Eight lawmakers representing Southwest Washington got that message Friday at a four-hour briefing organized by the Building Industry Association of Clark County, the Lower Columbia Contractors’ Association and the Clark County Association of Realtors.

“Clark County is preparing a draft set of standards which it’s unlikely the Department of Ecology will find acceptable,” said Steve Madsen, the building industry association’s director of governmental affairs. “The only way to fix that is a legislative intervention.”

The development community says complying with the state’s strict new standard would require builders to supersize the stormwater drainage ponds and basins that dot the landscape in newer Clark County subdivisions, making them two, three, or even four times as large — and expensive — as those built today.

Developers say that would gobble up land that would otherwise hold houses and businesses, make it uneconomical to develop small “infill” lots, and force development to the urban fringe.

“This is the biggest hurdle ever,” said Clark County Commissioner Marc Boldt.  “This is going to make us or break us” with affordable housing and jobs, he warned.

“We’re competing with Oregon,” said engineer Eric Golemo, a partner in the firm Sturtevant, Golemo & Associates.  “They don’t have the same regulations. It’s a competitive disadvantage, and it will have an impact that will  trickle through all parts of our economy.”

About 70 registered participants crowded into a conference room at the Oak Tree Restaurant for the forum.  Legislators in attendance were Sen. Joe Zarelli, R-Ridgefield; Rep. Ed Orcutt, R-Kalama;  Rep. Jaime Herrera, R-Ridgefield;  Rep. Deb Wallace, D-Vancouver; Rep. Jim Dunn, R-Vancouver;  Rep. Bruce Chandler, R-Granger; Rep. Dean Takko, D-Longview; and Rep. Brian Blake, D-Aberdeen.

County taking its time

In May, Ecology officials warned the county by certified mail that it had missed a Feb. 15 deadline for submitting a draft ordinance and other documents detailing how it intends to comply with the new state stormwater standard. It warned the county would face possible penalties if it did not submit a final ordinance by Aug. 18

Clark County commissioners wrote back this week saying they would adopt a final ordinance on their own schedule, in December.

“We regret missing the timeline, but the extensive outreach and public participation will give us a better stormwater ordinance to protect the water quality in Clark County,” they said.

At issue is Clark County’s fundamental disagreement with the state about the stormwater runoff standard new construction should have to meet in so-called Phase 1 municipal storm sewer systems — those owned or operated by Clark, King, Pierce and Snohomish counties and the cities of Seattle and Tacoma.

The state regulates stormwater runoff under the federal Clean Water Act to control the flushing of polluted water and sediments into the ocean and the waters of the state.

The new state standard,  which replaces a 1992 rule, says stormwater discharge from development in those Phase 1 urban areas should not exceed the volume of runoff that occurred prior to European settlement five centuries ago, when much of western Washington was heavily forested and able to absorb copious amounts of rainfall.

But Clark County argues that much of its land was open fields and meadows until intensive development began after World War II.  Commissioners are considering adopting a less stringent standard that would use a 1955 benchmark in watersheds; less than 40 percent of the land is forested today, and aerial photos show it has been that way since 1955.

The discussion is more than theoretical. In a power point presentation, Golemo illustrated how much land a drainage basin would consume under the new state standard — approximately four times as much as under the current standard,  adding tens of thousands of dollars to the cost of nearby homes.

The use of low-impact development techniques such as rain gardens and pervious pavement that absorb runoff could reduce that footprint, he said.

Boldt said he’d like to see legislation that sets out the argument Ecology is using to justify a predevelopment standard, explains what the standard is supposed to achieve, and describes how that outcome will be measured.

Orcutt said he’s open to considering legislating state stormwater rules if that becomes necessary to curb the cost of compliance and the burden on local governments and home buyers.  

“We serve constituents when they are having problems with state agencies,” he said. “There’s nothing to stop us from saying this negatively affects our constituents. “

But Ecology is being pushed from the other side as well.  Bill Moore, head of the agency’s stormwater unit, said its new Phase 1 rule and a separate Phase 2 rule that applies to stormwater runoff in Vancouver and other smaller jurisdictions are both being challenged by two Puget Sound environmental groups, which argue that the rules are not tough enough.

“We know the water in our urban waterways is degraded,” Moore said. “We have the science.”

“I don’t argue the science,” Golema  said.  “It’s very sound.  It’s more what the target should be. We need a more balanced target.”