Stormwater Utility PowerPoint Presentation (2012)

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 Needseach 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