HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-03-11 Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Minutes
Transportation & Infrastructure Committee
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Special Meeting – Stormwater Workshop
Minutes
Councilors Attending: Patricia Blanchette, Richard Bronson, Harold Wheeler,
Geoffrey Gratwick, Gerry Palmer
Staff Attending: Ed Barrett, Jim Ring, Wendy Warren, Norm Heitmann,
Paul Nicklas
Others Attending: LeMarr Cannon, NEMO Program
Lucy Quimby with Penjajawoc Marsh/Mall Commission
Kristina Debolt, 70 Palm Street
Andy Hamilton, Eaton & Peabody
Jeff Bigelow, Sewall Company
Valerie Carter, BACORD
Committee convened at 4:30 p.m.
Jim Ring stated there was previous discussion and expressed interest regarding stormwater and
holding a stormwater workshop. The workshop would cover regulations, management, and
stream improvement, which were important issues the City needed to deal with. LeMarr with the
Non-Point Education for Municipal Officers (NEMO) would provide a presentation. Staff would
provide a presentation on how the City would move forward.
LeMarr stated her funding for NEMO was from the 319 program, EPA money that goes through
DEP. Additional funding was made by the drinking water program. She explained that “non-point
source” pollution was not from one specific source. When it rains 50% soaks into vegetation and
evaporates. With development 15% goes into the ground. 55% moves across the landscape
picking up urban residue and dumps into streams, lakes, ponds, bays, etc. She explained the
development impacts on water: bacteria, sediments, temperature, nutrients, petroleum
derivatives, pesticides, herbicides, and heavy metals. She referenced EPA’s Smartgrowth website
graph. In a fifteen year period from 1982-1997 a quarter of all land converted form rural to urban
was suburban area. Towns that deal with growth impact the landscape. There is an 8% threshold
of impervious before moving from a protected stream system to an impacted. And at 25% it
moves from impacted to severely impacted. To deal with this they use detention basins (BMP).
However, these don’t do anything for pollutants or temperatures. She explained the different
percentages of impervious area and impacts such as erosion on the waterways and lowering the
water tables on adjacent parcels. Next she outlined improvement of detention basins with
underdrain soil filters leaving particulates behind and cools the temperatures. These make it
slower for water to move through, which also needed about three times as much area to hold the
water as it moved. She noted the use of density to protect natural resources. The use of Low
1
Impact Development techniques (LID), and figure out how to pay for it. Reference was made to
the Brookings Report that in the next twenty-five years, growth in Maine could be accommodated
in existing towns with urban streams. Next item was Urban Impaired Streams many have
impervious covers of ten to forty percent, the need to mitigate to reduce impacts to approximately
eight percent to continue development in these areas, and to maintain maximum development
flexibility by keeping water quality standards up. Andy Hamilton asked if the EPA understood the
concept of “effective impervious cover”. LeMarr stated the EPA/DEP in Maine had gone from
looking at Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) looking at individual pollutants separately to looking
at impervious surface as a surrogate of all of them. Andy then asked if they understood the
distinction between “impervious cover” and “effective impervious cover”. LeMarr responded no,
however her discussions with the EPA indicated they were excited and positive.
Under the Clean Water Act it’s illegal to give permits out for projects that go into these areas and
contribute to impairments of an urban impaired stream. Councilor Blanchette asked the City
Engineer to comment. Jim stated this was an important point that “we know we have impaired
streams, yet we still build”. What LeMarr said was correct except and unless there is a way a plan
or methodology to allow projects to move forward in conjunction with a program to improve the
eventual quality or impairment in the stream. The State of Maine, Chapter 500 Stormwater
Regulations did allow, under certain circumstances as long as there is a management plan, an
approach to improve that or reduce that impairment over time. That has been allowed. LeMarr
said Water Management Plans (WMP) include stakeholders to insure continued development. The
regulatory agencies were not necessarily the ones playing the hardest ball, it was often the private
groups holding people’s feet to the fire saying this is the rule, you’ve got to follow through on it.
Councilor Wheeler said there was a need and advantage to improve population density in urban
residential areas. He heard a great deal about it in the last ten years and wondered whether
homeowners on a large lot, with a long, wide, paved driveway and may have stormwater running
through a culvert into the backyard. Should the owner expect a visit from DEP declaring them
potentially responsible and what impact for those people who bought houses from 40-60 years
ago? And about housing value impacts when they sell? Lemarr stated they would not likely see
anyone from DEP in the next two decades due to minimal staffing at DEP. She didn’t think the
DEP intended to do that either. She emphasized that it was not a one point source it was a non-
point sources, a cumulative effect by all. One thing that could be done would be to say to every
developer/business/re-development to look at the stormwater and infiltrate it. Single family house
lots to pick up their share of the burden, for instance, ask them where they are going to place
their rain garden. Andy said that was right that everyone had a responsibility but was concerned
about an earlier statement that stormwater programs were most effective when citizens groups
brought law suits. He was also concerned that the outside was coming into telling private owners
to improve stormwater. The City Staff was capable and effective in bringing resources, insight,
and experience to these issues and that progress was made on a voluntary basis. He felt
threatened by being told that environmental groups bring law suits to make progress. He
suggested, early in the process, to find ways to talk to one another on the concept, work together
and move forward. LeMarr stated she was making reference to environmental groups outside of
Maine bringing suits. In Maine the exact opposite was happening, for example, the Long Creek
Watershed. She stated with the permit you not only deal with your own impacts in your
development you also must mitigate previous impacts. Everyone must get a permit within that
particular watershed as with South Portland working in conjunction with Portland, Westbrook,
Scarborough to reduce from 60% impervious with retrofits, detention basins, and monitoring
equipment.
2
Next was the adaptive management process, which was currently being used in the Penjajawoc
area. The use of low impact development would reduce impervious cover impacts in development
and redevelopment. Could require LID as part of the building permit process on single family
development and could require LID everywhere to avoid sprawl. An outline of bio-retention cells,
the maintenance of them, and how to integrate them into the landscape was discussed. There
was discussion of porous pavement, greenroofing, rain gardens, and tree boxes, which Jim stated
the Waterfront Park Construction Project would include. Councilor Blanchette mentioned asking
the Chair if the tree boxes could be done on Main Street. Wendy commented on the porous
pavement and stated they could work with Lane Construction who is also a member of the Bangor
Area Stormwater Group. She continued with other alternatives such as the Seattle Sea Street
Project where they selected a street and retrofitted to stormwater with infiltration areas infornt of
each house and outlined the benefits to the neighborhood and cost effectiveness by 25%
compared to traditional development. There is a LID study and the State Planning Office (SPO)
model ordinance for towns, and the “One Drop At A Time” website for low impact development for
individual house lots. Councilor Gratwick suggested that the Bangor Waterfront and parking lot
should become a demonstration area. LeMarr also suggested placing signage of improvements for
public awareness. She suggested funding assistance via DEP 319 Grant. Jim said a demonstration
for LID at the waterfront area was a great idea. There maybe some trouble for the parking lot
with the Brownfield redevelopment site and can provide more detail as needed. Ed stated there
was a whole series of projects in Birch Stream and Penjajawoc watershed using a variety of
techniques to deal with stormwater, anticipated to start this year. He recalled a presentation by
SMRT regarding retro/redesign work at the Airport. Wendy was working with Eastern Maine
Community College on doing a demonstration project there. Councilor Wheeler commented on
LeMarr’s animated, thorough presentation. He stated that public education was tremendously
important. LaMarr offered her assistance regarding outreach. There was discussion about the 319
Grant opportunities. Jim stated that bio-retention cells were conceived in house, developers had
started to use them and it was becoming the norm. Councilor Blanchette expressed it would be
st
important to have those non-attending members of this meeting attend on April 1 or any of the
other sessions because they didn’t need to play catch up during the implementation process. Ed
would provide a list of where the filtration systems had been installed and what they were.
Wendy, Environmental Coordinator for the City of Bangor stated there was a workshop about a
year ago. An overview of the regulatory background for stormwater, stormwater regulations, and
what lead up to a Watershed Management Plan was presented as follows:
The Clean Water Act prohibits discharge of any pollution by any person from a point source to
waters of the United States. EPA regulates discharge through several permits:
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer (MS4). Before 2003 regular large cities were required; after
2003 cities the size of Bangor were required to have a Watershed Management Plan.
Multi-sector General Industrial (Fleet Maintenance has, along with MS4).
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit (NPDES), which is meant for point
sources. For instance, Waster Water Treatment Plant.
3
Construction General Permit (Chapter 500) for construction projects, erosion control plan must
be in place.
Residual Designation Authority, any significant polluter that contributes to impairment triggers
NPDES- expanded to include stormwater not just point source.
She stated that in other states EPA regulated MS4 permits, NPDES, etc. but in Maine the State was
delegated to regulate and they are called MPDES permits.
The steps in the process are:
1. DEP makes an biannual report to EPA
All streams in Maine were classified into several categories. (AA, A, B, C, and D in
some states.)
DEP must identify water bodies that aren’t expected to meet water quality standards
- 303(d) list. By looking at dissolved oxygen (DO), bacteria, habitat, and aquatic life.
Bangor Streams on the 303(d) list:
Birch Stream
Penjajawoc
Arctic Brook
Shaw Brook (Hermon)
Capehart Brook
Sucker Brook (Originates in Bangor thru to Hampden)
DEP targets urban impaired streams.
2. DEP must report to EPA on Impaired water bodies (TMDL Report)
TMDL identifies impairments and sources.
Sets goals for improvement by designing waste load allocations.
Pollution budget- the amount of pollutants a water body can absorb without
violating water quality standards.
Urban streams have numerous cases; DEP uses a surrogate measure –
Impervious cover.
Effective Impervious Cover-accounts for modern stormwater treatment.
TMDL status:
Birch Stream draft TMDL report in August 2005, stakeholder process in
2006, and final report in 2007.
Penjajawoc draft TMDL report in November 2007. EPA approval on hold
(June 2009) comment period extended.
3. Enforcement:
DEP could stop issuing permits.
Individual property would need NPDES/MPDES Permits.
4
Pros:
o Issued by the State
o More immediate results
Cons:
o Fewer economies of scales
o No adaptive management plan, do , check
o Lack of synchronized approach
o Lack of peer group expectations.
Alternatives to enforcement would be for communities to demonstrate measurable progress
toward eliminating stormwater discharges with a Watershed Management Plan, Chapter 500, and
use attainability analysis (UAA). Use Attainability Analysis is the scientific assessment of factors
affecting the attainment of the classification (prove the stream was improperly classified based on:
Showing impairment is a natural condition
Proving controls would result in substantial and widespread economic and social
impact.
Must have already attempted to meet attainment, which requires many years of data
Councilor Blanchette stated there were back-to-back meetings tonight, with the School
Department following this meeting. She requested Wendy finish the presentation and questions
st
could be presented on April 1. The meeting would be held in the Council Chambers.
Meeting was adjourned.
5