United States: The Need For Off-Site Stormwater Easements In Pennsylvania

It is not uncommon these days for a question to arise as to the need for an off-site stormwater easement by the municipality or Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) as part of the design of the stormwater system for a new development project.  When this happens, an applicant needs to determine if they can redesign their stormwater system to avoid the need for this off-site stormwater easement or if they will have to approach one or more adjacent or area landowners to acquire a stormwater easement on their properties.  Obviously, in many cases, the former is much easier than the latter; particularly when one of those landowners from whom you would need a stormwater easement is either opposing your project or looking for a payday.  And I am not talking about the candy bar. 

In the recent case of Bretz v. Central Bucks School District, the Commonwealth Court attempted to "clarify" the law as to when an applicant needs an off-site stormwater easement.   Unfortunately, based on my reading of this case, the Court only "muddied up the waters" on this subject.  Some might attempt to argue that the Bretz case sets a "new and higher" standard as to when an applicant needs an off-site stormwater easement.  Some might also attempt to argue that an off-site stormwater easement is now needed any time an applicant has proposed to construct a stormwater basin and discharge the water from the basin either directly or indirectly onto an adjacent property.  In my opinion, such an interpretation would further complicate and frustrate the approval process when it comes to stormwater designs and would be contrary to the intent of the Pennsylvania Stormwater Management Act and other DEP regulations/design guidelines on the subject. 

In Bretz, the adjacent landowner appealed an Order of the Bucks County Court of Common Pleas that denied their request for injunctive relief concerning stormwater issues they were having as a result of recent and proposed improvements by the adjacent Central Bucks School District.  The landowner's 31-acre property is downstream from and adjacent to the District's 66-acre property containing a high school, middle school and related improvements.  The landowner filed a complaint in equity alleging that the expansion of the adjacent schools caused an increase in the volume and duration of stormwater discharge onto their property and resulted in long-term and continuous damage to their property.  According to the landowner, the detention basin, berm and 36-inch pipe installed by the District operated to decrease the rate of surface water flow onto their property, but substantially increased the duration of stormwater discharge from one to four or five days. 

At the hearing before the lower court, both parties presented expert testimony concerning the stormwater management undertaking during the District's construction.   Much of the testimony concerned whether the District violated the applicable subdivision and land development ordinance.   However, all parties agreed that, although the direction of water into the new detention basin decreased the rate of stormwater flow onto the landowner's property, it increased the total volume of water discharged.  The trial court determined that the landowner was not entitled to injunctive relief because they failed to establish a violation of the Township's subdivision and land development ordinance; and because the continued construction of the District's improvements will, in the future, reduce stormwater flow onto their property to pre-development levels. 

On appeal, the landowner argued that the trial court erred in holding that the landowner did not demonstrate an exception to the "common enemy rule" (i.e., the general principle that the law regards surface waters as a common enemy which every proprietor must fight to get rid of best he may) in determining that the District did not violate the applicable SALDO provisions and that the District's construction of a stormwater detention basin and a 36-inch pipe did not constitute an alteration of existing points, patterns or the location of natural drainage. 

In order to understand this issue, a historical review as to prior case law on the subject would be helpful.  In 1906, in a case titled Strauss v. Allentown, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held as follows: 

The owner of upper land has the right to have surface waters flowing on or over his land discharged through a natural water course onto the land of another  . . . He may take proper and profitable use of his land even though such use may result in some change in quality or quantity of the water flowing to the lower land . . . from those rules it is clear that only where the water id diverted from its natural channel or where it is unreasonably or unnecessarily changed in quantity or quality has the land owner received an injury. 

In 1955, the Supreme Court restated the common enemy rule in the case of Leiper v. Heywood-Hall Construction Co., as follows: 

It is only where the owner of higher land is guilty of negligence which causes unnecessary damage to the servient owner, or where by an artificial channel, he collects and discharges surface waters in a body or precipitates them in greatly increased quantities upon his neighbor, that the latter may recover for any damage thereby inflicted. 

In this same case, the Supreme Court summarized the law on this subject as follows: 

A landowner may not alter the natural flow of surface water on his property by concentrating it in an artificial channel and discharging it upon the lower land of his neighbor even though no more water is thereby collected than would naturally have flowed upon the neighbor's land in a diffused condition.  One may make improvements upon his own land, especially in the development of urban property, grade it and build upon it, without liability for any incidental effect upon adjoining property even though there may result some additional flow of surface water thereon through a natural watercourse but he may not, by artificial means, gather the water into a body and precipitate it on his neighbor's property

In Marlowe v. Lehigh Township, in 1982, the Commonwealth Court, in reliance on the above authority, held that where surface water is artificially diverted or collected, a plaintiff sustains a cognizable injury if there has been an increase in the total volume of water discharged onto the land or if the volume remains unchanged but is "discharged with augmented force."  This Court also held that the legal wrong lies in the artificial diversion or collection of water itself, and made these pronouncements without regard to the degree in which the volume or force is increased per this Court:  "A plaintiff need only show that a landowner collected and/or concentrated surface water from its natural channel through an artificial medium, and the water was discharged onto the plaintiff's property in an increased volume or force; however slight." 

Then, in 1985, these principles were summary by the Superior Court in LaForm v. Bethlehem Township, which held that an upper landowner is liable for the effects of surface water running off his property in two distinct circumstances:  (1) where the landowner has diverted the water from its natural channel by artificial means; or (2) where the landowner has unreasonably or unnecessarily increased the quantity or changed the quality of water discharged upon his neighbor. 

In the Bretz case, in addressing the District's liability under the common enemy rule, the trial court determined that the increase in quantity of water was "reasonable," the installation of the detention basin and 36-inch pipe was "a proper and profitable use" of the District's land, and the water was discharged onto the landowner's property at the same place before and after construction.  However, the Commonwealth Court held that the trial court applied only the second standard set forth in LaForm (unreasonable or unnecessary change in quantity or quality), and overlooked the first standard (diversion from the natural channel by artificial means). 

Per the Commonwealth Court, the determination of whether a landowner "has diverted the water from its natural channel by artificial means" does not involve consideration of the reasonableness of the change in quantity or location of water flowing onto the lower land;   rather, to establish liability, a plaintiff need only show that a landowner collected and/or concentrated surface water from its natural channel through an artificial medium and that the water was discharged onto plaintiff's property in an increased volume or force; however, slight. 

In this case, the trial court specifically found the following as fact: 

  • The natural, physical contour leading to the landowner's property was a 60-foot-wide swale.  Due to the District's construction, the swale was replaced by a five to six-acre detention basin and a surrounding 15-foot high berm. 
  • The detention basin and berm collected additional surface water emanating from five to seven acres (and after the science wing measures two to four acres) of drainage area, which was diverted toward the Landowner's property as a result of the District's expansion projects. 
  • After collecting the additional surface water, the detention basin concentrated it to and through a 36-inch pipe, and the water intruding upon the landowner's property increased in terms of total volume and duration of discharge. 
  • A channel on the landowner's property eroded after the District installed a detention basin, 36-inch pipe, and berm. 

Accepting the trial court's findings as supported by the evidence, the Commonwealth Court concluded that the trial court erred in applying the "common enemy rule" to the facts of this case. 

As the Commonwealth Court has interpreted the law concerning the need for off-site stormwater easements, I cannot recall a project where an applicant did not construct a stormwater basin to collect the stormwater to reduce the rate of flow onto the adjacent property; however, in such case, the total volume of stormwater discharge was increased.  How can it not?  If additional improvements are being constructed, there will be more stormwater, there will be a need to contain that stormwater in a basin and then that stormwater must be released.  Last this author checked, stormwater continues to flow, like it or not, to the downstream properties.  An upstream property owner should not be prevented from discharging an increased volume of stormwater onto a downstream property if they have reduced the rate of runoff required by the municipality and DEP.  That is exactly what the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held in 1906 in the Strauss case in allowing a property owner to make a "proper and profitable" use of their land even though such use may result in a change in the quality or quantity of water flowing to the lower land.  The Commonwealth Court completely ignored the law established by the Supreme Court in Strauss; not to mention the Pennsylvania Stormwater Management Act and other DEP regulations/design guidelines on the subject.  This issue may need further clarification by the Supreme Court, the State Legislature, the Governor or DEP. 

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions