Laserfiche WebLink
why not charge- for storm drainageP <br />Leal specialist-Patrick Gallagher, - contributions.- Boulder and Denver, litv are the residential commercial and <br />Esq., and management consultant o ora o;: oivallis; Oregon; and Belle <br />I. Washin on alread have user <br />David Laredo, P.E., bothwiththe � . ?'_ . { <br />arges forstorinwaterdrainage. <br />Boston -based consulting ;: <br />Reiyingonyser .fees rather than <br />engineering firm of Camp Dressejog­ s.property tax- "revenues means viewing <br />BcV�CKee sathere are good ?: stormwater ratnage as a u i i y'f w h <br />reasonsto'charge contributors of .. costs allocate - accor mg to service re- <br />stormwater flow for the cost of ceive . israisest a problFin o is in- <br />facilities "-- designed to handle "guishing between users and beneficiaries. <br />With most utilities users and benefi- <br />runoff..But can it done eg ru at bly? ciaries are the same. Users o electrical <br />service, for example, are also the princi- <br />pal beneficiaries of the electrical system. <br />Residential and industrial land develop - r-- A stormwater drainage utilitvdiffers'1 <br />ment, by creating impermeable areas <br />and changing natural drainage ways, <br />often increases stormwater runoff. The <br />burden of handling this sncreascd ritnof , <br />tain stormwater drainage facilities using <br />ad valorem property -tax funds. Drain - <br />age system costs therefore are spread <br />among nronertv owners without reeard <br />ening municipal bud <br />some communities to <br />are <br />hrouah user, 6hari=es "and developer <br />rent. Users of a drainage system are <br />,e properties adding stormwater runoff, <br />bile the beneficiaries are the properties <br />•otectedfrom flooding: The distinction <br />ot'the hill" resident obiects to paving <br />iiii <br />intended to protect the "bottom of the 1 <br />hill- resi ent from flooding. J <br />Wastewater treatment, commonl~ <br />viewed as a utility service ma Offer <br />some help in resolving the user vs. <br />beneficiary conflict in stormwater drain- <br />rial properties contributing waste <br />�1 <br />to the sanitary sewer system. e t <br />The beneficiaries of wastewater treat-',, "` <br />ment, on the of er hand are those who"" <br />utilize "the river. or lake where water . <br />gualit is.im rove or protec e y e y <br />treatment" act ity. This user vs. bene, <br />ficiary distinciion'is not often raised as <br />an objection to user charges for waste= . <br />water treatment, principally because the <br />users recognize their legal duty to 9r-o-. <br />vide minimum of levels of treatment. <br />not as clearly arecognized as the <br />provi e.•wastewater treatment. <br />:y of land.developers and pro- <br />perty owners, " <br />oun ,ei er in s a u ory <br />Qr m m <br />.coon law, genera y is to protect <br />4ownstream properties from higher than <br />natural runoff` rates. The precise scope <br />of this duty.varies from state to state.., <br />."Once the "user vs. beneficiarv" d istinc -' <br />age. Users of wastewater treatment faci J .tion has been resolved, the local. gover <br />'s the duty of land developers and property owners to protect downstream properties, says Gallagher. <br />AMERICAN CITY & COUNTY: May 1983 45 <br />