• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Title Page
 Table of Contents
 Introduction
 Model surface water runoff control...
 Model individual sewage disposal...
 Appendix






Group Title: Technical paper ;, no. 14
Title: Protecting coastal waters
CITATION PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00072271/00001
 Material Information
Title: Protecting coastal waters model ordinances for runoff control and sewerage disposal
Series Title: Technical paper - Florida Sea Grant College Program no. 14
Physical Description: v, 56 p. : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Maloney, Frank Edward
Canter, Bram D. E ( joint author )
University of Florida -- Eastern Water Law Center
Florida Sea Grant Program
Publisher: Eastern Water Law Center, University of Florida College of Law
Place of Publication: Gainesville
Publication Date: 1979
 Subjects
Subject: Coastal zone management -- Law and legislation -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Water quality management -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Runoff -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Sewage disposal -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Statement of Responsibility: by Frank E. Maloney, Bram D.E. Canter ; staff contributors: Peter Baker ... et al..
General Note: On cover: Florida Sea Grant.
General Note: "June 1979."
General Note: "The information contained in this paper was developed under the auspices of the Florida Sea Grant College Program with support from the NOAA Office of Sea Grant, U.S. Department of Commerce, grant number 04-8-M01-76."
Funding: Technical paper (Florida Sea Grant College) ;
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00072271
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved, Board of Trustees of the University of Florida
Resource Identifier: aleph - 000990244
oclc - 05534439
notis - AEW7156

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover
    Title Page
        Page i
    Table of Contents
        Page ii
    Introduction
        Page iii
        Page iv
        Page v
    Model surface water runoff control ordinance
        Page 1
        Introduction
            Page 1
            Page 2
            Page 3
            Page 4
        Model urban surface water runoff control ordinance
            Page 5
            Page 6
            Page 7
            Page 8
            Page 9
            Page 10
            Page 11
            Page 12
            Page 13
            Page 14
            Page 15
            Page 16
            Page 17
            Page 18
            Page 19
            Page 20
            Page 21
            Page 22
            Page 23
            Page 24
            Page 25
            Page 26
            Page 27
            Page 28
            Page 29
            Page 30
            Page 31
        Bibliography
            Page 32
            Page 33
    Model individual sewage disposal facility control ordinance
        Page 34
        Introduction
            Page 34
            Page 35
            Page 36
        Footnotes
            Page 37
        Model individual sewage disposal facility control ordinance
            Page 38
            Page 39
            Page 40
            Page 41
            Page 42
            Page 43
            Page 44
            Page 45
            Page 46
            Page 47
            Page 48
            Page 49
            Page 50
            Page 51
            Page 52
            Page 53
            Page 54
    Appendix
        Page 55
        Page 56
Full Text

F53t
=? / q


Frank E. Maloney


Bfram D. E. Canter


EASTERN WATER LAW CENTER
University of Florida College of Law
Gainesville, Flo da
TECHNICAL PAPER NO. 14
June 1979


)


(


Florida Sea Grant


HUME LIBRARY
AUG 7 1979
I.F.A.S. Univ. of Florida




PROTECTING COASTAL WATERS: MODEL ORDINANCES
FOR RUNOFF CONTROL AND SEWERAGE DISPOSAL


.ucrlon ra;...,l
~n
c~ s~


















PROTECTING COASTAL WATERS: MODEL ORDINANCES
FOR RUNOFF CONTROL AND SEWERAGE DISPOSAL


Frank E. Maloney


Bram D. E. Canter


EASTERN WATER LAW CENTER
University of Florida College of Law
Gainesville, Flo ida

TECHNICAL PAPER NO. 14
June 1979





Staff Contributors


Peter Baker
Ar.ita C. Brannon
Richard S. Brightman
Richard B. Bush
Marc C. Darling
Kathryn L. Ebaugh


Daniel P. Fernandez
Richard G. Hamann
Kathleen M. Kelly
Janice A. Mulligan
Stanley J. Niego
Lindy L. Phillips
David L. Smith


The information contained in this paper was
developed under the auspices of the Florida Sea
Grant College Program with support from the NOAA
Office of Sea Grant, U.S. Department of Commerce,
grant number 04-8-M01-76. This document is a
Technical Paper of the State University System of
Florida Sea Grant College Program,2001 McCarty Hall,
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611.
Technical Papers are duplicated in limited quan-
tities for specialized audiences requiring rapid
access to information which may be unedited.









TABLE OF CONTENTS




INTRODUCTION . . . .. ... .iii

MODEL SURFACE WATER RUNOFF CONTROL ORDINANCE. . .. 1

INTRODUCTION . . . . ... 1

MODEL URBAN SURFACE WATER RUNOFF CONTROL ORDINANCE . 5

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . .... .... 32

MODEL INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL FACILITY CONTROL ORDINANCE 34

INTRODUCTION . . . .... .... 34

FOOTNOTES. . . . . ... . .. 37

MODEL INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL FACILITY CONTROL
ORDINANCE . . . . . ... 38

*APPENDIX . . . . ... . . 55





*This technical paper is a pre-print of forthcoming law review
articles. It is excerpted from a final report to Florida Sea
Grant entitled "Stormwater Runoff and the Coastal Zone: Legal
Alternatives for Effective Management." The table of contents
is reproduced as an Appendix to this paper. Due to the report's
length it has not been reproduced in large quantity. However,
loan copies are available from the National Sea Grant Depository
at the Pell Library of the University of Rhode Island,
Narragansett, Ri 02882; and the Florida Sea Grant College
office at the University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611.






INTRODUCTION

Water pollution abatement programs in the United States have been

directed almost entirely toward the elimination of point sources of water

pollution. Yet officials of the Environmental Protection Agency estimate

that fifty percent or more of the nation's water pollution is waste picked

up from the land by rainfall, which then reaches ground and surface waters

through runoff and seepage and not through a pipe or other point source. It

is becoming increasingly clear that water quality standards cannot be success-

fully achieved until nonpoint sources of water pollution are also signifi-

cantly reduced.

Nonpoint water pollution, occurring primarily as a result of surface

water runoff, is already threatening Florida's health and economy. Nutrients

and sediments are damaging our lakes and streams by choking the water with

algae and noxious weeds and robbing other aquatic organisms of their oxygen

supply and breeding areas. Chemicals and heavy metals are killing or dis-

rupting the reproduction of fish and other wildlife. Potable water supplies

are being made unsafe for human use or more costly to treat.

The control of water pollution from nonpoint sources raises complex legal

problems. Unlike pollutants from point sources which can be collected and treated or

managed by the application of effluent limitations, the control of nonpoint

source pollution requires an entirely different regulatory approach. Because

of its dispersed and often random nature, nonpoint water pollution control

necessarily involves the regulation of the land uses from which the pollution

originates. Moreover, since land use control has been traditionally delegated

to local governments, the responsibility rests most heavily upon Florida's

counties and municipalities.

The task.of regulating land uses to protect the quality of surface and

ground waters must focus upon the most significant component of the nonpoint

source pollution problem surface water runoff. The volume and rate of
iii








runoff as well as the pollutant content of runoff waters must be managed.

Voluminous investigation and reporting has already been accomplished to

identify the nonpoint pollution problem and to develop control program

proposals. The result has been a general consensus that the keystone to

effective management lies in preserving and protecting water quality control

functions that are performed by natural systems such as vegetation, soils

and wetlands. If land development and use can be required to conform to

performance and design standards which incorporate the beneficial functions

of natural systems or, at least, to minimize adverse impacts upon them to the

greatest extent practicable, then the water pollution problems associated

with uncontrolled runoff will be substantially reduced.

The establishment of this kind of regulatory program by a local govern-

ment as a supplement to state-level regulation does not require the passage

of new enabling legislation to provide the necessary authority. Instead,

what is required is the creation of a well-organized and comprehensive

program which utilizes existing authority, heretofore unexercised. Florida

counties and municipalities have all the power they require to carry out

local government except when expressly prohibited or inconsistent with state

law. The prevention of environmental degradation is clearly within the

police powers of local governments to protect the health, safety and welfare

of their citizens.

In conjunction with the new approach required to tackle the problems

of nonpoint source pollution, it also seems appropriate to re-examine our

thinking generally as to the proper relationship between land ownership

and environmental quality. In the past, the only land uses which were

clearly understood to be harmful were those that resulted in quite obvious

nuisances with direct and observable adverse impacts. Today, however,

advances in scientific research and technology have revealed previously

iv








unknown relationships and processes that are fundamental elements of environ-

mental quality. It can now be shown that the cumulative subtle and indirect

effects of indiscriminate land use threaten the environment and human health

as well.

The ownership of land can, therefore, be looked upon as a form of

trusteeship. The use one makes of his or her land ultimately affects the

quality of life for everyone. This is especially true in the case of land-

owners upon whose property there exist wetlands, forests and groundwater

recharge areas, to name just a few of the most important components of

natural systems. Greater awareness of the value that is represented by

natural systems should temper the reaction of landowners to restrictions

which do no more than ask them to refrain from harming themselves and others.








MODEL SURFACE WATER RUNOFF CONTROL ORDINANCE


Introduction


Inadequately managed surface water runoff is an increasingly serious

environmental problem in Florida. The waters which drain urban streets,

construction sites, agricultural operations and other locations of intensive

human use are often heavily polluted with nutrients, oxygen demanding materi-

als, suspended solids, pesticides, heavy metals, petroleum products and

other deleterious substances. Canals, ditches, and pipes carry the polluted

water directly into Florida's streams, rivers, lakes or the ocean. Natural

systems such as forests and wetlands, which could help to purify and filter

the waters, are bypassed by drainage works or otherwise destroyed by develop-

ment.

The natural hydrologic characteristics of surface water runoff can be

severely altered by development of land. When native vegetation is removed

and replaced with more impervious surfaces, less water is able to percolate

through the soil and recharge groundwater. Instead, rainfalls result in

greater runoff volume and velocity. Increasing the rate and volume of runoff

increases the severity of flooding downstream during wet periods and exces-

sively drains the land during dry periods. In addition, the productivity of

estUarine systems dependent on particular levels of salinity can be drasti-

cally reduced. The erosion of soil by surface water runoff and consequent

sedimentation of downstream areas is particularly destructive. Many pollu-

tants are transported while physically attached to particles of sediment,

Sediment also fills watercourses and waterbodies, reducing their capacity,

and smothers aquatic life.








MODEL SURFACE WATER RUNOFF CONTROL ORDINANCE


Introduction


Inadequately managed surface water runoff is an increasingly serious

environmental problem in Florida. The waters which drain urban streets,

construction sites, agricultural operations and other locations of intensive

human use are often heavily polluted with nutrients, oxygen demanding materi-

als, suspended solids, pesticides, heavy metals, petroleum products and

other deleterious substances. Canals, ditches, and pipes carry the polluted

water directly into Florida's streams, rivers, lakes or the ocean. Natural

systems such as forests and wetlands, which could help to purify and filter

the waters, are bypassed by drainage works or otherwise destroyed by develop-

ment.

The natural hydrologic characteristics of surface water runoff can be

severely altered by development of land. When native vegetation is removed

and replaced with more impervious surfaces, less water is able to percolate

through the soil and recharge groundwater. Instead, rainfalls result in

greater runoff volume and velocity. Increasing the rate and volume of runoff

increases the severity of flooding downstream during wet periods and exces-

sively drains the land during dry periods. In addition, the productivity of

estUarine systems dependent on particular levels of salinity can be drasti-

cally reduced. The erosion of soil by surface water runoff and consequent

sedimentation of downstream areas is particularly destructive. Many pollu-

tants are transported while physically attached to particles of sediment,

Sediment also fills watercourses and waterbodies, reducing their capacity,

and smothers aquatic life.













Many surface water management systems have the effect of draining

wetlands. Wetlands exist at the interface between upland and aquatic

systems and are the location of intensive biological activity. Their

destruction eliminates many important functions, with harmful effects

on both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. One important role of wetlands

is as a buffer against rapid hydrologic fluctuations. They provide natural

detention for flood waters, releasing them gradually. The severity of floods

and the severity and duration of droughts are thus reduced. In some areas,

wetlands are important sites of groundwater recharge. Another significant
function of wetlands is purification of the waters which flow through

them and thus serve to mitigate the pollution caused by development

in the watershed. Finally, wetlands help to prevent siltation of down-

stream areas by slowing the flow of water, decreasing its ability to

erode stream banks and allowing a portion of the sediment load to settle

out.

Land can be developed and used in a manner that minimizes or avoids

adverse environmental impacts. The proposed development can be planned

to fit the natural features of the site to the greatest extent practicable

rather than altering the site indiscriminately to accommodate the develop-

ment. The Model Surface Water Runoff Control Ordinance was developed by

the Eastern Water Law Center to encourage a more harmonious relationship

between development and the natural environment.

The Ordinance is intended to implement development standards which








protect the functioning of important environmental processes which are

significantly related to the quality and flow of surface water runoff.

The commentary explains more fully how the various sections of the

Ordinance operate to achieve this goal, but a brief summary will aid

understanding. People who propose to engage in certain activities are

required to prepare a Water Management Plan and obtain approval of it

prior to commencing the activity. The Water Management Plan must contain

sufficient information for the local agency to accurately determine

whether the proposed activity would effectively manage surface water run-

off. The local agency is encouraged to make a careful evaluation of the

plan and the site. Approval of Water Management Plans will depend on

whether the activity is likely to meet specified environmental performance

and design standards. A manual to be prepared by the local agency will be

available to help people select techniques that can be used to meet the

performance and design standards.

This Model Surface Water Runoff Control Ordinance was developed

through three drafts over a two year period. After the completion of

each draft, copies were sent to water resource agencies and local govern-

ments all over the United States for review and comment. The feedback

thus received was of tremendous help in the refinement of the Ordinance.

Our continuous effort to resolve the implementation problems that were

recognized by the reviewers made it possible for the Eastern Water Law

Center to produce a regulatory mechanism that we believe surpasses the

few ordinances and statutes that have been developed so far to manage

surface water runoff.

The Model Ordinance, however, could not possibly be made to fit perfect-

ly into all of the innumerable varieties of regulatory infrastructures








that exist at the local governmental level. There are local environmental

programs, for example, where a specialized department handles all regula-

tory matters except the final decision to issue or deny a permit, which

is specifically left to the governing board of the county or municipality.

In other localities, the environmental agency has full authority to take

final action on permit applications. There are still other programs

where this responsibility is shared by the governing body and the special-

ized department. The diversity of such regulatory "styles" made the task

of developing a model program quite difficult.

The Model Surface Water Runoff Control Ordinance is designed to be

adapted to the unique characteristics of each local government organization.

It is presumed that some provisions of the Model Ordinance may be modified

or possibly even rejected altogether. Other provisions may have to be

added. Nevertheless, the regulatory approach and the means that were

formulated to accomplish surface water runoff control in the Model

Ordinance should go a long way toward facilitating the creation of effective

controls in areas where no controls presently exist.










MODEL URBAN SURFACE WATER RUNOFF CONTROL ORDINANCE

developed by the

Eastern Water Law Center
University of Florida College of Law


SECTION ONE: SHORT TITLE

This ordinance shall be known as the "Surface Water Runoff Control

Ordinance".


Commentary

The title uses "surface water runoff" rather than "stormwater runoff"
because use of the latter term implies that problems result only from the
way runoff is handled following rain storms. In fact, problems result from
the manner in which all surface water is managed.


SECTION TWO: FINDINGS OF FACTS

The of finds that uncontrolled
(governing authority) (local unit)

drainage and development of land has a significant adverse impact upon the

health, safety and welfare of the community. More specifically,

(a) Surface water runoff carries pollutants into receiving water bodies,

degrading water quality;

(b) The increase in nutrients such as phosphorus and nitrogen accelerates

eutrophication of receiving waters, adversely affecting flora and fauna;

(c) Improperly channeling water increases the velocity of runoff, there-

by increasing erosion;

(d) Construction requiring the alteration of natural topography and

removal of vegetation increases erosion;

(e) Siltation of water bodies resulting from increased erosion decreases

their capacity to hold and transport water, interferes with navigation, and

harms flora and fauna;




SECTION TWO: FINDINGS OF FACT (cont'd)


(f) Impervious surfaces increase the volume and rate of surface

water runoff, allowing less water to percolate into the soil and thereby

decreasing groundwater recharge;

(g) Imporperly managed surface water runoff increases the incidence

of flooding and the level of floods which occur, thereby destroying property

and causing loss of life.

(h) Improperly managed surface water runoff interferes with the

maintenance of optimum salinity in estuarine areas.

(i) Economic losses result from these adverse impacts on community

waters.

(j) Future problems can be avoided if developers provide for drainage

in accordance with this ordinance.


Commentary

Regulation under the police power must be reasonably related to pro-
tection of the public health, safety or welfare. Findings of fact identify
the problems which the ordinance is intended to remedy. The reviewing
court or an affected citizen should be able to read the findings of fact
and understand the reasonable necessity for the imposition of the ordinance's
requirements. The attached bibliography contains a listing of studies which
have identified or described the adverse impacts of improperly managed sur-
face water runoff on water quality and other environmental values.


SECTION THREE: OBJECTIVES

In order to protect, maintain, and enhance both the immediate and the

long term health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of
(local
,this ordinance has the following objectives:
unit)

(a) To encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between humanity

and nature;

(b) To protect, restore, and maintain the chemical, physical and

biological integrity of community waters;





SECTION THREE: OBJECTIVES (cont'd)


(c) To prevent individuals, business organizations and governments

from causing harm to the community by activities which adversely affect

water resources;

(d) To encourage the construction of drainage systems which aestheti-

cally and functionally approximate natural systems;

(e) To encourage the protection of natural systems and the use of

them in ways which do not impair their beneficial functioning;

(f) To encourage the use of drainage systems which minimize the

consumption of electrical energy or petroleum fuels to move water, remove

pollutants, or maintain the system;

(g) To minimize the transport of pollutants to community waters;

(h) To maintain or restore groundwater levels;

(i) To protect, maintain or restore natural salinity levels in

estuarine areas;

(j) To minimize erosion and sedimentation;

(k) To discourage drainage of wetlands;

(1) To prevent damage from flooding, while recognizing that natural

fluctuations in water levels are beneficial;

(m) To protect, restore, and maintain the habitat of fish and wildlife;

and

(n) To ensure the attainment of these objectives by requiring the ap-

proval and implementation of water management plans for all activities

which may have a significant impact upon community waters.

Commentary

A listing of objectives serves a number of purposes. Goals are clearly
identified. The scope of the program and its underlying policies are out-
lined. Finally, the statement of objectives aids in evaluating the effective-









ness of the program after implementation and determining what changes
are needed. See T. Debo, Survey and Analysis of Urban Drainage Ordinances
and a Recommended Model Ordinance 29-35, 49-!Z Februaryy, Iy/}) (Wilb No.
PB-2403 817).




SECTION FOUR: DEFINITIONS

Unless specifically defined below, words or phrases shall be inter-

preted so as to give them the meaning they have in common usage and to

give this ordinance its most effective application. Words used in the

singular shall include the plural and the plural the singular; words

used in the present tense shall include the future tense. The word

"shall" connotes mandatory and not discretionary; the word "may" is

permissive.

(a) "Adverse Impacts" are any modifications, alterations or effects

on a feature or characteristic of community waters or wetlands, including

their quality, quantity, hydrodynamics, surface area, species composition,

living resources, aesthetics or usefulness for human or natural uses

which are or may potentially be harmful or injurious to human health,

welfare, safety or property, to biological productivity, diversity, or

stability or which unreasonably interfere with the enjoyment of life or

property, including outdoor recreation.

(b) "Clearing" means the removal of trees and brush from the land

but shall not include mowing.

(c) "Detention" refers to the collection and storage of surface

water for subsequent discharge at a rate which is less than the rate of

inflow.

(d) "Developer" means any person who engages in development either







SECTION FOUR: DEFINITIONS (cont.)

as the owner or as the agent of an owner of property.

(e)- "Development" or "Development Activity" means:

(1) the construction, installation, alteration, demolition or

removal of a structure, impervious surface, or drainage facility; or

(2) clearing, scraping, grubbing, killing or otherwise removing

the vegetation from a site;

(3) adding, removing, exposing, excavating, leveling, grading,

digging, burrowing, dumping, piling, dredging or otherwise significantly

disturbing the soil, mud, sand or rock of a site.

(f) "Drainage Facility" means any component of the drainage system.

(g) "Drainage System" is the system through which water flows from

the land. It includes all watercourses, waterbodies and wetlands.

(h) "Erosion" is the wearing or washing away of soil by the action

of wind or water.

(i) "Flood" is a temporary rise in the level of any waterbody,

watercourse or wetland which results in the inundation of areas not

ordinarily covered by water.

(j) "Impervious Surface" means a surface which has been compacted

or covered with a layer of material so that it is highly resistant to

infiltration by water. It includes semi-impervious surfaces such as

compacted clay, as well as most conventionally surfaced streets, roofs,

sidewalks, parking lots and other similar structures.

(k) "Natural Systems" means systems which predominantly consist

of or use those communities of plants, animals, bacteria and other flora

and fauna which occur indigenously on the land, in the soil or in the

water.

(1) "Owner" is the person in whom is vested the fee ownership,






SECTION FOUR: DEFINITIONS (cont.)

dominion, or title of property, i.e., the proprietor. This term may also

include a tenant, if chargeable under his lease for the maintenance of

the property, and any agent of the owner or tenant including a developer.

(m) "Person" means any and all persons, natural or artificial and

includes any individual, firm, corporation, government agency, business

trust, estate, trust, partnership, association, two or more persons

having a joint or common interest, or any other legal entity.

(n) "Predevelopment Conditions" are those conditions which existed

before alteration, resulting from human activity, of the natural topo-

graphy, vegetation and rate, volume or direction of surface or ground

water flow, as indicated by the best available historical data.

(o) "Receiving Bodies of Water" shall mean any waterbodies, water-

courses or wetlands into which surface waters flow.

(p) "Retention" refers to the collection and storage of runoff

without subsequent discharge to surface waters.

(q) "Sediment" is fine particulate material, whether mineral or

organic, that is in suspension or has settled in a waterbody.

(r) "Sedimentation Facility" means any structure or area which is

designed to hold runoff water until suspended sediments have settled.

(s) "Site" means any tract, lot or parcel of land or combination

of tracts, lots or parcels of land which are in one ownership, or are

contiguous and in diverse ownership where development is to be per-

formed as part of a unit, subdivision, or project.

(t) "Structure" means that which is built or constructed, an

edifice or building of any kind, or any piece of work artificially

built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner

but shall not include fences or signs.







SECTION FOUR: DEFINITIONS (cont.)

(u) "Subdivide" means to divide a parcel of land, whether improved

or unimproved, into three or more contiguous lots or parcels of land,

whether by reference to a plat, by metes and bounds or otherwise, or, if

the establishment of a new street is involved, any division of a parcel

of land. Subdivision includes a resubdivision and, when appropriate to

the context, relates to the process of subdividing or to the land sub-

divided.

(v) "Vegetation" means all plant growth, especially trees, shrubs,

vines, ferns, mosses and grasses.

(w) "Water or Community Waters" means any and all water on or

beneath the surface of the ground or in the atmosphere. It includes the

water in any watercourse, waterbody or drainage system. It also includes

diffused surface water and water percolating, standing or flowing beneath

the surface of the ground, as well as coastal waters.

(x) "Water Management Plan" refers to the detailed analysis required

by Section Six for each activity described in Section Five of this

ordinance.

(y) "Watercourse" means any natural or artificial stream, river,

creek, channel, ditch, canal, conduit, culvert, drain,-waterway, gully,

ravine, street, roadway, swale, or wash in which water flows in a

definite direction, either continuously or intermittently, and which

has a definite channel, bed or banks.



(z) "Waterbody" means any natural or artificial pond, lake,

reservoir or other area which ordinarily or intermittently contains

water and which has a discernible shoreline.

(aa) "Watershed" means a drainage area or drainage basin(s) contributing





SECTION FOUR: DEFINITIONS (cont.)

to the flow of water in a receiving body of water.

(bb) "Wetlands" means those areas where

(1) the soil is ordinarily saturated with water; or

(2) the dominant plant community is one or more of those

species designated by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation

as identifying sub-i-.-). lands or the transitional zone of submerged lands.


Commentary

Some of the definitions have been adapted from F. Maloney and D.
Fernandez, Development of County and Local Ordinances Designed to Protect
the Public Interest in Florida's Coastal Beaches, Florida Sea Grant Program
Technical Paper (Grant no. 04-6-158-44055), July, 1977; Model Ordinances
for Use by Local Governments, Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities
Area, St. Paul, Minn. (March, 1977); Environmental Policy Standards,
Dekalb County Ga. Code, Ch. 6-A (1974); and Grading, Soil Erosion and
Sedimentation Control Regulations, Knox County, Tenn; The Florida
Coastal Management Program (Threshold Draft) prepared by the Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation (Oct., 1978); Drainage Ordinance,
Title XXIV Snohomish County, Washington (1979); Ordinance No. 78-32,
Volusia County, Florida (1978).



SECTION FIVE: APPLICABILITY

(a) Unless exempted pursuant to subsections (b) or (c) or waived

pursuant to subsection (d), a Water Management Plan must be submitted

and approved before:

(1) a plat is recorded or land is subdivided; or

(2) an existing drainage system is altered, rerouted, deepened,

widened, enlarged or obstructed; or

(3) development is commenced.

(b) Exemptions. The following development activities are exempt

from the Water Management Plan requirement:

(1) the development of less than 5 single family or duplex

residential structures and their accessory structures







SECTION FIVE: APPLICABILITY (cont.)

(such as fences, storage sheds and septic tanks) in an

existing subdivision;

(2) the development of one single family or duplex residen-

tial sturcture not in an existing subdivision;

(3) agricultural activity not involving the artificial

drainage of land;

(4) any maintenance, alteration, use or improvement to an

existing structure not changing or affecting quality,rate,

volume or location of surface water discharge.

(c) Emergency Exemption. This ordinance shall not be construed to

prevent the doing of any act necessary to prevent material harm to or

destruction of real or personal property as a result of a present emergency,

including but not limited to fire and hazards resulting from violent storms

or hurricanes or when the property is in imminent peril and obtaining a

permit is impractical. A report of any emergency action shall be made to

the by the owner or person in control of the property
(local agency)
which the emergency action was taken as soon as practicable, but no more

than ten (10) days following such action. Remedial action may be required

by the subject to appeal to the
(local agency) (governing agency)
in the event of dispute.

(d) Waivers.

(1) A waiver of the Water Management Plan requirement may be

obtained by submitting an application on forms supplied by

SThe application shall contain:
(local agency)
(i) the name, address and telephone number of the

developer and owner; and

(ii) a description and a drawing of the proposed develop-





SECTION FIVE: APPLICABILITY (cont.)

ment; and

(iii) the location of the development; and

(iv) any other information requested by ____
(local agency)
that is reasonably necessary to evaluate the proposed

development.

(2) The ______ may grant a waiver if the applica-
(local agency)
tion demonstrates the development is not likely to:

(i) significantly increase or decrease the rate or volume

of surface water runoff;

(ii) have a significant adverse impact on a wetland, water-

course or waterbody;

(iii) significantly contribute to the degradation of water

quality.

(3) The following types of development shall not be eligible

to receive a waiver:

(i) shopping centers;

(ii) industrial or commercial facilities;

(iii) subdivisions;

(iv) roads;

(v) impervious surfaces greater than 10,000 square feet.

(e) Variances.

The may grant a written variance from any
(local agency)
requirement of this ordinance using the following criteria:

(1) there are special circumstances applicable to the subject

property or its intended use; and,

(2) the granting of the variance will not:

(i) significantly increase or decrease the rate or volume






SECTION FIVE: APPLICABILITY (cont.)


of surface water runoff;

(ii) have a significant adverse impact on a wetland,

watercourse or waterbody;

(iii) significantly contribute to the degradation of water

quality;

(iv) otherwise significantly impair attainment of the

objectives of this ordinance.


Commentary

Land should not be divided without consideration of environmental
factors. For example, if there are wetlands on the property which detain
and purify water, recharge groundwater and perform other valuable functions,
then the land should be subdivided in a way that ensures their preservation.
No lot should be created unless it contains enough dry upland area so it
can be used without having to drain the wetland. Similarly, consideration
must be given to reserving sufficient land for components of the drainage
system, roads, utilities and other services. All of these decisions
should be made with consideration of the impact on surface water runoff.
Therefore, approval of a water management plan is required before re-
cording a plat or subdividing land. Changes in existing drainage systems
should be made only after careful evaluation and therefore prior approval
of a water management plan is required before any such changes are made.

The ordinance is applicable to a broad range of development activities
that have the potential to cause adverse impacts on water resources. It
may not be possible or desirable, however, to regulate all development
activity. Therefore provision is made for a system of exemptions and
waivers. The difference between the two is that exemptions are granted
in the ordinance, whereas waivers are granted by the local agency under
the authority of the ordinance. There is no requirement for the sub-
mission of any information regarding exempted activities. The category
should include only those activities that would clearly not have adverse
impacts. Waivers may be used to relieve other types of development that
are not likely to have significant adverse impacts from the requirement
of submitting a water management plan. Unlike exemptions, however, some
preliminary information regarding the proposed activity must be available
to the agency for use in deciding whether a waiver is appropriate. Be-
cause certain types of development have such a high potential for causing
significant adverse impacts, the local agency has no discretion to waive
the requirement of submitting a water management plan with regard to them.

The specific listings in this section are only illustrative of the
types of development that might be exempted or made ineligible to receive





SECTION FIVE: APPLICABILITY (cont.)

a waiver. The problems, needs and regulatory capabilities of each local
government vary greatly. This structure may be adapted to fit many
diverse situations and to incorporate the experience of the local govern-
ment.

Some examples were found in Drainage Ordinance, Title XXIV,
Snohmish County, Washington (1979) and Ordinance No. 78-32, Volusia
County, Florida (1978). An excellent review and commentary from the
Florida Department of Environmental Regulation was of considerable help
in developing this section.



SECTION SIX: CONTENTS OF THE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN

(a) It is the responsibility of an applicant to include in the Water

Management Plan sufficient information for the ____a to
(local agency)
evaluate the environmental characteristics of the affected ares, the

potential and predicted impacts of the proposed activity on community

waters, and the effectiveness and acceptability of those measures pro-

posed by the applicant for reducing adverse impacts. The Water Management

Plan shall contain maps, charts, graphs, tables, photographs, narrative

descriptions and explanations and citations to supporting references, as

appropriate to communicate the information required by this section.

(b) The Water Management Plan shall contain the name, address and

telephone number of the owner and the developer. In addition, the legal

description of the property shall be provided, and its location with

reference to such landmarks as major waterbodies, adjoining roads, rail-

roads, subdivisions, or towns shall be clearly identified by a map.

(c) The existing environmental and hydrologic conditions of the

site and of receiving waters and wetlands shall be described in detail,

including the following:

(1) the direction, flow rate, and volume of surface water

runoff under existing conditions and, to the extent

practicable, redevelopment conditions;







SECTION SIX: CONTENTS OF THE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (cont.)

(2) the location of areas on the site where surface water

collects or percolates into the ground;

(3) a description of all watercourses, waterbodies and wet-

lands on or adjacent to the site or into which surface

waters flow. Information regarding their water quality

and the current water quality classification, if any,

given them by the Florida Department of Environmental

Regulation shall be included;

(4) groundwater levels, including seasonal fluctuations;

(5) location of floodplains;

(6) vegetation;

(7) topography;

(8) soils.

(d) Proposed alterations of the site shall be described in detail,

including:

(1) changes in topography;

(2) areas where vegetation will be cleared or otherwise killed;

(3) areas.that will be covered with an impervious surface and

a description of the surfacing material;

(4) the size and location of any buildings or other structures.

(e) Predicted impacts of the proposed development on existing con-

ditions shall be described in detail, including:

(1) changes in water quality;

(2) changes in groundwater levels;

(3) changes in the incidence and duration of flooding on the

site and upstream and downstream from it;

(4) impacts on wetlands; and





SECTION SIX: CONTENTS OF THE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (cont.)

(5) impacts on vegetation.

(f) All components of the drainage system and any measure for

the detention, retention, or inflitration of water or for the protection

of water quality shall be described in detail, including:

(1) the channel, direction, flow rate, volume and quality of

surface water that will be conveyed from the site, with a

comparison to existing conditions and, to the extent

practicable, redevelopment conditions;

(2) detention and retention areas, including plans for the

discharge of contained waters, maintenance plans, and pre-

dictions of water quality in those areas;

(3) areas of the site to be used or reserved for percolating,

including a prediction of the impact on groundwater quality;

(4) a plan for the control of erosion and sedimentation which

describes in detail the type and location of control

measures, the stage of development at which they will be

put into place or used, and provisions for their maintenance;

(5) any other information which the developer or the
(local
believes is reasonably necessary for an
agency)
evaluation of the development.


Commentary

This section specifies the information that must be provided to the
local agency. The complexity and depth of information that is necessary
for proper evaluation will depend on the nature of the site and the extent
to which it will be altered. The Manual of Surface Water Management Prac-
tices discussed in Section Eleven should describe more specific techniques
for obtaining and calculating the data required in the Water Management
Plan. For example, a hydrologic accounting under redevelopment conditions
is required by Section Six, subsection (c)(1).

The Manual should tell an applicant what conditions must be accounted







SECTION SIX: CONTENTS OF THE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (cont.)

for drought, the 10 year storm, the 25 year storm, etc. The Water
Management Plan is similar to an environmental impact assessment. The
Water Management Plan contents were adapted in part from the Model
Ordinances for Use by Local Governments, Metropolitan Council of the
Twin Cities Area, St. Paul, Minn. (March 1977). See the commentary
following Section Eleven for more information regarding the use of a
practices manual.



SECTION SEVEN: PROCEDURES AND FEES

(a) Any person planning a development as defined in this ordinance,

unless exempted, shall submit a Water Management Plan or an application

for waiver to the
(local agency)

(b) Within ten (10) working days after submission of the completed

waiver application, the __ ___ shall notify the applicant that
(local agency)
the waiver has been approved or denied and whether a Water Management Plan

must be submitted by the applicant.

(c) A permit fee will be collected at the time the Water Management

Plan or application for waiver are submitted and will reflect the cost of

administration and management of the permitting process. The
(governing
______ shall establish, by resolution, a prorated fee schedule
authority)
based upon the relative complexity of the project and it will be attached

to this ordinance as Appendix A. The fee schedule may be amended from

time to time by the by resolution. Notice of
(governing authority)
such resolution shall be published no less than fifteen (15) days prior

to adoption.

(d) Within forty-five (45) days after submission of the completed

Water Management Plan, the shall approve, with or
(local agency)
without specified conditions or modifications, or reject the Plan and

shall notify the applicant accordingly. If the has
(local agency)






SECTION SEVEN: PROCEDURES AND FEES (cont.)

not rendered a decision within forty-five (45) days after Plan sub-

mission, it shall inform the applicant of the status of the review

process and the anticipated completion date. If the Plan is rejected

or modified, the shall state its reasons.
(local agency)
(e) The Water Management Plan shall not be approved unless it

clearly indicates that the proposed development will meet the Perfor-

mance Standards described in Section Eight and the Design Standards

described in Section Nine, except where a variance has been granted

pursuant to Section Five, Subsection (e), or where off-site management

is granted pursuant to Section Ten.

(f) Inspections. No Water Management Plan may be approved without

adequate provision for inspection of the property before development

activity commences. The applicant shall arrange with the
(local
for scheduling the following inspections:
agency)
(1) Initial Inspection: prior to approval of the Water

Management Plan;

(2) Bury Inspection: prior to burial of any underground

drainage structure;

(3) Erosion Control Inspection: as necessary to ensure

effective control of erosion and sedimentation;

(4) Finish Inspection: when all work including installation

of all drainage facilities has been completed.

The shall inspect the work and shall either
(local agency)
approve it or notify the applicant in writing in what respects there

has been a failure to comply with the requirements of the approved

Water Management Plan. Any portion of the work which does not comply
*.. *






SECTION SEVEN: PROCEDURES AND FEES (cont.)


shall be promptly corrected by the applicant or the applicant will

be subject to the penalty provisions of Section Thirteen.

(g) Appeals. An aggrieved applicant may appeal any final decision

or determination of the under this ordinance to the
(local agency)
__________________ The appeal shall be filed in writing
(special hearing examiner)
within twenty (20) days of the date of official transmittal of the final

decision or determination to the applicant, shall state clearly the

grounds on which the appeal is based, and shall be processed in the

manner prescribed for hearing administrative appeals under
(local

or state code provision)


Commentary

The procedures involved in the Model Ordinance are straightforward.
A proposed development is either exempted from the requirements of the
ordinance, is granted a waiver from its requirements after a review of
a written request for waiver, or requires the submission of a Water
Management Plan. The fee structure will provide funds to pay the cost
of administration, including costs of review and inspection.

If the Plan is not approved, the applicant will be told why and will
know what he can do to meet the requirements of the ordinance. Even if
the Plan is otherwise in good order, an initial site inspection will be
necessary to determine -whether the redevelopment conditions are actually
as they have been described in the Plan and whether any considerations
have been omitted. After approval of the Plan and commencement of the
development, it will be important to inspect the progress and completion
of the project to make certain that the approved Water Management Plan
is followed.

The appeals procedure is admittedly sketchy because this area is
one where differences between existing systems are great. It is con-
templated that the procedure for hearing appeals will conform to an
existing procedure for hearing appeals from building permit denials,
for example. Some counties have a hearing examiner for these purposes
and this type of appellate process seems to be a good one.

Some of the language in this section was adopted from Drainage
Ordinance, Title XXIV, Snohomish County, Washington (1979); and
Ordinance No. 78-32, Volusia County, Florida (1978).







SECTION EIGHT: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR WATER MANAGEMENT PLANS

Water Management Plans must demonstrate that the proposed develop-

ment or activity has been planned and designed and will be constructed

and maintained to meet each of the following standards:

(a) Ensure that after development, runoff from the site resulting

from rainfall approximates the rate of flow, volume and timing of runoff

that would have occurred following the same rainfall under existing

conditions and, to the extent practicable, redevelopment conditions,

unless runoff is discharged into a Regional Drainage Facility as pro-

vided in

(b) Maintain the natural hydrodynamic characteristics of the

watershed;

(c) Protect or restore the quality of ground and surface waters;

(d) Ensure that erosion during and after development is minimized;

(e) Protect groundwater levels;

(f) Protect the beneficial functioning of wetlands as areas for the

natural storage of surface waters and the chemical reduction and assimila-

tion of pollutants;

(g) Prevent increased flooding and damage that results from improper

location, construction and design of structures in areas which are pre-

sently subject to an unacceptable danger of flooding;

(h) Prevent or reverse salt water intrusion;

(i) Protect the natural fluctuating levels of salinity in estuarine

areas;

(j) Minimize injury to flora and fauna and adverse impacts to fish

and wildlife habitat;

(k) Otherwise further the objectives of this ordinance.







SECTION EIGHT: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR WATER MANAGEMENT PLANS (cont.)

Commentary

The basic objective of the ordinance is to prevent development from
adversely affecting certain characteristics and functions of the natural
environment. The primary basis for evaluating a developer's proposal is
to ascertain whether it is likely to meet that objective. A set of per-
formance standards has been developed which incorporates the environmental
processes that should be maintained. The local policy making body needs
to determine what will be an acceptable danger in flooding for different
types of uses. For example, it might be acceptable to build roads in
areas that flood more frequently than sites which would be acceptable for
hospitals.



SECTION NINE: DESIGN STANDARDS FOR WATER MANAGEMENT PLANS

To ensure attainment of the objectives of this ordinance and to

ensure that performance standards will be met, the design, construction

and maintenance of drainage systems shall be consistent with the follow-

ing standards:

(a) Channeling runoff directly into waterbodies shall be prohibited.

Instead, runoff shall be routed through swales and other systems designed

to increase time of concentration, decrease velocity, increase infiltra-

tion, allow suspended solids to settle, and remove pollutants;

(b) Natural watercourses shall not be dredged, cleared of vegeta-

tion, deepened, widened, straightened, stabilized or otherwise altered.

Water shall be retained or detained before it enters any natural water-

course in order to preserve the natural hydrodynamic of the watercourse

and to prevent siltation or other pollution;

(c) The area of land disturbed by development shall be as small as

practicable. Those areas which are not to be disturbed shall be pro-

tected by an adequate barrier from construction activity. Whenever

possible, natural vegetation shall be retained and protected;

(d) No grading, cutting or filling shall be commenced until erosion

and sedimentation control devices have been installed between the disturbed





SECTION NINE: DESIGN STANDARDS FOR WATER MANAGEMENT PLANS (cont.)

area and waterbodies, watercourses and wetlands;

(e) Land which has been cleared for development and upon which

construction has not commenced shall be protected from erosion by

appropriate techniques designed to revegetate the area;

(f) Sediment shall be retained on the site of the development;

(g) Wetlands and other waterbodies shall not be used as primary

sediment traps during development;

(h) Erosion and sedimentation facilities shall receive regular

maintenance to insure that they continue to function properly;

(i) Artificial watercourses shall be designed, considering soil

type, so that the velocity of flow is low enough to prevent erosion;

(j) Vegetated buffer strips shall be created or, where practicable,

retained in their natural state along the banks of all watercourses,

waterbodies or wetlands. The width of the buffer shall be sufficient

to prevent erosion, trap the sediment in overland runoff, provide access

to the waterbody and allow for periodic flooding without damage to struc-

tures;

(k) Intermittent watercourses, such as swales, should be vegetated;

(1) Retention and detention ponds shall be used to retain and

detain the increased and accelerated runoff which the development generates.

Water shall be released from detention ponds into watercourses or wetlands

at a rate and in a manner approximating the natural flow which would have

occurred before development;

(m) Although the use of wetlands for storing and purifying water is

encouraged, care must be taken not to overload their capacity, thereby

harming the wetlands and transitional vegetation. Wetlands should not

be damaged by the construction of detention ponds;






SECTION NINE: DESIGN STANDARDS FOR WATER MANAGEMENT PLANS (cont.)

(n) The first one inch of runoff from impervious surfaces shall be

retained on the site of the development;

(o) Runoff from parking lots shall be treated to remove oil and

sediment before it enters receiving waters;

(p) Detention and retention areas shall be designed so that shore-

lines are sinuous rather than straight and so that the length of shore-

line is increased, thus offering more space for the growth of littoral

vegetation;

(q) The banks of detention and retention areas shall slope at a

gentle grade into the water as a safeguard against drowning, personal

injury or other accidents, to encourage the growth of vegetation and to

allow the alternate flooding and exposure of areas along the shore as

water levels periodically rise and fall;

(r) The use of drainage facilities and vegetated buffer zones as

open space, recreation and conservation areas shall be encouraged.


Commentary

Design standards create limitations on the specific methods that
can be utilized to achieve the performance standards of Section Eight.
For example, the performance standard that requires runoff after
-development to approximate the rate, quantity and timing of runoff
under natural, redevelopment conditions could be met by constructing
a deep, rectangular pit to trap runoff which could then be pumped out
on a schedule that approximates the natural, redevelopment hydro-
period. Obviously, that solution would not be desirable because the
.pit would be unsightly, usable for only that limited purpose and the
use of the energy to run the pumps would be wasteful. Design standards
constrain such undesirable solutions. The list of design standards
included in the ordinance should be augmented when appropriate to meet
the needs of a community.

One of the most common infirmities of local regulatory programs,
and one which prompts many lawsuits, is the lack of clear guidelines
to a regulatory board in its decision-making. The performance and
design standards in the Model Ordinance create the necessary objective
guidelines to guide decision-making. Some design standards were
adapted or modified in part from Model Ordinances for Use by Local






SECTION NINE: DESIGN STANDARDS FOR WATER MANAGEMENT PLANS (cont.)

Governments, Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area, St. Paul,
Minn. (March 1977); and Environmental Policy Standards, Dekalb Co.
Ga. Code, Ch. 6-A (1974).



SECTION TEN: OFF-SITE DRAINAGE FACILITIES

The may allow surface water runoff that is other-
(local agency)
wise of unacceptable quality or which would be discharged in volumes or

at rates in excess of those otherwise allowed by this ordinance, to be

discharged into drainage facilities off the site of development if each

of the following conditions is met:

(a) It is not practicable to completely manage runoff on the site

in a manner that meets the Performance Standards and Design Standards;

(b) The off-site drainage facilities and channels leading to them

are designed, constructed and maintained in accordance with the require-

ments of this ordinance;

(c) Adequate provision is made for the sharing of construction and

operating costs of the facilities. The developer may be required to pay

a portion of the cost of constructing the facilities as a condition to

receiving approval of the drainage plan;

(d) Adverse environmental impacts on the site of development will

be minimized.


Commentary

The Model Ordinance was initially designed to regulate the land
activities that affect runoff by requiring on-site management in every
instance. However, it was later recognized that not only are there
cases where on-site management is impracticable but it is often much
less cost-effective for the developer and the local government for
costs of drainage facilities and their subsequent maintenance. There-
fore, Section Ten was drafted to provide a mechanism for providing
off-site management as an alternative where it can be demonstrated to
otherwise meet the objectives of the Model Ordinance.








SECTION ELEVEN: MANUAL OF SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

(a) The _____ shall compile a manual of Surface Water
(local agency)
Management Practices for the guidance of persons preparing Water Manage-

ment Plans, and designing or operating drainage systems. The Manual

shall be updated periodically to reflect the most current and effective

practices and shall be made available to the public;

(b) The Manual shall include guidance and specifications for the

preparation of water management plans. Acceptable techniques for

obtaining, calculating and presenting the information required in the

water management plans shall be described;

(c) The Manual shall include guidance in the selection of environ-

mentally sound practices for the management of surface water and the

control of erosion and sediment. Specific techniques and practices shall

be described in detail. However, the development and use of innovative

techniques which emphasize the use of natural systems and implement the

objectives of this ordinance shall be encouraged whether or not they are

specifically listed in the Manual;

(d) The Manual shall also establish minimum specifications for the

construction of drainage facilities. Construction Specifications shall

be established in accordance with current good engineering practices;

(e) The ____ shall submit the Manual and subsequent
(local agency)
revisions of it to the (local author ) for review and approval.
(local authority)

Commentary

There are numerous effective techniques that have been developed
for managing surface water runoff in an environmentally acceptable manner.
Many local developers will be unfamiliar with these techniques, however.
The local agency, therefore, should compile a manual to guide persons in
the selection of appropriate techniques.

"The manual should not be a limiting document forcing the






SECTION ELEVEN: MANUAL OF SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (cont.)

engineer to use standard designs and procedures. Several
design examples should be given ... with latitude for the
design engineer to use his imagination and engineering
judgment. The manual should have the connotation of a
document that suggests and informs rather than limiting
or prescribing. In addition, the manual would give more
complete definitions of some of the concepts included in
the ordinance ...." (T. Debo, page 123, supra, at 38-39).

The use of innovative techniques should be encouraged, subject always to
the review of the local agency as to whether they will be effective.

Construction Specifications are also required by the ordinance.
These specifications would serve the same function with regard to the
drainage system as a building code serves with regard to construction
of a house. The requirements of construction specifications should
ensure that the various components of the drainage system are con-
structed in a safe and dependable manner. The manual could draw largely
from similar guides that have already been written. E.g., J. Tourbier
and R. Westmacott, Water Resources Protection Measures in Land Develop-
ment--A Handbook (April 1974), Water Resources Center, University of
Delaware, Newark, Delaware 19711. The U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Soil Conservation Service's Technical Release No. 55 entitled, "Urban
Hydrology for Small Watersheds," and SCS National Engineering Handbook,
Section 4, entitled, "Hydrology" would also be helpful. In addition,
many states have developed best management practice manuals or study
reports in conjunction with the Clean Water Act (P.L. 92-500) Section 208
Areawide Water Quality Management Planning requirement to develop
nonpoint source pollution control programs. See, e.g., Stormwater
Management, Procedures and Methods, Snohomish County, Washington (1977).
These manuals and reports could be adopted in whole or part by local
governments in the development of their own Manual of Surface Water
Management Practices.

Some helpful reference materials include, EPA, Processes, Procedures
and Methods to Control Pollution Resulting From All Construction Activity,
EPA-430/9-73-007; Urban Stormwater Management and Technology, An Assess-
ment, EPA-670/2-74-040; EPA, Preventive Approaches to Stormwater Manage-
ment, EPA-440/9-77-001; EPA, Nonpoint Source Control Guidance, Hydrologic
Modifications, (Feb. 1977); J.T. Wildrick, K. Kuhn, W.R. Kerns, Urban
Water Runoff and Water Quality Control, Virginia Water Resources Center,
Blacksburg, Va. (Dec. 1976); EPA, Methods and Practices for Controlling
Water Pollution from Agricultural Nonpoint Sources, EPA-430/9-73-015.



SECTION TWELVE: MAINTENANCE

(a) Drainage facilities shall be dedicated to the (governing author
(governing authority)
where they are determined to be appropriately a part of the ____
(local unit)
maintained regional system or are unlikely to be adequately maintained by







SECTION TWELVE: MAINTENANCE (cont.)

the owner.

(b) The systems maintained by the owner shall have adequate ease-

ments to permit the _____( l ___ to inspect and, if necessary, to
(local agency)
take corrective action should the owner fail to properly maintain the

system. Before taking corrective action, the shall
(local agency)
give the owner written notice of the nature of the existing defects.

If the owner fails within thirty (30) days from the date of notice to

commence corrective action or to appeal the'matter to the
(special hear-
ing ea the _________ may take necessary corrective action, the
ing examiner) (local agency)
cost of which shall become a lien on the property until paid.


Commentary

A frequent comment that was recieved in response to our request for
feedback on early drafts of the Model Ordinance was that maintenance
problems can be a significant headache for local governments. Section
Twelve provides alternatives for allocating the maintenance responsibility
between the private and public sectors. No cost sharing is provided for
maintenance here as it is in Section Ten for off-site facilities. There
may be particular situations, however, where a cost contribution would
be justified and easily administered by the local government that assumed
maintenance responsibility. Articulating those situations, however, is
extremely difficult. This section was adapted from Ordinance No. 78-32,
Volusia County, Florida (1978).



SECTION THIRTEEN: ENFORCEMENT

(a) Nuisance. Any development activity that is commenced without

prior approval of a Water Management Plan or is conducted contrary to an

approved Water Management Plan as required by this ordinance, shall be

deemed a public nuisance and may be restrained by injunction or other-

wise abated in a manner provided by law.

(b) Civil and Criminal Penalties. In addition to or as an alterna-

tive to any penalty provided herein or by law, any person who violates

the provisions of this ordinance shall be punishable by a fine of not less






SECTION THIRTEEN: ENFORCEMENT (cont.)

than One Hundred Dollars ($100) nor more than One Thousand Dollars

($1,000) or by imprisonment in the county jail for a period not to

exceed sixty (60) days, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Such

person shall be guilty of a separate offense for each day during which

the violation occurs or continues.

(c) The violator may be required to restore any altered conditions

to the land to their undisturbed condition. In the event that restora-

tion is not undertaken within a reasonable time after notice, the
(local)
may take necessary corrective action, the cost of which shall
agency)
become a lien upon the property until paid.

(d) Notice of Violation. When the ____ determines
(local agency)
that development activity is not being carried out in accordance with

the requirements of this ordinance, it shall issue a written notice of

violation to the owner of the property. The notice of violation shall

contain:

(1) the name and address of the owner or applicant;

(2) the street address when available or a description of the

building, structure, or land upon which the violation is

occurring;

(3) a statement specifying the nature of the violation;

(4) a description of the remedial actions necessary to bring

the development activity into compliance with this or-

dinance and a time schedule for completion of such

remedial action;

(5) a statement of the penalty or penalties that shall or may

be assessed against the person to whom the notice of vio-

lation is directed;







SECTION THIRTEEN: ENFORCEMENT (cont.)

(6) a statement that the determination or
(local agency)
violation may be appealed to the _____(ela
(special hearing examiner)

by filing a written notice of appeal within fifteen (15)

days of service of notice of violation.

The notice of violation shall be served upon the persons) to whom

it is directed either personally, in the manner provided for personal

service of notices in court or by mailing a copy of the notice of violation

by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to such

person at his or her last known address.

A notice of violation issued pursuant to this section constitutes

a determination from which an administrative appeal may be taken to the


(special hearing examiner)

Commentary

The local government is provided with a substantial arsenal for
enforcing the provisions of the Model Ordinance. A violator is provided
with considerable notice of the nature of his alleged violation and
related matters. This section was drawn in part from Drainage Ordinance,
Title XXIV, Snohomish County, Washington (1979) and Ordinance No. 78-32,
Volusia County, Florida (1978).



SECTION FOURTEEN: SEVERABILITY

Each separate provision of this ordinance is deemed independent of

all other provisions herein so that if.any provision or provisions of

this ordinance be declared invalid, all other provisions thereof shall

remain valid and enforceable.



SECTION FIFTEEN: EFFECTIVE DATE

This ordinance shall become effective on








BIBLIOGRAPHY

The adverse impacts of improperly managed surface water runoff are

identified and described in the following reports and the sources cited

therein. Since technological knowledge is expanding rapidly in this

area, reference should be made to the most current literature.


1. Amy, G., et. al., Water Quality Management Planning For Urban Runoff (1974).

2. Darnell, Impacts of Construction Activities in Wetlands of the United

States, EPA-600/3-76-045 (1976).

3. EPA, Methods For Identifying and Evaluating the Nature and Extent of

Nonpoint Sources of Pollutants, EPA-430/9-73-014 (1973).

4. EPA, Nonpoint Source Control Guidance, Hydrologic Modifications (Feb. 1977).

5. EPA, Preventative Approaches to Stormwater Management, EPA-440/9-77-001

(1977).

6. EPA, Processes, Procedures and Methods to Control Pollution Resulting

From All Construction Activity, EPA-430/9-73-007 (1973).

7. EPA, The Control of Pollution From Hydrographic Modifications (1973).

8. EPA, Urban Stormwater Management and Technology: An Assessment, EPA-670/2-

74-040 (1974).

9. EPA, Water Quality Management Planning For Urban Runoff, EPA-440/9-75-004

(1975).

10. Leopold, L., Hydrology For Urban Land Planning: A Guidebook on the Hydrologic

Effects of Urban Land Use, U.S. Geological Survey Circular 555 (1968).

11. MacGill, R., et. al., Final Report on the Special Project to Prevent Eutro-

phication of Lake Okeechobee, Florida Division of State Planning (November

1976).









12. James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers, Inc., Forest Harvest,

Residue Treatment, Reforestation and Protection of Water Quality, EPA-910/

9-76-020 (1976).

13. Omernik, J., Nonpoint Source Stream Nutrient Level Relationships,

EPA-600/3-77-105 (Sept., 1977).

14. Seaman, W., Jr. and R. McLean, eds., Freshwater and the Florida Coast:

Southwest Florida, Sea Grant Report Number 22 (Oct. 1977).

15. U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of Water Research and Technology,

Water Resources Scientific Information Center, Urbanization and Sedimentation:

A Bibliography (Dec., 1975).

16. Wanielista, M., Nonpoint Source Effects, Report #ESEI-76-1, Florida

Department of Environmental Regulation (January, 1976).

17. Wharton, C.H., et. al., Forested Wetlands of Florida Their Management

and Use, Florida Division of State Planning (1977).

18. Wildrick, J.T., et. al., Urban Water Runoff and Water Quality Control,

Virginia Water Resources Center, Blacksburg, Va. 24061, (1976).







MODEL INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL FACILITY CONTROL ORDINANCE


Introduction


Regulation of the collection and disposal of human waste has evolved

considerably since the widespread use of water-flushed toilets began in

London over a hundred years ago. In the more populated areas during that

period, central collection and disposal systems were built to transport

sewage away from the city. Today, we recognize that simply sending away

our waste is no solution at all. Water quality control problems associated

with waste treatment systems require close examination and their control

mechanisms need continuing reevaluation to assure that the most effective

alternatives are implemented. The Model Individual Sewage Disposal Facility

Control Ordinance is the result of the Eastern Water Law Center's reevalua-

tion of past regulatory techniques and investigation of the latest commen-

tary in the field of sanitary engineering. It is our belief that the Model

Ordinance provides a more effective program than is possible through appli-

cation of the State of Florida's regulations alone and that it can be use-

ful in meeting the water quality management mandate of the Federal Water

Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.

In 1970, over 28% of America's housing units, or 19.5 million house-

holds, were not served by public sewage systems.' This means that more

than 60 million Americans must provide their own sewage disposal system to

manage the three billion gallons of domestic sewage which they cumulatively

generate every day.2 Yet, only about 32% of the land in the United States

is suitable for onsite treatment and disposal.3

By far, the most common type of individual sewage disposal facility is
the septic tank-soil absorption system (ST-SA). Such systems are not appro-

priate in densely populated areas and are not suitable to many geomorpholo-







MODEL INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL FACILITY CONTROL ORDINANCE


Introduction


Regulation of the collection and disposal of human waste has evolved

considerably since the widespread use of water-flushed toilets began in

London over a hundred years ago. In the more populated areas during that

period, central collection and disposal systems were built to transport

sewage away from the city. Today, we recognize that simply sending away

our waste is no solution at all. Water quality control problems associated

with waste treatment systems require close examination and their control

mechanisms need continuing reevaluation to assure that the most effective

alternatives are implemented. The Model Individual Sewage Disposal Facility

Control Ordinance is the result of the Eastern Water Law Center's reevalua-

tion of past regulatory techniques and investigation of the latest commen-

tary in the field of sanitary engineering. It is our belief that the Model

Ordinance provides a more effective program than is possible through appli-

cation of the State of Florida's regulations alone and that it can be use-

ful in meeting the water quality management mandate of the Federal Water

Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.

In 1970, over 28% of America's housing units, or 19.5 million house-

holds, were not served by public sewage systems.' This means that more

than 60 million Americans must provide their own sewage disposal system to

manage the three billion gallons of domestic sewage which they cumulatively

generate every day.2 Yet, only about 32% of the land in the United States

is suitable for onsite treatment and disposal.3

By far, the most common type of individual sewage disposal facility is
the septic tank-soil absorption system (ST-SA). Such systems are not appro-

priate in densely populated areas and are not suitable to many geomorpholo-








gical conditions. Moreover, most ST-SA systems have a short operational

life, failing within three years in most instances. Factors that contribute

to the short life-span of these systems include inadequate site evaluation,

faulty construction and installation, overloading and inadequate inspection

programs. Absent these avoidable problems, an individual ST-SA system could

give 20 years or more of efficient service.

In 1972, the Federal Government made water quality problem identifica-

tion and control a national goal.4 The Government initiated what later be-

came the largest public works program in the nation by providing funds for

planning and construction of municipal wastewater treatment facilities. In

addition to federal efforts, the State of Florida has also taken steps to

control water quality problems associated with sewage treatment and dis-

posal. It is the policy of the State to require that all individual sewage

disposal systems "connect to a public or investor-owned sewerage system

within 180 days from the date that such system becomes available."7 Not-

withstanding such a policy, over 25% of Florida's housing units are not con-

nected to a central sewage disposal system.8 The Florida Department of Health

and Rehabilitative Services, pursuant to Chapter 381 of the Florida Statutes,

has promulgated regulations for installation of septFc tanks which control

location, design and performance criteria.9 While the standards thus estab-

lished in Chapter 10 D-6 of the Florida Administrative Code (hereinafter

10 D-6) are important, several provisions do not provide optimum protection

from surface and groundwater pollution.10 In addition, no provisions insure
the proper functioning of individual systems after installation. An ordi-

nance which combines installation requirements with an ongoing maintenance

program would provide much greater environmental protection.







Communities that are either too small to afford the cost of a central

collection and treatment system or too sprawling to connect all suburban

residences to an existing central system, should consider the problems gen-

erated by individual sewage disposal facilities and ask such pertinent ques-

tions as:

1. "How many onsite systems are there and how many are malfunctioning?

2. What is the nature of the malfunctioning and where are these units
located?

3. When was each system installed?

4. What were the results of the percolation test(s) before installa-
tion? What are they now?

5. How frequently has each unit been pumped out? How frequently inspec-
ted? Is there a garbage grinder connected into the system?

6. Describe the physical areas, including soils and groundwater charac-
teristics, where malfunctions are occurring. What is the depth to the
groundwater table?

7. Would a local commercial or municipal organization with adequate
pumping vehicles and a treatment facility properly utilized eliminate
most of the malfunctions of the onsite systems?

8. Would a municipal organization be able to obtain ownership of, or
easements to, each onsite system?

9. What are the costs of upgrading the systems, of providing maintenance
service, etc.?

10. In areas where conditions vary and only a portion of the area is
suitable for septic tank service, will a limited collection and
treatment system suffice?

11. What is the estimated charge to each user for the onsite treatment
system service if such service would be cost-effective?"ll

The Model Ordinance which follows is designed to protect community waters

from the pollution caused by malfunctioning or inadequate individual sewage

disposal facilities through a local regulatory program which incorporates

and supplements Chapter 10 D-6 regulations of the Department of Health and

Rehabilitation Services.








FOOTNOTES


1. Randolph, The Next Steps in Protecting the Environment, in Individual
Onsite Wastewater Systems 4 (N. McClelland ed. 1977) (hereinafter
McClelland).

2. Id.

3. Goddard, The Social, Economic and Political Impacts of Onlot Sewage
Disposal, in McClelland 15 at 17.

4. 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq. (1978).

5. Dearth, U.S. EPA, Response to PL-92-500 Relative to Rural Wastewater
Problems, in McClelland 37.

6. Fla. Stat. 381 et seq. (1977).

7. Fla. Stat. 381.272 (6) (1977).

8. E. Locognata, The Role of the States in Guiding Land-Use Decisions (1974).

9. Fla. Admin. Code, Chapter 10 D-6 et seq. (1978).

10. The need for expansion and modification of the provisions of 10 D-6 is
demonstrated by the recent establishment of a Septic Tank Ad Hoc Techni-
cal Committee which drafted alterations to 10 D-6. These draft suggestions
have, to date, not been adopted by either the Department of Environmental
Regulation or the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services of the
State of Florida.

11. Dearth, supra note 5 at 38.










MODEL INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL FACILITY CONTROL ORDINANCE


by

Eastern Water Law Center
358 Holland Law Center
University of Florida
Gainesville, Florida 32611



SECTION ONE: GENERAL PROVISIONS

1.1 Problem Recognition.

The _______ of _____ hereby recognizes the need
(governing body) (local unit)

to protect its surface and groundwaters from pollution by inadequately treated

sewage. It is further recognized that large quantities of inadequately treated

sewage are released from individual sewage disposal facilities as a result of

improper design, siting, construction, or maintenance of such facilities. In-

adequately treated sewage endangers the health, safety, and welfare of the

citizens of and requires the expenditure of public funds to cor-
(local unit)

rect deficiencies.


Commentary

By identifying the problem to be solved, both the reasonableness of the
exercise of regulatory authority and the intent of the local government is
made clear.


1.2 Objective.

To protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of
(local

to protect and maintain the chemical, physical and biological Integrity
unit)

of surface and ground waters in and adjacent to and to reduce
(local unit)










the expenditures of public funds, there is hereby established an individual

sewage disposal facility control program which incorporates and supplements

the minimum standards of Chapter 10D-6 of the Florida Administrative Code.

This ordinance establishes minimum standards for the design, siting,

construction and maintenance of individual sewage disposal facilities within


(local unit)


Commentary

The language of this subsection is modeled after language in the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, P.L. 92-500. The statement of objective aids
interpretation and guides discretion. Chapter 10D-6 is expressly incorporated
so that an applicant clearly understands that all of its requirements remain
applicable to him.


1.3 Effective Date.

This ordinance shall take effect on 19


1.4 Scope.

All individual sewage disposal facilities within the jurisdiction of

shall be installed, modified, and maintained in accordance with
(local unit)

the provisions of this ordinance. Where provisions of this ordinance require

more stringent controls than comparable provisions in Chapter 10D-6 of the

Florida Administrative Code, the provisions of this ordinance will apply.


Commentary

Chapter 10D-6 is neant to establish minimum standards only. Where pro-
visions of the Model Ordinance impose more stringent criteria for permit ap-
proval, they must be complied with before the local permit will be issued.


1.5 When a Sewer Connection Is Required.

(a) Every building in which plumbing fixtures are installed shall be










connected to a public or private sewage collection system unless:

(1) no such system exists; or

(2) no such system is under construction and will be located within

feet of the building to be connected; or
(#)

(3) the additional wastewater that would be added to the sewage

collection system by connecting the building would cause the total waste load

entering the system to exceed the maximum waste load for which it was designed.

(b) In no instance shall any individual sewage disposal facility be in-

stalled where the waste load to be received by that system exceeds gallons


per day.

(c) When connection to a sewage collection system is not required by

subsection 1.5(a), no wastewater may be discharged from the building in any

manner other than into an individual sewage disposal facility pursuant to the

provisions of this ordinance.

Commentary

This subsection clarifies and elaborates on similar language in 10D-6.21(6),
Florida Admin. Code.



1.6 Surface and Stormwater Disposal.

Surface and stormwaters shall not be discharged into an individual sewage

disposal facility nor in any manner which could interfere with the functioning

of the facility.

Commentary

Discharge of stormwater into an individual sewage disposal facility is
likely to exceed its design capacity and would thus contribute to the malfunc-
tioning of the system. This section is a modification of Maine Plumbing Code
Part II, 4.4 Surface Water.









SECTION TWO: DEFINITIONS

(1) "Absorption Areas"--total surface area of bottom of trenches used

for absorption field.

(2) "Absorption Field"--a system of openjointed or perforated pipe or

alternate distribution units of approved type to receive flow from septic tank

and designed to distribute effluent for oxidation and absorption by the soil.

(3) "Automatic Dosing Device"--pumps or siphons which discharge a specific

volume of wastewater into a disposal area.

(4) "Domestic Water Supply"--one or more sources of potable water, including

facilities for conveyance thereof, such as wells, springs and pumps, on one pro-

perty, other than those serving a municipality or a group of 10 or more premises

of mixed ownership.

(5) "Effluent"--liquid flowing from a septic or treatment tank.

(6) "Fill"--a disturbed soil free of foreign debris which was brought in

and placed over the original soil, ledge, low areas, etc. It is characterized

by having no distinct horizons or color patterns, as found in naturally developed

and undisturbed soils.

(7) "Individual Sewage Disposal System"--a privately owned and maintained

system of sewage treatment and disposal facilities serving a single lot.

(8) "Owner"--the person in whom is vested the fee ownership, dominion,

or title of property, the proprietor; this term may also include a tenant, if

chargeable under his lease for the maintenance of the property, and any agent

of the owner or tenant including a developer.

(9) "Person"--any individual firm, corporation, partnership, association

or other private or governmental entity.

(10) "Scum"--a mass of sewage matter which flows on the surface of sewage.










(11) "Septic Tank'--watertight tank or receptacle used as a reservoir

for receiving or disposing sewage wastes.

(12) "Sewage"--liquid or solid in suspension or solution, originating

from toilets.

(13) "Sludge"--the accumulated settled solids deposited from sewage and

containing more or less water to form a semi-liquid mass.

(14) "Watercourses"--any natural or artificial stream, river, creek, channel,

ditch, canal, conduit, culvert, drain, waterway, gully, ravine, street, roadway,

or wash in which water flows in a definite direction or course, either continu-

ously or intermittently, and which has a definite channel, bed or banks, and

shall include any area adjacent thereto subject to inundation by reason of

overflow of surface water.


Commentary

Many of the definitions have been taken from 10OD-6.22 Fla..Admin.
Code. In addition, certain.definitions have been adopted from L. Winneberger,
Manual of Grey Water Treatment Practice 18 (1974); Wisconsin Adm. Code 62.02;
and Maine Plumbing Code Part II, Subsurface Wastewater Disposal Regulations (1978).



SECTION THREE: PERMITS FOR NEW FACILITIES

3.1 Permit Requirement.

No person may obtain a building or plumbing permit from
(local authority)

unless that person obtains a sewage disposal permit.


3.2 Permit Application.

Application for a sewage disposal permit shall be made to
(local authority)

on forms supplied by that office. Applications shall Include:

(a) the property owner's name and address;









(b) the location of the property;

(c) the existing or proposed location and size of the individual waste

disposal facility;

(d) a diagram drawn to scale which clearly indicates:

(1) the location of the proposed or existing individual waste

disposal facility, property lines, structures and adjacent bodies of water.

(2) the location of any public or private water well inlets or

water pipelines on the property described in the application or within
(#)
feet thereof.

(3) the groundwater level, represented by contour lines, for the

wettest portion of the year.

(4) ground surface contours and slopes, showing direction and grade

of all slopes.

(5) a soil profile identifying soil types to a depth of six (6)

feet or the wet season water table, whichever is less, within any proposed

absorption fields) and extending feet in all directions from the edges
(#)
of the absorption areass.

(6) any proposed or existing drainage features affecting the pro-

perty described in the application, including offsite areas.

(7) any areas containing fill or covered with any impervious

material and areas where fill or impervious surfacing is proposed.

(e) A description of all existing or proposed sources of wastewater to

be treated by the individual sewage disposal systems) described in the applica-

tion, including:

(1) sinks;










(2) toilets;

(3) tubs and/or showers;

(4) automatic dish or clothes washers; and

(5) garbage grinders and disposals.

(f) Any percolation test results.

(g) An application fee of $


Commentary

The intent here is to require all of the data that are necessary to truly
evaluate the application. Subpart (e) requires data not required by 10 D-6
but which are important to evaluate the waste load that must be treated by the
proposed system. Portions of this section have been adapted from the Maine
Plumbing Code, Part II 3 (1978).

3.3 Issuance.

Upon satisfaction of all requirements of this ordinance, the
(local

shall issue a sewage disposal permit to the person named in the
authority)
application. The permit shall include on its face the date of issuance and

expiration, and shall state that the permit is non-transferable.


SECTION FOUR: PERMIT APPLICATION EVALUATION

4.1 In General.

The suitability of the land or building for the use of an individual

sewage treatment facility shall be determined from results of tests and

investigations performed at the expense of the owner by a registered engineer

and submitted to the with an application for a sewage dis-
(local authority)

posal permit.

A sewage disposal permit shall be granted only if all minimum standards

established by this ordinance are met. In addition, a permit shall be Issued









l i f after eval ati e


v IIy I I gv t *pLJIIp l J L I IIS L I I a3 UI CU
(local authority)

that with reasonable maintenance the Individual sewage disposal system will

function in a sanitary manner, not create a nuisance, a health hazard or

contribute to the pollution of surface or groundwaters.


4.2 Location and Installation.

(a) Individual sewage disposal facilities shall not be located:

(1) within rl00] feet of any private or public water supply well;

(2) uphill or at a higher elevation than water supply wells when

the land is sloped;

(3) under or within [51 feet of any building;

(4) under or within [10] feet of water supply pipelines;

(5) within [5] feet of any property line;

(6) within [50] feet of the high water line of lakes, streams, canals

or other waters;

(7) in filled areas, unless thoroughly and mechanically compacted

or until allowed to settle for a period of at least [6] months;

(8) in areas where the permanent, seasonal or fluctuating water

table rises or is likely to rise to within inches of the ground sur-

face at any time;

(9) in areas subject to flooding.


Commentary

This provision is nearly identical to 10 D-6.24 et. seq. but is included
here so that the local authority may impose stricter criteria than are required
by the State. The bracketed numbers are provided to indicate what is currently
required by 10 D-6.


i. dr-. ,









4.3 Septic Tank Sizing Criteria.

(a) For individual sewage disposal facilities which utilize a septic

tank, the tank shall be of such size that wastewater entering the tank will

be detained for at least (48) hours to insure sufficient anaerobic digestion

and sedimentation of organic material.

(b) The minimum acceptable size of any septic tank shall be determined

by the based upon the estimated peak waste load which
(local authority)

will enter the septic tank. Factors to be considered in calculating the peak

waste load shall include, but are not limited to:

(1) the number of persons to inhabit the dwelling described in the

application;

(2) the number of bedrooms;

(3) the number, and operation specifications of wastewater-producing

appliances and other wastewater sources described in the application, including:


(i) toilets and sinks,

(ii) tubs and/or showers,

(iii) -automatic dish and clothes washers,

(iv) garbage grinders and disposals.

(c) If it is determined by the that one seotic


(local authority)

tank will not be adequate to insure sufficient anaerobic digestion and sedi-

mentation of organic material because of the number and types of wastewater-

producing appliances that are to be operated in the dwelling described in the

application, the shall require the installation of two
(local authority)

separate tanks.

(d) In no instance shall the minimum septic tank volume be less than

[750] gallons. 46
"'" -" '' "'4 6









Commentary

10 D-6.26 (2) (a) provides that the number of bedrooms in a building
will be the controlling factor in a determination of the proper size for the
septic tank. The Model Ordinance makes this factor only one of three to be
considered. A more accurate estimate of wasteload is therefore possible.
Subsection 4.3 (c) incorporates the current practices of the Alachua County
Health Department, Gainesville, Florida, which have been proven effective to
prevent overloading and malfunctioning of individual disposal facilities.
When two septic tanks are utilized, wastewater sources can be connected
in a manner which facilitates effective anaerobic digestion. Kitchen and
clothes washer effluent, for example, can be routed to one tank and sanitary
waste to another.

4.4 Absorption Field Sizing Criteria.

(a) For individual sewage disposal facilities which utilize an absorption

field, the field shall be of such size that wastewater entering the field will

receive the degree of waste stabilization that will insure it will be rendered

harmless to human health and safety, not create a nuisance, and not contribute to

the pollution of surface or groundwaters.

(b) The minimum acceptable size of any absorption field shall be deter-

mined by the based upon the following factors:
(local authority)

(1) criteria listed in 4.3(b)(1), (2), & (3);

(2) soil characteristics of the area designated in the permit

application, including:

(I) soil types;

(ii) percolation rate;

(iii) ground slope degree & direction.

(c) In no instance shall the minimum absorption field be less than

square feet.

(d) Automatic dosing devices shall be installed in absorption fields
(d) Automatic dosing devices shall be installed in absorption fields










which exceed 1000 square feet in area, such that septic tank effluent is

delivered in a uniform manner over the entire absorption field in a pulse as

opposed to a continuous flow.

Commentary

This subsection begins by making clear the objective of the absorption
field sizing procedure. Dosing devices significantly enhance the effective-
ness and operational life of the facility by avoiding overloading near the
discharge point and thus make better use of the entire absorption field.
Again 10 D-6 information requirements are supplemented to facilitate
review of the application. The information regarding soil characteristics
and absorption field sizing was adapted from the Maine Plumbing Code,
1 (1978).


SECTION FIVE: PERMITS FOR EXISTING FACILITIES


5.1 Initial Notification.

(a) The owner of any property upon which there already exists an indi-

vidual sewage disposal facility, as of the effective date of this ordinance,

is required to make application for a sewage disposal permit within
(#)

days from the date of notification by the that a permit is re-
(local unit)

quired for the continued operation of the facility.

(b) Notification shall be made by registered mail to the person whose

name appears on the current tax roles as the owner of the property upon which

the individual sewage disposal facility is located. Notification shall include

an explanatory letter and a sewage disposal permit application form.

(c) An application for a sewage disposal permit for the existing facility

shall be made in accordance with Section Three of this ordinance.


Commentary

The balance of the Model Ordinance is not covered by 10 D-6 because the
State regulations control installation only--not maintenance. Because it may










not be practicable or feasible to make all existing individual sewage disposal
facilities immediately subject to this Model Ordinance, the local authority
could determine which areas are in greatest need of immediate regulation to
prevent environmental degradation and danger to the public health. Implemen-
tation could then be undertaken step-by-step on a pre-determined time schedule
until all individual sewage disposal facilities are subject to regulation un-
der the Ordinance. The Model for Section Five was adapted from J.,Gamble,
O&M Costs of Wastewater Treatment Plants, in Less Costly Wastewater Treatment
Systems for Small Communities at 39 (April, 1977).


5.2 Inspection.

(a) Within days of receiving an application for a sewage disposal
(#)

permit pursuant to subsection 5.1, personnel approved by
(local authority)

shall conduct a physical inspection of the individual sewage disposal facility

described in the application.

(b) A sewage disposal permit shall not be issued for an existing facility

without the inspection certificate described in Section Seven of this ordinance.


Commentary

Unlike the inspection which must be made in conjunction with a proposed
facility, this inspection is to determine whether the existing system is
functioning properly under actual user conditions.


SECTION SIX: PERMIT VALIDITY

6.1 Period of Validity.

A sewage disposal permit issued pursuant to this ordinance shall be valid

for a period of (2) years from the date of issuance, except that all per-

mits shall remain revocable by the upon reasonable notice
(local authority)

to the holder and opportunity to be heard. A permit may be revoked only when

the individual sewage disposal system no longer meets the minimum standards

contained in this ordinance.









Commentary

Expiration of the permit after two years allows for re-inspection of the
disposal system before it can be expected to begin malfunctioning. This is a
distinct advantage of the Model Ordinance over the 10 D-6 program which pro-
vides no controls.after installation. The two year.period was chosen from
J. Winneberqer, Manual ofGreyWater Treatment Practice 41 (1974).


6.2 Transfer of Property Affecting Validity of Permit.

(a) When property upon which is located an individual sewage treatment

facility is sold, devised, conveyed or title is otherwise transferred, the

new owner must notify the within days of the date
(local authority) (#)

of transfer and such notification shall include the information required by

subsection 4.3 (b).

(b) If the determines that no alteration of the
(local authority)

existing individual sewage disposal facility is required to ensure its proper

functioning, a sewage disposal permit shall be issued to the new owner for

the duration of the period for which the previous permit was issued.

(c) If the determines that an alteration of the
(local authority)

existing facility may be required due to increased-peak loads that will enter

the system, an inspection shall be conducted to ascertain what alterations

are required before a sewage disposal permit will be issued and the new owner

will be notified pursuant to subsection 7.2 of the required changes.

(d) A sewage disposal permit shall not be issued pursuant to this sub-

section without the inspection certificate described in Section Seven.


Commentary

This requirement is intended to account for changed conditions which are
brought about by new ownership. The new owner's family may be larger and may









use many more wastewater-producing appliances. Such changed conditions may
require a change in the sewage disposal facility to prevent malfunctioning.
It is also intended that the owner be responsible for the disposal facility
and, therefore, new owners must receive a sewage disposal permit in their own
names. This section was adapted from J. Gamble, O&M Costs of.Wastewater Treat-
ment Plants, in Less Costly Wastewater Treatment Systems for Small Communities
at 40 (April, 1977T).I


SECTION SEVEN: INSPECTION CERTIFICATION


7.1 Requirement Generally.

(a) An inspection certificate is required before issuance of a sewage

disposal permit when:

(1) an individual sewage disposal facility already exists on the

effective date of this ordinance and a sewage disposal permit is required in

accordance with subsection 5.2; or

(2) the previous sewage disposal permit has expired in accordance

with subsection 6.1; or

(3) title to the property upon which the individual sewage dispo-

sal facility is located has been transferred and changed circumstances re-

quire that the facility be modified pursuant to subsection 6.2(c).

(b) It is the property owner's duty to ensure that reasonable access

to the facility is available to the inspector so that a proper inspection may

be performed. Failure to provide reasonable access shall constitute grounds

for issuance of a deficiency notice in accordance with subsection 7.2.









(c) The inspection certificate must be signed by an inspector approved


by
(local authority)


and must contain the following statement:


"I certify that on the __ day of _, 19 I inspected the


individual waste disposal facility owned by


(name)


and located at


r____ es_. Upon inspection, I have determined
(address)


that:


All sludge and scum was pumped out of the septic tank,
for an amount of sludge appropriate for a seed culture
the proper performance of the tank in the future.


except
to assure


The volume of sludge and scum was such that pumping was not re-
quired.

The absorption field area is functioning adequately.

All other components of the facility are adequately maintained
and working properly, and there is no recognizable present or
potential danger to human health or the environment.

The facility was deficient for the reasons) explained below.
I further certify that corrective measures have been taken as
described below, and that the facility is now working properly.













Signature


Commentary

The inspection certificate is the key to the maintenance program. Through
periodic inspection, the potential pollution problems which arise from inade-
quately treated sewage entering surface and groundwaters can be substantially









eliminated. Unlike the 10 D-6 program which cannot control after-installation
malfunctioning due to overloading, breakage, or any number of possible circum-
stances, the Model Ordinance inspection requirement for operating facilities
can prevent these situations from occurring or continuing. The certificate in-
sures that the inspector understands his responsibility and provides for a
description of the action taken by him. The inspection certificate was modified
from a model presented by J. Gamble, 0&M Costs of Wastewater Treatment Plants,
in Less Costly Wastewater Treatment Systems for Small Communities at 40 (April,
1977).


7.2 Deficiency Notice.

(a) If for any reason the individual sewage disposal facility does not

appear to be operating properly, so that an inspection certificate cannot be

issued, the shall issue a written deficiency notice to
(local authority)

the applicant.

(b) The notice shall describe the deficiency(ies) found and shall

state clearly that a sewage disposal permit will not be issued until the

deficiency(ies) are corrected. The notice shall also state with particularity

what remedial actions) must be taken before a permit will be issued.

(c) Within days of receiving a deficiency notice, an appli-
(# )
cant may demand a hearing before the for reconsidera-
(local authority)
tion of the matter. If upon review, the ______ decides that
(local authority)
a deficiency notice is warranted as originally issued or as modified, a

new deficiency notice will be issued to the applicant must comply with

the require-ents of subsection 7.3.


7.3 Reinspection.

Within days of receiving a deficiency notice, the applicant
(#)
must apply to the for reinspection of the facility,
(local authority)
certifying that the deficiency(ies) have been corrected. A facility for







which reapplication has not been made within


(#)


a public nuisance and a public health hazard. Upon such a declaration, in

order to protect the public health, safety and welfare, the
(local

shall either cause to be performed appropriate corrective
authority)

measures at the cost of the applicant, or assure that the deficient

system receives zero waste load, either by condemnation of the premises

as a threat to public health or by assuring that all wastewater sources

formerly connected to the deficient system have been disconnected and

connected to a separate, approved, and properly functioning waste collec-

tion and treatment system.


SECTION EIGHT: SEVERABILITY

Each separate provision of this ordinance is deemed independent of

all other provisions herein so that if any provisions of this ordinance

be declared invalid, all other provisions thereof shall remain valid and

enforceable.


days will be declared







APPENDIX



TABLE OF CONTENTS


PREFACE . . . . . .



THE LAW OF DIFFUSED SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT.....


PART I: THE COMMON LAW . . .


PART II: FEDERAL LAW . . . .


PART III: STATE, REGIONAL AND LOCAL LAW .


MODEL SURFACE WATER RUNOFF CONTROL ORDINANCE......


MODEL INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL FACILITY
CONTROL ORDINANCE . . . .


THE LEGAL DEFENSE OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL
ORDINANCES . ......... ..


THE TAKING ISSUE . . . ..


ESTUARY MANAGEMENT . . . . .


SALTWATER INTRUSION . . . .


COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT IN FLORIDA:
CHALLENGE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT.



CONSERVATION EASEMENTS . .


MANDATORY DEDICATION. . ..


3


S. 35


. 84


. 145



* 178



* 199


* 214


-. 238


. 248


THE
. . . .


258


277


292

















State University System of Florida Technical Papers are

published by the Marine Advisory Program which functions as a

component of the Florida Cooperative Extension Service, John

T. Woeste, Dean, in conducting Cooperative Extension work in

Agriculture, Home Economics, and Marine Sciences, State of

Florida, U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of

Commerce, and Boards of County Commissioners, cooperating.

Printed and distributed in furtherance of the Acts of Congress

of May 8 and June 14, 1914.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs