest single PUD in this country, pedestrian paths are routed throughout
the community so that children can walk to schools and play areas without
having to cross or go near conventional streets.
References:
—RERC. op.cit.
—Christensen. op.cit.
M.4 THE IMPACT OF FLEXIBLE ZONING ALTERNATIVES ON THE ENERGY USE OF
BUILDINGS
Cluster subdivisions are usually composed of conventional single-family
units, although in principle they could be adapted to any-housing format. This
menas that they cannot take advantage of the space-heating efficiencies of
multiple dwellings, although a very small energy saving may accrue when clusters
are situated in windy areas, such as on an open plain—there, the reduction
in wind velocity caused by the housing cluster with its surrounding streets
may be important enough to cut wind infiltration and conduction heat loss.*
PUDs, on the other hand, with their freedom to mix land uses, are commonly
built to contain at least some, if not all, multi-family housing. Here,
space-heating energy savings can be substantial. One study indicates that
townhouse-type residents consume about eighty percent of the gas and
electricity that conventional single family units do, that walk-up apart-
ments require only sixty-two percent, and high-rise apartments {six stories)
only fifty percent.**
Reference:
—RERC. op.cit.
*The Soil Conservation Service estimates that wind breaks of specially
planted trees can, in some locations, reduce home fuel needs fifteen percent.
Although clustering of housing is not as efficient a way to create a wind-
break, together with appropriate landscaping it may offer some energy
savings in windy areas. Reference: Department of Agriculture, Soil Conserva-
tion Service, Agricultural Information Bulletin 339, Washington, D.C., 1969.
**The figures are for operation and maintenance expenditures only--i.e.,
average fuel costs over a year for the two energy sources mentioned. This
study did not take climatic effects into account, and represents only a
theoretical national average. Obviously, where no space heating is required,
no heating costs will be incurred—in that case, it is appropriate to
consider air conditioning costs, if these are incurred. The figures quoted
do, however, give an indication of the relative energy efficiencies of new
units constructed under standard building technology. Reference: RERC, op.cit.
369
-------
M.I3 THE IMPACT OF HEALTH CODES ON ENERGY USE
Health codes provide standards for capacity of heating systems by giving
the ambient temperatures which must be met for outside temperatures. Lower
standards, if reasonable by other considerations, would reduce energy use for
space heating and also reduce air pollution from space heating.
Comments^
A minor possibility. Not much is written on this subject and it is
probably more trouble to change than it is worth in most communities. Re-
ductions in interior temperatures are a good idea, but there is no easy way
to legislate them. Voluntary efforts must be relied upon.
N.ll THE IMPACT OF CONSTRUCTION CODES ON SOIL LOSS
A large portion o'f the soil loss from urban areas is a result of con-
struction and the clearing of land it requires. Codes which regulate con-
struction can be used to remedy this, as can specialized sedimentation and
erosion control ordinances.
Reference:
—See Section V, Stormwater Management.
N.20 THE IMPACT OF SEDIMENTATION AND EROSION CONTROL Oil SOIL LOSS
The loss of soils by erosion is a major concern: must of the impetus
behind sedimentation and erosion control reforms has come from soil con-
servation districts throughout the United States. Where fertile topsoil is
lost through erosion and must be replaced for landscape purposes, this re-
presents an unnecessary environmental-cost as well as an economic one.
In rapidly developing areas, erosion loss per acre in developing areas
can be high: the Soil Conservation Service has estimated that about 120 cubic
yards/acre/year (roughly 180 tons) are lost in representative metropolitan
areas.
Reference:
—See Section V, Stormwater Management.
370
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA 600/5-79-006
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
5. REPORT DATE
The Use of Existing and Modified Land Use
Instruments to Achieve Environmental Quality
March 1979
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
Michael R. Alford
James F. Hudson
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Urban Systems Research and Engineering
1218 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02138
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1HC619
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-01-3231
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development (RD-682)
Washington, D.C. 20460
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600 (ORD)
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
This report reviews the application and potential of the police power at
the local level of government as it is used to achieve environmental planning
objectives. The first section presents an overview of the interactions of
various municipal regulations and ordinances as they affect the environment.
Subsequent sections examine the potential of conventional, locally available,
legal tools to affect residuals production—these include transportation and
parking ordinances, building codes, on-site wastewater management and mainten-
ance permits, stormwater management ordinances, noise control ordinances,
solid waste ordinances, and subdivision permit procedures. In each section,
examples of successful or model ordinances are supplied, preceded by a
discussion of the technical issues involved in associated environmental
programs. The last section of the report is a two-part appendix that elaborates
on the impacts of various commonly used ordinances on individual factors of
environmental quality; it serves as an extension of the overview presented
in the first section.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lOENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
*Management, *Planning, *Regulations,
Urbanization, Local Government, Land
Use, Environments
institutions, *Environ-
mental Control, Insti-
tutional Constraints,
Legal Aspects
6E
3. DISTRIBU'
Release to Public
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
20. SECURITY CLASS /This narfl
370
------- |