Stormwater detention ponds are widely utilized as control structures to manage runoff during storm events. These ponds also represent biogeochemical hotspots, where carbon (C) and nutrients can be processed and buried in sediments. This study quantified C and nutrient [nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P)] sources and burial rates in 14 stormwater detention ponds representative of typical residential development in coastal South Carolina. Bulk sediment accumulation was directly correlated with catchment impervious surface coverage (R 2 = 0.90) with sediment accumulation rates ranging from 0.06 to 0.50 cm y -1 . These rates of sediment accumulation and consequent pond volume loss were lower than anticipated based on maintenance guidelines provided by the State. Nalkanes were used as biomarkers of sediment source; the derived terrestrial aquatic ratio (TAR HC ) index was strongly correlated with sediment accumulation rate (R 2 = 0.71) which, in conjunction with high C/N ratios (16-33), suggests that terrestrial biomass drives this sediment accumulation, with relatively minimal contributions from algal derived material. This is counter to expectations that were based on the high algal productivity generally observed in stormwater ponds and previous studies of natural lakes. Sediment C and nutrient concentrations were consistent among ponds, such that differences in burial rates were a simple function of bulk sediment accumulation rate. These burial rates (C: 8.7-161 g m -2 y -1 , N: 0.65-6.4 g m -2 y -1 , P: 0.238-4.13 g m -2 y -1 ) were similar to those observed in natural lake systems, but lower than those observed in reservoirs or impoundments. Though individual ponds were small in area (930-41,000 m 2 ), they are regionally abundant and, when mean burial rates are extrapolated to the regional scale (% 21,000 ponds), ultimately sequester 2.0 9 10 9 g C y -1 , Received 28 July 2017; accepted 11 November 2017; published online 16 January 2018Electronic supplementary material: The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-017-0207-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Authors' Contribution: EMS and CBN were responsible for the original conception and design of this study, with input from WFS and LAZ. Sample collection and bathymetric mapping were performed by WFS. Phosphorus analyses were performed by WFS with assistance from CBN. Carbon and nitrogen analyses were performed by WFS with assistance from EMS. N-alkane analyses were performed by WFS with assistance from LAZ. WFS, CBN, EMS, and LAZ were responsible for data interpretation. WFS drafted the manuscript and all authors contributed critical revisions. *Corresponding author; e-mail: William.Schroer@uga.edu Ecosystems (2018) 21: 1118-1138 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-017-0207-z Ó 2018 The Author(s). This article is an open access publication 1118 9.5 9 10 7 g N y -1 , and 3.7 9 10 7 g P y -1 in the coastal region of South Carolina alone. Stormwater ponds represent a relatively new but increasingly...