RICHMOND
The Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board has approved revised stormwater rules aimed at reducing polluted runoff in waterways from new developments.
But the board temporarily set aside the new regulations so that another public comment period can be held. A final vote is expected in early December.
Gov. Timothy M. Kaine said the new regulations update 20-year-old rules and give localities more flexibility to address sprawl and conduct inspections.
Kaine said the regulations will protect the Chesapeake Bay, rivers, streams and lakes from polluted runoff.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Compliant Original Designs AND Innovative Retrofits of Existing
MB is one of the few property developers tugging on the notion of retrofitting existing structures, upgrading site features and enhancing municipalities to achive greater water quality in storm water runoff passing into our valued waterways. Whereas it is certainly easier for the owner of an expansive property to set aside square footage or acreage for the sole purpose of storm water management, what is proposed for the municipalities that have literally built out to the waters' edges. In those cases, the first approach would be to reduce volume. How - retrofit buildings with green roofing, reuse collected waters for non-potable purposes such as flushing toilets, landscape irrigation, uses in cooling equipment, and so forth. Structural retrofits? Tough one. The many MS4 systems lie below grade and near other valuable utilities. Retrofitting existing MS4 systems would require tremendous effort for what possible gain. HRPDC is the group in this Region that lies at the hub of the great wheel of water quality, cities as the spokes.
comments
This will be a costly and unnecessary action. There are enough rules and regulations regarding new development, and wetlands, which are loosely defined based on one person's opinion. Mr. Barrett suggests retrofitting existing stormwater systems. Taxpayers already pay for water & sewage, plus fees, plus infrastructure maintenance, plus for rainwater that runs off the roof/land/driveways. Enough. Do more and better with what is already being provided, both via the private sector (taxes/fees) and the public sector (grants).
Not so
Actually, you misinterpret my comment. As a property owner, I accept the fact that much of the cost of retrofitting must be paid by the property owner. That is, if you own property that is fitted with a stormwater system that simply uses the fastest and most direct path to the stream, river, or bay, you should be given a set period of time to plan and build a stormwater mamangement system that meets current standards, or, to the degree that you can't meet these standards, then you should be required to pay into the city's water quality improvement fund that will build community facilities that will reduce run off, or at least treat it before it goes directly into the stream, river, or bay. So the costs of this retrofit will be the responsibiloity of the private property ownere with the public sector as the facilitator.
Irony
Yes, actually new development has been under strict rules for the last decade or so preventing any stormwater run off from leaving the site. The water must be as clean as the water that would be leaving an undeveloped site. But the gutless politicians can't actually say to citizens who pollute by dumping fertilizer on their lawn, or farmers who use excessive fertilizer, or old developements whose concept of stormwater management was to pipe the water as directly as possible into the stream, ditch or bay, that they are the problem. So instead, the regulations focus on unattainable regulation of new development in urban areas, thereby moving new development to rural areas. This is welfare for sprawl, and while it may be well intended, it will have disastrous results. Instead, focus on best management practices for "old development "which means retrofitting those concrete pipes with treatment. That will solve the problem.
I don't know about your
I don't know about your town, but here in Portsmouth the streets run into the Elizabeth and other waters, full of dog feces and other crap, including fertilizer. This courtesty of our city government. NEW DEVELOPMENT is a small part of the problem. The existing development runoff is the problem. Get it straight, you politicians!
The smell
Smells like a tax increase to me.
Get it done...now!
"But the board temporarily set aside the new regulations so that another public comment period can be held. A final vote is expected in early December."
Get on with cleaning up the bay. Delay, stall, more comments. Typical from a quasi governmental agency with entrenched interests.
This move to water down the regulations shows where the true intentions are with this "appointed" group.
I'm surprised they even passed any new rules.
If they do pass, where is the money to enforce it?