1. Linking Transportation Infrastructure and Water Quality
Carl Spirio, PE, FDOT
Drew Bartlett, FDEP
Rick Renna, PE, Atkins
Panelists:

2. Topics Current Practice The Benefit/Cost of Current Practice
Prudent Funding of Stormwater Improvements
Recommended Direction
Obstacles

3. Current Practice Typical Ponds Receiving Waterbody Outfall System
(Waters of the State)
Receiving Waterbody
Typical Ponds
DOT
Road

4. Traditional Pond Design Approach

5. Traditional Pond Design Approach

6. I-75 from Lee County Line to Tuckers Grade

7. I-75 from Lee County Line to Tuckers Grade
Originally, Project was NOT funded for R-O-W acquisition.
All stormwater treatment and floodplain compensation to be managed within the median of I-75.
Much of the bi-furcated median was jurisdictional wetlands.
Approximately, 95 acres of wetlands would be impacted by the roadway and linear stormwater systems.
This design approach presented difficulty in permitting due to the offsite constraints and TW concerns.

10. I-75 from Lee County Line to Tuckers Grade
Cost Savings:
$1.48 million in construction cost savings from eliminating median ponds. (Negative SA from contractor)
Reduced wetland impacts saves approximately $715,000 in mitigation.
Savings from not maintaining median ponds over 20 years is estimated to be $1,782,000.
FDOT contributed $1.48 million toward acquisition of Bond Ranch Parcel by FDEP.

11. Study of FDOT Ponds – Costs
Ponds Purchased, : R/W and Construction Costs
R/W Costs Include Eminent Domain Costs
Improvements
Cost to Cure
Business Damages
Attorney Fees
Experts Costs
Relocation

12. $272M Total Cost
$591k/acre Average
Bad Investment!
5-year Study

13. Study of FDOT Ponds – Nutrient Removal & Efficiency
Estimated annual nutrient removal using…
Basin area & characteristics
Pond size
Annualized up-front costs over 20 years of performance
TN C/B: $1,140/lb-N
TP C/B: $5,037/lb-P

15. Comparison of SJRWMD and FDOT Approaches
SJRWMD Projects
TN Range: $24 - $156 / lb-TN
TP Range: $148 - $1400 / lb-TP
FDOT
TN Average: $1,140/lb-N
TP Average: $5,037/lb-P
TN C/B: 13x Greater
TP C/B: 7x Greater

16. FDOT Annual Stormwater Investment
FDOT Capacity projects, 2005/06 – 2009/10: $13.1B
Stormwater Management Investment $272M/$13.1B = 2.07%
FDOT Capacity projects, FY : $21,110.9M
Expected Stormwater Management Investment: 2.07% = $438M
$87M/year Public Investment in Stormwater Quality

17. Prudent Funding of Stormwater Improvements
Wisdom
Funding
Funding, Wisdom, but no authority: FRUSTRATION
Wisdom & Authority, but no funding: USELESS
Funding & Authority, but no Wisdom: INEFFECTIVE → DANGEROUS

18. ERP FDOT/Developers BMAP D.E.A.R. Legal/Regulatory Agency/Program
Other possibility: FDOT funds WMD work program projects: a bit to fox/hen house!
DEAR proposes an alternate ERP path to FDOT as a FIRST choice
FDOT can pursue that path with DOT’s eminent domain authority
FDOT gets BMAP credits for their funding
BMAP stakeholders get credits for ongoing maintenance of new facilities
Obstacle: state water quality law that requires immediate downstream treatment
BMAP
D.E.A.R.

19. Recommended Direction
Allow FDOT to engage in nutrient-control water quality projects within the basin in lieu of satisfying nutrient-related water quality rules
Require a measure of onsite pre-treatment to capture first-flush pollutants
Water quality project must provide more environmental improvement than ERP rules
Wetland mitigation and flood control requirements remain unchanged

20. Current Obstacles/Hindrances
Must demonstrate NO additional pollutant load to drainage system, even to low-value ditches
FDOT needs certainty in water quality requirements to avoid project delays due to re-design
WMD reviewers need clear authority to accept non- traditional W/Q approaches

21. Thank you!
Questions / Comments?