A couple of years ago, Stormwater magazine ran an
article on safety issues with urban stormwater retention and detention ponds.
The authors cited many potential hazards, some of them obvious and others not so
intuitive. Some of these had to do with the basic design of the pond: for
example, side slopes so steep that a person couldn’t easily climb out after
falling in, or inlet and outlet structures directly across from each other so
that the flows could potentially trap or pin a person—especially a child—against
the side of the pond. Another was undersized spillways that could result in
overtopping of a pond during a large storm and might cause flooding of adjacent
property.
Some of the hazards had to do with
secondary measures that are easier to fix after the fact: steel bars or grates
that are sharp on the ends rather than beveled, or the lack of a fence around a
pond near a school or recreation area. Still others related to maintenance:
accumulated trash or poor drainage that might lead to stagnant water, a
potential breeding ground for mosquitoes.
Especially now, as we tend to encourage more multiuse
facilities and sites, stormwater ponds are often located in or near parks and
recreational areas; we’re deliberately bringing the public closer to them. And
almost everyone involved from beginning to end has some liability if something
goes wrong, from the designer of the system to the owner of the property to
those responsible for maintaining it.
After posing the potential problems, the article also
offers suggestions for countering them. In planning and maintaining your own
stormwater facilities—whether you work for a municipal stormwater program, are
responsible for stormwater facilities on private property—where do safety and
liability issues rank? In particular, how much consideration do you give the
concept of the “attractive nuisance”—an object
or situation that would entice a child to investigate or play?