View
218
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
1
City of Meadville Stormwater Program and Funding Project
Andy Walker, Assistant City Manager
PA Association of Municipal Management
May 21, 2014
Get it off our property - Run it in Ditches
Run it in Stormwater Pipes
Separated SewersSeparated Sewers
Minimize the flow to Stormwater Pipes
Detention PondDetention Pond
Add On-site Controls - Green and Bear It
6
Stormwater Challenges
Earth and EnvironmentalProvides specialist consultancy and
engineering services
Over 100 years of stormwater management: structural system components reaching design life
Commercial and industrial development in the floodplain
Flood protection, major system management and high hazard dam are costly to maintain
City’s stormwater needs continue to grow – increasing regulatory mandates require increased efforts to meet federal and state law. We’re the only MS4 municipality in Crawford County.
7
Stormwater Challenges
Earth and EnvironmentalProvides specialist consultancy and
engineering services
8
Stormwater in Meadville –Infrastructure Needs
Water and wastewater services are supported by water and sewer rates
Stormwater service is funded via the general fund and competes with other City needs
The City is responsible for operation and maintenance of:
Meadville must comply with Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit requirements
Reduced staffing and limited funding has deferred maintenance
Some infrastructure is rapidly deteriorating requiring emergency repair e.g. Dick Run Culvert, Neason Run Culvert,
Rainbow Lake Dam Shadybrook Park BMP
Mill Run Flood Control Project Major System Culverts
30+ Miles of Stormwater Pipe 1200+ Catch Basins/Inlets
Roadside swales New Public SW Infrastructure
9
Stormwater Challenges- Rainbow Lake Dam
10
Stormwater Challenges – Summary
Even without new challenges, the complexity and cost of stormwater management in Meadville will continue to increase.
Earth and EnvironmentalProvides specialist consultancy and
engineering services
Aging Infrastructure
Maintenance Needs
Flood Safety and Mitigation
Regulatory Requirements
Water Quality Protection
11
The Reality
Stormwater costs continue to increase -competing with other City needs
Regulation/MS4, Maintenance, Capital, etc
Local Stormwater Budget
12
Meadville Financial Challenges – Pre User Fee
FY2012 No Capital Improvement budget for stormwater projects.
The City has approximately $500-$750M in stormwater related assets “in the ground” - the recommended industry standard is to invest 1% annually in infrastructure maintenance ($5M+ annually).
Spending fluctuates significantly on a year to year basis – driven mostly by emergency repairs and maintenance. All funding currently comes from the General Fund.
Taxes have only been raised ~3 times in the past 20 years and more than 40% of Meadville properties are tax-exempt.
The budget for stormwater related efforts competes with other City needs:
Current stormwater spending estimated at $366K per year (includes personnel, materials, vehicles and supplies); and
Mainly personnel time > 65% of current costs go to emergency response/repairs.
Over the past several years personnel levels have been reduced and maintenance has been deferred to meet budget constraints.
13
Stormwater in Meadville - Infrastructure
Majority of stormwater infrastructure is located underground
In Meadville
Under streets and roads
Under lawns
And in some instances under buildings!
Out of Sight / Out of Mind
Until It Isn’t!
14
June 27, 2013 Storm
15
Stormwater Funding and Implementation Study
16
Scope of Study
Develop a better understanding of the City’s existing and future stormwater management challenges
Recommend appropriate Levels of Service (LOS) and the revenue required to meet the identified needs
Examine and discuss the feasibility (technically and practically) of funding stormwater services through a service fee in Meadville
Obtain feedback and input from the community on key policy decisions
Provide a decision-making tool for the Mayor and City Council
17
Stakeholder Advisory Committee
Represented diverse voices of the community
Allegheny College (largest tax exempt), French Creek Valley Conservancy (watershed group), Meadville Medical Center (large tax exempt), Wesbury Retirement Community (largest taxpayer), CHAPS (human services non-profit), Crawford County Planning Office, Local Ministerium Representative, Local Realtor, Local Engineer, Small Commercial Guys, Large Industrial Guys
Provided feedback on proposed policies and recommendations:
Program Needs and Proposed Levels of Service
Data Analysis and Rate Methodology Options
Rate Structure and Cost Projections Goal : Reach consensus on a recommendation to Council
18
Field Tour Highlights
19
Current Services and Preliminary Program Gaps
Represents a snapshot of the City’s program.
Based on a review of existing documents and staff interviews.
Needs driven by:
Aging system and need for funding for both maintenance and capital improvements
Flooding Concerns and the need for mitigation
MS4 permit/regulatory compliance
Health and Safety issues
20
Identifying the True Costs of Stormwater Management
21
Current Stormwater Program – Cost Center Approach
There are several Departments involved in stormwater: Management & Development, Zoning Administration, Public Works, Finance, City Solicitor
Using cost centers allows for thinking outside of organizational lines in preparation for the next question: “What should the City be doing?”
22
Preliminary Program Goals
Maintain system’s existing capacity and integrity through proactive inspections and maintenance
Ensure compliance with regulatory requirements
Protection of French Creek
Flood protection and mitigation
Public health and safety
Funding for stormwater priorities
23
Level of Service (LOS) Recommendations
Compared Existing program vs. Moderate and Significant LOS Increases
City Staff recommended further evaluation of Moderate LOS for all Cost Centers
SAC input helped to further develop LOS recommendation and prioritize funding
24
2 - GIS/Mapping
LOS Program Element Description Cost Estimate
Existing Program Stormwater System Mapping Maintain existing City wide stormwater system mapping - hard
copy format. --
Moderate Increase
Update Aerial Imagery
High-resolution imagery to be flown in Spring 2012. Resolution will be detailed enough for future parcel data updates and to develop a map of the existing stormwater infrastructure (no cost to proposed program).
$54,000Digitize City Maps
Digitization of existing City maps will to allow for the input of the existing information into the proposed stormwater system GIS database.
Map SW System Outfalls Outfall locations to be field located via GPS unit during field survey – MS4 Permit Requirement.
Maintain and update impervious area features Maintenance of impervious surface database via customer inquiries, stormwater fee appeals, building occupancy permits, as-built planning information, etc.
Significant Increase
Refresh Aerial Imagery/Update Billing Database
Refreshed aerial imagery to maintain accurate data that captures changes in the land use (not necessarily captured by the impervious cover tracking). Assumed to be updated once every five years.
$108,000Map SW Drainage Areas
Develop engineering analysis of current hydrology / drainage contributions to the City’s stormwater infrastructure and natural flow paths including inlets, channels, drainage basins, streams, etc.
“Easements” Database
Development of a GIS database/layer to capture easements which grant City access to stormwater infrastructure (public and private) throughout the City - additional Data will be collection may be required.
25
8 - Capital Improvements
LOS Program Element Description Cost Estimate
Existing Program
Major Vehicle Repairs Currently major vehicle repairs are not covered within the existing City budget and occur on as needed or emergency basis.
$99,000
Curb Replacement Annualized curb replacement program based on data provided by the City.
Moderate Increase
Vehicle Replacement Fund (e.g. vacuum truck, leaf collection equip, etc)
Ongoing vehicle replacement fund does not currently exist within the capital budget. An annual fund would be established to begin collecting the funds needed to systematically and periodically replace vehicles, creating a long-term and sustainable replacement mechanism. The following vehicles require replacement within the next 1-5 years: 1 - Street Sweeper 2 - Vacuum Truck
$186,000Dam Repair (Rainbow Dam)
PADEP inspections identified joint separation along the spillway and significant erosion at the inlet location; this may require remedial construction. PADEP has stated that the spillway is undersized,requiring additional engineering evaluation.
Moderate Funding of Major Projects
Currently funding of major stormwater related infrastructure projects are not included in the City capital budget. Assumes initial capital funding at $50,000/yr (option to cover debt service on these projects with capital costs covered or shared with the City’s CIP budget). An additional 20% of the capital costs ($10,000) will be added to cover project engineering (design and permitting).
Significant Increase
Culvert Replacement/Rehab Planned annualized culvert replacement program.
$686,000Significant Funding of Major Projects
Cost estimate assumes initial capital funding at $250,000/yr (option to cover debt service on these projects with capital costs covered or shared with the City’s CIP budget). Estimated an additional 20% of the capital costs ($50,000) would be needed to cover project engineering (design and permitting) as well as construction administration by City Staff and/or a preferred provider.
26
Stormwater Funding Priorities
Earth and EnvironmentalProvides specialist consultancy and
engineering services
Combined Priorities and Ranking
Cost Category Combined Priority Rank
8 - Capital Improvements 3 1
5 - Infrastructure Assessment & Rehabilitation 5 2
4 - Operations & Maintenance 6 3
3 - Master Planning & Studies 9 4
2 - GIS/Mapping 10 5
7 - Education & Outreach 11 6
1- Stormwater Review, Inspection, Administration, & Enforcement 13 7
6 - Regulatory Compliance 13 7
27
Impact of priorities on program development
Provides guidance on
Where resources should be targeted
What level of service the City should reach for
How quickly activities might need to be ramped up to meet needs/goals
When projects should be undertaken/services contracted/equipment purchased
28
Program Plan Development
Combined SAC and staff recommendations to identify the preferred level of service for each cost center – recommended moderate increase
Created a stepped approach to implementation based on
Distributed program elements over first 5 years of the program to calculate annual program costs.
Adjusted start and end dates to balance annual costs.
Logical sequences
Planned activities
Priorities
Increased support needs (Personnel, Contractor, Equipment, Materials, Capital, etc)
29
Comparison - Overall Program Budget
Draft 5-Year Program Plan
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Total Existing LOS Annual Cost $356,000 $356,000 $356,000 $356,000 $356,000
Total Moderate Increase LOS Annual Cost
$452,000 $433,000 $484,000 $868,500 $767,500
Total Program Annual Cost $808,000 $789,000 $840,000 $1,224,500 $1,123,500
Adjusted 5-Year Program Plan
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Total Existing LOS Annual Cost $306,000 $306,000 $306,000 $306,000 $306,000
Total Moderate Increase LOS Annual Cost
$452,000 $458,000 $458,500 $766,000 $645,000
Total Program Annual Cost $758,000 $764,000 $764,500 $1,072,000 $951,000
Total Program Annual Cost Reductions
$50,000 $25,000 $75,500 $152,500 $172,500
Total adjustments over 5-year $475,500 ~ 10% reduction from original plan
30
Preferred 5-Year Program Plan Costs
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Years 6-10
1. Stormwater Review, Inspection, Administration, &
Enforcement$97,000 $97,000 $97,000 $111,000 $111,000 $111,000
2. GIS/Mapping $32,000 $12,500 $12,500 $12,500 $12,500 $48,500
3. Master Planning & Studies $ - $ - $11,000 $11,000 $11,000 $47,000
4. Operations & Maintenance $180,000 $206,500 $212,500 $266,000 $315,000 $315,000
5. Infrastructure Assessment & Rehabilitation
$79,000 $197,000 $225,500 $225,500 $225,500 $196,500
6. Regulatory Compliance $37,000 $54,000 $54,000 $54,000 $54,000 $85,000
7. Education & Outreach $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000
8. Capital Improvements $326,000 $190,000 $145,000 $385,000 $215,000 $100,000
Total Program Annual Cost $758,000 $764,000 $764,500 $1,072,000 $951,000 $910,000
31
Preferred 5-yr Program Overview
Existing Total Projected
5-Year Total = $1.53M
5-Year Total = $4.31M
Capital
Infrastructure Assessment & Replacement
O&M
Capital
O&M
Infrastructure Assessment & Replacement
32
Now That We Have the Program Plan - How Do We Pay for It?
33
Variety of Funding Options
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
34
How to pay for it? Evaluation Considerations
General Tax Fund Dedicated Service Fee
• Pros• No need to change process
• Less media attention
• Cons• Inequitably Apportioned
based on property value
• Only “taxed” properties pay
• Competition between programs/departments
• Variable by year
• Pros• Equitable – all developed
properties contribute
• Set based on the actual costs of services
• Reviewed and adjusted annually
• Stable
• Cons• Cost to implement a new
system
• Stakeholder acceptance
35
Stable Funding
Tax-basedTax-based
User fee basedUser fee based
Maximum possible program
Time
$$
User Fee vs. Tax Revenue
36
Evaluation Considerations
General Funds User-Fee
Who Pays? Taxed Properties Everyone who contributes pays
Basis of Contribution ($)
Property Value Estimated contribution to Runoff
Credits for On-site Management
None Consideration of Treatment or services that offset the need for public services
• Program needs are still the same• Fees may provide a more equitable or flexible distribution
of cost than tax revenue
37
Fees based on amount of impervious area on a lot
Like water and wastewater, everyone pays (including tax-exempt properties)
Because residences have less built area (impervious cover), they typically pay less than large paved commercial lots
Equity Issue
38
Rate Methodology Criteria
Factors used to determine the appropriate rate structure for Meadville include the following:
Data availability
Equity in the apportionment of costs
Cost of implementation and upkeep
Compatibility with existing data processing and GIS systems
Revenue stability and sensitivity
39
Rate Methodology
Fee options depend on the supporting data and the goals of the community.
Recommended structure for Meadville:
Flat rate (one billing unit) for single family detached (SFD) residential, with other uses billed in Equivalent Residential Units (ERUs).
Rate Structure is the way costs are distributed
Rate Base – All developed parcels within the City limits, regardless of land use
40
Impervious Area Definition
Impervious Area Definition from 2011 City Stormwater Ordinance:
“Impervious surface (impervious area)” means a surface that prevents the infiltration of water into the ground. Impervious surface (or areas) include, but is not limited to: roofs, additional indoor living spaces, patios, garages, storage sheds and similar structures, parking or driveway areas, and any new streets and sidewalks. Any surface areas proposed to initially be gravel or crushed stone shall be assumed to be impervious surfaces.”
41
Rate Structure Evaluation
Rate base = Approximately 5,100 developed parcels including 3,300 Single Family Detached (SFD) parcels
Impervious coverage will be developed for Non-single Family Detached (NSFD) parcels
Median amount of impervious on SFD sample set is 2,660 square feet
This is would be used as the billing unit (ERU) for all NSFD Parcels
i.e. 1 ERU = 2,660 square Feet
42
Meadville Impervious Area Distribution of SFD Sample Set
43
Typical Fee Structure
Any Single Family Detached HouseOne Billing Unit
Properties Other Than SFD LotsBased on Average Impervious Area square footage in a Billing Unit
1 ERU
1 ERU
1 ERU
1 ERU
2 ERUs
3 ERUs
RIT
CH
IE P
KY
SUMMER GARDEN WAY
Flat rate for single family residential detached.
44
Rate Structure
All developed SFD properties will be billed a flat rate of one ERU (equal to 2,660 square feet of impervious surface) and all NSFD
developed properties in The City of Meadville will be billed for stormwater at the rate of one
ERU per 2,660 square feet of impervious surface.
45
Impervious Area Example
Number of SFD ERUs estimated based on current data set (aerial imagery, land use codes, tax database, etc)
Non-Single Family Detached (NSFD) – Digitized impervious surfaces on each parcel
Former Meadville City Hall
Total Impervious Area = 56,408 sq ft
Estimated ERUs = 21 ERUs
46
Fee Calculation
Program Costs + Financial Adjustments = Revenue Needs
Divide Total Revenue needs by # of Billing Units = Rate
Future years would need to be adjusted for inflation and account for potential growth
Generally look to keep rates relatively steady over a 5-year period
47
Preferred Rate Strategies
Preliminary recommendation is focused on 2 Options which could result in a range of rates between $75-90 per billing unit per year: Option 1 - All cash; annually adjusted; program and rate
reviewed after year 3
Option 2 - 50% Bond; annually adjusted; program and rate reviewed after year 3
Adjusted Annual Rates Per Billing Unit
Option Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
1. All Cash $89.40 $89.40 $88.80 $120.00 $108.00
2. 50% Bonds $75.00 $79.20 $82.20 $105.00 $100.80
Adjusted Monthly Rates Per Billing Unit
Option Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
1. All Cash $7.45 $7.45 $7.40 $10.00 $9.00
2. 50% Bonds $6.25 $6.60 $6.85 $8.75 $8.40
48
Financial Impact of New Stormwater Fee vs. Real Estate Tax Increase
“Winner”
231 Chestnut St (commercial, NSFD)
Assessed Value = $192,650
Proposed Fee: 2 ERUs (5,150 sf.) x $90/ERU
= $180.00
Tax Increase : 3.05 mils x 192.65
= $587.58
49
Financial Impact of New Stormwater Fee vs. Real Estate Tax Increase
“Loser”
Downtown Mall
Assessed Value = $343,250
Proposed Fee: 35 ERUs (92,523 sf.) x $90/ERU = $3,150
Tax Increase: 3.05 mils x 343.25 = $1,046.91
50
City Bill for Stormwater Fee
City of Meadville – approximately 204 ERUs (40 properties) currently tax exempt
204 ERUs x $89.40 = $18,237.60
51
Stakeholder Advisory CommitteeWhat We Heard
General Consensus: Program of services needs to be funded at or near recommended program plan level - “Don’t Kick the
Can Down the Road” Keep services at a reasonable rate - concerned about the fee getting to high in the future Use funding efficiently Concern about erosion of “Non-profit” status though they agreed everyone needs to pay their share Stormwater fee approach is reasonable way to raise necessary revenue - preferred over a tax increase Consider fee in the context of all other costs to the community (e.g. taxes, utilities, service fees, etc) –
consider relief to general fund Additional public education and outreach is needed on stormwater Timing of implementation is aggressive – doesn’t allow for budgeting this year
52
Meadville – Process Overview
Worked with City staff to identify Meadville’s program needs and develop proposed approach for filling gaps
Facilitated Stakeholder Advisory Committee Meetings for input on program and funding options
Developed program and funding recommendations based on stakeholder input
Presented program plan and recommendations to Top Potential Rate Payers as well as general public
Convened a working group to help develop credit and appeals policies
Reviewed project status and funding recommendations with Council along the way
53
Credits & Appeals Policy
Offer credits to properties that provide exceptional stormwater management
Provide incentives to support private stormwater management
Establish a mechanism and process to correct billing errors
Green Roof at Allegheny College Rain Garden at Market House
54
Credits & Appeals Policy
Credits include:
Peak Control Credit for Detention Basins
Volume Control for Raingardens/Infiltration Basins
Water Quality Management for Constructed Wetlands or Green Roofs
Appeals include:
Billing Error Appeals
Side Yard Appeals
Special Conditions Appeals
55
Meadville - Results
Results:
Dedicated funding for stormwater activities
Supported by the Stakeholders, Staff, and Political Leaders
Understood by the public
Current Progress:
1st Year of Program Plan Current Status
Purchase a new street sweeper Complete
Replace 500 feet of storm sewer 824 feet installed to date
Replace 15 structures 10 structures installed to date
Address Rainbow Lake Dam erosion Complete
Replace curb Over 800 feet replaced to date
Map and verify the system Ongoing/Multi-year effort
56
Lessons Learned
• Stakeholder engagement is critical!
• Educate, educate, educate. If they stop to listen, you’ll win them over
• Sometimes the media is our friend-use them
• Don’t throw out a target rate, build the program first
• Stormwater infrastructure used to be “out of sight, out of mind”—now that people are paying for it, they pay attention!
• Steady dedicated funding = steady planning and budgeting
• Show results
Recommended