Laserfiche WebLink
f the land Lo/pcally. <br />sessrnent tj^ainsi the <br />snjentv reficct market <br />follow local zoning <br />•nsideralion to these <br />»cess of easements or <br />require public access, <br />community with a <br />einent to run with the <br />m he adjusted for the <br />I addition, the land- <br />eiit for an income ta,\ <br />provisions into their <br />the advantage of <br />mers and also places <br />ccepting any of these <br />xation accordingly. <br />)viding a landowner <br />1 is to remove his <br />a defray the cost of <br />I as sanitar>' sewers. <br />These assessments <br />>f revenue than the <br />provide a break for <br />iessments are not a <br />rable discretion in <br />•ement is that they <br />>enefits derived, but <br />!onsc(juently, most <br />I within a wetland <br />[jo.se a.'-sessnients. <br />K assessment, rather <br />these areas, since it <br />r development. This <br />er taking advantage <br />in tryin;; to develop <br />fjsed. Anotht?r check <br />in the same manner <br />r the easement route <br />e included in the <br />ity Adjacent to the <br />E*ntal sense to place <br />d ignore activities <br />ind district. Hence, <br />'e whose c.^sential <br />tlopment adjacent <br />i tciiii to exhibit <br />vatercourses. steep <br />dlen near wetland <br />1 is not sensitive in <br />calls for special <br />rovide. <br />w two basic ap- <br />i.xed area from the <br />might range from <br />iinporta ’ice of the <br />mm’ <br />n. <br />i <br />al <br />I) t <br />• s <br />t\elhiiu1 ami. Sinond, the buffer might take a minimum <br />lixet! area, coupled with the flexibility to incorporate <br />sen.sitive land an>as Iwyond the fixed area. The Ceniial <br />.\ew York Regional Planning Commission has <br />mxminu-mlod that the wetlands regulation include a <br />|,(MH) foot buffer with a limitation of five per cent <br />im|M*rvious surface within this area. In Washington, the <br />Shoreline Management Act establishcti a buffer zone <br />running 200 feet in all directions from the mean high water <br />line u) all wetlands above a minimum size. Within this <br />fixwl area, the objective is to establish stringent environ- <br />mental controls over a larger list of |iermitted or special <br />uses. Key among the controls would be protection against <br />the by-products of increased use, such as liquid wastes, <br />runoff, erosion, and sedimentation. The control could be <br />exercised through limitations on impervious surface, <br />through extensive performance requirements for control of <br />erosion and runoff, or in the case of liquid w'astc, through <br />strin^nt reflation of private sewer systems. If com­ <br />mercial and industrial uses were allowed in this zone, it <br />would also be necessary to give careful attention to the <br />|M>ssibility of waste disposal resulting from internal <br />commercial processes. In most cases, the objective should <br />l>e to limit commercial and industrial uses to those with no <br />significant liquid waste products. <br />The floating buffer would be directed toward essentially <br />the same purposes. The use list might be expanded, but <br />more stringent controls would be placed on the <br />by-products of the various uses. With the floating buffer, <br />the local community might establish a minimum buffer, <br />coupled with the potential to expand, depending upon the <br />prese...^e of related sensitive land areas. The dimensions of <br />the buffer could easily be taken from maps indicating soil <br />type, slojie, drainage patterns, and so on. The buffer <br />boundary would vary with the presence or absence of <br />adjacent sensitive land areas. For any specific dcvclo|>- <br />ment within this area, the proponent would be required to <br />show the relation between the proposed use and related <br />sensitive land areas. In this way, the buffer could float <br />and account for the sensitivity of land. <br />The principal disadvantage of the floating buffer is <br />simply the availability of the requisite information. In <br />tho.se .''reas with a paucity of environmental information, <br />the fixed buffer would be more attractive. In those areas <br />with extensive topographical information, the floating <br />buffer would make more sense. In both cases, the <br />objective of the buffer is to allow for an expanded range of <br />usc.s while placing .strict controls over the by-products of <br />these u.scs. The use of the buffer zone complements the <br />basic wetlands control by minimizing negative develop­ <br />mental consequences in lands adjoining the wetland area. <br />Controlling the Attendant Watershed <br />The final difficulty with the sole reliance u|)on wetlands <br />districts is simply that the wetland is, in large measure, a <br />reflection of the larger watershed. What happens in tJi*? <br />watershed will eventually have conse(|uences for the <br />wetland. So, the effectiveness of wetlands regulations is <br />closely tied to the control of development in the watershed. <br />In the watershed, two key natural processess are <br />directly related to the health of the well. nd. These are the <br />processes of runoff and erosion. Under natural watershed <br />condition.s. the wetland is generally able to control and <br />maintain its important functions. However, as the <br />watershed becomes progre.ssively more developed, the <br />capacity of the wetland to deal with erosion and runoff is <br />overwhelmed. To maintain the wetland, the p.o»cesM,s of <br />runoff and ero.sion must be controlled throughout the <br />watershed. With no c^mlrol, pre.sence or ahsence of <br />wetland districts would make little-difference. This control <br />is a preconditi»»n to wetland regulation. <br />A more.* complete discussion of the necessity for and the <br />methods of control over the.se natural processes is <br />contained in ChaptcT M of this rc|>ort. The design of <br />wc^lland rc-gulations should ewcur only in the conte.xt of <br />these largc-r control.s. If tb»-se watershed controls e.xist, <br />then the wetland distr:ct receives critical environmental <br />support. If not. the long-term effectiveness of wetlands <br />regulation would be in scriou.s (|uestion. <br />Wetland regulation surmounts many of the difficulties <br />assocuitc*d with .sole reliance ujjon acquisition. The regula­ <br />tions cover broader areas, may be quickly designed and <br />implemented, unci allow for widcT public participation. <br />However, to preserve the ini|)ortant functions of the <br />wetland they should be complementc-d by the use of buffer <br />zones for adjacent ari*as and by controls over runoff and <br />erosion in the watershed. In facing the probleiu of <br />re.strifted use lists, wetland and buffer zone regulations <br />should allow for special u.ses. The basic principle in the <br />evaluation of tht; spcxrial uses would simply be that the* <br />uses would be compatible with the maintenance of the <br />important fcinctions of the wetland. Local contmunities <br />might also consider the use of density transfers or perhaps <br />transferable* development rights to preserve tl.cjse <br />functions, while allowing for additional uses in less <br />sensitive areas. <br />In aceountiiig for the* nc*gH(ive influence of development <br />4it the wetland site, in adjacent land areas, and throughout <br />the attendant watershc*d, local communitie.s should move* <br />closcsr to the real goal of wetland regulation. The goal is to <br />preserve the important functions of the wetland, such as <br />inoderatiTig waU*r flow, filtering water for adjacent lakes <br />and rivers, and providing sjjecics diversity for an arc*a. In <br />this more inclusive regulatory framework the goal is more <br />likely to be acbievcul. <br />DATA NEKDS AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE <br />Since wetlands types range from wet prairie to deep <br />cattail marsh and are characterized by different vegetation <br />and water levc'ls, identification of wetland areas is <br />somewhat difficult. The cyclical and fluctuating nature of <br />wetland water IcrvcI.s adds another element of confusion to <br />mapping them. If you ncsid basic iuformatrun on where <br />your community s wetlands are locutc'd or whether or not <br />any exist in your hrea, the States Geological Survey has <br />topographic quadrangle maps that indicate the locations <br />of wetlands. The? maps are available for almost all areas of <br />the country in a degrc'e .scale?, and for some areas at <br />the more detailc ’d 7' / degree scale, at many public and <br />unr.orsity libraries and selected bookstores and from the <br />USCiS Distribution Hraiiches in Arlington, Virgini.-i. and <br />Denver. (Alaska maps available from the USGS brarch in <br />Fairbanks.) An index map for each state indicates which <br />topographic map covens your area. <br />4'J <br />■L <br />Tv <br />Er <br />. * <br />s.-Jij *• <br />wetlaiu! area. S<>c‘ond <br />Jixcal aiva, ccniplt'd <br />sensitive land an*as I <br />.\ew York Region <br />rtrommeiided that t <br />l.tMKt-fool buffer wit <br />impervious surface wi <br />Shoreline Managemci <br />running 200 feet in all c <br />line to all wetlands a <br />fixixl area, the objectic <br />mental controls over c <br />usc?s. Key among the c <br />the by-products of inc <br />runoff, erosion, and sc <br />exercised through Hr <br />through extensive pcrfi <br />erosion and runoff, or i <br />stringent regulation o <br />mercial and industrial <br />would also be necessai <br />|)ossibility of waste <br />commercial processes. 1 <br />Ije to limit commercial « <br />significant Iic]uid waste <br />The floating buffer w <br />the same purposes. Th( <br />more stringent conti <br />by-products of the varic <br />the local community m <br />coupled with the potent <br />presence of related sensi <br />the buffer could easily h <br />type, sIo|je, drainage | <br />boundary would vary ■ <br />adjacent sensitive land <br />meiit within this area, tl <br />show the relation betwe <br />sensitive land areas. In <br />and account for the sem <br />1'he principal disadv. <br />simply the availability <br />tho.se -vreas with a pauc <br />the fixed buffer would b <br />with extensive topograj <br />buffer would make me <br />objective of the buffer is <br />u.scs while placing .strict <br />these uses. The use of t <br />basic wetlands control b <br />mental consequences in li <br />Controlling the Atten< <br />The final difficulty \ <br />districts is simply that <br />reflection of the larger <br />watershed will eventi <br />wetland. So, the effcci <br />closely tied to therontn <br />In the watershed, <br />directly related to the b <br />processes of runoff and