ltcp meeting 9-16-04

Long Term Control PlanLong Term Control PlanPublic InputPublic Input

September 16, 2004September 16, 2004

22

Tonight’s MeetingTonight’s Meeting

• Program Overview – Video

• What is a Long Term Control Plan?

• CSO Locations

• Waterway Uses

• Input Breakout Sessions

33

What You Can DoWhat You Can Do

• Listen to the presentations and issues that are presented to you

• Offer your honest opinions on the issues

• Work with us to help find constructive solutions

• Help educate others on the project

44

City of Toledo City of Toledo Sewer SystemSewer System

• As indicated in the video, the City’s sewer system includes both separated and combined sewer systems

• Combined systems – carry both sewage and rainwater in the same pipe

• Separated systems – carry sewage and rainwater in separate pipes

55

City’s Combined AreaCity’s Combined Area

66

CSO Control Work CSO Control Work has been Performedhas been Performed

• The City constructed three major tunnel systems to store excess flow

• The City has implemented a number of sewer separation projects to build separate sewer systems

77

CSO Area to TunnelsCSO Area to Tunnels

88

Sewer Separation Sewer Separation ProjectsProjects

99

Long Term Control Plan – Long Term Control Plan – ContentsContents• Actions – projects or

programs• Schedules – when

projects will happen• Where – locations where

projects will be constructed

• Costs – project expenditures; financing plan

1010

ObligationsObligations

• The LTCP must evaluate a range of CSO control alternatives based on:• Pollution reduction benefits• Instream water quality conditions• Frequency of discharge• Construction and operations costs

1111

Consent Decree Consent Decree RequirementsRequirements• The Consent Decree requires the development of a

Long Term Control Plan for Combined Sewer Overflows (LTCP).

• A draft plan will be prepared by summer 2005.

1212

CSO Regulations….CSO Regulations….

Call for:

• Control of CSOs

• New sewers to implement controls

• Reducing stormwater flow

• Systems to be properly maintained

• Minimizing CSO discharges

Do not call for:

• Elimination of CSOs

• Extensive replacement of the sewer system

• Improvements in drainage

• Control of basement backup

• Other actions that would improve water quality, that are not related to CSOs.

1313

Primary Issue #1 – Primary Issue #1 – Big Picture GoalsBig Picture Goals

• Big picture goals define the hoped for achievements of the project. The primary question relates to how residents want to be able to use the waterways.

• Depending on the type of alternative selected, additional benefits are possible. These include: improving the performance of the sewer system, and changed land use in the combined areas.

1414

Primary Issue #1 – Primary Issue #1 – Big Picture GoalsBig Picture Goals

• What is the balance that the public prefers in water quality versus cost?• Seeing a real change in

the waterways?

• Meeting the regulations at the lowest possible cost?

1515

Other Important Other Important ConcernsConcerns• You will be asked to provide input on other

important concerns you have with the sewer system and water quality later in the program. Please think about what is important to you.

1616

Primary Issue #1 – Primary Issue #1 – Big Picture GoalsBig Picture Goals

Input is requested on what the goals should be:

• Seeing a real change in (specify waterway, i.e. Maumee R, Swan Creek, Ottawa R)

• Having a sewer system that works well

• Meeting regulations for the lowest possible cost

• Helping to meet other City goals

• Others

1717

Primary Issue #2 – Primary Issue #2 – Types of AlternativesTypes of Alternatives

• Alternative selection is a combination of performance and suitability considerations. There are a number of types of alternatives.

1818

Principal AlternativesPrincipal Alternatives

• Flow storage and/ or treatment• Storage basins and tunnels with screening and other

treatment capability

• Sewer Separation• Construction of new sewers for eliminating

combined systems

• Flow reduction/rerouting• Small scale measures to reduce the amount of flow

to the sewer system

1919

Storage / Treatment Storage / Treatment Facility ExamplesFacility Examples

7 Mile CSO Basin - Detroit7 Mile CSO Basin - Detroit

Birmingham CSO basinBirmingham CSO basin

Leib Screening/ Disinfection Leib Screening/ Disinfection Facility - DetroitFacility - Detroit

George Kuhn Drain – Oakland George Kuhn Drain – Oakland CountyCounty

2020

Storage / Treatment Storage / Treatment Basic InformationBasic Information

• Type of facilities: either concrete tanks or tunnels

• Type of treatment: screening (minimum), potentially disinfection

• Land area required: 3 – 10 acres• Typical siting locations: waterfront property,

parks, other vacant parcels near rivers• Other requirements: some sewer work to bring

flow to the site

2121

Storage/ Treatment Storage/ Treatment Facilities Pros and ConsFacilities Pros and Cons

• Pros• Most work is limited to one location and the

adjacent areas are not disturbed• Water is either stored (small storms) or partially

treated (large storms)

• Cons• Treatment generally requires construction of a

relatively tall building.• Construction activities are generally 2 – 3 years in

duration limiting the use of sites during that period.

2222

Sewer Separation PhotosSewer Separation Photos

BeforeBefore AfterAfter

2323

Sewer Separation PhotosSewer Separation Photos

DuringDuring

2424

Sewer Separation BasicsSewer Separation Basics

• Construct a new sewer to separate flow

• Generally requires 3 – 6 months to complete work on a street; 1 – 2 years to complete work in an area

• Generally doesn’t involve land acquisition

2525

Sewer Separation Sewer Separation Pros and ConsPros and Cons

• Pros• Upgrades the sewer system

• Eliminates CSO discharges

• Doesn’t require property

• Cons• May increase total load of pollutants to the

waterways• Disruptive to individual property owner

2626

Flow Reduction / Flow Reduction / ReroutingRerouting

2727

Flow Routing/ Flow Routing/ Reduction BasicsReduction Basics

• Reduces the amount of stormwater runoff generated by rerouting flows to site storage areas.

• Implemented on either a site specific or area specific basis

• Relatively long time implementation and generally dependant on voluntary participation.

2828

Flow Reduction / Flow Reduction / Rerouting Pros and ConsRerouting Pros and Cons

• Pros• Addresses problem at the source

• Could be considered best environmentally

• Could reduce basement or surface flooding

• Cons• Generally not adequate to solve the entire

problem• Most disruptive to individual property owner• Administratively intensive program

2929

Primary Issue #2 – Primary Issue #2 – Types of AlternativesTypes of Alternatives

Input is requested on what alternative type is most acceptable?• Examples:

• Whatever works best to limit sewer overflows• Options that are not visible above ground• Options that look good in the neighborhood• Options that limit construction disruptions on the

neighborhood streets• Whatever costs the least• Whatever each neighborhood prefers• Others

3030

Waterway UsesWaterway Uses

• Determining Current Waterway Uses• 2003 survey of 600 residents• Community Program Advisory Committee• Interviews with waterway users/experts

• Boaters/fisherman

• Parks & Recreation staff

• Maumee RAP

• Your input

3131

Survey ResultsSurvey Results

• On a scale of 1 (never) to 5 (very often), how often do you use Lake Erie in the following ways:• To enjoy scenery 2.51• Walking/jogging 2.00• Fishing 1.92• Picnicking 1.91• Boating 1.85• Swimming/water sports 1.71

3232

Survey Results Survey Results

• On a scale of 1 (never) to 5 (very often), how often do you use our Rivers in the following ways:• To enjoy scenery 2.68• Walking/jogging 2.15• Fishing 1.98• Picnicking 1.86• Boating 1.79• Swimming/water sports 1.55

3333

Where are the CSOs?Where are the CSOs?

• Maumee River

• 17 overflow points on the Maumee

3434

Maumee River – Maumee River – Current UsesCurrent Uses

• Boating• Personal watercraft• Fishing• Commercial shipping• Scenic

3535

Where are the CSOs?Where are the CSOs?What are Current Uses?What are Current Uses?

Maumee River

3636

Where are the CSOs?Where are the CSOs?

• Swan Creek• 9 overflow points

on Swan Creek

3737

Swan Creek – Swan Creek – Current UsesCurrent Uses

• Some fishing• Some boating• Migratory birds• Scenic

3838

Where are the CSOs?Where are the CSOs?What are Current Uses?What are Current Uses?Swan Creek

3939

Where are the CSOs?Where are the CSOs?

• Ottawa River• 6 overflow points

4040

Ottawa River – Ottawa River – Current UsesCurrent Uses• Boating• Personal Watercraft• Water Skiing• Scenic

4141

Where are the CSOs? Where are the CSOs? What are Current Uses?What are Current Uses?Ottawa River

4242

Ottawa River – Ottawa River – Current UsesCurrent UsesOttawa River

4343

Feedback – Feedback – What You Can Do!What You Can Do!• Participate in a breakout group

• Choose a session:• Ottawa River – Downstairs “Sky Left”• East Side Maumee River – Downstairs “Sky Right”• West Side Maumee River & Swan Creek -- Here

• Fill out questionnaire and sign up for future meetings

4444

Areas for InputAreas for Input

• Waterway uses• Are there any priority areas?

• What should be the goals of the program?

• What are the Preferred Alternatives?

4545

Things to RememberThings to Remember

• The Long Term Control Plan Must:• Meet the criteria required by the EPA• Must be a solution the community can afford

4646

Next StepsNext Steps

• Get public input on proposed alternatives at meetings for each waterway• November 2004 – January 2005

• Present draft plan for public comment• March 2005

4747

Future MeetingsFuture Meetings

• Ottawa River• November 18, 2004• Location – To be discussed in breakout

• Maumee River East • To be scheduled – January 2005

• Maumee River West/Swan Creek• To be scheduled – January 2005