Stormwater Management Facilities

Adequate Stormwater Management Facilities under City Code Chapters 22.24

The City of Annapolis Code 22.24 stated the Director of Public Works shall be responsible for review and assessment of a proposed project with regard to the adequacy of stormwater management facilities.  The goal of adequate stormwater management facilities is to ensure that all public and private stormwater infrastructure as installed within a receiving drainage area is capable of handling a ten-year storm as calculated prior to installation. Consideration will be given to any existing or proposed infrastructure within the study impact area downstream of the point of discharge.  There will be no exemptions from meeting the goals of the criteria.

In accordance with 22.24.040, the standards required to be promulgated pursuant to Section 22.08.010, shall include but not be limited to a requirement that the proposed project complies with the provisions of Chapter 17.08 and Chapter 17.10 of the Annapolis City Code.

22.02.010 - Purpose

As stated in the City of Annapolis Code 22.02.010, the purpose of testing for and certification of Adequate Public Facilities are to:

1. Assure that development and redevelopment occurs in concert with the Capital Improvement Program and will enable the City to provide adequate public facilities in a timely manner and achieve the growth objectives of the Comprehensive Plan as defined in Title 21.
2. Assure that proposed development protects the public health and safety, promotes the general welfare of the community, and conserves the environment.
3. Assure that proposed development fits harmoniously into the fabric of the community.
4. Encourage new development to occur in areas of the City where public facilities are being provided.
5. Additionally, adequacy standards should be achievable within a six-year time-frame and the annual Capital Improvement

22.24.030  - Exemptions.

There are no exemptions.

Applied Standards

The standards for Adequate Stormwater Management Facilities have been set forth by the following documents the MDE 2000 Maryland Stormwater Management Design Manual Volumes I & II, the SHA Highway Drainage Manual, and the Anne Arundel County Design Manual.

The MDE 2000 Maryland Stormwater Management Design Manual Volumes 1 & 2 establishes the criteria for the volume of runoff that is required to be treated for the project based on whether the site is considered New Development or Redevelopment.  For Adequate Public Facilities, the documents provided by the applicant have shown on the requirements outlined in the Concept Phase and Plan as outlined in Chapter 5.  MDE has also published the documents Environmental Site Design (ESD) Process and Computations, July 2010 and Environmental Site Design (ESD) Redevelopment Examples, October 2010.  These two documents show how to determine the volume requiring treatment and how to implement ESD practices to meet the required volume.

The SHA Highway Drainage Manual and the Anne Arundel County Design Manual in Chapter 5 discuss how to design and evaluate storm drain systems.  The applicant is required to provide the documentation clearly showing how the storm drain system receiving runoff from this project will be capable of handling a ten-year storm.

The applicant will be required to evaluate the site outfall and the ultimate outfall of the storm drain system.  The site outfall is where runoff from the site leaves the drainage area.  The ultimate outfall of the storm drain system is where runoff from the site leaves the storm drain system and discharges into an open channel.  The inspection of the ultimate outfall will assess the structural condition of the outfall by inspecting the outfall pipe and outfall structure for cracking, spalling, stability issues, and pipe separations.  The Adequate Public Facilities Report will document any damage outfalls and note any deficiencies associated with the outfall.  If there are other conditions such as excessive debris or pipe corrosion that can affect the structural integrity of an outfall, it should be noted in the Adequate Public Facilities Report. Other observations that should be noted in the Adequate Public Facilities Report include deposits and stains present in an outfall (which may indicate the past discharge of a contaminant) and the vegetative condition at the outfall (may indicate the possibility of excessive nutrients, or chemicals and compounds in a discharge that harm or inhibit growth).  At each outfall, the banks of the channel leading away from the outfall shall be inspected for signs of erosion. Any significant erosion within 25 feet of an outfall will be included in the Adequate Public Facilities Report.  Pictures of the outfall should be included in the Adequate Public Facilities Report to document the conditions at the time of the inspection.

22.28 Mitigation

2.28.010 - Opportunity to mitigate.

An applicant whose proposed project is subject to denial or delay under this title shall be given an opportunity to provide infrastructure funds, to improve facilities directly, or to donate necessary facilities in order to allow for approval of the applicant’s application under this title for a Certificate for Adequate Public Facilities.

The forms and levels of mitigation required of an applicant shall be roughly proportionate to the projected impact of the proposed project upon the facility or facilities and shall be determined by the Director of Planning and Zoning in consultation with the other departments responsible for the applicable facilities as outlined in Section 22.28.010.

For a school facility, mitigation consists of the construction or funding of improvements by a developer that increase capacity of the school facility which, at the time of application, is below the minimum standard in the impact area so that the capacity of the facility in the scheduled completion year is equal to, or greater than, it would have been had the development not been constructed. A mitigation plan with physical improvements may be secured by bond

22.28.20- Process.

Mitigation consists of the construction or funding of improvements to onsite or offsite public facilities by an applicant that increase capacity or safety on each public facility that is below the minimum standard so that the capacity or safety of the facility after mitigation will be equal to or greater than if the proposed project had not been developed.

To determine the appropriate forms and levels of mitigation, an applicant shall consult with the department responsible for review and assessment of each facility that would be deemed inadequate. Once the applicant and the department agree upon the forms and levels of mitigation that will offset the impact of the project upon the facility, the applicant shall enter into a mitigation plan on terms and conditions acceptable to the Department of Planning and Zoning in consultation with the Office of Law. The mitigation plan shall require the applicant to provide the mitigation agreed upon and in return the Department of Planning and Zoning shall determine that the facility or facilities will be adequate for the project.

If a department finds that a facility is or would be inadequate as a result of more than one proposed project, the department may apportion the responsibility and cost of mitigation among all contributing projects, which apportionment shall be reflected in the applicable mitigation plans.

Each mitigation plan shall be approved by the Director of Planning and Zoning as well as the department responsible for the facility for which the mitigation plan approval is sought. If a facility would be inadequate for a project, and if the project and the applicant are unable to agree upon acceptable forms and levels of mitigation for the facility such that no mitigation plan is entered into by the applicant, the department shall determine that the facility is inadequate to support the project and shall forward a written copy of such findings and explanation to the Director of Planning and Zoning.