I have been discussing development issues with one my Engineering colleagues and they have informed the following issue will increase development burden and/or cost. In an effort to assist with reducing these burdens, please consider the following,

Title: Section 5.3.2.1 and Appendix A Limits of Analysis

In Chapter 5 and Appendix A with regards to discharges at limits of analysis where the contributing drainage area from the project is less than 1% of the overall drainage area, there is guidance to require additional detention. Detention requirements to meet “Energy Balance” is not necessary when discharging to larger bodies of water such as Lakes, Rivers, or Bays. The regulations allow for no additional detention if the 1% condition is met. The sections of the Manual stating otherwise shall be revised to meet the current regulations. Suggest a statement, “If the site being developed discharges to a channel, manmade or natural, where the receiving channel or pipe were to have a drainage area greater than 100 times that of the site’s drainage area, then any form of detention is not required to meet Channel Protection and Flooding portions of Water Quantity Stormwater Regulations.” 

Title: Section A.5.4 10% allowance

Section A.5.4 adds additional burden to situations where the post developed drainage area is greater than 10% of the pre-developed area. These situations are common and should not have additional burden as the regulations do not require these additional burdens. Furthermore, the value 10% is arbitrary. Approving this will set a precedent giving the Agency the ability to reduce to 5% or 1% in the future. Recommend eliminating Section A.5.4.

Title: Section A.5.1.3 Manmade Lakes

In Section A.5.1.3, eliminate the statement that Manmade lakes shall be considered Natural Channels. A manmade lake is not natural and meets the current regulatory definition of a manmade channel that simply states “constructed by man” in 9VAC25-870-10.

Title: Pollutant Load References

This manual references a pollutant load allowance of 0.26 lbs/ac/yr that is more restrictive than current regulations limit of 0.41 lbs/ac/yr. A proposed guidance shall not propose more burden than the current regulations allow as stated in 9VAC25-870-63.

Title: Ponds in Open Space – Ch 8.5 P-Fil-07

The manual does not allow Stormwater Ponds in Open Space. We suggest to add language to address concerns regarding increased burdens and costs. Consider the following language in the second bullet of Chapter 8.5 P-Fil-07, Section 2.1:

"Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) may be constructed within open space areas with minimal disturbance, such that after construction, these areas are to remain relatively undisturbed and not be subject to maintenance more than four times per year. This provision aligns with previous regulations and aims to prevent unnecessary burdens and costs associated with post-construction maintenance. It is important to note the similarity between a BMP and a utility easement, both of which serve critical functions within open space. Failure to include BMPs within the open space designation would represent an increase in burden from previous guidelines."

Title: Allow Early Grading Plan Approval – Section 4.3.3

In order to address the inconsistencies surrounding the allowance of early grading plans across various jurisdictions within the state, it is proposed to append a final paragraph to Chapter 4, Section 4.3.3:

"Subject to any restrictions imposed by local ordinances, design professionals are permitted to submit early grading plans for development projects, provided that the Best Management Practices (BMPs) and associated calculations accommodate the current phase and any potential future development. It is understood details of future phases may not be known and estimations may be made. If subsequent phases are proposed, it is imperative that the effectiveness of all prior BMPs is maintained, enhanced, or supplemented by additional BMPs as necessary.” By incorporating this language, it is anticipated that the ambiguity surrounding the permissibility of early grading plans will be alleviated, thereby streamlining the development process and reducing associated burdens and costs.

Title: Create an independent system to alter the Handbook, Section 1.4.2

Chapter 1, Section 1.4.2 currently designates the handbook as a "living document," allowing the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to oversee changes twice annually. However, the current system grants DEQ extensive control over the alteration process, including committee selection, comment gathering, validity determination, prioritization, filtering, public dissemination, and committee chair authorization. While DEQ asserts that these changes aim for improvement, there is a concern that they could potentially result in more restrictive regulations without sufficient checks and balances, contrary to the principles upon which our government was founded. Therefore, it is recommended to establish an independent system for modifying the handbook.

Under this proposed system, an independent group of professionals, selected from diverse fields relevant to environmental regulation, would be tasked with overseeing handbook revisions. This group would be chaired by personnel rotating from different backgrounds within the environmental and land development sector to ensure a balanced and impartial approach. By introducing this independent oversight, the process of handbook modification would be subject to greater scrutiny and accountability, aligning more closely with the principles of checks and balances inherent in our governmental system.

Thank you for your consideration of these comments.