They Fouled Coffee Creek for Nearly Five Years to Build New Homes
The Non-Financial Ledger
Coffee Creek is not an abstraction. It is a perennial stream, meaning it flows year-round. It feeds the Blue River. The Blue River feeds the Missouri River. These are living systems that people fish, that wildlife drink from, that neighborhoods border, that kids grow up near. When a construction company fails to contain its runoff, it is not committing a paperwork violation. It is choosing to use that creek as a free waste disposal system so it can sell houses faster.
Sediment-laden runoff is a specific and documented harm. When construction sites are graded and cleared, the bare soil is exposed to every rainstorm. Without proper controls, that soil, along with whatever else is on the site, concrete washout water, debris, waste, flows into waterways and smothers them. It clouds the water. It blocks sunlight. It destroys aquatic habitat. It kills the insects and small organisms that the whole food chain depends on. Fish suffocate. The ecological baseline of a creek drops, quietly, year after year, and most people never know why.
The EPA’s inspection took place over nine days in November 2024. By that point, Martens Family Enterprises had been operating the Heather Ridge South site since at least May 2021. That means the problems documented by federal inspectors, broken silt fences, sediment pouring into storm drains, trash crammed into inlets, portable toilets sitting uncontained over drain openings, had existed in some form for as long as three and a half years before a federal agency showed up to look. The company had its own inspection program. It had written its own promises into its Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans. It repeatedly failed to keep them. No one stopped them.
The people who live near Coffee Creek did not get to weigh in on whether their creek would serve as the construction site’s runoff drain. They were not offered a say when the retention ponds were overwhelmed with sediment. They were not consulted when the concrete washout area began releasing washout water outside its containment walls. They just inherited the damage, the way working people always inherit the environmental costs of someone else’s profit margin.
The fine is $96,730. Martens Family Enterprises is building a multi-plat single-family housing subdivision in Johnson County, one of the wealthiest counties in Kansas. The land was worth disturbing 31 acres for. The creek was, apparently, not worth protecting.
Legal Receipts: What the Documents Actually Say
All of the following quotes are taken verbatim from EPA Docket No. CWA-07-2025-0201, the Complaint, Consent Agreement, and Final Order filed with the Regional Hearing Clerk on March 2, 2026.
“Sediment laden water flowing in both retention ponds, the conveyance channel between the ponds, the discharge to the rock channel, and into Coffee Creek.”
EPA Inspection Finding, Count 2, Β§47(h) β CWA-07-2025-0201
- This documents active pollution at the time of the federal inspection, not a historical incident. The sediment was not contained to the site. It had already moved through the retention ponds, through the conveyance channel, through the discharge channel, and into Coffee Creek itself.
- This is a direct violation of Part 7.2.3(5) of the Kansas General Permit, which requires the permittee to “minimize sediment discharges from the site.” The water was not minimized. It was flowing out.
“The concrete washout area east of Plat 4 was not adequately sized or constructed and was releasing washout water outside of containment.”
EPA Inspection Finding, Count 2, Β§47(i) β CWA-07-2025-0201
- Concrete washout water is a toxic discharge. It contains high-pH liquid with heavy metals and chemical additives. The company’s own Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan required the washout area to be “lined with plastic sheeting at least 10 mils thick and free of any holes or tears” with “sufficient quantity and volume to contain all liquid and concrete waste.” The EPA found it was doing neither.
- This means the company wrote a compliance plan, agreed to be bound by it as a permit condition, and then did not build the required infrastructure to meet it.
“Portable toilets stationed on street inlet platforms without containment.”
EPA Inspection Finding, Count 2, Β§47(g) β CWA-07-2025-0201
- Street inlets connect directly to the storm sewer system, which drains to the waterway. Portable toilets placed directly on top of those inlets, with no containment barrier, means any leak, spill, or overflow could enter the storm sewer and flow directly toward Coffee Creek.
- There is no technical misunderstanding possible here. Whoever placed those toilets made a specific decision about where to put them, and that decision was to put them over a drain.
“No erosion control or soil stabilization for lots 123-126 where soil disturbing activities had ceased for greater than 14 days.”
EPA Inspection Finding, Count 1, Β§37(a) β CWA-07-2025-0201
- The Kansas General Permit requires stabilization of disturbed areas within 14 days after soil-disturbing activities stop. The EPA found lots that had been sitting bare and exposed, with zero erosion controls, for more than two weeks. Every rain event during that window was an uncontrolled runoff event.
- This is also documented at the retention pond perimeter north of lots 125-127, meaning the area immediately adjacent to the water management infrastructure was itself left unprotected.
“Respondent’s SWP2 Plans for both Plat 4 and Plat 5, Section 5.1.2 state that ‘If corrective actions are identified by the inspector during the inspection he will notify and submit a copy of the inspection report to the Project Manager, who will be responsible for initiating the corrective action within 24 hours of the report and completing maintenance as soon as possible or before the next storm event.'”
EPA Complaint, Count 5, Β§64 β CWA-07-2025-0201
- This is the company’s own written standard. The EPA found that deficiencies documented in the company’s own inspection reports were not corrected within the timelines the company itself set. The company set a 24-hour standard, then repeatedly failed to meet it.
- This is documented for both Plat 4 and Plat 5, meaning the pattern was not isolated to one part of the site. It was systemic.
β EPA Docket No. CWA-07-2025-0201, Β§69. They signed the order. They paid the fine. They just won’t say it happened.
Societal Impact Mapping
Environmental Degradation
The physical damage flows downstream from a connected chain: 31 disturbed acres at Heather Ridge South feed Coffee Creek, which feeds the Blue River, which feeds the Missouri River. Every failure documented in this case sent pollutants deeper into that chain.
- Coffee Creek and the Blue River are classified as “relatively permanent waters” under Section 502(7) of the Clean Water Act, meaning they are federally protected navigable waters. The contamination documented during the EPA’s inspection, sediment-laden water actively flowing into Coffee Creek, constitutes a direct violation of that protection.
- Construction site sediment runoff smothers stream beds, reducing dissolved oxygen levels, eliminating benthic habitat, and disrupting the biological baseline that supports fish, invertebrates, and riparian wildlife. Coffee Creek was exposed to this for years.
- Concrete washout water contains calcium hydroxide, heavy metals, and high-pH compounds. The EPA documented that the Plat 4 washout area was both undersized and actively releasing washout water outside containment. Even a small continuous release of this material into a storm drainage system is a chemical contamination event, not merely a sediment event.
- The site ran without adequate silt fences on downslope sections of multiple lots, without stabilization on multiple bare-soil areas, and with storm sewer inlets stuffed with sediment and debris rather than protected by functioning inlet controls. This means that during every significant rain event at the site, uncontrolled runoff entered the drainage system.
- The retention ponds on site were not functioning as designed. The EPA found sediment-laden water in both ponds, in the conveyance channel between them, and at the discharge point to the rock channel. The ponds had become throughput systems for pollutants rather than containment systems.
Public Health
Construction runoff is not a sterile substance. The downstream consequences of untreated, uncontained stormwater from active construction sites carry documented health and safety implications for residents and communities near the affected waterways.
- Sediment loading in waterways used for recreation or near residential areas creates contact exposure risks. Coffee Creek and the Blue River are perennial streams in a populated Kansas county. Turbid, contaminated water carries bacteria, heavy metals, and chemical residues that people and animals can contact during any normal interaction with those waterways.
- Concrete washout water is classified as a hazardous waste stream when improperly managed. Calcium hydroxide and concrete admixtures released outside containment can elevate the pH of adjacent soils and water, creating corrosive conditions toxic to aquatic life and harmful to humans who contact the water downstream.
- Portable toilets placed directly over storm drain inlets with no containment represent a raw sewage exposure risk for every downstream contact point, from stream recreators to downstream water treatment intake zones. This was documented not as a design flaw but as an active, observable condition during the EPA’s November 2024 inspection.
- Residents near Coffee Creek and the Blue River had no notification, no compensation, and no remediation plan offered to them as part of this settlement. The consent agreement resolves the regulatory violation. It does not restore the creek.
Economic Inequality
The Heather Ridge South subdivision is being built in Johnson County, Kansas. Johnson County is consistently ranked among the wealthiest counties in the state. The water pollution produced by that construction did not stay in Johnson County. It flowed into shared public waterways used by everyone.
- The company extracted profit from a 31-acre development while externalizing the environmental cost onto a public creek, a public river, and ultimately the Missouri River. The people who bear that cost include anyone who uses, depends on, or lives near those waterways, many of whom cannot afford to leave or remediate the damage themselves.
- The $96,730 fine is the entirety of the government’s financial response to nearly five years of documented violations. For a company developing a multi-plat single-family housing subdivision in one of Kansas’s wealthiest counties, this penalty must be contextualized against the revenue generated by selling dozens of homes at current Johnson County market prices. Johnson County median home sale prices routinely exceed $400,000. A single completed lot sale likely exceeds the total fine.
- The permit for Plat 4 (KSR116437) was issued in May 2021 and was not terminated until April 14, 2025, well after EPA’s inspection documented its violations. This means the company operated under active permit coverage for its violations for years, with the permit serving as legal cover during the period of harm.
- Communities near polluted urban waterways are disproportionately lower-income. While the construction site sits in affluent Johnson County, the Blue River and Missouri River corridor includes communities with significantly less wealth and significantly more environmental burden. The pollution flows downhill, economically and literally.
What the Plan Said vs. What the EPA Found
Martens Family Enterprises was required to write a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for both Plat 4 and Plat 5. Those plans were legally binding permit conditions. Here is what those plans promised versus what federal inspectors documented.
The “Cost of a Creek” Metric
What Now: Who to Watch and What to Do
This case is formally resolved, but the enforcement architecture that allowed Martens Family Enterprises to operate for nearly five years before federal accountability remains unchanged. Here is where the oversight is supposed to happen, who runs it, and what you can actually do.
Key People Named in the Enforcement Record
- Philip Martens, President of Martens Family Enterprises, Inc. Named recipient of the Final Order. The company signed consent with him as the authorized representative. His email of record in the case is MFEIKCl@gmail.com.
- Alyse Stoy, Acting Director, Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Division, EPA Region 7. She signed the Final Order on February 24, 2026.
- Samantha Pappas, Attorney, EPA Region 7 Office of Regional Counsel. Lead attorney on this enforcement action.
- Karina Borromeo, Regional Judicial Officer, EPA Region 7. Signed the Final Order on March 2, 2026.
- William Carr, Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE). Received a copy of the Final Order as the state agency with co-enforcement authority. KDHE is also the agency that issued and administered the permits throughout the violation period.
Regulatory Bodies With Jurisdiction
- EPA Region 7: Has concurrent enforcement authority with Kansas under CWA Section 402(i). Conducted the inspection, filed the complaint, and signed this order. Located at 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219. Public complaints and tips can be submitted at epa.gov/enforcement/report-environmental-violations.
- Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE): The state agency that issued the stormwater construction permits (KSR116437 for Plat 4, KSR122360 for Plat 5) and administers the Kansas General Permit program. KDHE can receive violation complaints directly and has independent enforcement authority under the state-authorized NPDES program.
- EPA Office of Inspector General (OIG): Accepts complaints about whether EPA enforcement is adequate or whether settlements are in the public interest. If you believe this penalty was too low for the duration and severity of the violations, that is a legitimate public comment subject.
What You Can Do Now
- Comment on the public notice. Under CWA Section 309(g)(4) and 40 C.F.R. Β§ 22.45, this consent agreement is subject to public notice and comment. The EPA is required to receive and consider public input. Find the docket (CWA-07-2025-0201) through the EPA’s enforcement database and submit a formal comment if you believe the penalty was insufficient or that remediation of Coffee Creek should have been required.
- Contact Johnson County and Olathe city officials. The Heather Ridge South development is in their jurisdiction. Local elected officials can demand reporting on construction site compliance and can push for stronger local enforcement of state-issued stormwater permits. Show up to city council meetings. Put this case on the record.
- Connect with local watershed organizations. Groups that monitor the Blue River and Missouri River corridor are your strongest ground-level allies. They track water quality data, document conditions independently, and often submit formal comments in enforcement proceedings. Find them through the Missouri Watershed Information Network or the Blue River Watershed Association if one exists in your area.
- Request KDHE inspection records. Kansas open records law (K.S.A. Β§ 45-215 et seq.) gives you the right to request the state inspection records, permit compliance history, and any enforcement correspondence related to KSR116437 and KSR122360. Build the paper trail. Share it.
- Track the development. Heather Ridge South is ongoing. Plat 5 permit (KSR122360) is still active, set to expire July 31, 2027. Watch the site. If you observe violations, document them with photos, timestamps, and GPS coordinates, and file a formal complaint with both EPA Region 7 and KDHE. The company has now been placed on notice. Any new violation occurs in a context of documented prior misconduct.
The source document for this investigation is attached below.
Explore by category
Product Safety Violations
When companies sell dangerous goods, consumers pay the price.
View Cases →Financial Fraud & Corruption
Lies, scams, and executive impunity that distort markets.
View Cases →


