Concise explainer of NJ DEP’s proposed inland flood-hazard & storm-water rules—key changes, project impacts, hardship tests, next steps, and how CPES keeps professionals informed.
Moderator: Dr. Jorge Berkowitz, LSRP
Speaker: Andrew Robins, Esq., Sills, Cummis & Gross, PC
What New Jersey’s Proposed Inland Flood-Hazard & Storm-Water Rules Could Mean for Projects Large and Small
Highlights from CPES’ January Hot-Topic webinar with Andrew Robins, Esq.
When the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) released its long-anticipated Inland Flood Protection and storm-water rule proposal late last year, the 232-page document landed with a thud. Two feet of additional flood-hazard elevation, new rainfall tables county-by-county, the end of Method 5 and a sweeping re-write of “grandfathering” rules all appear in the same package.
To separate the myths from the mandates, CPES opened its 2024 Hot-Topic series on 10 January with veteran land-use and remediation attorney Andrew Robins (Saul Ewing). Moderated by Dr. Jorge Berkowitz, the fast-moving session distilled where the proposal helps, where it hurts and what still isn’t clear.
1. Two Feet Up—Everywhere
- Uniform rise. For every non-tidal stream reach in New Jersey the flood-hazard area (FHA) line jumps two vertical feet. No selective mapping; no corridor-by-corridor studies.
- Immediate design shock. Foundations, finished-floor elevations, utility corridors and surface lots drafted only months ago are suddenly non-compliant—unless you can show construction has already begun (more than earthwork).
- Hardship ≠ automatic waiver. Robins warned that DEP’s hardship relief remains vague and highly case-by-case. Raising the road that serves your site, for example, is your problem, not the agency’s.
2. Storm-Water: New Numbers, Uneven Impacts
County-specific rainfall. Intensity–duration–frequency (IDF) curves jump 5 % to 50 % depending on location. Projects straddling two counties must design to the higher storm.
Detention timing untouched. The rules still ignore basin-to-basin timing—meaning downstream streets may see worse peak flows even when upstream sites satisfy the new standard.
DPCC/DPCC ripple. Larger design storms could force retrofits under spill-prevention plans, though DEP hasn’t clarified.
3. Limited “Grandfathering” (And Linear Favors)
- Valid permit in hand? You’re safe—if every activity on the plan is covered and no amendments are needed.
- Complete application filed pre-adoption? Maybe. DEP decides whether the package was truly “complete.”
- Public linear projects (DOT, NJ Transit). A separate, more forgiving test rewards long-lead highway and rail jobs—leaving schools, hospitals and affordable-housing sites to fight for hardship findings.
4. Alternative Fill: Missed Opportunity
Elevating thousands of acres will require mountains of soil, yet DEP’s site-remediation arm still limits the use of alternative (non-virgin) fill. Panelists argued that, without broader acceptance of engineered “dirty” fill under protective caps, the rule will drive up costs and strain clean-soil supply.
What Comes Next
- Comment deadline: 3 February 2024.
- Coastal (CAFÉ) rules: A separate proposal—likely adding five feet to tidal FHAs—will follow.
- Legislative interest: Builders, municipalities and environmental groups have already signalled competing concerns; expect hearings.
CPES will track every revision, hearing and implementation memo—then translate them into plain-language briefings for practitioners. Together we’ll keep New Jersey’s redevelopment community informed, compliant and ready to build.