1 City of Meadville Stormwater Program and Funding Project Andy Walker, Assistant City Manager PA Association of Municipal Management May 21, 2014

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



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.



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



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

Documents

1 City of Meadville Stormwater Program and Funding Project Andy Walker, Assistant City Manager PA Association of Municipal Management May 21, 2014