10/16/1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

portant for auy municipality consider- ing a program to consult with its legal advisors and ensure that the pro- posed solution coincides with state laws and the needs of the community. After six months of research, our department submitted a report to the city council in July 1982 that recom- mended the city create a stormwater management utility with user fees based on contribution to runoff'. By October, the council approved the recommendation. Developing the Utility From its inception, the stormwater management study was planned to maximize both interdepartmental coordination and public participation. Public input would ensure that the study did not proceed in a vacuum. Interdepartmental Coordination. The department first established a city management team to monitor the progress of a drainage finance study and coordinate activities among city departments. The team consisted of representatives from the engineering and highway maintenance divisions of the Metropolitan Sewer District of Greater Cincinnati; the city depart- ments of buildings and inspections, law -civil division, law -real estate divi- sion, planning, finance and neighbor- hood housing and conservation; and the division of research, evaluation and budget in the city manager's of- fice. A representative from each city department would ensure that many diverse needs were accounted for and that public works managers would be involved with the implementation of the program. The team also drafted two ordi- nances tTiis project One au- t zec t e researcTi_an__d pry- nary planning for a stormwater man- agement utility, and the secon a Ot- te or the development p hase o t e project. Although council members were tightening their budget belts, both ordinances passed. The team then recommended that Water Resource Associates, Inc., Kirkland, Washington, prepare a drainage finance study. The goal of the study was to determine an adequate, stable, and publicly ac- ceptable method of financing the util- ity. The final study gave the public works department a functional re- quirements analysis, financing op- tions, a program and financing strategy, a rate structure analysis, and a rate study. After the program and financing strategy phase of the study was com- pleted in mid -1983, we submitted a progress report to the council. The report contained the study's prelimi- nary findings, a summary of the city's needs and functional requirements and a recommendation that the city establish a stormwater management utility. By this time, more than 10,000 com- plaints from residents had accumu- lated in the city's file. Public Involvement. After the council approved the progress report, Water Resource Associates, Inc. began the rate structure analysis. At this time, the real public involvement began, which meant getting to know the people and their particular stormwater - related complaints. To set the groundwork for later public involvement activities and to compile fast," a bimonthly meeting attended by the city manager and the executive boards of the community councils. Our challenge was to present this city -wide problem — which called for a $50 million solution of planned routine and remedial maintenance — and make it a priority in the minds of the public. Our presentation consisted of: 1) a statement of the seriousness of stormwater drainage in Cincinnati; 2) a slide show that demonstrated real drainage problems (inlets blocked with debris, living rooms damaged by flood water, and factory workers wading through a Iocal industrial ■ INADEQUATE roadside drainage was creating severe roadway flooding. The city's deteriorating drainage system prompted numerous complaints. information collected by the city man- agement team, several projects were established. Stormwater Functional Require- ment Maps. Since 1958, the depart- ment had kept careful records of the 10,000 stormwater complaints. Using these records, the locations of the complaints were noted on neighbor- hood maps. These 48 "Stormwater Functional Requirement Maps" were bound into a separate volume, which provided excellent source material for determining the worst drainage problem areas. Community Council Rapport. Es- tablishing a rapport with the commu- nity councils was crucial. Cincinnati has more than 48 "recognized" com- munities that are established political forces in the city. To ensure their in- volvement, we presented a program at the city manager's "working break- complex); and 3) a presentation of the "utility" solution. Because this first program was so well received, the director of public works asked each of the community councils if we could make a similar presentation at a future meeting. Property owners would be given the opportunity to listen to the proposal and give feedback. Many of the coun- cils accepted the invitation. The key to the community council talks was targeting and tailoring each presentation to an individual commu- nity. For example, in the Mt. Airy neighborhood, we used a map that pinpointed areas of local drainage problems and included locations of resident complaints. Showing photo- graphs of stormwater problems in that community, such as clogged in- lets, basement water destruction, and on (Ctinued on page 150) PUBLIC WORKS for September, 1986 127