Subscribe in a reader
In Dyer, a suburb of Chicago, IL. homes were flooded recently from rains. That is not overly surprising since house flood across America all the time for various reasons. This case was a little different however.
From the Chicago Sun-Times:
The Stormwater Management Board was formed in 1991, a year after Plum Creek flooded streets and homes in the Berens-Monaldi subdivision, the same area that flooded last week.
So the board to prevent this has been in place for over 15 years.
Neeb said the recent flooding was comparable to the floods of 1990 when hundreds of Dyer residents got water in their basements. About 150 houses got water in their yards and basements in the latest flooding.
If this is the case it sounds like the town needs to readjust their definition of a 10-year storm event and protect themselves accordingly.
“The water would have gone 1,800 feet along the berm then backed up at a low point and flowed into the subdivision,” Neeb said.
The Stormwater Management Board awarded Hasse Construction a $400,000 contract in 2006 to install an 1,800-foot-long berm along the creek.
Only half the work has been completed due to construction delays.
So it’s taken 17 years to come up with a half million dollars to build a berm that the city already knows isn’t going to work? On top of that, the construction company is suffering from delays and the city officials don’t seem to be rushing things along very quickly.
The National Stormwater laws have changed at least 3 times since 1991. I’m somewhat shocked that the residents aren’t completely up in arms about this.
Giant Flood….17 years spent talking about how to prepare with no actual preparation…. Giant Flood.
-Stormwater Guru
Technorati Tags: stormwater, dyer, chicago, flood, hasse, illinois
Powered by ScribeFire.
A proposed property tax is being put on the ballot in Aspen, Colorado in order to pay for the cities stormwater management plan.
The dedicated property tax would be used to fund the annual costs of the program, plus all of the capital investments. City officials estimate that the property tax would generate about $12 million over the next 15 years. The tax would be equal to a single-family homeowner paying an estimated $13.24 a month; an owner of affordable housing paying $0.62 a month and a large commercial property owner paying $606.70 a month, according to a memo written by Aragon………
A development fee also is proposed, which would be assessed against all properties at the time of building the system. The fee would be $2.88 per square foot of the proposed impervious area. Proceeds from that fee would be used to pay for improvements to the storm sewer collection system.
This route is the way that many municipalities are beginning to go in order to fund their Phase II stormwater requirements. I am somewhat surprised that Aspen decided to levy the development tax on top of the property tax. Does this mean that Aspen is going to provide the controls and maintain compliance for new developments? Somehow I doubt it.
A 2,500 square foot impervious footprint on a new home would now cost $8,000 more. I wonder if this is going to lead to a lot of ‘green’ roofs. If I was a developer, it seems it would almost be cost effective to put in rooftop gardens etc.
I wonder why the city didn’t choose to place the tax instead on sales tax. Aspen usually draws a significant number of tourists each year, so in effect the city is taxing relatively few for the stormwater pollution of many.
-Stormwater Guru
Aspen Colorado MS4 Phase II Pollution News stormwater taxes
A high end suburb of San Antonio, Texas announced that they will be issuing a $7.5 million in bonds to pay for, among other things, their stormwater drainage plan.
Phase I projects include:
- The purchase of a new ladder truck for the Fire Department.
- Repairs, extensions and improvements to the city’s water and sewer system.
- Street and sidewalk improvements.
- The creation of a stormwater drainage master plan.
- Renovations to the City Hall complex and fire station
- Professional services related to the capital projects.
This plan is the first stage in Alamo Heights’ compliance with the new Phase II regulations passed in Texas 2 weeks ago. MS4s have until Feb 11, 2008 to file their NOIs with the State Agency, the TCEQ.
-Stormwater Guru
alamo heights MS4 Phase II san antonio stormwater taxes Texas
The Stormwater Ordinance is one of the first steps necessary to comply with Phase II Requirements. Manhattan, Kansas announced this morning that they have passed their ordinance.
In brief the ordinance prohibits the following:
domestic sewage or septic tank waste, garbage, industrial waste, wastewater that contains soap, detergent, degreaser or solvent; yard wastes that have been moved or gathered by a person, any discharge from a petroleum storage tank, and effluent from a cooling tower, condenser, compressor, emissions filter; or the blowdown from a boiler.
The article also includes a pretty embarrasing quote from one of the city commissioners:
Commissioner Mark Hatesohl said the city was a “bad polluter” in the way it applies large volumes of salt each winter to streets. He said the city needed “a more environmentally friendly ice-melter.”
It’s okay Mark, de-icing activities are almost universally allowed as permitted non-stormwater discharges.
What’s interesting about the announcement is that violation of the ordinance appears to be a misdemeanor offense. This is probably a mistake. By making it a criminal offense, you have created a situation where the punishment may not meet the crime. Are you going to give a guy who dumps a two gallon bucket of car wash soap down the storm drain the same punishment as someone who decides to empty out 100 paint cans or a lawn service that dumps thousands of pounds of clippings down the drain?
Instead, a fine structure would be more appropriate for this kind of ordinance. Start it at $50 and scale it up to as much as $10,000 per incident. That way you can create an appropriate response for violators.
-Stormwater Guru
Technorati Tags: stormwater, K-state, Kansas, Mark Hatesohl, Manhattan
Kansas Mark Hatesohl MS4 ordinance Phase II stormwater
From the Tampa Bay Times:
TAMPA - Since 2003, Tampa property owners have been charged a
stormwater fee to help pay for projects to ease flooding on city
streets.
But dozens of government agencies with offices in
Tampa have ignored their stormwater bills from the city for the past
four years.
Outstanding payments total more than $870,000, with
the bulk of that - about $505,000 -attached to the Hillsborough County
School Board.
Government organizations are refusing to pay usage fees to other governments. This is interesting in itself, but becomes more interesting if you have a private MS4 with government entities in it. For example does a Post Office located in a private subdivision that qualifies as an MS4 have to pay any Storm Water Utility type fees that are assessed?
I think the best way to make the comparison is to ask if the entity has to pay for power, water service, or any emergency services. If the answer is yes, then the entity should be required to pay any storm water usage/infrastructure fees.
-Stormwater Guru
fees Florida MS4 Storm Water Utility stormwater
Yesterday afternoon the Phase II Small MS4 permit (TXR040000) was approved in Texas and went into effect. This will have some major effects on Stormwater Management in the state. Not the least of which is that all of the small MS4s (Texas says 500 but my count puts it closer to 1000) will have to begin putting their own stormwater programs into place.
This Permit was originally supposed to have gone into effect in 2003 but because of a tie up in the Supreme Court, Texas waited for official guidance from the EPA.
The passage can be seen here. It was docket number 73 and is discussed about halfway through the videocast.
One thing I found curious is the commission seemed to think that the NOIs that were going to be submitted were going to be the bulk of the work. I was extremely surprised to not even see a passing mention of the annual reporting requirements, of which there are many.
The Permit has some lofty goals for the permit term and is heavily focused on education. This does not mean that regulatory activity will not increase. These Small MS4s will regulate their cities towns and districts and Texas will in turn regulate the MS4s
In the coming weeks and months, I will document developments as I am able concerning this permit.
-Stormwater Guru
MS4 Permits Phase II stormwater Texas TXR040000
