Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRiparian Bufferdate :JI).,~ l 5" IO project 1---~-----.-...------------------~---------------------------------------------------------- -~ fril--' .AY\ eo.~~ -_1 ____________ --------------------------------'-----~~-~---5+~-~-.------=--~-r--~-r:------------f~--M-------------------------------·--------------·-···-····-------------·-·-··-------------------·------------ ------·--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------···········--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------···------------ b, :~:::·::::::::: ··:.:··-~·:::.·:::::·:~%~;:~.-~:~~-:.: ___ ~::~:~:.::::·;··:-:::;+ ::-··_:·:::::~:~~:::~::::::~:::~:::::::::·:::·:::::::::~:·:~:~~::=:::~:::~:::~:·:::::::_::::-:.:::::::::::~:::~:~::~:~::::: .. :::::::::::_ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------·------ .~-----·--··-· -______ r. __ 0:~ __ _r;::i:__0:!_6_~~-~-~------··-------·----···········----·-·--···-·-·-·····-·---·····················-·······--·--·----··--·-·-····-·················-··-·-·--··--·-···-·-····--······-······-·---· ---------------·-----·-------··--··-·-·-·--··--~~-~:\:}_<?Y'_-$. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _ 4 -------·-·-·-· ··--··---·--············-A-/_o_ ... f?-~l?-~-=-----------·-----------------------------------------------·---·------------·----·-------------------------·--·-·-·-····-·------------------------------···-··-·-··-···-· ~sibt.t., ·5------------·-----------------------------Ju:\~---·····l·~-5~-i--·:··--;::=·~-------------------·-······-··--··············-·-··-·····-------------··-······-·----------·-··---------------------------···· ·····----·····-··········-········L~~~-------------·--····-----~-----···-------------~~1~'---~-~~--'···-·--------··--·--·-·--------------------------------·--·-·-------------------------·-·-··-·-···--·-·--·· 6 & .\w-1.. Oo'fld--1 11 Oii\ -- ~::::::·_-_·::·.::-·_-_:::·_·_:·.:·-.:-_-_·_:·.:::::~---_-_-.:~-.::-__ :-_-_·_·_-_-_:-_-_-_-_-_-__ -__ -_-_-_-_-_: .. :·.::·_-:-.:~_:-=.:-.~.:~::·~_::-_-_·_-_-_~_-9-_?;~~:-~:~~;~.:~:-.·_:·-~~~:i~:-.~~J_:~-;;·.=------~~-_::~.-.:~.---_·_::·.=~~ 7 o o-.11n° c~t;...~ ~c -··-··-·-···-·· -··--·····--·-··-··-···-··------------·---------------·--·····-·----------·--·-·-···-·-··-····-·---··--·--···--··-·-·---;---·····--r·~;;·----·· --·· ---·--··-.-·----------·-----·---------·-----------------------··-··-·-·------ 8 c y,\) rL -1\..Vv'-'~ .h _.. ~ L.. t .tAJ, O-V-. · ···--------·--·-· --------··---------------··----·-··---··----------·---------------------·--·-------------------L--=--------·---------=~~J--------------------------------------------------------------·------------·-·--·-----------------·------------- ------------------·-··------·········-···--·-·······--··-····--··-··------··-----------------·----·-----···--·-------·---r--··-······-··---·--··-·······-··-·······-·---·--··-··-···--··-···-··············-··-·--·-····--·····--··--····-··-·-·-··---··--··· 12-0ft~ -ro uoss ·---···----·-·-···-····-···-··-····-------·-· ~~~---··-···--·-·········---·-······--··---·----···--·----·--·----------·-··---------·--··-·····---·---·---··--·-····-····--·······-··········-··-·-·········-··-------··--·-· ······--·-· 11 ~ "-\JV\) ty\M. ~ l-! 5 C(.,.N\..A. ~ l ~ ( ~ .f '(J t:f.. f... / C -:/--lU--\ ··-·········-·---··-·----------··-·----···-·--···· ______________ j _____ ·---·--·---··-·-·--····-···-··-----··--·-··---··-----·---··-··-----·--·----·-·--···-···:;J-··--········-----·--··--·----·-··---·········-·---··-··----·----·----·--..... ---·------·-------· ~ ( ~tr C-~J.._ 0 ' I ~ lrA-/ -~=--------· ·--·········-·-········--··----·-·-· ·······--·······-·-··--·-··-·-·--·-·-··-····-··-····--··---·-·----·----------·-····--······-····-··-·······\JY.'_(l~J'.-~/-·· -~-----------·----··----------- _i_~---·--··--··-·------···-··-···--------·····-··-·-·-···-_K_<_!_ _____ ~~----~---···---~-·-Cf.~f • 1·7------··--······-··------------------···----~!DI!>·-·--·· \;::~~---ay,si--,-v-··v-----···-:··-·-··--··--- -----····---·· ·-·· ·--------------··-····------·---·-···-······----········-··-©-·9ciA_o _____ ---·-c1--·-7r \ \. , a /\7-'t ~~AAJ ~ D o(r ;-t) V6. ~/ Dl~~ p~ \17. ~: -J-30-aCj -~~k~ -ft ~ __.. 5-f-JC.-.J~_,,f l_e_ f-h.s~ ~~~~~/ )c~· ~ v~~ ~~~ ~ r {Mobt) ~,(~ ckd-z~-11 r$~ U{)O V~ ~/~ P/-L~ j M~yt 13.,,;_~ ec ~.; I -~~1~ ---£15~ ~ !~ ti.r ft!~~~: -~~:r -,AtW~ ~ / ("9~1.Yef ;"hf-~ = -?O -@ A-z. ---w-~ ~q ~(~__s. -- -/)f'Vv?'">:; 1 sf~/ ~ -~~ef "' r, ~ -/,e SIU4-~ date project -----------------------· ---·------------·----· ---;;J-5 ·1 -----s -------· ----------- .. "" -=--=-~~~.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ °' ' f lf , .. .. ...... ·01 "'7}? ... ·"°u-t:•d . ~; . -t >cation ano,TX lien, TX Section Subdivision Ordinance -5.6 Drainage, Storm Sewers and Storm Water Controls; c. Creeks and Floodplains Subdivision Regulations -8.13 Drainage Requirements rlington, TX 5.01 Drainage and Environmental Standards aytown1)(. Chapter 34. Environment Article 8. Sec 34-427 -Buffer requirements Type of Dedication Fee Simple to City or to approved HOA Off!M SplfCL co r:v2<d.otZ. tJ!b...&'. . I ( Description Other Major creeks shall remain in open natural tree ordinance; park condition; prohibit development of any portion improvements required of the property that lies within the floodplain of including planting trees, any stream or drainage course. bu@ng of trails 100 year flood plain or 100 feet top of the based on ult~rn;;ite wat"e• hed bank; to remain in natural state -modifications develop(l:lent for 100 yr. ; require approval bu ii.ding of trails Natural creeks (including creek buffer zone -2.S:~ not too clear ... still resea ching ,., .. .. . feet top of the bank and closed systems ./:: .. . l .-., l-.1 _./ : • (o~ ~pa.CL PIM-\) · I r...___ • -· -L -". ·_ --_ .. _',_J I n r\,. ,. I :i,. .. 12. ,LP.,,,. 7-_A Feedback from riparian professionals There is a general scientific consensus that a minimum setback is 50 feet from the stream's ordinary high water mark, but should be more to get all the value possible from the many benefits of stream buffers. These benefits can be measured as far as 1000 feet in some of literature I have read, and ordinances include measures to increase as stream order or drainage area increase. Dripping Springs passed a water quality ordinance which included stream buffers. USFWS, LCRA, COA, land owners, development interests, etc. all weighed into a Regional Plan that served as a guide to Dripping Springs. will attach the last version I got of the Dripping Ord inance and a revision that I can't seem to open. The Region Plan is on line and has scientific references included for justification (google Region Water Quality Plan, Hays County). I'll attach a list of stakeholders. I served as a technical advisor. Most ordinances begin their buffers at a minimum drainage area (32 acres is usually where you begin to see evidence of stream formation and has been used as a threshold in the Dripping Ordinance). This makes it easier for the planning engineers to know wnere to start. Great news ...... it is a start! The fed standards for riparian buffers is 66ft on each side if I remember correctly. 25 ft on a very small, mostly dry, drainage tributary might be ok? But you guys can really get some gully washers and wet spells there. I was always thinking of that around the drainage and small ponds on the research park properties -mowed right to the water. Need buffers there too Georgianne. The City of Austin has a Critical Water Quality Zon e ordinance and background on its development at http://www.ci.au stin.tx.us/watershed/ordinances.htm and our buffer numbers at http://www.ci .austin.tx.us/watershed/ordinance table.htm Summary of setbacks we use in Austin shown at link be low. http://www.ci.au stin.tx.us/watershed/ordinance table.htm I. Critical Water Quality Setback Amendments o October 2006 -February 2008 o In February 2008, City Council approved an amendment to the Land Development Code brought forward by city staff, moving the starting point of the Critical Water Quality Zone buffer from the Colorado River below Longhorn Dam , to the bank's edge. The width of the Critical Water Quality Zone will remain 200 to 400 feet, depending on the 100-year-flood plain; however, the new starting point of measurement will ensu re that the full buffer width is on land. Mike Lyday was the "City Staff' who figured out how to define where measurement should be taken from at the bank instead of the centerline of the river. This made a huge difference in terms of increasing the protected buffer. The language we use in Austin is "Critical Water Quality Zone" (CWQZ) and "Water Quality Transition Zone" (WQTZ) and are defined in our Land Development Code, which is on-line, though I don't t hink it's been updated with the change that Mike got pushed through. http://www.amlegal.com/austin tx/ Yo u have to drill down to "Title 25 . La nd Development", then go to "25-8 Environment". The setback in Austin is not specifica lly described as a ri parian buffe r, so I thi nk the College Station wording is better in the sense that it is more exp licit ab out what it is that we are t rying to protect, but I think the buffer is rathe r too small. This one size fits all will work on some streams but it can get you in trouble on others. If the drainage area is small and the stream not degraded than it might be OK. However, if the stream has a large drainage area or it is down cutting and widening (evolving), it may not be near enough. I have seen where the 25 feet would not be enough for streams less than 50 acres of drainage. Even if the stream is currently in good condition, things can change and it may start to evolve causing bank and riparians to fai l. They should also evaluate the condition of the stream and its floodplain to help establish a buffer width . This may not be very definitive but it is not a simple issue and has lots of variable. The city of College Station doesn't have a major river, but several perennial creeks that drain either into the Brazos or Navasota rivers, for example White Creek, Beehouse Creek, and Carters Creek. These are already severely impacted and deeply downcut by erosion in places. For that reason it would be better to measure the buffer width by three widths wider than it is deep (see their second option in the proposal), rather than a fi xed di stance of 25 feet. The current write-up on riparian set-backs is better than nothing. The regulations, dealing with developers and future development reminds me of the urban regulations used in Oregon and Washington states. The final analysis of the implied saving of a riparian corridor will probably reside in the control of the Greenways committee, panel or coordinator. What will these groups believe is the best for their local si tuation as the plan has multiple loop-holes and outs at the end of the regulation. Personally, as I look at riparian situations on streams in College Station, a 25 foot width seems to be too narrow, but there are already homes and businesses built here that are within 10-12 feet of the "stream top". So does the regulation only apply to new development? Is there a grandfather clause for homes and businesses that are already established? This regulation will assist with the saving of a functional riparian area but totally leaves out the flood plain concept. Look at Lemontree Park and Bee Creek Park in CS, the city must already know this regulation is coming down and they have literally destroyed the riparian zone at Bee Creek by removing the vegetation to put i n a new sewer line which follows the creek bottom . There are houses and businesses-in that area with water flowing through their backyards when above normal rainfall occurs. Building further diversion dams and dikes only narrows the flow of flood waters, thus increasing the speed of the water and causing further degradation to stream banks, current vegetation and downstream. A standard of 25 feet may be worthless in some areas based on the defini tion given .: in the text. The regulation is written for site specific and does nothing to consider above stream conditions or that future development upstream will obliterate the current standard and waste money and resources. College Station soils are particularly vulnerable to erosion when urbanization increases runoff. Future development near streams should provide extra room for floodwater protection under future scenarios. I don't know the specifics of your creek geomorphology (rock beds? clay? gradient? etc.) but if they are at all like Central Texas creeks-especially our creeks in Blackland prairie clay soils (alluvial bed and banks)-then your proposed setbacks of 25 or 50 feet will likely be too modest. Our latest research is showing that we have an "Erosion Hazard Zone" of about 100 feet (or more) in creeks of 32 acres of ,2rainage and great~. This means that, unless your post-deVeloped I 19d1 ology Is controlled by structural measures (e.g., sand filters, wet ponds, extended detention, biofiltration , etc.), then you are likely to see a widening of your creeks such that up to 100 feet on either side of the creek centerline might be lost. Note that my engineering/technical colleagues cringe when I state a single number-100 feet, in this case-is "the" required setback. (I'm a planning/policy guy.©) Obviously, much depends on planform, soils, geology, bank height, percent imperviousness of contributing drainage, etc., etc. But the bottom line is that our old 50-foot setbacks are too small (or just barely adequate) to ensure long-term health (and even existence!) of riparian areas. Austin has literally spent millions of dollars trying to stabilize development along creek banks that was built too close. We used to have the excuse that we did not know any better. We no longer have that excuse. We need to keep ridged structures and infrastructure away from creeks or deep enough under them to not be damaged by downcutting. So we'd need a more detailed description of what your geography is like there, but I would wager than at least 50 feet, and more likely 75 or 100 feet, is necessary to provide the protection for both creek riparian health and safety of adjacent development that you want. I completely agree -25 feet is inadequate and irresponsible. College Station soils are highly erodible, with no underlying bedrock or boulders to slow head cuts. There is a shallow fine sandy lens overlaying a heavy clay silt. Terrain is nearly flat. This area is within the ancient floodplain of the Brazos river. My guess is most College Station soils are worse than soils near Austin. Do you have any materials or supporting evidence for the 100-foot "Erosion Hazard Zone" in drainage areas of 32+ acres? Specifics would be a great help! Given that city planners and policy makers might post strong opposition to ANY buffer ordinance ... Evidence shows that a minimum of 50 feet from intermittent streams and 100 feet from perennial streams (or we could define by contributing area) is needed. Except in cases where the stream depth-to-width ratio is great than 2, for example, buffer-width requirements increase to 100 ft (intermittent) and 200 feet (perennial). It could help to identify unstable systems and widen setback requirements accordingly. Like you say, anything less may disappear over time! I guess it all depends on how they determine what is the top of the bank. As you know, that can be difficult to locate and may be subject to quite a bit of debate depending on who is looking. It seems that in most cases on small and medium size creeks, the 25 foot setback should be OK. If they define top of bank pretty high in the landscape, this will protect the primary floodplain. The use of 1st order, 2nd order, 3rd order etc would be an easy way to create different setbacks for different size streams. Glad to see the city addressing this. Needs to be done everywhere. Collaborators: Georgianne Moore Assistant Professor, Texas A&M University Ecosystem Science & Management Vice President -Texas Riparian Association Mike Lyday City of Austin I'll be happy to talk to your greenway's manager. My number is 512 8587166 Nikki Dictson Extension Program Specialist II Texas Agrilife Extension Service Board Member -Texas Riparian Association Mike Mecke Texas Agrilife Extension Service Retired Will Pickens Landscape Architect PRADO DESIGN LLC Board Member-Texas Riparian Association Kevin M. Anderson, Coordinator Austin Water Utility -Center for Environmental Research [CER] President -Texas Riparian Association Matt Hollon Environmental Program Manager, Planning & GIS Watershed Protection & Development Review City of Austin Ken Mayben Professional Engineer USDA-ARS Weatherford, TX Barron S. Rector Associate Professor, Texas A&M University Extension Range Specialist Ecosystem Science and Management Steve Nelle USDA-NRCS San Angelo, TX Kevin Thuesen Environmental Conservation Program Manager Austin Water Quality Protection Lands Section I. Background City of College Station, Texas Stream Buffer Ordinance Whereas, buffers adjacent to stream systems provide numerous environmental protection and resource management benefits which can include the following: a) restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the water resources b) removing pollutants delivered in urban stormwater c) reducing erosion and controlling sedimentation d) stabilizing stream banks e) providing infiltration of storm water runoff t) maintaining base flow of streams g) contributing the organic matter that is a source of food and energy for the aquatic ecosystem h) providing tree canopy to shade streams and promote desirable aquatic organisms i) providing riparian wildlife habitat j) furnishing scenic value and recreational opportunity It is the desire of the City of College Station to protect and maintain the native vegetation in riparian and wetland areas by implementing specifications for the establishment, protection and maintenance of vegetation along all stream systems within our jurisdictional authority. Section II. Intent The purpose of this ordinance is to establish minimal acceptable requirements for the design of buffers to protect the streams, wetlands and floodplains of the City of College Station, to protect the water quality of watercourses and significant water resources within the City of College Station, to protect the City of College Station's riparian and aquatic ecosystems; and to provide for the environmentally sound use of the City of College Station's land resources. Section III. Definitions Active Channel: The area of the stream that is subject to frequent flows (approximately once per one and a half years), and that includes the portion of the channel below where the floodplain flattens. Best Management Practices (BMP's): Conservation practices or management measures which control soil loss and reduce water quality degradation caused by nutrients, animal wastes, toxins, sediment, and runoff. Buffer: A vegetated area, including trees, shrubs and herbaceous vegetation, which exists or is established to protect a stream system, lake, or reservoir. Alteration of this natural area is strictly limited. Development: 1) The improvement of property for any purpose involving building; 2) Subdivision, or division of a tract or parcel of land in to 2 or more parcels; 3) the combination of any two or more lots, tracts, or parcels of property for any purpose; 4) the preparation of land for any of the above purposes. Non-Tidal Wetland: Those areas not influenced by tidal fluctuations that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Non-point Source Pollution: Pollution which is generated by various land use activities rather than from an identifiable or discrete source, and is conveyed to waterways through natural processes, such as rainfall, storm runoff or ground water seepage rather than direct discharge. One Hundred Year Floodplain: The area of land adjacent to a stream that is subject to inundation during a storm event that has a recurrence interval of one hundred (I 00) years. Pollution: Any contamination or alteration of the physical, chemical, or biological properties of any waters that will render the waters harmful or detrimental to: public health, safety or welfare; domestic, commercial, industrial , agricultural, recreational, or other legitimate beneficial uses; livestock, wild animals, or birds; fish or other aquatic life. Stream Channel: Part of a water course either naturally or artificially created which contains an intermittent or perennial base flow of groundwater origin. Base flows of groundwater origin can be distinguished by any of the following physical indicators: I) Hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil or other hydrologic indicators in the area(s) where groundwater enters the stream channel, in the vicinity of the stream headwaters, channel bed or channel banks 2) Flowing water not directly related to a storm event 3) Historical records of a local high groundwater table, such as well and stream gauge records. Stream Order: A classification system for streams based on stream hierarchy. The smaller the stream, the lower its numerical classification. For example, a first order stream does not have tributaries and normally originates from springs and/or seeps. At the confluence of two first order streams, a second order stream begins, and so on . Stream System: A stream channel together with one or both of the following: I) I 00-year floodplain and/or 2) Hydrologically-related non-tidal wetlands Streams: Perennial and intermittent watercourses identified through site inspection and USGS maps. Perennial streams are those which are depicted on a USGS map with a solid blue line. Intermittent streams are those which are depicted on a USGS map with a dotted blue line. Water Pollution Hazard: A land use or activity that causes a relatively high risk of potential water pollution. Section IV. Applications A) This ordinance shall apply to all proposed development except that development, which meets waiver or variance criteria as, outlined in Section IX of this regulation. B) This ordinance shall apply to all timber harvesting activities, except those timber harvesting operations which are implementing a forest management plan which has been deemed to be in compliance with the regulations of the buffer ordinance and has received approval from the Texas Conservation and Natural Resources Department. C) This ordinance shall apply to all surface mining operations except that the design standards shall not apply to active surface mining operations that are operating in compliance with an approved Texas Conservation and Natural Resources Department surface mining permit. D) The ordinance shall not apply to agricultural operations that are covered by an approved TCNR conservation plan that includes the application of best management practices. E) Except as provided in Section LX, this ordinance shall apply to all parcels of land, structures and activities which are causing or contributing to: 1) Pollution, including non-point pollution, of the waters of the City of College Station. 2) Erosion or sedimentation of stream channels 3) Degradation of aquatic or riparian habitat Section V. Plan Requirements A) In accordance with section IV of this ordinance, a plan approved by the appropriate agency is required for all development, forest harvesting operations, surface mining operations, and agricultural operations. B) The plan shall set forth an informative, conceptual and schematic representation of the proposed activity by means of maps, graphs, charts, or other written or drawn documents so as to enable the City of College Station an opportunity to make a reasonably informed decision regarding the proposed activity. C) The plan shall contain the following information: I) a location or vicinity map 2) Field delineated and surveyed streams, springs, seeps, bodies of water, and wetlands (include a minimum of two hundred (200) feet into adjacent properties;). 3) Field delineated and surveyed forest buffers 4) Limits of the ultimate one hundred year floodplain 5) Hydric soils mapped in accordance with the NRCS soil survey of the site area 6) Steep slopes greater than fifteen ( 15) percent for areas adjacent to and within two hundred (200) feet of streams, wetlands, or other waterbodies. 7) A narrative of the species and distribution of existing vegetation within the buffer D) The buffer plan shall be submitted in conjunction with the required grading plan for any development, and the forest buffer should be clearly delineated on the final grading plan. E) Permanent boundary markers, in the form of signage approved by the City of College Station, shall be installed prior to final approval of the required clearing and grading plan. Signs shall be placed at the edge of the Middle Zone (See Section VI.E). Section VI Design Standards for Forest Buffers A) A forest buffer for a stream system shall consist of a forested strip of land extending along both sides of a stream and its adjacent wetlands, floodplains or slopes. The forest buffer width shall be adjusted to include contiguous sensitive areas, such as steep slopes or erodible soils, where development or disturbance may adversely affect water quality, streams, wetlands, or other waterbodies. 8) The forest buffer shall begin at the edge of the stream bank of the active channel. C) The required width for all forest buffers (i.e., the base width) shall be a minimum of one hundred feet, with the requirement to expand the buffer depending on: I) stream order; 2) percent slope; 3) I 00-year floodplain; 4) wetlands or critical areas. I) In third order and higher streams, add twenty-five feet to the base width. 2) Forest buffer width shall be modified ifthere are steep slopes which are within a close proximity to the stream and drain into the stream system. In those cases, the forest buffer width can be adjusted. 3) Forest buffers shall be extended to encompass the entire I 00-year floodplain and a zone with minimum width of25 feet beyond the edge of the floodplain. 4) When wetland or critical areas extend beyond the edge of the required buffer width, the buffer shall be adjusted so that the buffer consists of the extent of the wetland plus a 25-foot zone extending beyond the wetland edge. D) Water Pollution Hazards The following land uses and/or activities are designated as potential water pollution hazards, and must be set back from any stream or waterbody by the distance indicated below: 1) storage of hazardous substances ( 150 feet) 2) above or below ground petroleum storage facilities (150 feet) 3) drainfields from on-site sewage disposal and treatment systems (i.e., septic systems -I 00 feet) 4) raised septic systems (250 feet) 5) solid waste landfills or junkyards (300 feet) 6) confined animals feedlot operations (250 feet) 7) subsurface discharges from a wastewater treatment plant (I 00 feet) 8) land application of biosolids (I 00 feet) For surface water supplies, the setbacks should be doubled. E) The forest buffer shall be composed of three distinct zones, with each zone having its own set of allowable uses and vegetative targets as specified in the ordinance. I) Zone I Streamside Zone a) The function of the streamside zone is to protect the physical and ecological integrity of the stream ecosystem. b) The streamside zone will begin at the edge of the stream bank of the active channel and extend a minimum of25 feet from the top of the bank. c) Allowable uses within this zone are highly restricted to: i) flood control structures ii) utility rights of way iii) footpaths iv) road crossings, where permitted d) The vegetative target for the streamside zone is undisturbed native vegetation. 2) Zone 2 Middle Zone a) The function of the middle zone is to protect key components of the stream and to provide distance between upland development and the streamside zone. b) The middle zone will begin at the outer edge of the streamside zone and extend a minimum of 50 feet plus any additional buffer width as specified in Section VI C. c) Allowable uses within the middle zone are restricted to: i) biking or hiking paths ii) stormwater management facilities with the approval of the City of College Station iii) recreational uses as approved by the City of College Station iv) limited tree clearing with approval from the TCNR d) The vegetative target for the middle zone is mature native vegetation adapted to the region. 3) Zone 3 Outer Zone a) The function of the outer zone is to prevent encroachment into the forest buffer and to filter runoff from residential and commercial development. b) The outer zone will begin at the outward edge of the middle zone and provide a minimum width of25 feet between Zone 2 and the nearest permanent structure. c) There shall be no septic systems, permanent structures or impervious cover, with the exception of paths, within the outer zone. d) The vegetative target for the outer zone may vary, although the planting of native vegetation should be encouraged to increase the total width of the buffer. Section VII. Buffer Management and Maintenance A) The forest buffer, including wetlands and floodplains, shall be managed to enhance and maximize the unique value of these resources. Management includes specific limitations on alteration of the natural conditions of these resources. The following practices and activities are restricted within Zones I and 2 of the forest buffer, except with approval by the TCNR. I) Clearing of existing vegetation. 2) Soil disturbance by grading, stripping, or other practices. 3) Filling or dumping 4) Drainage by ditching, underdrains, or other systems 5) Use, storage, or application of pesticides, except for the spot spraying of noxious weeds or non-native species consistent with recommendations of TCNR 6) Housing, grazing, or other maintenance of livestock. 7) Storage or operation of motorized vehicles, except for maintenance and emergency use approved by the City of College Station. 8) The following structures, practices, and activities are permitted in the forest buffer, with specific design or maintenance features, subject to the review of the City of College Station: I) Roads, bridges, paths, and utilities: a) An analysis needs to be conducted to ensure that no economically feasible alternative is available. b) The right of way should be the minimum width needed to allow for maintenance access and installation c) The angle of the crossing shall be perpendicular to the stream or buffer in order to minimize clearing requirements. d) The minimum number of road crossings should be used within each subdivision, and no more than one fairway crossing is allowed for every 1,000 feet of buffer. 2) Stormwater management e) An analysis needs to be conducted to ensure that no economically feasible alternative is available, and that the project is either necessary for flood control, or significantly improves the water quality or habitat in the stream. t) In new developments, on-site and non-structural alternatives will be preferred over larger facilities within the stream buffer. g) When constructing stormwater management facilities (i.e., BMP's), the area cleared will be limited to the area required for construction, and adequate maintenance access, as outlined in the most recent edition of the City of College Station's Stormwater Management Plan. h) Material dredged or otherwise removed from a BMP shall be stored outside the buffer. 3) Stream restoration projects, facilities and activities approved by TCNR are permitted within the forest buffer. 4) Water quality monitoring and stream gauging are permitted within the forest buffer, as approved by the City of College Station. 5) Individual trees within the forest buffer may be removed which are in danger of falling, causing damage to dwellings or other structures, or causing blockage of the stream. 6) Other timber cutting techniques approved by the City of College Station may be undertaken within the forest buffer under the advice and guidance of the City of College Station Urban Forester, if necessary to preserve the forest from extensive pest infestation, disease infestation, or threat from fire . C) All plats prepared for recording and aU right-of-way plats shall clearly: I) Show the extent of any forest buffer on the subject property by metes and bounds 2) Label the forest buffer 3) Provide a note to reference any forest buffer stating: "There shall be no clearing, grading, construction or disturbance of vegetation except as permitted by the City of College Station. 4) Provide a note to reference any protective covenants governing all forest buffer areas stating: "Any forest buffer shown hereon is subject to protective covenants which may be found in the land records and which restrict disturbance and use of these areas." D) All forest buffer areas shall be maintained through a declaration of protective covenant, which is required to be submitted for approval by the City of College Station Development Services Division. The covenant shall be recorded in the land records and shall run with the land and continue in perpetuity. E) All lease agreements must contain a notation regarding the presence and location of protective covenants for forest buffer areas, and which shall contain information on the management and maintenance requirements for the forest buffer for the new property owner. F) An offer of dedication of a forest buffer area to the City of College Station shall not be interpreted to mean that this automatically conveys to the general public the right of access to this area. G) The City of College Station Drainage Administrator shall inspect the buffer annually and immediately following sever storms for evidence of sediment deposition, erosion, or concentrated flow channels and determine corrective actions to be taken to ensure the integrity and functions of the forest buffer. H) Forest buffer areas may be allowed to grow into their vegetative target state naturally, but methods to enhance the successional process such as active reforestation may be used when deemed necessary by the City of College Station Urban Forester to ensure the preservation and propagation of the buffer area. Forest buffer areas may also be enhanced through reforestation or other growth techniques as a form of mitigation for achieving buffer preservation requirements. Section VIII. Enforcement Procedures A) The Director of is authorized and empowered to enforce the requirements of this ordinance in accordance with the procedures of this section. B) If, upon inspection or investigation, the Director or his/her designee is of the opinion that any person has violated any provision of this ordinance, he/she shall with reasonable promptness issue a correction notice to the person. Each such notice shall be in writing and shall describe the nature of the violation, including a reference to the provision within this ordinance that has been violated. 1n addition, the notice shall set a reasonable time for the abatement and correction of the violation. C) If it is determined that the violation or violations continue after the time fixed for abatement and correction has expired, the Director shall issue a citation by certified mail to the person who is in violation. Each such notice shall be in writing and shall describe the nature of the violation, including a reference to the provision within this ordinance which has been violated, and what penalty, if any, is proposed to be assessed. The person charged has thirty (30) days within which to contest the citation or proposed assessment of penalty and to file a request for a hearing with the Director or his designee. At the conclusion of this hearing, the Director or his designee will issue a final order, subject to appeal to the appropriate authority. If, within thirty (3)) days from the receipt of the citation issued by the Director, the person fails to contest the citation or proposed assessment of penalty, the citation or proposed assessment of penalty shall be deemed the final order of the Director. • D) Any person who violates any provision of this ordinance may be liable for any cost or expense incurred as a result thereof by the City of College Station. E) Penalties which may be assessed for those deemed to be in violation may include: I) f j ;-.__ 74.46 1569.52 262.51 74.n 22.23 33.14 A-P 14.40 3.45 5.83 C-1 43.50 56.72 52.00 C-2 3.75 4.39 3.n C-3 1.31 0.41 1.66 K-0 0.00 0.00 0.00 M-1 -4.11 1.50 1 NG-3 3.26 0.00 4.98 17.79 0.06 2.62 1.31 0.37 0 \ I / /(]!/ I <// I I / / -~- '· I ~x\ I T1 >-i f I ~ r--