Stormwater Utility PowerPoint Presentation (2012)

Exactly as extracted, unformatted — for checking against the original. The readable version is easier to read.

Town of Centreville
Stormwater Utility Public Meetings
Fall, 2012

What is Stormwater?
• Precipitation (i.e. rainstorms and melting snow)
• Runoff from impervious areas
• Becomes surface runoff
• Enters storm drains
• Eventually discharges to Millstream, Gravel Run and into the Corsica
River.
2

Why does stormwater have to be managed?
Flooding Conveyance
• Flows from all properties • Stormwater runoff must be channeled
through a system of inlets and pipes, before
contribute to the overall flow and
being safely discharged into local streams
must be managed
and rivers.
3

Why does stormwater have to be managed?
• Protect local waterways. Stormwater conveys sediment, metals, oils,
gasoline and pesticides as it flows over construction sites, farm fields,
lawns and streets.
• Pollution impairs local waterways and ultimately the Chesapeake Bay.
• The Clean Water Act requires total maximum daily loads (TMDL’s) in the
Chesapeake Bay to be reduced Key milestones are Nitrogen, Phosphorous
and Sediments. Think of it as a weight watchers plan for the Bay.
• Urban stormwater is one sector in the watershed improvement plan (WIP).
4

Need – Water Quality
The Corsica River is a community resource that all property owners in the
Town have a vested interest in – these resources must be protected.
5

Watershed Restoration Action Strategy (WRAS)
• The WRAS documents, including a Characterization, Synoptic Survey,
Stream Corridor Assessment, and a Strategy/Business Plan, were
completed in 2004.
• A Six Year Progress Report (2005-2011) was completed in Summer 2012
6

The Corsica River Restoration project has been an extraordinary effort and
partnership which includes state, federal and local agencies as well as
conservation organizations, universities, research institutions and local
watershed groups.
This effort involves outreach to the community, monitoring, research and
implementation of water quality and habitat enhancement projects.
7

All of these efforts have provided insight and lessons on how to effectively
communicate conservation goals in the watershed, engage local communities
in restoration, determine research priorities and monitoring priorities, and focus
restoration efforts that provide the best overall and long-term gains.
8

WHAT IS THE TOWN DOING FOR
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT?
• Retrofit projects
• Street sweeping
• Cleaning storm drains
9

10

11

Town Retrofits
Banjo Lane Coastal Plain Outfall
Under construction Corsica River Gen. Funds & 2010 Trust Funds
• Completed, spring 2012
1122

Wooded Wetland
Completed Spring 2010
located behind Corsica Technologies, drains 17 acres
Under construction- 3 cells MDE Monitoring device
• Discharges directly into Gravel Run • Fore-bay collects sediment
1133

DPW crews perform maintenance
In two years 4 cubic yards of sediment and are
The sediment would have been deposited in
removed
Gravel Run
1144

DPW Yard Bio Retention
MDE 319 Funds Fall 2011
15

DPW Yard
Pre- construction Gravel Run on left Post construction Flows intercepted and treated
16

Need - Maintenance
17

WWTP Outfall Improvements Phase 1
Completed Winter 2012
• Broken headwall and 24 “ storm drain pipe
• Flows are from stormwater not waste water
• Re-grade the slopes at the outfall
• Install three vegetated plunge pools in a stepped
fashion constructed with large sandstone boulders and
smaller silica cobbles
18

19

Stormwater Utility Studies
• URS Phase 1 in February 2010
• Municipal Financial Services Group in February,
2011 to complete the Phase II Study.
• Both studies were completely paid for with a
grant from DNR.
20

Background
The Town hired URS Corporation in February 2010
•
to complete a Stormwater Utility Phase I Study.
The study included:
•
Evaluation of the current stormwater
•
infrastructure and operations and a high-level
forecast of future stormwater needs (defining
level of service).
Evaluation of the potential issues associated
•
with creating a stormwater utility for the Town.
21

Phase I Findings
Town Town Performance of
Stormwater Assets Stormwater Stormwater Current Stormwater
Practices Expenses System
Maintenance of 3 Full time
Approximately 700 inlets Inlets in good shape
inlets equivalent
Current annual
Town experiences
Unknown number of Mowing of open expenses
ponding during rain
miles of pipe channels estimated at
events
$122,000
Expenses
43 Best Management Daily / weekly include gas, System may be
Practices * street sweeping equipment, staff undersized
time, etc
Vac-Tron and Sweeper
Construction on Age and condition of
Truck**
as needed basis lines unknown
*41 are privately owned and maintained
**10 years old
22

Street Sweeping, Chesterfield Ave Spring 2012
23

Phase I
Town created Stormwater Citizens Advisory
•
Committee (SWAC) – to assist in defining the
program.
Town needs to prepare a business plan - provide
•
solid foundation for implementation of utility.
Town needs to research and decide on level of
•
service utility will provide.
24

Phase 2
The objective of the study was to build upon the work
•
completed in the Stormwater Phase I Feasibility Study
Developing a specific business plan for the
•
implementation of a stormwater utility for the Town.
25

Phase 2 Conclusions
The Town has been able to provide a high level of
•
service largely due to grant funding and the Watershed
Manager position.
Grant funding will not continue indefinitely and
•
therefore is not a reliable source of revenue.
Recommend the Town augment the existing level of
•
service to meet an essential level to allow for
management and maintenance of the stormwater
system.
26

Why Treat Stormwater Management
as a Utility?
The Town of Centreville is accustomed to managing its
infrastructure through a utility or enterprise fund
(cid:1) Water
(cid:1) Wastewater
At its basic level a utility is comprised of:
(cid:1) Asset Management
(cid:1) Service Delivery
The stormwater system must be managed and provides a vital
service to all residents and businesses in the Town.
27

What are the Benefits of Managing
Stormwater as a Utility?
(cid:1)
Fiscally accountable
(cid:2) Fees are driven by level of service and needs
(cid:1) Dependable revenue stream
(cid:2) Allows for pro-active management of system resulting in lower
life-cycle costs.
(cid:1) More equitable – based on demands placed on system
(cid:2) As compared to general fund / property value rate
(cid:2) More water generated the more pollution, users will pay based
on amount of stormwater generated.
(cid:2) Tax-exempt currently pay nothing
28

Simple Solutions
Police Station Rain Garden Kennard Elementary School Rain Barrels
29

Level of Service to Meet Needs-
each level
builds upon the one prior
Existing - includes current costs related to providing
stormwater services by the Town. No project monies.
Essential - includes the existing costs plus basic costs of
implementing a stormwater utility along with a basic capital
improvement program.
Enhanced - includes costs which allow the Town to become
proactive in its approach to managing stormwater in the capital
improvement plan plus all costs associated with an essential
level of service.
Optimal - includes an aggressively proactive capital
improvement plan for managing stormwater plus all costs
associated with an enhanced level of service.
30

Essential Level of Service – Forecast
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Current and Future Grant Funding $300,000 $200,000 $- $- $-
Current Funding from the General Fund $122,193 $122,193 $122,193 $122,193 $122,193
Existing Incremental Costs above Current $24,287 $28,703 $33,253 $37,940 $42,768
Essential Incremental Costs above Current $44,500 $45,585 $153,711 $157,548 $194,510
Enhanced Incremental Costs above Current $80,571 $82,824 $192,156 $197,240 $235,488
Optimal Incremental Costs above Current $314,000 $323,370 $440,037 $452,681 $498,721
31

Recommend -
Essential Level of Service
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Operating & Maintenance Expenses $170,980 $175,681 $165,524 $170,514 $175,653
Capital Projects $300,000 $200,000 $89,000 $91,670 $94,420
Capital Equipment - - $33,000 $33,000 $66,000
Repair and Rehabilitation $20,000 $20,800 $21,632 $22,497 $23,397
Total Revenue Requirements $490,980 $396,481 $309,156 $317,681 $359,471
Less Grant Funding $300,000 $200,000 - - -
Less General Fund Contribution $122,193 $122,193 $122,193 $122,193 $122,193
Funding Gap $68,787 $74,288 $186,963 $195,488 $237,278
32

Key Policy Issues Addressed
Policy Issue Consideration
Fee Structure How should the fee be imposed?
Exemptions Public Roads
Credits Rain barrels, rain gardens, any onsite BMP gets credit.
Billing How should the fee be billed?
Methodology On the property tax bill, utility bill, separate bill
33

Fee Structure - Impervious Area
(cid:1) The most common approach is the use of impervious
area.
(cid:1) Impervious area relates directly to runoff and demand
on system.
(cid:1) Easily measured and verified.
(cid:1) Upheld by courts.
34

Fee Structure - Impervious Area
Average Single Family Impervious Area
= 1 Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU)
= 3,200 square feet
Customer Class Square Footage ERU’s
Single Family 4,267,138 1,333
Multi-Family 162,043 51
Commercial/Industrial 2,691,137 841
Public/Institutional 1,400,018 438
Roads 3,957,426 1,237
Total 12,477,762 3,899
35

Fee Structure - Recommendation
(cid:1) Impose stormwater fee based on impervious area
Standard average size for all single family
•
residential (1ERU)
Property by property basis for non-residential.
•
(cid:1) Implementation will require assignment of ERU to
each non-single family residential customer.
(cid:1) Recommend the Town impose the stormwater fee
on a quarterly basis and be represented on the
utility bill, similar to water and sewer charges.
36

Level of Fee - Recommendation
(cid:1)
We recommend that the Town:
(cid:2)
Continue the existing level of funding for the Stormwater Utility
through the General Fund.
(cid:2)
Implement a stormwater fee at a level that will allow the Town
to fund the essential level of service.
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Total Incremental Costs :
$68,787
Essential Level of Service
Total ERU’s 2,663
Recommended Monthly Fee per ERU $2.50
37

Benchmarking Comparison
Annual
Municipality Population Billing Rate Per ERU Revenue
Generated
Virginia Beach, VA 433,746 $7.23 $21,058,267
Takoma Park, MD 18,027 $4.00 $350,000
Rockville, MD 60,734 $4.10 $1,927,928
Suffolk, VA 83,659 $5.24 $4,056,979
Fayetteville, NC 121,015 $3.00 $4,800,000
Chesapeake, VA 220,111 $7.35 $14,431,471
Norfolk, VA 234,220 $8.33 $3,500,000
$5.00 Residential, $10
Lewes, DE 2,932 $200,000
Commercial, $20 Industrial
Washington, DC 599,657 $2.67 $13,000,000
38

QUESTIONS??
39