Sussex County engineering staff presented a menu of stormwater and erosion‑control changes on July 15 intended to reduce construction‑era sediment discharges to downstream ponds, wetlands and neighborhoods, and to give the county more enforceable tools if perimeter controls fail.

Assistant County Engineer (presentation attributed to engineering staff) identified low‑cost, near‑term fixes and higher‑lift options. Near‑term changes include adopting EPA‑recommended siltrun (silt‑fence) installation practices and requiring enhanced sediment capture sized to a conveyance event (formerly called a 10‑year event), rather than default perimeter measures that county staff said are often placed around the limit of disturbance regardless of flow paths.

Staff proposed requiring larger, sequenced sediment traps and, where feasible, stabilizing or constructing a principal sediment trap prior to other disturbance. For sensitive downstream resources or sites with large upstream drainage, staff recommended smaller “limit of disturbance” (LOD) areas to reduce exposed, bare soil simultaneously grading proceeds.

For enforcement and compliance, engineers proposed giving building and field inspectors the authority to halt inspections or issuance of additional building permits when perimeter controls are breached or turbidity thresholds are exceeded; staff said such holds are a strong compliance tool because halting building inspections effectively stops vertical construction until sediment issues are fixed.

Engineering staff discussed other options ranging from higher‑performance terraced living‑wall sediment controls (a technical, higher‑cost approach used successfully on previous county projects) to coordinating with the state to request suspension of NPDES construction general permits in the most severe cases — an approach staff warned could draw regulatory and political scrutiny.

Council members praised the technical detail and asked staff to return with specific ordinance language and a prioritized package. Staff said they would meet with the conservation district and return within about eight weeks with recommended code amendments and proposed enforcement language.

Why this matters: Repeated sediment discharges from construction sites have damaged downstream resources and prompted complaints; engineering staff identified practical changes that could reduce erosion and provide enforcement leverage without wholesale revision of state permits.

No ordinance changes were adopted at the July 15 meeting; staff will draft recommended amendments and return for further council consideration.