From: | "cpeo@cpeo.org" <cpeo@cpeo.org> |
Date: | Wed, 9 Jun 1999 10:04:58 -0700 (PDT) |
Reply: | cpeo-brownfields |
Subject: | Re: INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS |
Individual responses to "institutional controls" posted by Bob Paterson 1) Brooks Koenig (KOENIG.Brooks@deq.state.or.us) 2) Christine C. Gaspar (cgaspar@icma.org) _______________________________________________________________ From: KOENIG Brooks <KOENIG.Brooks@deq.state.or.us> Date: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 17:18:10 -0700 Tony, I like the clustered approach; it also picks up threads that others of us miss if the exchange is just between parties. To add a bit to the institutional controls discussion . . . I am on an ASTM workgroup (E50.04) that is working on institutional controls, or as they are termed there, Activity and Use Limitations. Like many other states, Oregon has guidance on institutional controls. And, like many other states, there is no lack of controversy as to how much public participation there should be in developing those controls and how they will be monitored over time. Readers may also want to look at EPA's manual on ICs. For the most part this is a technical summary for attorneys, but another indicator than ICs and restricting use of the property will be the more common remedy in years ahead. Brooks Koenig Oregon DEQ 811 SW 6th Ave. Portland, OR 97214 (503) 229-6801 (503) 229-6954 (fax) koenig.brooks@deq.state.or.us _______________________________________________________________ Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 10:37:48 -0500 From: cgaspar@icma.org In response to Bob Paterson and Caryl Terrell's questions: Bob refers to a study ICMA (the International City/County Management Association) completed last year on local government use of institutional controls (or as we are now calling them for the sake of clarity, land use controls or LUCs). It's a survey of 27 local governments and 5 state governments on their awareness of and experience with LUCs. I would be happy to send copies to anyone interested. E-mail me with your address and I'll drop a copy in the mail. Since completing that study, ICMA has conducted two forums on LUCs. The first was held in March 1998. It was an "expert forum" that brought together a number of people working on the issue here in DC as well as federal, state, and local government folks. The second, held in September 1998, was a "state and local forum on LUCs", which we sponsored with ASTSWMO. About 15 people attended, half state solid waste management officials, half local government officials. We are currently preparing a white paper on LUCs, which builds on our previous research and addresses the current state of knowledge on LUCs as well as the importance of a local government role in LUC implementation and data management. We also have a pending proposal to estimate the long-term costs to local government of implementing a LUC. Finally, we are collecting sample LUCs from state and local governments to include in a compendium that will be released late this fall. Feel free to e-mail or call me directly with any additional questions. (See contact information below.) ___________________________________________________________________ Christine C. Gaspar Project Manager, Economic Development International City/County Management Association 202/962.3582 202/962.3605 cgaspar@icma.org _______________________________________________________________ | |
Prev by Date: Re: institutional controls Next by Date: Federal Influence on "Urban Sprawl" is Unclear | |
Prev by Thread: Re: institutional controls Next by Thread: Institutional controls |