My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 07-17-2000
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
CCP 07-17-2000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:16:08 PM
Creation date
11/13/2006 1:25:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
77
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Appendix - Arden Hills Water Quality Task Force - June 2000 <br /> <br />Endnotes <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />8.) Best Management Practices Descriptions (excetpted from the National Resources Defense Council) -entire report is at <br />www.NRDC.ore( <br /> <br />BMP's- A set of defmed procedures that offer solutions using the appropriate scale technology and the best cost to benefit <br />advantages for solving site specific problems. <br /> <br />Non-Structnral BMP's- Best management practices for water quality measures that rely on programs or policies as <br />opposed to Structural methods which rely on constructed components. Ideally implemented before growth or development <br />occurs as part of a comprehensive pliiriiling process for water quality controls. <br /> <br />Examples - Non-structural BMP's <br /> <br />Buffers and Open Space Preservation <br /> <br />As Table 5-1 and the case studies show, many municipalities employ stream and wetland buffer requirements, open space <br />preservation, and other laws or programs as cost-effective means for reducing stormwater runoff and achieving other public <br />goals. These programs are often the specific means of implementing larger growth management goals and are often <br />linked with incentives to aid development in other areas. In addition to zoning-type ordinances, municipalities can also use <br />economic incentives to reduce impervious cover or implement stormwater control through stormwater utilities where the fee <br />is based on amount of impervious cover, inspection and permit fees linked to compliance, or dedicated <br />contributions from land developers. <br /> <br />Many local govemments have had great snccess, apparently often more than they expected, with a buffer system of <br />protected natural areas around waterbodies, sensitive areas, or steep slopes. Forested buffers are an essential part of natural <br />stream, lake, and wetland protection.25 They often provide highly desired community amenities as well. Not only do <br />buffers allow the water resource to fimction more naturally, they also help reduce a site's overall imperviousness. An <br />average buffer width of 100 feet can reduce imperviousness by up to 5 percent of a watershed. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />SITE DESIGN MEASURES <br /> <br />The case studies in this report highlight several communities and developers that have taken approaches that <br />minimize overall imperviousness on a particular site. In many cases the developer initiated their approach <br />independent of government requirements. Minimizing imperviousness, which is prevention focused, is more <br />cost-effective than treating stormwater runoff and much more cost-effective than restoring waterbodies after <br />they have been polluted or damaged. The case studies also offer insight into a particular difficult <br />aspect of this approach to stormwater pollution prevention. Often existing local or state regulators make <br />stormwater-conscious site design more difficult due to street, set-back, density, or other site development <br />requirements. While generally the case studies show that it is important that local governments enforce their <br />regulations, in these circumstances it is important for local governments to allow flexibility. <br /> <br />Conservation Design <br />Conservation-design development concentrates homes on a limited percentage of the land comprising a <br />residential subdivision, while leaving the rest of the land as open space.31 As several of the case studies show, <br />conservation design also reduces the amount of impervious road surface created, since the homes are not spread <br />as far apart, and preserves a much greater percentage of undeveloped land. Narrower roads, shorter setbacks <br />from residential streets that allow shorter driveways, or shared driveways also reduce impervious cover when <br />designing residential developments.32 <br /> <br />Traditional Neighborhood Design <br />A more comprehensive approach to site-specific planning is the traditional neighborhood developments <br />(INDs).37 Although aesthetic or cultural concerns motivate many proponents ofINDs, environmental <br />concerns are also advanced with INDs. Like conservation-design developments, INDs have sought to <br />minimize the impervious lIfootprint" of the built environment and preserve open space through compact <br />development patterns that feature narrower roads, shared alleyways, smaller lots, and smaller front setbacks <br />from the street. However, INDs in the case studies go a step further by adding the principle of mixed-use <br />development. At their best, TNDs provide stores, offices, schools, day-care centers, recreational opportunities, <br />and mass-transit facilities all within a short walk of residents' <br /> <br />. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.