O.C.G.A.
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the ‘‘Erosion and Sedimentation Act of 1975.’’
History
Ga. L. 1975, p. 994, § 1; Ga. L. 2003, p. 224, § 5.
Annotations
Law reviews. - For article, ‘‘From Marshes to Mountains, Wetlands Come Under State Regulation,’’ see 41 Mercer L.
Rev. 865 (1990). For article, ‘‘Local Government Litigation: Some Pivotal Principles,’’ see 55 Mercer L. Rev. 1 (2003). For annual survey of zoning and land use law, see 58 Mercer L. Rev. 477 (2006).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Construction with other law. - When a landowner made no effort to comply with the Georgia Erosion and Sedimentation Act, O.C.G.A. § 12-7-1 et seq., until the landowner covenanted to maintain the property in agricultural use for a period of ten years, and the record did not show that the landowner fulfilled the necessary regulatory requirements as was necessary for the landowner to have a valid permit under the rule, the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in the landowner’s favor and ruling that the landowner’s subsequent use of the property as a landfill was grandfathered as a non-conforming use under the applicable zoning ordinance. Flippen Alliance for Cmty. Empowerment, Inc. v. Brannan, 267 Ga. App. 134, 601 S.E.2d 106 (2004).
Organization lacked standing to appeal consent order. - Trial court erred by concluding that an organization had standing to appeal a consent order between a property owner and the Director of the Environmental Protection Division (EPD) with regard to soil erosion as it lacked standing to appeal based upon its inability to demonstrate redressability as it failed to identify a procedural requirement the EPD violated, and the consent order did not fall within the categories of orders that required provision of notice and opportunity for comment. Ctr. for a Sustainable Coast, Inc. v. Turner, 324 Ga. App. 762, 751 S.E.2d 555 (2013).
OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Post development regulatory framework not mandated. - Erosion and Sedimentation Act, O.C.G.A. § 12-7-1
et seq., does not mandate a post-development regulatory framework and it cannot serve as a basis for local
governments to assert regulatory authority over the state in a post-development capacity. 2013 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 13-3. RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 78 Am. Jur. 2d, Waters, § 324.
C.J.S. - 93 C.J.S., Waters, § 187.
Notes of Decisions
Coastal Marshlands Prot. Comm. v. Ctr. for a Sustainable Coast, 649 S.E.2d 619 (Ga. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 4× “Moreover, local zoning ordinances provide additional regulation of storm water runoff into marshlands. The CMPA recognizes the existence of these other regulations by requiring that a permit application include a letter from the local governing authority that the proposed…”
Tyler v. Lincoln, 527 S.E.2d 180 (Ga. 2000).
· cites it 2× “ed that the developers violated the county ordinance by failing to construct a sedimentation or detention pond to control the flow of surface water from the subdivision into the wetlands on their property and the Tylers’ cypress pond; it further found that there were unresolved…”
Sumitomo Corp. of Am. v. Deal, 569 S.E.2d 608 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 2× “Georgia’s Erosion and Sedimentation Act, OCGA § 12-7-1 et seq., regulates “land-disturbing activities.”
Ctr. for a Sustainable Coast, Inc. v. Turner, 751 S.E.2d 555 (Ga. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 2× “This case concerns the Erosion and Sedimentation Act of 1975, OCGA § 12-7-1 et seq. (“the Act”). The Environmental Protection Division of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources is charged with enforcing violations of the Act.”
Flippen All. for Cmty. Empowerment, Inc. v. Brannan, 601 S.E.2d 106 (Ga. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 2× “Henry County and FACE allege that Brannan is in violation of the Georgia Erosion and Sedimentation Act of 1975, OCGA § 12-7-1 et seq.; the Henry County Nuisance Ordinance; the Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 USC § 6901 et seq.”
City of Decatur v. DeKalb Cnty., 567 S.E.2d 376 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 2× “Georgia’s Erosion and Sedimentation Act (OCGA § 12-7-1 et seq.) requires that municipalities “adopt.”
Tyler v. Lincoln, 513 S.E.2d 6 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 2× “1 OCGA § 12-7-1 et seq. 2 OCGA § 12-7-6. 3 See Horney v.”
Colony Bank Se. v. Brown, 622 S.E.2d 7 (Ga. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 2× “3 OCGA § 12-7-1 et seq. 4 Colony Bank’s contention that all construction activity relating to the pond occurred on the 94-acre tract is not supported by Colony Bank’s citations to the record.”
City of Albany v. Oxford Solid Waste Landfill, Inc., 476 S.E.2d 729 (Ga. 1996).
· cites it 2× “Pretermitting the question of whether the language used by the trial court in its order actually refers to vested rights, we find this contention to have been rendered moot by our ruling in Division 2, supra.”
Hopkins v. Baker, 572 S.E.2d 716 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 2× “Brinson, Askew, Berry, Seigler, Richardson & Davis, C. King Askew, Mark M. Webb, for appellant.”
Forsyth Cnty. Georgia v. Mommies Props. LLC (Ga. Ct. App. 2021).
· cites it 4× “4 The Board of Commissioners of the County enacted Ordinance 73 pursuant to the Georgia Erosion and Sedimentation Control Act, OCGA § 12-7-1. 5 Around the same time that the dirt was being brought onto the Property, Petitioner represented that the electrical service utility for…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.