Section 21-526. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT: RELIEF FROM EXTRAORDINARILY DIFFICULT SITE CONDITIONS

 

526.1The applicant may apply for relief from extraordinarily difficult site conditions if it is technically infeasible or environmentally harmful:

 

(a) For a site to comply with the minimum on-site retention requirement (50% of Stormwater Retention Volume (SWRv); or

 

(b) For an Anacostia Waterfront Development Zone (AWDZ) site to comply with any portion of its Water Quality Treatment Volume or SWRv on site, except that AWDZ sites may also apply based on the limited appropriateness of on-site stormwater management.

 

526.2The Department shall not provide relief unless the applicant proves that on-site compliance is technically infeasible or environmentally harmful, except that, for an AWDZ site, the Department may also consider the appropriateness of on-site compliance in terms of impact on surrounding landowners or overall benefit to District waterbodies.

 

526.3In order to support its case for relief, the applicant shall provide the following information demonstrating technical infeasibility or environmental harm:

 

(a) Detailed explanation of each opportunity for on-site installation of a  Best Management Practice (BMP) that was considered and rejected, and the reasons for each rejection; and

 

(b)Evidence of site conditions limiting each opportunity for a BMP, including, as applicable:

 

(1) Data on soil and groundwater contamination;

 

(2) Data from percolation testing;

 

(3) Documentation of the presence of utilities requiring impermeable protection or a setback;

 

(4) Evidence of the applicability of a statute, regulation, court order, pre-existing covenant, or other restriction having the force of law;

 

(5) Evidence that the installation of a retention BMP would conflict with the terms of a non-expired approval, applied for prior to the end of Transition Period Two A for a major land-disturbing activity or before the end of Transition Period Two B for a major substantial improvement activity, of a:

 

(A) Concept review by the Historic Preservation Review Board;

 

(B) Concept review by the Commission on Fine Arts;

 

(C) Preliminary or final design submission by the National Capital Planning Commission;

 

(D) Variance or special exception from the Board of Zoning Adjustment; or

 

(E) Large Tract Review by the District Office of Planning; and

 

(6) For a utility, evidence that a property owner on or under whose land the utility is conducting work objects to the installation of a BMP; and

 

(7) For a major substantial improvement activity, evidence that the structure cannot accommodate a BMP without significant alteration, because of a lack of available interior or exterior space or limited load-bearing capacity.

 

526.4An applicant for relief shall submit:

 

(a) A complete application; and

 

(b) Proof of payment of the applicable fee.

 

526.5The Department shall not consider an incomplete application for relief; except that if an application is substantially complete, the Department may begin consideration.

 

526.6In determining whether to grant relief, the Department may consider:

 

(a) The applicant’s submittal;

 

(b) Other site-related information;

 

(c) An alternative design;

 

(d) The Department’s Stormwater Management Guidebook;

 

(e) Another BMP that complies with the requirements of this chapter; and

 

(f) Relevant scientific and technical literature, reports, guidance, and standards.

 

526.7After considering whether an application meets the requirements of this section, the Department may:

 

(a) Require additional information;

 

(b) Grant relief;

 

(c) Grant relief, with conditions;

 

(d) Deny relief; or

 

(e) Deny relief in part.

 

526.8No relief shall be granted unless, for the volume of relief granted, the Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) for the project provides for:

 

(a) Use of off-site retention, with the Off-Site Retention Volume documented on the approved SWMP; and

 

(b) If the relief is from a minimum on-site retention requirement, treatment to remove eighty percent (80%) of total suspended solids.

 

authority

Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs Civil Infractions Act of 1985, effective October 5, 1985, as amended (D.C. Law 6-42; D.C. Official Code §§ 2-1801.01 et seq. (2007 Repl. & 2012 Supp.)); District Department of the Environment Establishment Act of 2005, §§ 101 et seq., effective February 15, 2006, as amended (D.C. Law 16-51; D.C. Official Code §§ 8-151.01 et seq. (2008 Repl. & 2012 Supp.)); National Capital Revitalization Corporation and Anacostia Waterfront Corporation Reorganization Act of 2008, effective March 26, 2008 (D.C. Law 17-138; 55 DCR 1689), as amended by the Anacostia Waterfront Environmental Standards Amendment Act of 2012, effective October 23, 2012 (D.C. Law 19-192; D.C. Official Code §§ 2-1226.31 et seq.) (2012 Supp.)); The Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Act of 1977, effective September 28, 1977 (D.C. Law 2-23; 24 DCR 792), as amended by the Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Amendment Act of 1994, effective August 26, 1994, (D.C. Law 10-166; 41 DCR 4892; 21 DCMR §§ 500-15); Uniform Environmental Covenants Act of 2005, effective May 12, 2006, as amended (D.C. Law 16-95; D.C. Official Code §§ 8-671.01 et seq. (2008 Repl.)); Water Pollution Control Act of 1984, effective March 16, 1985, as amended (D.C. Law 5-188; D.C. Official Code §§ 8-103.01 et seq. (2008 Repl. & 2012 Supp.)); and Mayor’s Order 2006-61, dated June 14, 2006, and its delegations of authority.

source

Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 21 (January 1, 1988); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 60 DCR 10640 (July 19, 2013).