1437 SOUTH BOULDER AVE., SUITE 1080  TULSA, OKLAHOMA  (P) (F)  CITY OF OWASSO Roadway To Implementation – How A Small Oklahoma Community Adopted A Successful Stormwater Program Ana Stagg, PE, CFM, Meshek & Associates, PLC Roger Stevens, City of Owasso

AGENDA – THE PROCESS  SPEAKERS QUALIFICATIONS  PROJECT UNDERSTANDING –ABOUT OWASSO –WHAT HAPPENED  PROJECT APPROACH –MASTER PLANNING PROCESS –PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM –IMPERVIOUS AREA STUDY –CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS  PROJECT SCHEDULE  QUESTIONS

ANA STAGG, CONSULTING ENGINEER  Served as Owasso Public Works Director  Over15 years of experience in civil engineering, management consulting and municipal government.  Certified Floodplain Manager OK  Oklahoma PE  Certified Water and Wastewater Works Operator OK-20972(B) OK (A)  BS, Civil Engineering, 1993 Florida Institute of Technology  ME, Environmental Engineering, 1997, Cornell University  MBA, Business Administration, 2003, Northwest University, Kellogg Graduate School of Business  Currently serves as Owasso Public Works Director since 2007  Certified Water and Wastewater Works Operator OK-20972(B) OK (A)  Employed with the City of Owasso, Public Works Department, since 1991  Member of INCOG (Transportation Technical Committee)  Member of the Owasso Economic Development Authority  Member of the Owasso Annexation Committee  1997 Eagle Award Winner for Excellence in Public Service  At City of Owasso, Public Department, since (P.S. In 1980, I was only 8 years old). ROGER STEVENS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ABOUT THE SPEAKERS

Coordinates: 36°17′25″N 95°49′43″W / °N °W / ; CountryUnited States StateOklahoma CountiesTulsa, Rogers Incorporated1904 Government – City Manager MayorSteve Cataudella City ManagerRodney J Ray Area Total10.1 sq mi (26.0 km 2 ) Land10.0 sq mi (26.0 km 2 ) Water0.1 sq mi (0.06 km 2 ) Population (2000) Total18,502 Density1,844.4/sq mi Annual Budget General$ 5.5 million Utility$ 7.3 million Websitewww.cityofowasso.com ABOUT OWASSO, OKLAHOMA

OWASSO BLOSSOMS…  , annual growth rate was 7.5%.  2000, population of 18,502.  2010, population projected at 35,000.  , voted as the highest growth rate in Oklahoma for cities of at least 10,000 people.  , Owasso transformed from a small rural community to a thriving suburban city.

 Update critical master planning documents  Secure new financing resources  Upgrade priority infrastructure  Improve essential services  Support development WITH GROWTH CAME PROSPERITY…

WITH GROWTH CAME RUNOFF…  Increased flooding  Overtopped bridges  Roadway closures  Public objection

DEVELOPING A PLAN OF ATTACK…

DO’s  Apply a watershed approach  Listen/inventory all complaints  Investigate partnering opportunities  Use quantitative prioritization processes  Explain implementation plan in detail  Provide ample comment periods  Employ process mediators  Consult experts  Follow up with agreements/promises  Be reactive  Ignore the problem  Start without a plan  Overlook the watershed effect  Act in response to the squeaky wheel  Use qualitative prioritization processes  Neglect (overreact to) development  Forget already developed areas DON’Ts FORMULATING THE PLAN…

SEEK PUBLIC SUPPORT EARLY…  Start Early – DO IT OFTEN  Beginning of Process – USE QUESTIONNAIRES  Following Inventory Phase  Review Mitigation Measures  Draft Plan – OBTAIN PUBLIC BUY-IN  Public Planning Commission for Final Plan  City Council / County Commission Public Hearing for Final Plan – MAKE IT FORMAL

ADVERTISE AND COMMUNICATE…  Utility Billing Inserts  Television Coverage  Public Meetings  Newspapers  Radio/TV Public Announcements  Community/Civic Groups

CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE  Appointees of Elected Officials  Flood Victims  Planning Commission  Board of Adjustment  Floodplain Board  Interested Citizens  City Manager/Asst. City Manager  Building Officials  Utilities  Emergency Management  Parks & Recreation  Economic Development  Floodplain Manager TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT OPPORTUNITIES…

 Existing problems  New land development  Increased impervious area  Speeding up surface flow with paved streets and parking lots, lawn areas instead of pasture, etc. (resultant shorter times of concentration)  Loss of floodplain and resultant loss of floodplain storage  Constructed channels that speed up the water through a reach  Prevent new problems  Correct existing problems  Enhance the community's safety, environment and quality of life EXPLAINING WHY A PLAN IS NECESSARY… WHAT’S THE CAUSE? WHAT’S THE BENEFIT?

FOLLOWING FEMA’s PROCESS…  Provide detailed, logical approach to… –Problem areas inventory, –Alternative evaluation, –Development of solutions, and –Prioritization of projects.  Allows Hazard Mitigation Plan – Appendix – Inclusion  Facilitates Grant Funding Application Process  Enables Flood Plain Maps Revisions (CLOMRs) 14 FEMA 10-STEP PROCESS

MITIGATION OPTIONS  Regional Stormwater Detention/Retention  Channelization, Bridge/Culvert/Storm Sewer Replacement  Acquisition of Buildings in the Floodplain  Floodproofing  Regional Stormwater Detention/Retention  Acquisition of Property in the Floodplain  Stricter Regulatory Controls PREVENTION OPTIONS COVERING DETAILS… SELECTION AND PRIORITIZATION  Flood Damage Reduction Benefits  Increased Safety  Nuisance Flooding Abeyance  Allowance for Future Development  Multi-use Facilities Where Possible

ILLUSTRATING RESULTS… 2-YEAR FLOODPLAIN MAPPING 10-YEAR FLOODPLAIN MAPPING 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN MAPPING FLOODPLAIN VISUALIZATION

IMPLEMENTING THE ($30-MILLION) PLAN… 17

SECURING FUNDING…  Protect human life, health, and property;  Minimize public and private storm and flood losses from stormwater runoff in the City;  Provide for development of Stormwater Master Plan which will define the existing and future drainage system, identify drainage facilities improvements and project long-range capital improvements requirements; and  Comply with the Phase II Stormwater Management regulations. ORDINANCE 754 (2003) Customer Type No. of Customers Annual Unit ChargeTotal Residential7,450$30.00$ 223,500 Non-residential Meters > 2-inch65$30.00$ 1,950 Meters < 2-inch310$90.00$ 27,900 $ 253,350  (2003) Master Planning starts  (2003) Ordinance 754 establishes Stormwater Management Program  (2003) Resolution establishes ($2.50/ESU) Service Fee… –1 ESU – residential –3 ESU – non- residential (w/ water meters > 2-inch)  (2003) Stormwater Program starts w/ annual budget of $265,000

PHASE I OF IMPLEMENTATION…  (2005) Master Drainage Plan is completed  Over 30 Projects identified  Total cost of program is over 30 projects and $20 million  Top Ten Projects = $2.5 million  $250,000/year > 10 yrs  (2005) Commissioned “Impervious Area Utility Fee”  (2005-present) Find Partners

TASKS  Detail edge of pavement, building outlines and other impervious planimetrics  Use developed polygons to measure impervious areas  Determine size of Equivalent Service Unit (ESU) for Owasso  Average ESU = 2,500 to 3,000 sq.ft  Recommend fee and estimate revenue  Map of impervious surfaces linked to GIS parcel data  Database containing: –Number of ESU’s per parcel –Corresponding billing amount  Data Table developed in a format to facilitate linkage to billing department accounts  Customer Web Viewer identifying parcel impervious area and/or ESU’s DELIVERABLES IMPERVIOUS AREA STUDY… 20

IMPLEMENTATION OF IMPERVIOUS AREASTUDY FINDINGS…  Impervious Study revealed potential 600% increase non- residential revenues  (2005) Commercial Service Charge Implementation  Phased implementation used to mitigate impact… –FY % of Fee –FY % of Fee –FY % of Fee –F Y % of Fee Customer TypeFY 05-06FY 06-07FY 07-08FY Residential$ 240,000$ 255,000$ 270,000$ 285,000 Non-residential$ 45,000$ 90,000$ 135,000$ 180,000 Total$ 285,000$ 345,000$ 405,000$ 465,000

STORMWATER UTILITY FEE  Immediate 150% increase in Non-Residential Fee  Revenues estimated at $285,000  Potential annual revenues of $480,000  Maximum debt ability… –6%, 15 yr, $4.6 M –6%, 20 yr, $5.5 M  Need… –Top Priority > $6.7 M –Total > $20 M  Tulsa County  Oklahoma Water Resources Board  Development Community  FEMA - HMGP PARTNERS WANTED CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS…

GOLF COURSE USED TO REMEDIATE RESIDENTIAL FLOODING CITY BEGINS IMPLEMENTATION…  (May 2000) First complaints recorded  (June 2003) Study commissioned  (July 2003) Council approves immediate action  (August 2003) Design completed  (October 2003) Construction begins  (December 2003) Construction ends  Cost to City = $250,000

NEW DEVELOPMENT HELD TO STANDARDS…  (2004) Complaints received on newly constructed residential subdivision  (2004) City commissioned study finds errors in engineering assumptions  (2004) Developer asked to construct remedial actions  (2005) Necessary improvements constructed and functional  Cost to City = $0 DEVELOPER AGREES TO CONSTRUCT REMEDIAL DETENTION

2006 DEVELOPERS STEP TO BAT…  Residential development detention facility serves as Regional Detention  Developer contributed land and built facility  City contributed 70% of cost  Total project savings of $600,000

GARNETT REGIONAL DETENTION  Provides remedial storage for downstream residential structures  Provides detention storage to future development  Enables larger development of retail space  Uses Fee-In-Lieu and OWRB Loan for financing  Project Value = $3 MIL  Project Cost = $1.8 MIL  City Cost = $ CITY HITS HOME RUN…

OWASSO LOOKS AHEAD… – , Over $5 Million spent in Stormwater Improvements –2006-present, Phase II Program compliant –2009, new FIRM maps adopted (City’s MDP maps) –2011, Completing GIS inventory of stormwater infrastructure – , $1.5 million Stormwater Budget – , $6.5 million earmarked for Stormwater Improvements

1437 SOUTH BOULDER AVE., SUITE 1080  TULSA, OKLAHOMA  (P) (F)  CITY OF OWASSO QUESTIONS? Roadway To Implementation – How A Small Oklahoma Community Adopted A Successful Stormwater Program Ana Stagg, PE, CFM, Meshek & Associates, PLC Roger Stevens, City of Owasso