The Role of Building Departments in Stormwater Management Compliance - What are you missing?

Stormwater management is a critical aspect of environmental protection, mandated by both state and federal regulations across the United States. Every state has established specific rules to manage stormwater runoff, especially from construction and redevelopment sites. These regulations aim to mitigate the impact of urban development on water quality and to prevent flooding, erosion, and pollution.

However, while these mandates are clear at the state level, their enforcement often falls to local municipalities, where the building department plays a crucial role. Building departments typically focus on ensuring compliance with local building codes, yet stormwater management is sometimes viewed as an ancillary responsibility—if it is recognized at all.

What many building officials may not realize is that local stormwater ordinances are not just guidelines but legal requirements, often mandated by state statutes. These ordinances require municipalities to enforce stormwater retention and treatment standards that align with state and federal regulations. As a result, building departments must actively incorporate stormwater management considerations into their plan review, inspection processes, and final approvals.

For example, projects that disturb more than one acre of land generally trigger the need for a stormwater management plan. This plan must be reviewed and approved by the building department to ensure it meets all applicable regulations. Furthermore, ongoing site inspections should include checks for compliance with stormwater control measures to prevent violations that could lead to environmental damage and legal repercussions for the municipality.

Stormwater retention requirements for the construction of single-family homes on lots smaller than 1 acre vary depending on the specific regulations of the state and local jurisdiction. However, some general principles and standards are commonly applied across different states and municipalities.

1. Size Thresholds: For many states, stormwater management regulations typically kick in for developments disturbing an area of 1 acre or more. However, some local jurisdictions may have lower thresholds or specific criteria, particularly in environmentally sensitive areas. For example, in Florida, stormwater retention may be required for any project that increases impervious surfaces, even if the lot is smaller than 1 acre .
2. Volume Control Requirements: Single-family homes on smaller lots may be required to manage a specific volume of stormwater runoff. This can involve retaining or treating the first inch of runoff or a specified percentage of runoff volume based on impervious area. The goal is often to mimic pre-development hydrology and prevent any increase in runoff volume post-construction .
3. Low Impact Development (LID): Many jurisdictions encourage or mandate the use of LID practices to manage stormwater on-site. These practices include rain gardens, permeable pavements, and infiltration trenches, designed to capture and treat runoff at the source. LID practices are particularly useful for smaller lots where traditional stormwater infrastructure may not be feasible .
4. State and Local Ordinances: It’s crucial to note that while state-level requirements may set broad standards, municipalities often have additional ordinances that require more stringent stormwater management practices. These local regulations might mandate retention or detention measures even for developments disturbing less than 1 acre, particularly in areas prone to flooding or with a high density of development .

Building departments must embrace their role in enforcing stormwater management ordinances to protect their communities from the adverse effects of runoff and ensure compliance with state and federal regulations. While state regulations provide a baseline, local ordinances often dictate specific requirements, especially for smaller lots like single-family homes. Ignoring this responsibility can lead to severe legal and environmental consequences for municipalities and their residents. Therefore, it is crucial for both building departments and developers to be fully aware of and adhere to these requirements to effectively manage stormwater and prevent flooding.

 

[tmurray]

One of the only times I was in court was over storm water issues.

I think this is going to be getting more and more litigious as we continue to see changes in climate.

 

[Plumb-bob]

How do you define storm water? Lot surface and roof drainage? Foundation drainage also?

 

[Mark K]

while storm water management is important it is only the job of the building department if there is a law saying so

 

[Yikes]

Hot topic on some other websites/forums, triggered by this article about a Maryland site. Although this is more about SWPPP BMP's, in the public's mind the lack of enforcement and protection reinforces the notion that development always equals stormwater degradation, and you have to pick a side: clean water vs. housing. I try to explain to others this is a false dichotomy. Demanding watershed protection during (and post-) construction doesn't make you a NIMBY any more that enforcing gun range safety rules makes you anti- 2nd amendment.

https://www.bayjournal.com/news/pol...cle_e57ccd2e-55ba-11ef-9523-07d3b279350f.html

Gunpowder Riverkeeper threatens to sue over muddy runoff from development​

Timothy B. Wheeler
Aug 8, 2024 Updated Aug 12, 2024



For more than two years now, the Gunpowder River has turned orange or brown whenever there’s a hard or steady rain. It happened again in mid-July, after back-to-back downpours dumped 1.5 inches on the area over two days.

Aerial photos taken afterward show murky water flowing into the river from Foster Branch, a stream that drains a large housing development under construction in Harford County, MD.


Anger has grown on both sides of the Gunpowder, a tidal tributary of the Chesapeake Bay that separates Harford and Baltimore counties. Area residents say they’ve filed repeated complaints about their beloved waterways being fouled by muddy runoff, yet Foster Branch and the Gunpowder still aren’t flowing clear.

“I haven’t seen the bottom of Foster Branch in — well, three years,” said Gunpowder Riverkeeper Theaux Le Gardeur.

With sunlight unable to reach the bottom, underwater grasses that provide critical habitat for fish and crabs have effectively vanished from the Gunpowder. Even as grass beds expanded 7% Baywide in 2023, according to the latest annual survey, they declined by 80-87% in the Gunpowder.

On Aug. 7, Le Gardeur formally notified the three companies building a 200-acre housing development in Joppa, called Ridgely’s Reserve, that he intends to sue them for failing to keep the soil from washing off their project, in violation of federal and state water pollution laws.

The riverkeeper and residents contend that the developers have been cited for dozens of sediment and erosion control violations and other infractions since 2022, when they cleared 120 acres of mostly wooded land along Foster Branch.


Foster Branch in Harford County, MD, flows orange downstream from the Ridgely’s Reserve construction site in summer 2023 before it reaches the Gunpowder River.
Dave Harp

The Maryland Department of the Environment has inspected the construction site 33 times since May 2022, according to agency data posted online. State inspectors found sediment and erosion control violations on every visit, including the most recent one July 23.

Patrick DeArmey, an attorney with Chesapeake Legal Alliance, which is representing the Gunpowder Riverkeeper, called this “one of the most egregious examples of uncontrolled construction stormwater runoff in Maryland. The flows of turbid runoff are so large you can see it from space.”

State law authorizes MDE to levy fines of $1,000 per violation up to a maximum of $20,000, or in severe cases to file a lawsuit seeking a $10,000 penalty. Even though every MDE inspection report mentioned the agency could impose penalties for violations, the state agency deferred to Harford County in each instance to follow up.

Harford County officials, meanwhile, maintain they have acted forcefully in response to the complaints. The county levied two $10,000 fines on the developer, an unusual step for a jurisdiction that until recently has rarely imposed monetary penalties for such violations.

The county also stopped work on the development seven times over the last two years, ordering construction halted for anywhere from two days to more than a month until failed runoff control measures had been deemed fixed.

In February, after county officials threatened to revoke the development’s permits, Forestar Real Estate Group, a subsidiary of the Texas-based national home builder D.R. Horton, formally agreed to beef up runoff control efforts at the site. The company pledged to hire a dedicated contractor to install more and better silt fences, detention ponds and other measures and to make daily inspections of them. It also said it would hire a contractor to treat muddy detention ponds with flocculants, chemicals designed to clear up the water by getting the sediment to settle to the bottom more quickly.


Ralph Comegna, a resident of Joppatowne, MD, points out where submerged grasses once grew in profusion in the lower Gunpowder River.
Dave Harp

Representatives and a spokesperson for Forestar did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Matt Button, a county spokesman, wrote in an email that Harford officials “continue to proactively inspect the project weekly and after major storms and will continue to hold the developer to the terms of the agreement, the permit and the sediment control plans.”

Residents say despite the county and state responses to their complaint, they haven’t seen much if any improvement.


“There’s just a calamity of band-aids and excuses of why this can’t be changed,” complained Jack Whisted, a retired engineer who lives along Foster Branch in Joppatowne.

Agitation over the muddy runoff has spread across the Gunpowder to Baltimore County. A frustrated resident of Oliver Beach on the river’s southern shore put together a website headlined “Mad About Mud” that channels public ire over the situation.

“Looking out of our windows at Oliver Beach, you just saw this orange going down the middle of the river,” said Lindsay Crone, the site’s creator. “And everyone was so shocked.”

A petition on the website has collected more than 800 signatures so far demanding “immediate action to hold accountable those responsible and protect the Gunpowder River for future generations.”

MDE officials have told residents they are preparing to take enforcement action for past violations and referred the situation last fall to the state attorney general’s office for potential legal action.

In the meantime, Matthew Rowe, MDE’s deputy water and science administrator said in response to an email query that agency officials are “continuing to evaluate the site’s current status to ensure continued compliance.”

“There’s just a seeming reluctance on the county’s and state’s [part] to do anything meaningful as it relates to penalties,” said Le Gardeur, the Gunpowder Riverkeeper. “The stop work orders and corrective orders issued have not fixed the problem.

“I can’t think of a stick big enough at this point,” he added, “that would correct the harm that has happened to communities downstream and to the waterway.”

Brandon Jenkins, a crabber, said the water he drew from the river for his soft-crab operation was so cloudy he couldn’t see the crabs on the bottom of the tank.

“I won’t swim in this water because it’s so dirty,” he added.


This photo taken on July 19, 2024, shows the Gunpowder River in Maryland after two days of rain. Foster Branch is see in the lower left. (Mad About Mud)

The Harford County Council voted earlier this year to impose a 20-acre limit on how much soil a developer can leave bare during construction, reversing a decision made after MDE in 2017 relaxed its limit on how much ground could be cleared at one time.

Residents say that should help reduce mud pollution in future but does nothing to stop runoff from projects like Ridgely’s Reserve that got greenlighted before limits were imposed.

Button, the county spokesman, said the problem with sediment runoff “did not start with the construction of Ridgely’s Reserve and comes from many sources in Harford and Baltimore counties.” He noted that the county has dredged portions of the river three times in the past 20 years because of sediment buildup hampering navigation.

Vera and Ray Reiner, who’ve lived in Oliver Beach more than 60 years, said Ridgely’s Reserve is just the latest of multiple bouts of sediment pollution that have assaulted the Gunpowder over the decades.

Vera Reiner remembers being able to see crabs on the bottom as a child after her parents bought a place by the river in the 1930s. Before long, though, the water clouded up with silt from a sand and gravel mine upriver. Residents picketed the plant in protest, she recalled.

Since then, she and her husband said, the water clarity threats have shifted from industry to development.

“What bothers me,” said Ray Reiner, “Seventy years we’ve been dealing with this. Seventy years from now, will we still be dealing with it?”

 

[Paul Sweet]

I thought that stormwater management is a planning and zoning issue rather than building. In Virginia the state Dept. of Environmental Quality (DEQ) regulates and minimizes stormwater runoff from construction sites through the Construction Stormwater Management Program.