Martin's Additions task force sets timeline for draft report, weighs ordinance and engineering options

The Martin's Additions Stormwater Task Force on Nov. 1 heard a technical update from consultant Megan that the group's hydrologic and hydraulic model has been recalibrated with resident survey data and public-meeting feedback and that the team identified 10 priority areas for potential solutions.

Megan said the consulting team will submit a comprehensive draft report to the task force on Friday, Nov. 21. The task force is expected to review the draft in mid-December, hold a community meeting in mid-January to collect resident feedback, and then present a revised report to the village council in late January or at the February council meeting (February 19 was discussed as a target). Megan said the task force will have at least two weeks — preferably a month — to review the draft before the community meeting.

Members focused the discussion on how to translate potential solutions into enforceable local requirements. Speakers discussed two parallel approaches: capital projects and regulatory changes. On the regulatory side, the group reviewed model ordinance ideas used by nearby municipalities, including: establishing an objective threshold for when a development must submit a drainage and stormwater-management plan (one village uses 144 sq. ft. as a local trigger for small structures, while state rules trigger review at 5,000 sq. ft. disturbed or 100 cubic yards of cut/fill); requiring a developer-submitted engineer report and giving the village authority to hold permits until adequate plans are provided; and requiring maintenance agreements or deed-recorded notices for on-site features such as dry wells.

Participants reviewed Somerset’s practice of using prepermit drainage reviews and contracting with on-call civil engineers to vet plans and mitigate instances where county reviews were insufficient. The task force discussed cost-control options: passing standard review fees to developers or using a case-by-case contract model to avoid per-submittal charges. Members noted one consultant review fee example of roughly $1,200 and emphasized that the village can set stricter local thresholds than the state to require village review.

The task force also reviewed Chevy Chase Village’s 2023 stormwater report and projects, which combined gray and green infrastructure (trench drains, regrading, a municipal storm-drain project) and used deed-notice language and code changes to make maintenance responsibilities objective rather than discretionary. Members said those examples offered practical language and design approaches the task force can adapt.

On short-term measures, multiple members and residents recommended low-cost code changes to reduce immediate risk: require a minimum proportion of permeable surfaces for front yards, prevent developers from converting side-setback areas to impervious driveways, and consider adding objective definitions of “adverse impact” and time frames for compliance in local permits. Resident Doug Grove cited the Cummings Lane project as a case where side-setback conversion increased impervious area and argued the code should regulate lot coverage, not just building coverage.

Next steps: Megan will aim to deliver the draft report by Nov. 21; the task force tentatively agreed to meet the week of Dec. 8 (with a preferred meeting window Dec. 8–9) to review timing and to set a community meeting date for mid-January. The task force also agreed to rotate secretary duties among members between meetings and continue coordination by email.

The task force adjourned after a motion and second.