Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSection 5: Implementation 5.0 Section 5 - Implementation 5.1 Introduction The Implementation Section is intended to provide guidance in carrying out the plan objectives. The implementation program summarizes a schedule and cost of recommended actions. Lastly, procedures for amending the plan are discussed. Table 13 summarizes the implementation schedule for the St. Joseph Stonn Water Management Plan, Table 13 St. Joseph SWMP Implementation Summary """ IJ') \0 t- oo a-, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N Adopt St. Joseph SWMP X Assessment of Problem Areas X X Pond Design Standards and Developer Guidelines X X X X X X Administer Land Use Controls X X X X X X Capital Improvements X X X X X X Storm Water Utility or Other Financing Methods X X X X X X Information and Education X X X X X X 5.2 Implementation Priorities The implementation plan includes the identification and prioritization of capital improvements, administration, permitting, plan amendments, public education, and operation and maintenance. Prioritization of improvements will be based on a review of all recommended actions. The current estimate of stonn water related expenditures have been made. The activities have been distributed throughout a 5-year implementation plan extending though 2008. The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is summarized in Table 14. Storm Water Management Plan St. Joseph, Minnesota A-STJOE0315 Page 37 Project Water Quality Improvement Projects GIS System Setup for SW Mgmt Property Easements and Aquisitions NPDES Permit Program NPDES Reporting and Evaluation Best Management Practices Outfall Pgm. Storm Water Management Plan St. Joseph, Minnesota Table 14 Capital Improvement Plan Project Description Evaluation and construction of water quality treatment for subwatersheds Preliminary Project Cost Estimate $100,000 Date(s) of Implementation 2004-2008 - Update GIS database for SW Mgmt $10,000 2004-2005 needs Purchase easements or property for $90,000 2005-2008 storm water management MS4 and Construction permit $56,000 2004-2008 compliance activities Annual permit reports; Evaluation of $35,000 2004-2008 program Update storm sewer outfalls to $50,000 2004-2008 improve water quality Total $341,000 The CIP plan anticipates storm water management activity throughout the City. Future projects related to the storm sewer and ponding improvements have also been estimated. These costs are not included in the CIP above, however Tables 17 and 18 show a summary of the estimated costs for these improvements, These estimates should not be interpreted as a commitment by the City to build all of these ponds in the short term, however over the long term these improvements will serve the purpose of storm water routing as land development progresses. The storm sewer and ponds are a suggested course of action that will accomplish the major goal of this plan, to accommodate growth and redevelopment in the community while protecting the environment and water resources. The cost estimate for the construction of the proposed ponds does not include land acquisition or easement acquisition. The cost also does not take into account if a feasible study will be completed or engineering design costs, The cost does include the larger construction items such as excavation and restoration. The final project cost may change based on the determination of scope of work. The Plan anticipates some kind of storm water activities at all locations. The Plan has identified storm water ponds for the purpose of developing cost estimates and budgeting purposes only. This should not be interpreted as a commitment by the City to build a pond at all of these locations, especially where private property is involved. Table 15 includes annual operating and maintenance costs, which are separate from capital expenditures. A-STJOE0315 Page 38 Table 15 Operating Costs Project Project Preliminary Date(s) of Comments Location Description Project Cost Implementation Estimate Public Education Updating and managing $19,000 2004-2008 and Outreach web page, and distribution of newsletter Storm Sewer and Cleaning and maintenance $100,000 2004-2008 Pond Maintenance of storm sewer and ponds Street Sweeping Sweeping the streets twice a $50,000 2004-2008 Assumes City labor and year equipment, no contract sweeping. Total $169,000 The Implementation Plan should be reviewed on an annual basis, At that time, each proposed improvement is to be reconsidered, City budgets adjusted, and additional improvements added to the program. 5.3 Cost/Benefit for Pollutant Removal Storm water BMPs as described in this Report are the primary tool to improve the quality of urban streams and meet future NPDESPhase II requirements. The BMPs include both structural and non-structural alternatives. Resources and references on BMPs can be found in Appendix M. The SWMP suggests the construction of detention ponds as theBMP for future urban stormwater pollution control. The term 'structural BMP' refers to a physical facility designed and constructed to remove pollutants from stormwater runoff, potentially reduce downstream erosion, provide flood control, and promote ground water recharge. Typical structural BMPs include: · Detention basins · Retention basins · Constructed wetlands · Infiltration practices · Filters · Biofilters (swales and filter strips) · Precast or cast-in-place treatment devices The typical capital costs for BMPs were evaluated based upon a recent U.S, Environmental Protection Agency document entitled: Preliminary Data Summary of Urban Stormwater Best Management Practices, (Office of Water, Washington, D.C. August 1999, EPA~821-R-99-012). Table 16 has been adapted from the USEPA document (Table 6-1, page 6-3) to show typical capital construction costs. While detention ponds have an initial high cost for construction, their annual operation and maintenance cost is among the lowest of alternatives. Storm Water Management Plan S1. Joseph, Minnesota A-ST JOE0315 Page 39 BMP Type Retention and Detention Basins Constructed Wetland Infiltration Basin Sand Filter Bioretention Grass Swale Filter Strip Table 16 Capital and Maintenance Costs for BMP's Typical Cost* ($/cf) 0.55 - 1.11 Notes Annual Maintenance Cost (% of Construction Cost) Cost range reflects economies of scale in designing this BMP. The lowest unit cost represents approx, 150,000 CF of storage, while the highest is approx. 15,000 CF. Little data available to assess cost. It is assumed they are approx. 25% more expensive due to plant selection and sediment forebay requirements than detention basins. Represents typical cost for a 0.25-acre infiltration basin. 3.32 - 6.65 Range in costs largely due to different 11 % - 13% designs. Of the three most common, perimeter sand filters are moderate cost while surface and underground sand filters are the most expensive. 5.87 Bioretention is relatively constant in cost 5% - 7% because it is usually designed as a constant fraction of the total drainage cost. 0.55 Based on cost per square foot, assuming 6 5% - 7% inches of storage in filter, o - 1.44 Based on cost per square foot, assuming 6 $320/acre (maintained) inches of storage in the filter strip. The lowest cost assumes that the buffer uses existing vegetation, while highest cost assumes that sod was used to establish the filter strip. * Typical capital cost on a volume basis: August 2001 3% - 6% 0.66 - 1.38 < 1% 1.44 5% - 10% Table 17 shows the construction cost estimate for the developed conditions treatment ponds. The total cost construction cost for the 96 stonn water treatment ponds is $4,86 million. This equals an average of $50,600 for each pond. Of that amount, 55 percent is for the earthmoving costs and 32 percent covers restoration costs with a mix of native and domestic seed mixes. These estimates may be high, assuming that the developer will be able to balance the earthwork quantities to economize on the projects. The unit cost assumptions are included on the table for comparison with other costs. Table 18 shows the construction cost estimate for the developed conditions regional stonn sewer lines. The stonn sewers were routed together in 14 regional systems, shown in Figure 19. These regional systems were used for grouping the stonn sewer cost estimates. The total cost for the developed Storm Water Management Plan St. Joseph, Minnesota Ä-ST JOE0315 Page 40 conditions storm sewer construction is $9,59 million, This equals an average cost of $685,000 for each of the systems. The storm sewer pipe sizes range :trom 18 to 78 inches, The larger pipes would be for large trunk storm sewer lines that serve large areas. The unit cost assumptions are included on the table for comparison with other costs. The economic benefit is difficult to quantify :trom "balance sheet" perspective for BMPs. The ideal approach would specify a chain of events: pollutant loading reductions from construction of the ponds; the physical- chemical properties of the receiving streams and consequent linkages to biologic/ecological responses in the aquatic environment; and human responses and values associated with these changes. The necessary data does not exist to conduct such analysis, Instead, the benefits can be outlined in terms of: 1, Effectiveness of reducing pollutant loads; 2. Direct water quality impacts; and 3. Economic benefits or costs. The primary function of the proposed detention ponds is to reduce pollutants. They are very effective at removing total suspended solids (often 90 percent + efficiency), total phosphorus (up to 60 percent removal) and other associated pollutants (heavy metals and hydrocarbons), Thus, their track record and performance has been documented in various studies, but must be constructed properly and maintained. 5.4 Amendment Procedures The S1. Joseph Storm Water Management Plan is intended to extend through the year 2010. For the plan to remain dynamic, an avenue must be available to implement new information, ideas, methods, standards and management practices. Persons either residing or having business within the City shall be able to request amendment proposals at any time. 5,5 Request for Amendments Written requests for plan amendment are submitted to the City staff, The request shall outline the need for the amendment as well as additional materials that the City will need to consider before making its decision. 5.6 Staff Review A decision is made to the validity of the request. Three options exist; 1. Rej ect the amendment 2, Accept the amendment as a minor issue, with minor issues collectively added to the plan at a later date 3. Accept the amendment as a major issue, with major issues requiring an immediate amendment. In acting on an amendment request, staff shall recommend to City Council whether or not a public hearing is warranted, Storm Water Management Plan St. Joseph, Minnesota A-ST JOE0315 Page 41 5.7 5.8 5.10 5.11 5.11.1 5.11.2 Storm Water Management Plan St. Joseph, Minnesota Council Consideration The amendment and the need for a public hearing shall be considered at a regular or special Council meeting. Staff recommendations should also be considered before decisions on appropriate action(s) are made. 5.9 Public Hearing and Council Approval This step allows the public input based on the public sentiment. Council shall determine when the public hearing should occur in the process. Based on the public hearing, Council could approve the amendment, and, if necessary, refer the amendments to the Watershed District Board for comment and approval. Council Adoption Final action on an amendment following approval by the RCWD is Council adoption. However, prior to the adoption, an additional public hearing could be held to review the plan changes and to notify the appropriate stakeholders. Annual Report to Council A brief annual report should be made by City staff summarizing development changes, capital improvements, and other water management-related issues that have occurred over the past year. The review should also include an update on available funding sources for water resource issues. Grant programs are especially important to review since they may change annually. These changes do not necessarily require individual amendments. The reports can, however, be considered when the plan is brought up to date. The report should be completed by June 1 st of each year to allow implementation items to be considered in the normal budget process. Copies of the report should be filed with the RCWD. The annual update can also serve as an important public information tool. A summary could be published in the City's newsletter. NPDES, Phase II Construction Permit Currently, an NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) General Storm Water Permit for Construction Activity [#MNRI00001] is required to be obtained by any person disturbing one or more acres of land within the city of S1. Joseph, This permit application is submitted to the MPCA. MS4 Permit On March 10, 2003, MPCA issued final Phase II storm water regulations that apply to the City of St. Joseph [#MNRS80000]. The regulations require compliance with the following six minimum measures under the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit: 1. Public Education and Outreach on Storm water Impacts, 2. Public Involvement/Participation, 3. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination, 4. Construction Site Storm water Runoff Control, 5. Post-Construction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment, and A-ST JOE0315 Page 42 5.12 Storm Water Management Plan St. Joseph, Minnesota 6. Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations. GIS St. Joseph does have GIS (Geographic Information System) data for the City. The GIS data includes information on roads, parcels, existing and future land use, water and zoning, A-ST JOE0315 Page 43