The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutStormwater Utility Enhancement Policy Discussion1 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Kyle Mehrens, GIS Technician Jon Henderson, GIS Manager Brian Heaston, Project Engineer Craig Woolard, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Stormwater Utility Enhancement MEETING DATE: April 21, 2014 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Policy Discussion KEY POLICY DECISIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: As presented to the Commission on March 3, 2014, the city’s present stormwater utility is failing to meet its MS4 discharge permit requirements, manage fresh water pollution, replace failing infrastructure, and maintain city-owned assets. A comprehensive stormwater utility expansion is recommended to meet current and projected stormwater utility needs. This memorandum outlines options for enhancing the utility and provides Staff recommendations for three primary policy issues: 1) Level of service and utility revenue requirements; 2) Rate assessment method; 3) Geographic distribution of utility costs/revenue collections. Staff recommendations are provided that will provide an adequate annual operating budget, enforcement capability, address deferred maintenance, and provide system enhancements to ensure adequate MS4 permit compliance. These items, together with a fair, proportional, and equitable utility rate assessment method are designed to collect revenue required to meet the funding needs of the enhanced stormwater utility. Level of Service and Utility Revenue Requirements – Staff recommends the stormwater utility level of service be raised to the ‘Silver’ level further described within this memorandum. Annual revenue collections of $1.7 million/yr are recommended to fund the following annual costs: • $697,500/yr for stormwater utility operations, which includes five and one-half new full- time personnel, new equipment, and additional supplies to perform on-going and typical operations and maintenance activities required of a successful stormwater utility. 174 2 • $700,900/yr to complete within a 10-year timeframe an estimated $7.2 million in deferred maintenance items for: 1) failed storm pipe replacements; 2) clogged storm sewer flushing; and 3) one-time rehabilitation of deficient HOA detention ponds at a 50/50 cost share. • $290,000/yr commitment to improve water quality by eliminating direct discharges of stormwater to urban waterways by retro-fitting mechanical stormwater treatment devices or installing green infrastructure improvements at a total estimated cost of $2.9 million). In the event a cost adjustment to the Silver level of service is desired by the Commission, Staff recommends fixing the operations costs at the recommended level as they are critical to support the overall success of the enhanced stormwater utility. Staff recommends the Commission achieve any desired cost adjustments by modifying the time period necessary to complete deferred maintenance and/or system enhancement items from the recommended 10-year window. Refer to Exhibit A attached which graphically illustrates cost variability and completion time amongst varying levels of service. Rate Assessment Method – Staff recommends implementing a new rate method that assesses stormwater utility rates commensurate to site-specific stormwater runoff impacts. The ‘impervious area with gross parcel area’ assessment method further described within this memorandum is recommended. All single family residential property is considered equally, whereas all other sites are assessed fees commensurate to site-specific impervious area with credits for pervious area. Geographic Distribution of Utility Costs/Revenue Collections – Because there are differences in condition of the stormwater utility throughout Bozeman, Staff has provided three geographic analyses of costs. • A city-wide analysis where the entire rate base would be assessed the costs for deferred maintenance and system enhancements. • A 1980 development boundary where the relative costs of deferred maintenance and system enhancements are distributed proportionally between the pre-1980 and post-1980 rate base. • A “Bozeman Creek” watershed boundary where the relative costs of deferred maintenance and system enhancements are distributed proportionally between the rate base within and outside the Bozeman Creek watershed. Staff is seeking policy guidance on how costs for deferred maintenance and system enhancements should be distributed. Staff strongly recommends that operations costs are equally distributed city-wide and that if geographic cost distribution is implemented that it be limited to deferred maintenance and systems enhancements only. LEVEL OF SERVICE AND UTILITY REVENUE REQUIREMENTS: Three levels of service – designated for discussion as the Gold, Silver and Bronze options are presented below. In order to establish revenue requirements for each, cost estimates were prepared for operations, deferred maintenance, and system enhancements categories (see Exhibit A for level of service cost details). 175 3 Operations Costs – Utility operations costs are comprised of annual expenses required for typical maintenance (CCTV main inspections, manhole/inlet cleaning, routine main flushing, etc.), personnel, GIS services, contracted services and equipment leases. Operations funds are critical to the success of an enhanced stormwater utility and comprehensive stormwater management program that adequately addresses the six minimum control measures required of the city’s MS4 discharge permit (public education/outreach, public involvement/participation; illicit discharge detection and elimination, construction site stormwater runoff control, post-construction stormwater management, and pollution prevention/good housekeeping). Annual operations costs are relatively fixed compared to deferred maintenance and systems enhancements. Deferred Maintenance Costs – A significant backlog of deferred maintenance items exist within the city’s stormwater infrastructure assets due to the historical absence of typical maintenance activities. These items were identified during the asset inventory, condition assessment, and mapping activities completed over the previous 2 years. As condition assessment of 100% of stormwater assets has not occurred to-date. Therefore, existing data has been extrapolated to arrive at a total cost for deferred maintenance. A total of $7.2 million is required to replace failed stormwater mains at or near failure ($6.58 million), flush clogged stormwater pipes ($0.23 million), and to rehabilitate subdivision detention ponds to a functional condition ($0.40 million). Annual costs for deferred maintenance are a function of the time period that the deficiencies are addressed. Opportunities exist to shorten or lengthen the time-span in which this work is completed, thereby increasing or decreasing annual costs respectfully (e.g., reduced annual costs for 15-year period versus a 5-year period). System Enhancements Costs – System enhancements are needed to improve the water quality of stormwater prior to discharge to urban waterways. Areas of the city developed prior to the early 1980’s do not have treatment systems installed and result in direct, untreated, stormwater discharges to urban waterways. Treatment retro-fits, such as installation of mechanical separators or green-infrastructure, are necessary to eliminate direct discharges. Without proper treatment of stormwater pollutants, the city could face future MS4 permit violations and monetary penalties. Annual system enhancement costs are a function of the community’s commitment to improve urban water quality. Larger funding levels represent a higher commitment to reducing stormwater impacts to urban waterways in a shorter amount of time. Based on an evaluation of existing treatment technologies and system needs, complete treatment of currently untreated stormwater discharges will require a total capital investment of approximately $2.9 million. Gold Level of Service: This level of service requires $2.7 million in annual funding and is designed to aggressively transform the city’s stormwater utility by ensuring MS4 permit compliance, public safety, and future stormwater program success. Gold level of service proposes the highest staffing level by hiring six (6) new full time personnel within the annual operations budget and aggressively tackling deferred maintenance items and system enhancements over a 5-year period. The Gold level of service further proposes the city rehabilitates all deficient subdivision detention ponds to a functional state of repair and fund at 100% this one-time expense.  Operations Costs – $722,500 (6 new FTEs)  Deferred Maintenance – $1,441,000 (5-year completion)  System Enhancements – $580,000 (5-year completion) 176 4 Silver Level of Service (Recommended): Requires $1.7 million in annual funding and is designed to effectively manage and improve the city’s stormwater utility. Significant differences from the gold program include: reducing to half-time the street sweeper position thereby leaving five and one-half (5.5) FTEs for operations; tackling deferred maintenance and system enhancements over a 10-year period; and a 50/50 cost share with subdivision HOAs to fix deficient detention ponds. Staff recommends the stormwater utility be enhanced to the Silver level of service.  Operations Costs – $697,500 (5.5 new FTEs)  Deferred Maintenance – $700,900 (10-year completion)  Capital Enhancements – $290,000 (10-year completion) Bronze Level of Service: Requires $1.2 million in annual funding and offers an economical alternative. Significant differences from the gold program include: eliminating two stormwater operator positions and the loss of street sweeping equipment; tackling deferred maintenance and system enhancements over a 15-year period; and zero cost contribution toward rehabilitation of HOA detention ponds.  Operations Costs – $572,700 (4 new FTEs)  Deferred Maintenance – $454,200 (15-year completion)  Capital Enhancements – $193,300 (15-year completion) Personnel: Requested new personnel positions are outlined below and arranged in order of importance for overall program success. Stormwater Program Coordinator – Ensures MS4 permit compliance, develops and maintains all stormwater management programs (pollution prevention, construction site management, post-construction site management, education, and outreach), designs internal work-flows and trainings, manages implementation and maintenance of the rate assessment methodology, produces city-owned facility stormwater plans, addresses stormwater issues for new development and infill, develops, low impact development programs, suggests and manages ordinance changes, and coordinates with regulating agencies and co-permittees. This position resides within the Public Works Department, reports to the Public Works Director, and is included under all levels of service. Public Works Technician – The public works technician will conduct all construction site inspections and enforcement, water quality monitoring, private infrastructure inspections, pollution event response, and outreach and education activities. These activities are critical for MS4 permit compliance and cost effective water quality improvement. This position resides within the Public Works Department, reports to the Stormwater Program Coordinator, and is included under all levels of service. Stormwater Crew Foreman – Manages and leads daily stormwater system maintenance, condition assessments, inspections, and repair operations. This position resides in the city’s Water and Sewer Department, reports to the Water and Sewer Superintendent, and is included under all levels of service. Stormwater Operator – Completes assigned tasks by the stormwater foreman related to the maintenance, condition assessment, inspection and repair of the city’s stormwater 177 5 system. This position resides in the Water and Sewer Department and reports to the Stormwater Foreman. One operator position is included with Silver and Bronze levels of service and two operators with Gold. Streets Operator – Increases the frequency of street sweeping and other above grade stormwater related maintenance activities. This position resides in the Streets Department and reports to the Streets Superintendent. This position exists as a full time (Gold), half-time (Silver), or none (Bronze). Note: elimination of streets operator position also eliminates need for new street sweeper equipment lease. RATE ASSESSMENT METHOD: An increase in stormwater utility rates is required to collect revenue at levels necessary to cover costs estimated for the enhanced levels of service described above. Six different methodologies have been analyzed for the assessment of increased stormwater utility rates. Distribution of costs and assessment rate variations exist amongst all options analyzed. Once an enhanced level of service and new assessment method are determined, additional funding, analysis, and time will be required to fully implement the new rate model. Exhibits are attached to this memorandum that tabulate anticipated financial impacts to a select subset of properties at the recommended Silver level of service. The information contained in these exhibits is intended to support this policy discussion and inform the Commission on relative differences in financial impacts across the different rate assessment methods. Final rates based on Commission policy direction will be presented once a finalized rate model is constructed. The following rate assessment methods were analyzed:  Total Water Meter – All single family residential, multi-family, and commercial properties that have a water meter are assessed a flat rate (see Exhibit E).  Size of Water Meter (Current Method) – All single family residential, multi-family, and commercial properties are assessed a rate consistent with the size of meter in use. Larger meters pay a higher monthly rate (see Exhibit E).  Zoning with Lot Square Footage – A cost proportional to the extent (parcel size) and type (zoning class) of an individual piece of property is assessed. A rate is then applied through a dollar per square foot measurement for each particular zoning category occupied (Single family, residential, industrial, etc.). The total square footage of a parcel is multiplied by the correct zoning category unit cost (see Exhibit E). Note: The following 4 methods utilize an industry standard measurement known as an equivalent residential unit (ERU). By calculating the average impervious area (driveways, rooftops, etc.) for all single family units within the City of Bozeman (2,700 square feet), this value is used as a standardized billing unit and can be then applied to multi-family and commercial billing classes. 178 6 As an example, a multi-family or commercial property which has 5,400 square feet of impervious area would have 2 ERUs (5,400 square feet/2,700 square feet = 2).  Impervious Area - A unit cost is determined for 1 ERU dependent on the annual stormwater budget requirement. All single family properties are assessed the same monthly rate of 1 ERU. ERUs for all multi-family and commercial properties must be individually developed by analyzing the extent of site-specific impervious areas (see Exhibit E).  Impervious Area with Gross Parcel Area (Recommended) - Similar to the impervious area approach, this method additionally accounts and contributes a credit for pervious areas on the site (grass, detention ponds, swales, etc.). All single family residential properties are assessed the same monthly rate of 1 ERU. All multi-family and commercial sites are assessed rates based on total impervious ERUs with a credit applied for all pervious ERUs (see Exhibit E).  Intensity of Development – A percentage is calculated by dividing a parcel’s total impervious area by its total area. This percentage is known as an intensity of development. Rates can then be charged by an ERU base similar to the methods outlined above, but also based on the total intensity of the particular property. As the ratio of impervious to pervious area on an individual property increases, the cost multiplied by the total ERUs increases (see Exhibit E). GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION OF COSTS/REVENUE COLLECTIONS: Bozeman’s stormwater system has developed with the community and with changing stormwater management practices and regualtions. As as result, the age, condition and effectiveness of the system varies throughout the City. To estimate how the costs of deferred maintenace and system enhancements vary geographically, Staff first established a 1980 development boundary. Stormwater practices allowed for direct, untreated, discharge to local waterways before the early 1980’s. After that time, all stormwater systems were required to provide for indirect, treated discharge (i.e., stormwater detention/retention facilities were required). Using this boundary, 71% (or $7.1 million) of the estimated costs for deferred maintenance and system enhancements fall within the pre-1980 development boundary (see Exhibit C). The remaining 29% ($2.95 million) are attributeable to post-1980 development. Staff also established a boundary for the Bozeman Creek watershed. This boundary represents the portion of the stormwater system discharging into Bozeman Creek. Using this boundary, 42% ($4.2 million) of the estimated costs for deferred maintenace and system enhancements fall within the Bozeman Creek watershed boundary (see Exhibit D). The remaining 58% of the costs ($5.9 million) are attributeable to development oustide the Bozeman Creek watershed. Staff strongly recommends that if geographic distribution of cost is implemented, only the deferred maintenance and system enhancement costs be considered for geographic distribution. Operating costs are for appropriately maintaining the current stormwater system, and as such, should be uniformly assessed city-wide based on the rate structure selected by the Commission. 179 7 UNRESOLVED ISSUES: After receiving policy direction on the desired level of service, preferred rate model, and geographic distribution of costs, Staff will return with a formal rate resolution and implementation schedule for adoption of new stormwater rates on January 1, 2015. Continued operation of the stormwater utility and development of the new rate model will require funding during the first half of fiscal year 2015. Staff intends to prepare a FY15 stormwater utility budget that provides the necessary funding by amending the existing rate model to fund ongoing stormwater operations and development of the new rate model. ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS: Enhancement of the city’s stormwater utility requires generation of additional revenue. The Silver level of service recommended by Staff requires $1.7 million in annual revenue to cover costs. Estimates of the anticipated impacts of additional stormwater charges on various customer classes are provided in the attached exhibits. Attachments: Exhibit A: Graph and detailed budgets of Gold, Silver, and Bronze levels of service. Exhibit-B: Map Displaying Citywide Analysis Exhibit-C: Map Displaying Pre-1980 Development Analysis Exhibit-D: Map Displaying Bozeman Creek Watershed Analysis Exhibit-E: Assessment Methodology Analysis Report compiled on: 4/14/2014 180 Level of Service Analysis City of Bozeman Stormwater Program Figure 1 – Level of service analysis graph. Exhibit A 181 Level of Service Analysis City of Bozeman Stormwater Program Exhibit A 182 Level of Service Analysis City of Bozeman Stormwater Program Exhibit A 183 ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! !!! ! ! ! !! ! !!! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! !! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !!!!!!! ! ! !!!! !!! ! !!!!! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!! ! ! !!! !! !!!! ! !! ! !! ! ! !!!!!! !! !! !! ! ! ! !! !!!! !!! !!!!! !! !!! ! !!!! ! !! !! ! !!! ! ! !! !!! !! !!! !! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! !! ! !!!!!!!!! !!! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!! ! ! !!!!! !! !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! !! ! ! !!! ! !!!!!!! !!! !!!! !! ! !!! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !!!! !!! ! !! ! !!! ! !!! !! !!!!! !!!! !!!!!! ! ! !!!! !!! !! ! !!!! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !!! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!!!! ! ! !! !!! !! !!!!!!!!!! !!! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! !!! !!! !!! !!!!!!! !!!! !! ! !! !!!! ! !!!!!!!!!! !!!! ! !!!! ! !!!!! !! ! !!! !!! !! !!! !!! ! !! !!! !! ! !! !!!!!! ! !!!!! !! ! ! ! !! !!!! ! !!! ! !!! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !!!! !!! ! !!!!!! ! ! !! !! !!!!! !! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! !!! ! !! ! !!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! ! !! !!! !!!!!!!! !!!! ! !! !! !! !! ! !! !!! !!! ! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!! !!! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !!!! ! ! !!!! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! !! !! ! ! ! !! !!! ! ! !!! ! !! ! !! !!!! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!!!! ! !!!! ! !! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !!!! !! !! !!! !!!!!!! !!!!! ! !!!! ! !! !! ! ! !! !!!!!! ! ! ! !! !!! ! ! !!!!! !! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! !!!! ! !! !! !! !! !! !!!! !!!! !!!!!!!! ! ! !!!!!!! !!!!! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!! !!! ! ! ! ! #* #* #* #*#* #* #* #* #* #*#* #*#* #* #* #*#* #* #* #* #* #*#*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#*#*#*#*#* #*#* #* #* #* #* #*#* #*#* #* #* #* #* #* #*#* #*#*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#* #* #*#*#* #* #*#* #*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#*#* #*#*#* #* #* #* #*#* #* #* #* #*#* #* #*#*#* #*#*#* #* #*#* #* #* #*#*#* #* #* #* #* #*#*#* #*#*#* #* #*#*#*#*#*#* #*#* #*#*#*#*#*#*#* #*#*#* #*#* #* #*#*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#* #*#* #*#*#*#*#*#*#*#* #*#* #* #*#* #*#* #* #* #* #* #*#* #* #*#*#*#*#*#* #*#* #*#* #*#* #*#* #* #*#*#* #* #* #* #* #* #*#*#*#*#*#*#*#* #*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#* #*#*#* #* #*#* #* #*#* #* #* #* #* #* #*#* #*#* #* #* #*#*#*#* #* #* #* #* #*#* #*#*#*#*#*#*#*#* #*#* #*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#*#*#* #*#* #* #*#* #* #*#* #*#*#*#*#*#*#*#* #*#*#*#* #*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#* #* #* #*#* #* #*#*#* #* #* #*#*#* #* #*#*#* #* #* #* #* #*#* #* #* #* #* #* #*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#* #* #* #* Babcock St Durston St 19th Ave FR O N T A G E R D 19t h A ve College St 11th AveMain St Rouse AveS 3RD AVE Willson Ave HighlandBlvd Oak St Peach St Davis Ln7th Ave Baxter Ln Legend #*Stormwater Outfalls !Stormwater Manholes Stormwater Gravity Mains Roads Alleyways Citywide Boundary Citywide Development Boundary Analysis 0 1.50.75 Miles/This map was created by the City of Bozeman GIS Department on 3/13/2014 and is intended for planning purposes only. City of Bozeman Stormwater Program Bozeman Creek Mandeville Creek Mathew Bird Creek Catron Creek Baxter Creek §¨¦90 Exhibit B184 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! !!! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!! !! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!! ! !!!!!! !!!! ! !! ! !! ! !!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !!!! !!! !! !!! !! !! ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! !! ! ! !!! !!!!!!! ! !! ! !!!! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! !!! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!!!! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! !! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!! !! ! !!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!! !!!! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !!!! !!!! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!! !!!!!!!!! !!!! !!! !! ! !! ! ! #*#* #* #* #* #* #*#* #* #*#*#* #*#* #* #* #*#* #* #* #*#*#* #* #* #* #* #*#* #*#*#* #*#*#*#* #*#*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#* #*#* #*#* #* #* #* #*#* #* #*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#* #* #* #* #*#*#*#* #*#* #*#* #*#* #* #* #*#* #* #*#*#* #*#*#* #*#* #* #* #* #* #*#*#* #*#* #*#*#* #*#* #*#*#* #* #*#* #* #* #* #* #*#* #*#*#*#*#*#*#*#* #*#* #*#* #*#* #*#*#*#*#*#* #*#* #*#*#* #* #* #*#* #* #* #*#*#* #* #*#*#* #* #* #* #* #* #*#* #* #* #* #* #* Main St College St 11th Ave Main St Kagy Blvd Durston Rd Willson AveChurch Ave Highland Blvd 7th Ave 3rd Ave Rouse Ave 11th Ave Peach St 7th Ave 19th Ave Sourdou g h R dLegend #*Stormwater Outfalls !Stormwater Manholes Stormwater Gravity Mains Roads Alleyways Pre-1980 Development Boundary Pre-1980 Development Boundary Analysis 0 0.850.425 Miles/This map was created by the City of Bozeman GIS Department on 3/13/2014 and is intended for planning purposes only. City of Bozeman Stormwater Program Bozeman CreekMandeville Creek Mathew Bird Creek Catron Creek Exhibit C185 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!!!! ! !!! ! !!! !!! !! ! !! ! !!!! ! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!! ! !!! !!! !!!! ! ! !! ! !!!! !!! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !!! ! ! ! !!!!!!! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!!!!!!! !! ! !! #* #*#*#*#*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#* #* #* #* #*#* #* #* #* #* #*#*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#*#* #*#* #* #* #*#*#*#*#* #* #*#*#* #*#* #*#* #*#* #* #* #*#* #*#*#*#* #*#*#* #*#*#* #*#*#* #* #* #*#*#* #*#* #*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#*#*#*#* #*#*#* #* #* #* #* #* #*Church Ave Story St Tamarack St Grant St Kagy Blvd 3rd AveRouse Ave Wallace Ave Rouse Ave Main St Willson AveCollege St Graf St Peach St 3rd AveLegend #*Stormwater Outfalls !Stormwater Manholes Stormwater Gravity Mains Roads Alleyways Bozeman Creek Watershed Bozeman Creek Watershed Analysis 0 10.5 Miles / City of Bozeman Stormwater Program This map was created by the City of Bozeman GIS Department on 3/13/2014 and is intended for planning purposes only. Bozeman Creek §¨¦90 Contributing Waterways Confluence with East Gallatin Exhibit D 186 Total Water Meter How Method This Method Works – All single family residential, multi-family, and commercial properties that have a water meter would be assessed a flat rate. Advantages –  Data and processes to implement are currently in place (Sungard Billing Database).  Annual maintenance, staff overhead, and data development is minimal. Disadvantages –  Unrepresentative of actual stormwater runoff impact.  Single family residential (~8,000 meters) subsidizes multi-family and commercial (~3,250 meters).  Credit and incentive based programs are difficult to implement.  Uncommon methodology within the industry. Example – A single family household, Bozeman Ford, Osterman’s Warehouse, and Wal-Mart would be charged the same monthly rate. Figure 1 – Analysis Used (Silver Level of Service) Figure 2 – Varying Estimated Costs Exhibit E 187 Water Meter Size (Current Approach) How This Method Works – All single family residential, multi-family, and commercial properties are assessed a rate consistent with the size of water meter in use. Larger water meters pay a higher monthly rate. Advantages –  Current stormwater utility billing methodology  Data and processes to implement are currently in place (Sungard Billing Database).  Annual maintenance, staff overhead, and data development is minimal. Disadvantages –  Unrepresentative of actual stormwater runoff impact.  Single family units (~8,000 meters) subsidize multi-family and commercial (~3250 meters).  Credit and incentive based programs are difficult to implement.  Uncommon methodology within the industry. Example – Town and Country (2” water meter) would pay a higher yearly rate than Osterman’s Warehouse (5/8” water meter) even though its total paved area and actual stormwater runoff impact is far less. Figure 4 - Varying Estimated Costs Figure 3 – Analysis Used (Silver Level of Service) Exhibit E 188 Zoning with Lot Square Footage How Method C Works – A cost proportional to the extent (parcel size) and type (zoning class) of an individual piece of property is assessed. A rate is then applied through a dollar per square foot measurement for each particular zoning category occupied (Single family, residential, industrial, etc.). Once a piece of property is analyzed, the total square footage of that parcel is multiplied by the correct zoning category cost and assessed Advantages –  Multi-family and commercial parcels pay rates proportional to their zoning classification. Disadvantages –  Unrepresentative of actual stormwater runoff impact.  Uncommon methodology within the industry.  Data and processes to implement would require extensive development (accurate parcel and zoning databases).  Annual maintenance, staff overhead, and data development is required. Example – This method estimates runoff through zoning classifications, but fails to charge rates based on actual stormwater runoff. A small building with substantial green space and minor stormwater runoff would pay the same as a large building which has the same sized parcel, little green space, and high stormwater runoff. Figure 5 – Analysis Used (Silver Level of Service) Figure 6 - Varying Estimated Costs Exhibit E 189 Impervious Area How Method D Works – A cost is determined for 1 ERU (dependent on stormwater annual budget) and then multiplied by each multi-family and commercial structures total calculated ERUs. Under this model, all single family units are assessed the same monthly rate of 1 ERU significantly reducing the complexity and extent of data needed to implement and maintain. Advantages –  Multi-family and commercial units pay rates proportional to their actual stormwater runoff impact.  Industry standard billing methodology. Disadvantages –  Data and processes to implement would require extensive development (accurate parcel and impervious area databases).  Annual maintenance, staff overhead, and data development is required. Example – Bozeman Ford has a total parcel area of 486,657 square feet. Of that, 309,982 square feet exists as impervious area. Dividing total impervious area (309,982 square feet) by one ERU (2700 square feet) equals 114.8 total impervious ERUs. Multiplying total calculated ERUs by the cost of one ERU ($7.08 for Silver) would give Bozeman Ford a monthly charge of ~$800.00 or ~$9,700.00 annually. Figure 8 – Map displaying analysis. Figure 9 – Varying Estimated Costs Figure 7 – Analysis Used (Silver Level of Service) Exhibit E 190 Impervious Area plus Gross Parcel Area (Staff Recommendation) How Method E Works – Similar to the impervious area approach, this method additionally accounts and contributes a built in credit for pervious area (grass, detention ponds, swales, etc.). All single family residential units are assessed the same monthly rate of 1 impervious ERU. All multi-family and commercial units are assessed rates based on total impervious ERUs and a reduction is given for all pervious ERUs calculated within a particular parcel. Advantages –  Multi-family and commercial units pay rates proportional to their actual stormwater impact.  Industry standard billing methodology. Disadvantages –  Data and processes to implement would require extensive development (accurate parcel and impervious area databases).  Annual maintenance, staff overhead, and data development is required. Example – Bozeman Ford has a total parcel area of 486,657 square feet. Of that, 309,982 square feet exists as impervious area. Dividing total impervious area (309,982 square feet) by one ERU (2,700 square feet) equals 114.8 total impervious ERUs. Subtracting the total impervious area (309,982 square feet) from the total area (486,657 square feet) gives a value of 176,676 pervious square feet. This value, divided by the ERU (2700 square feet) totals 65.4 pervious ERUs. Multiplying the impervious rate ($7.08 for Silver) by 114.8 and pervious rate (-$.50) by 65.4 will give you the total monthly charge of ~ $780.00 or ~$9,366.00 annually. Figure 10 – Analysis Used (Silver Level of Service) Figure 11 - Varying Estimated Costs Exhibit E 191 Intensity of Development How Method G Works – An intensity of development percentage is calculated by dividing a parcels total impervious area by its total area. This percentage is known as an intensity of development. Rates can then be charged by an ERU base similar to the methods outlined above, but also based on the total intensity of the particular property. As the ratio of impervious to pervious area on an individual property increases, the cost multiplied by the total ERUs increases. Advantages –  Multi-family and commercial units pay rates proportional to their actual stormwater impact. Disadvantages –  Data and processes to implement would require extensive development (accurate parcel and impervious area databases).  Annual maintenance, staff overhead, and data development is required Example – Bozeman Ford has a total parcel area of 486,657 square feet, which includes 309,982 square feet of impervious area. By dividing the two, a 63% intensity of development is calculated. Similar to an impervious area approach, total ERUs are calculated (114.8 ERUs) and multiplied by the correct rate classification depending on the category its percentage falls (63%). Bozeman Ford would pay the ERU rate of category 3 ($8.08/impervious ERU). Figure 14 – Varying Estimated Costs Figure 12 – Analysis Used (Silver Level of Service) Figure 13 – Map Displaying Analysis Exhibit E 192