Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.20141103 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION November 03, 2014 5:00 PM, City Council Chambers MEETING AGENDA I. Colorado Water Plan Memo II. Clean River Initiative Annual Report III. Urban Runoff Management Plan Memo Page 1 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: April Long, P.E. – Stormwater Manager THRU: Trish Aragon, P.E. – City Engineer Scott Miller – Capital Asset Director DATE OF MEMO: October 30, 2014 MEETING DATE: November 3, 2014 RE: Colorado Water Plan REQUEST OF COUNCIL: This an informational item only. No Council request at this time. DISCUSSION: There are 19 states that depend on the water that falls in Colorado, and the populations in those states are growing. The State Demographer’s Office predicts that population in Colorado will double to 10 million people by 2050. Most of this water demand for the Western US is expected to be supplied by the Colorado River, which originates in the Rocky Mountains, on the western side of the Continental Divide. Unfortunately, there is not enough water in the Colorado River to meet the current water demands – let alone future demand increases from a growing population or future supply reductions from climate change. The growing population, increasing demands for water, and an inadequate supply of this precious resource is what prompted Governor John Hickenlooper to sign an executive order last year calling for a statewide water plan – something most other western states already have. The Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) is responsible for compiling the Colorado Water Plan, and the draft is due to the Governor’s Office in December of this year. The CWCB asked for a draft plan (Basin Implementation Plan) from each basin in the State (there are nine basins) to be delivered in July. The Roaring Fork Watershed is a portion of the Colorado River Basin, whose implementation plan was prepared and submitted by SGM in July 2014. Staff plans to present a brief overview of the information included in the Colorado River Basin Implementation Plan and the information included in other basins’ implementation plans that might impact the Roaring Fork River and the City of Aspen. In short: • The section of the Roaring Fork River in Aspen is currently one of the most endangered sections in our state, and at times, not capable of meeting even the minimum in-stream flows. P1 I. Page 2 of 2 • There are serious threats of increasing trans-basin diversions from the Colorado River Basin to supply water to the Front Range. • The Front Range municipalities have studied future water demands in detail, and can make a good case for increasing diversions from the Colorado River basin to meet those demands. The Governor indicated that he is looking for “shovel-ready” projects to provide solutions to Colorado’s water demands. Front Range projects may be given priority if they are able to deliver “shovel-ready” solutions sooner than the West Slope can. • There are very important reasons for keeping water in the Roaring Fork River that have been only partially explored by non-consumptive use studies (e.g. economic benefits from recreation and in-stream flows). These studies should be expanded to better investigate all uses of the river and to determine how much water is necessary to maintain the economies in this Valley. • Only some of these non-consumptive uses have a legal claim to the water and it would be worth exploring how to expand these legal uses (for instance, the City’s lease of Wheeler water rights to the Colorado Water Trust). Local diverters and local users are not speaking with a unified voice—yet. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: None. Presentation and reports are for informational purposes only. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: P2 I. Page 1 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: April Long, P.E. – Stormwater Manager THRU: Trish Aragon, P.E. – City Engineer Scott Miller – Capital Asset Director DATE OF MEMO: October 30, 2014 MEETING DATE: November 3, 2014 RE: Clean River Initiative Annual Report and Six-Year Summary REQUEST OF COUNCIL: None. BACKGROUND: In 2007, City staff, the citizens of Aspen, and City Council developed the Clean River Initiative in effort to prevent, reduce, and mitigate the impacts of urbanization on the Roaring Fork River. As part of the Clean River Initiative, a Citizens Review Committee, City staff, and City Council, through an extensive planning process, developed a Stormwater Business Plan (AMEC, 2007) that recommended the development and implementation of a moderate stormwater program. The Stormwater Business Plan provided guidelines for a Clean River Initiative that would focus on water quality improvements for the Roaring Fork River and stormwater system improvements over a 15-year period. DISCUSSION: The program began with the passing of a tax in 2007, the adoption of a system development fee in 2007, and the hiring of a stormwater manager in May of 2008. Since that time much progress has been made. Staff would like to present a summary of accomplishments from 2008 – 2013 (Attachment A) the 2014 Annual Report (Attachment B). Staff intends to present an Annual Report each year hereafter, with summary reports every five years. Highlights from the attached reports include: • The goals of the program • A history of the funding sources • Average annual operating and capital budgets • Descriptions for each staff position associated with the Clean River Initiative • Developments within the program from 2008-2013, including key projects • Data and measuring metrics (Jenny Adair has prevented almost 200 tons of sediment from reaching the river!) • Summary of monitoring results P3 II. Page 2 of 2 • Capital projects and goals completed in 2014 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: None. Presentation and reports are for informational purposes only. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A – Clean River Initiative 2008 – 2013 Summary Attachment B – Clean River Initiative 2014 Annual Report P4 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Clean River Initiative 2008 City of Aspen The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Clean River Initiative 2008 – 2013 Summary October 2014 City of Aspen Engineering Department 130 S Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 1 P5 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 1._Pr ogram Inception and G In 2005 and 2006, two local studies were released that identified a strong technical basis for concern about the adverse effects of Aspen’s urbanization on the quality of the Roaring Fork River (Roaring Fork Conservancy State of the Watershed Report, 2005 Initiative, 2006). It is generally understood areas contribute significant amounts of pollutants to receiving waters Aspen is no different. The adverse e riparian vegetation as a result of development along the Roaring Fork River (the River). The reduced river flows due to diversions upstream further compounds the problem. Additionally, i n 2001 the City completed a Surface Drainage Master Plan Aspen Mountain Basin that showed that the majority of the stormwater system in the downtown area was not capable of carrying even minor storm events without flooding properties Master Plan also identified risks associated with a mud flow from Aspen Mountain, showing mud accumulating more than 2 feet deep in several areas of town. In response to these reports and the looming federal and state standards plac municipalities across the nation, citizens and staff became concerned that the City of Aspen needed a more aggressive approach to river protection and restoration and City Council, through an extensive plann 2007) that recommended the development and implementation of a moderate stormwater program. The Stormwater Business Plan provided guidelines for a qu ality improvements for the Roaring Fork River and stormwater system improvements over a 15 period. The prim ary objective of the Clean River Initiative and mitigate the impacts of urban following goals have been identified, either at program inception or as we have learned more about the City’s impacts to the River. • Develop a stormwater management year-to-year • Generate funding that is adequate, stable, equitable and dedicated solely to the Initiative • Coordinate stormwater-related responsibilities from a unified front • Protect human health, safety and property by r • Improve and maintain watershed functions in the Roaring Fork Valley, including water quality, riparian habitat, and hydrology • Involve stakeholders in the protection, maintenance and restoration of the Aspen watershed • Practice sto rmwater management techniques that mimic natural hydrology The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative ogram Inception and G oals two local studies were released that identified a strong technical basis for concern about the adverse effects of Aspen’s urbanization on the quality of the Roaring Fork River (Roaring Fork Conservancy State of the Watershed Report, 2005 , and Roaring Fork Initiative, 2006). It is generally understood across the nation that stormwater discharges from urban areas contribute significant amounts of pollutants to receiving waters , and these reports found that Aspen is no different. The adverse e ffects of these polluted discharges are exacerbated by the loss of riparian vegetation as a result of development along the Roaring Fork River (the River). The reduced river flows due to diversions upstream further compounds the problem. n 2001 the City completed a Surface Drainage Master Plan (Master Plan) Aspen Mountain Basin that showed that the majority of the stormwater system in the downtown area was not capable of carrying even minor storm events without flooding properties and buildings. This Master Plan also identified risks associated with a mud flow from Aspen Mountain, showing mud accumulating more than 2 feet deep in several areas of town. In response to these reports and the looming federal and state standards plac municipalities across the nation, citizens and staff became concerned that the City of Aspen needed a river protection and restoration . A Citizens Review Committee, City staff, and City Council, through an extensive plann ing process, developed a Stormwater Business Plan (AMEC, 2007) that recommended the development and implementation of a moderate stormwater program. The Stormwater Business Plan provided guidelines for a Clean River Initiative that would focus on water ality improvements for the Roaring Fork River and stormwater system improvements over a 15 ary objective of the Clean River Initiative for the City of Aspen is to prevent, reduce, urban ization on the Roaring Fork River. To accomplish this objective, the following goals have been identified, either at program inception or as we have learned more about the management program that is comprehensive, cohesive, and consistent Generate funding that is adequate, stable, equitable and dedicated solely to the related responsibilities from a unified front Protect human health, safety and property by r educing stormwater impacts Improve and maintain watershed functions in the Roaring Fork Valley, including water quality, riparian habitat, and hydrology Involve stakeholders in the protection, maintenance and restoration of the Aspen watershed rmwater management techniques that mimic natural hydrology The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 2 two local studies were released that identified a strong technical basis for concern about the adverse effects of Aspen’s urbanization on the quality of the Roaring Fork River and Roaring Fork Stream Health that stormwater discharges from urban and these reports found that ffects of these polluted discharges are exacerbated by the loss of riparian vegetation as a result of development along the Roaring Fork River (the River). The reduced (Master Plan) for the Aspen Mountain Basin that showed that the majority of the stormwater system in the downtown area and buildings. This Master Plan also identified risks associated with a mud flow from Aspen Mountain, showing mud In response to these reports and the looming federal and state standards plac ed on municipalities across the nation, citizens and staff became concerned that the City of Aspen needed a . A Citizens Review Committee, City staff, ing process, developed a Stormwater Business Plan (AMEC, 2007) that recommended the development and implementation of a moderate stormwater program. that would focus on water ality improvements for the Roaring Fork River and stormwater system improvements over a 15 -year for the City of Aspen is to prevent, reduce, To accomplish this objective, the following goals have been identified, either at program inception or as we have learned more about the cohesive, and consistent Generate funding that is adequate, stable, equitable and dedicated solely to the Clean River Improve and maintain watershed functions in the Roaring Fork Valley, including water quality, Involve stakeholders in the protection, maintenance and restoration of the Aspen watershed P6 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative • Reduce the amount of pollutants that have the potential to enter the tributaries via stormwater runoff • Reduce impervious surface groundwater • Reduce the demand on the City’s storm system and the cost of cons systems • Increase urban green space and areas for stormwater infiltration • Foster positive connec tions between people and stormwater • Address requirements of federal and state regulations to protect protect watershed health 2. Funding In 2007, the citizens of Aspen voted to tax themselves to provide a dedicated funding source for the creation and operation of a stormwater program. The tax, a 0.65 mill levy on property ta with 60% of the vote and is not limited by TABOR restrictions $830,000 on average annually for the operation of the stormwater program. It was the intention of the citizens and Council at the inception of the stormwater program that the operating costs be funded by the tax community. Therefore, in 2007, Council approved a System Developm for new or redeveloped impervious areas. 2007 was the height of the economy and, based on development rates at the time, this fee was anticipated to bring in $1.2 million annually for the stormwater program , generating $19 stormwater improvements over a 15 year period. about $800,000 annually. In 2010, amidst the recession and facing significant pressure from the development community, Council decided to withdraw the System Development Fee, replacing it with a voluntary fee-in-lieu of providing on that is offered to property owners that cannot or do not want to provide detention on their own property. It is ba sed on the cost of providing detention and is discounted to recognize the economy of scale the City has in providing regional detention and conveyance 2013, this fee contributed approximately In July of 2011 , the City’s Community Developm stop subsidizing the costs of development review, began The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative educe the amount of pollutants that have the potential to enter the Roaring Fork River and its via stormwater runoff Reduce impervious surface s so stormwater can infiltrate to remove poll utants and recharge Reduce the demand on the City’s storm system and the cost of cons tructing expensive pipe Increase urban green space and areas for stormwater infiltration tions between people and stormwater Address requirements of federal and state regulations to protect the public In 2007, the citizens of Aspen voted to tax themselves to provide a dedicated funding source for a stormwater program. The tax, a 0.65 mill levy on property ta not limited by TABOR restrictions . Between 2008 and 2013 for the operation of the stormwater program. the intention of the citizens and Council at the inception of the stormwater program that the operating costs be funded by the tax -payers and the capital costs be funded by community. Therefore, in 2007, Council approved a System Developm ent Fee of $2.88 per square foot new or redeveloped impervious areas. 2007 was the height of the economy and, based on development rates at the time, this fee was anticipated to bring in $1.2 million annually for the , generating $19 million and providing the ability to pay for the recommended stormwater improvements over a 15 year period. Between 2008 and 2010, the fee actual In 2010, amidst the recession and facing significant pressure from the development community, Council decided to the System Development Fee, replacing it with providing on -site detention. The Fee-in-Lieu o f Detention is an optional that is offered to property owners that cannot or do not want to provide detention on their own sed on the cost of providing detention and is discounted to recognize the economy of scale the City has in providing regional detention and conveyance on the owner’s behalf approximately $150,000 average annually to the stormwater program. , the City’s Community Developm ent and Engineering Departments, in a of development review, began charging for its services. Ten percent of the Revenue Source Avg Annual Rev Predicted Rev Property Taxes $ 830,000 $ 860,000 Development Fees $ 450,000 $ 1,200,000 Total $ 1,300,000 $ 2,060,000 The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 3 Roaring Fork River and its utants and recharge tructing expensive pipe the public and restore and In 2007, the citizens of Aspen voted to tax themselves to provide a dedicated funding source for a stormwater program. The tax, a 0.65 mill levy on property ta x, passed Between 2008 and 2013 , this provided the intention of the citizens and Council at the inception of the stormwater program that and the capital costs be funded by the development Fee of $2.88 per square foot new or redeveloped impervious areas. 2007 was the height of the economy and, based on development rates at the time, this fee was anticipated to bring in $1.2 million annually for the million and providing the ability to pay for the recommended Between 2008 and 2010, the fee actual ly brought in f Detention is an optional fee that is offered to property owners that cannot or do not want to provide detention on their own sed on the cost of providing detention and is discounted to recognize the economy of on the owner’s behalf . From 2011 - the stormwater program. ent and Engineering Departments, in a n effort to charging for its services. Ten percent of the Shortfall negligible $ 1,200,000 $ 750,000 $ 2,060,000 $ 750,000 P7 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative fees collected by the Engineeri ng Department for reviews and inspections is allocated to the stormwater program. In 2011, a half-year of earnings, This fee contributed $126,898 to the stormwater program in 2012 Another small source of revenue for the stormwater program is received from returns on investments. 3. Budget and Expenses Prior to establishment of the minimal, were costing the City’s General Fund approximately $336,000 each year. A stormwater manager was hired in May of 2008, with the stormwater program really beginning shortly after From 2009 through 2013 , the stormwater program has In addition the program has provided Operating expenses include staff salaries, of the stormwater system, upkeep to equipment (such as street sweepers), small repairs to the stormwater system, plans review, construction inspections, system inspections, water quality monitoring, and general administration costs. Capital projects have included master plans, th quality facilities, small demonstration projects, and infrastructure upgrades. For more detailed descriptions of projects see Section 5. 4. Operations Overview The Clean River Initiative Department, with the following staff members dedicated completely or in some part to Stormwater Manager: Dedicated Manager ensures the suc cessful Revenue Source 2008 2009 Property Tax $797,535 $812,297 Investment Interest $49,853 $74,951 Development Fees $700,831 $440,847 Permit Review Fees $0 Total $ 1,550,227 $ 1,330,104 The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative ng Department for reviews and inspections is allocated to the stormwater year of earnings, this fee contributed $14,623 to the stormwater program. to the stormwater program in 2012 and $154,686 in 20 13. Another small source of revenue for the stormwater program is received from returns on Table 1. Revenues 2008 - 2013 Prior to establishment of the Clean River Initiative, stormwater-related services were costing the City’s General Fund approximately $336,000 each year. A stormwater manager was hired in May of 2008, with the stormwater program really beginning shortly after , the stormwater program has operated with approximately $519 In addition the program has provided approximately $1.7 million in capital projects. Operating expenses include staff salaries, staff training, public education, routine maintenance upkeep to equipment (such as street sweepers), small repairs to the stormwater system, plans review, construction inspections, system inspections, water quality monitoring, and general administration costs. projects have included master plans, th e development of the URMP, large regional water quality facilities, small demonstration projects, and infrastructure upgrades. For more detailed descriptions of projects see Section 5. and the majority of its operations are housed in the Engineering Department, with the following staff members dedicated completely or in some part to Dedicated completely to the Clean River Initiative cessful achievement of the Clean River Initiative’s goals 2009 2010 2011 2012 $812,297 $824,296 $884,217 $834,700 $74,951 $35,299 $22,410 $28,885 $440,847 $511,805 $324,651 $106,953 $0 $0 $14,623 $126,898 1,330,104 $ 1,373,410 $ 1,247,912 $ 1,099,448 The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 4 ng Department for reviews and inspections is allocated to the stormwater this fee contributed $14,623 to the stormwater program. 13. Another small source of revenue for the stormwater program is received from returns on related services , which were were costing the City’s General Fund approximately $336,000 each year. A stormwater manager was hired in May of 2008, with the stormwater program really beginning shortly after that. $519 ,000 annually. routine maintenance upkeep to equipment (such as street sweepers), small repairs to the stormwater system, plans review, construction inspections, system inspections, water quality e development of the URMP, large regional water quality facilities, small demonstration projects, and infrastructure upgrades. For more detailed its operations are housed in the Engineering Department, with the following staff members dedicated completely or in some part to its success: Clean River Initiative , the Stormwater the Clean River Initiative’s goals . She manages 2013 Averages $827,880 $830,154 $1,255 $35,442 $15,891 $350,163 $154,686 $98,735 $ 999,712 $1,266,802 P8 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative stormwater staff members, capital projects, the the stormwater system. The Stormwater Manager researches advancements in the stormwat and in stormwater technology, stays abreast of changes to federal and state rules and regulations, and monitors the effectiveness of the Clean River Initiative procedures, guidelines and educational for both the public and City employees. Development Engineer: The D in the City for compliance with City Code, the URMP, and the Engineering Design Standards. His review includes grading and drainage, excavation and stabilization, public improvements, geologic hazards, site functionality. Additionally, he reviews as ensure that what is built in the field meets the intent of the approved design and can be maintained in the long term. He writes policy and assists in meets regularly with the development community to provide education and training. Civil Engineer I: This position was added in 2013 to assist the development engineer in reviewing civil plans and plats. She also assists the Engineering Department wit projects from site design to computer programming. Project Managers: There are multiple st managed in-house . While the Stormwat project managers in the Engineering Department manage the construction component of the project. Stormwater Inspector: Stormwater Insp ector ensures that impacts from construction on stormwater runoff are minimized and mitigated. The inspector checks construction sites in the City for the proper planning, installation, and maintenance of BMPs to keep sediment and investigates drainage complaints and illegal discharges to the stormwater system. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative stormwater staff members, capital projects, the 160 Fund budget, and maintenance and operation of The Stormwater Manager researches advancements in the stormwat and in stormwater technology, stays abreast of changes to federal and state rules and regulations, and the Clean River Initiative . She writes policy and ordinances, plans and procedures, guidelines and educational materials, and also conducts educational projects both the public and City employees. The D evelopment E ngineer reviews the civil plans for all developments in the City for compliance with City Code, the URMP, and the Engineering Design Standards. His review includes grading and drainage, excavation and stabilization, public improvements, geologic hazards, site functionality. Additionally, he reviews as -built drawings and stormwater maintenance plans to ensure that what is built in the field meets the intent of the approved design and can be maintained in the long term. He writes policy and assists in writing technical guidelines and education materials. He meets regularly with the development community to provide education and training. This position was added in 2013 to assist the development engineer in plats. She also assists the Engineering Department wit h a wide range of projects from site design to computer programming. There are multiple st ormwater capital projects each year . While the Stormwat er Manager manages most design and planning projects, other project managers in the Engineering Department manage the construction component of the project. Through regular education, inspection and enforcement, t ector ensures that impacts from construction on stormwater runoff are minimized and mitigated. The inspector checks construction sites in the City for the proper planning, installation, and to keep sediment and other pollutants on site . He also responds to and investigates drainage complaints and illegal discharges to the stormwater system. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 5 maintenance and operation of The Stormwater Manager researches advancements in the stormwat er industry and in stormwater technology, stays abreast of changes to federal and state rules and regulations, and . She writes policy and ordinances, plans and projects and training ngineer reviews the civil plans for all developments in the City for compliance with City Code, the URMP, and the Engineering Design Standards. His review includes grading and drainage, excavation and stabilization, public improvements, geologic hazards, and built drawings and stormwater maintenance plans to ensure that what is built in the field meets the intent of the approved design and can be maintained in writing technical guidelines and education materials. He This position was added in 2013 to assist the development engineer in h a wide range of year , all of which are er Manager manages most design and planning projects, other project managers in the Engineering Department manage the construction component of the project. Through regular education, inspection and enforcement, t he ector ensures that impacts from construction on stormwater runoff are minimized and mitigated. The inspector checks construction sites in the City for the proper planning, installation, and . He also responds to and P9 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Stormwater Intern: Each year, the stormwater program hires an intern for the summer months with the main responsibility to gather samples dur program. The intern compiles information gathered from lab tests and analyzes the information to identify trends. The intern also performs research, writes papers and reports, prepares educational materials, and participates in education understanding of the stormwater program. The stormwater program also has staff in the Parks and Streets Department. The responsibilities of these staff members involves mai ntenance and operation of the stormwater system well with the purposes of those departments. Parks Department: The Parks department manages local parks including the various biological (planted) stormwater treatm ent sites much of the maintenance of the carried through swales and other above ground facilities sedimentatio n vaults, general upkeep involved with maintenance of inlets, outlets and ditches. architects, a landscape crew, a restoration crew, the design and construction of Parks facilities installment of these BMPs, Parks staff als the functions and usefulness to riparian and river health. Streets Department: Plowing streets and street sweeping are the regul Streets Department, which are very important to the success of the stormwater program because they keep tons of sedi ment and other pollutants from reaching the River each year. maintenance that must be conducted on the storm sewer system The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Each year, the stormwater program hires an intern for the summer months with the main responsibility to gather samples dur ing storm events for the stormwater monitoring The intern compiles information gathered from lab tests and analyzes the information to identify trends. The intern also performs research, writes papers and reports, prepares educational education al programs to increase the public’s awareness and understanding of the stormwater program. The stormwater program also has staff in the Parks and Streets Department. The responsibilities of ntenance and operation of the stormwater system well with the purposes of those departments. The Parks department manages local parks including the various biological ent sites located throughout town. The Parks D epartment is in charge of much of the maintenance of the open stormwater system – the system that is NOT in pipes, but is carried through swales and other above ground facilities . This involves the cleaning of the n vaults, general upkeep involved with regional treatment facilities located in maintenance of inlets, outlets and ditches. The City of Aspen Parks D epartment has , a landscape crew, a restoration crew, and a construction depart ment that does a the design and construction of Parks facilities including some stormwater BMP installments. installment of these BMPs, Parks staff als o provide interpretative signs, programs, and tours riparian and river health. Plowing streets and street sweeping are the regul ar responsibilities of the reets Department, which are very important to the success of the stormwater program because they ment and other pollutants from reaching the River each year. There is also regular maintenance that must be conducted on the storm sewer system , such as inlet cleaning and The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 6 Each year, the stormwater program hires an intern for the summer months ing storm events for the stormwater monitoring The intern compiles information gathered from lab tests and analyzes the information to identify trends. The intern also performs research, writes papers and reports, prepares educational al programs to increase the public’s awareness and The stormwater program also has staff in the Parks and Streets Department. The responsibilities of ntenance and operation of the stormwater system – tasks that align The Parks department manages local parks including the various biological epartment is in charge of the system that is NOT in pipes, but is . This involves the cleaning of the regional treatment facilities located in parks, epartment has landscape ment that does a majority of BMP installments. After the and tours to highlight ar responsibilities of the reets Department, which are very important to the success of the stormwater program because they There is also regular , such as inlet cleaning and P10 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative replacement of damaged inlets or manhole lids, in the Mud and Flood team, which is done by the Streets D 5. Highlights of 2008-2013 The years of 2008 – 2013 provided for really interesting Initiative . 2008 was an epic water year, has ever experienced. Both 2009 and 2010 were fairly average years in hydrology terms again very wet late in the spring, bringing us very near flood levels but long runoff season. Then, in 2012 the C another dry year in 2013. Economically, 2008 was the end of began in 2009, with co nstruction decreasing to recovery in 2012. Other accomplishments of the program during that time Stormwater Added to Municipal Code. Municipal Code to house stormwater “Therefore, the City of Aspen establishes this set of stormwater management policies to provide reasonable guidance for the regulation of stormwater runoff for the purpose of resources from degradation. It is determined that the regulation of stormwater runoff discharges from construction and development activities and other construction activities in order to control and minimize increases in stormwater nonpoint source pollution associated with stormwater runoff is in the public interest and will prevent threats to public health and safety.” Construction Site Impacts Inspected. Mitigation Program in 2007 to ensure that impacts from construction sites, such as noise, parking, and excavations, were controlled and minimized. In 2008, Construction Mitigation Officers (CMOs) be gan to also inspect and enforce the proper use of erosion prevention and sediment control (EPSC) measures to prevent sediment from leaving the dirt CMOs also inspect for tracking onto City’s roads from constru disposal of materials such as concrete, and site stabilization and revegetation at project completion. 2012, one CMO became dedicated to the inspection of EPSC measures and is now classified as the Stormwater Inspector. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative replacement of damaged inlets or manhole lids, responding to drainage emergencies an which is done by the Streets D epartment. provided for really interesting and educational times in the . 2008 was an epic water year, with one of the largest snow seasons and runoff season and 2010 were fairly average years in hydrology terms bringing us very near flood levels but fortunately Then, in 2012 the C ity saw one of the worst droughts on record, followed by 2008 was the end of a boom and development in Aspen was skyrocketing. nstruction decreasing to minimal levels. The City began to see evidence of Other accomplishments of the program during that time : Stormwater Added to Municipal Code. In 2010, the City created a separate section of the house stormwater -related regulations. Title 28, states the following purpose: Therefore, the City of Aspen establishes this set of stormwater management policies to provide reasonable guidance for the regulation of stormwater runoff for the purpose of protecting local water resources from degradation. It is determined that the regulation of stormwater runoff discharges from construction and development activities and other construction activities in order to control and minimize increases in stormwater runoff rates and volumes, soil erosion, stream channel erosion, and nonpoint source pollution associated with stormwater runoff is in the public interest and will prevent threats to public health and safety.” Construction Site Impacts Inspected. The City’s Engineering Department began a Construction to ensure that impacts from construction sites, such as noise, parking, and excavations, were controlled and minimized. In 2008, Construction Mitigation Officers (CMOs) gan to also inspect and enforce the proper use of erosion prevention and sediment control (EPSC) measures to prevent sediment from leaving the dirt -exposed sites during storms and snowmelt. The CMOs also inspect for tracking onto City’s roads from constru ction site equipment, proper storage and disposal of materials such as concrete, and site stabilization and revegetation at project completion. 2012, one CMO became dedicated to the inspection of EPSC measures and is now classified as the The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 7 responding to drainage emergencies an d participating times in the Clean River and runoff season s Aspen and 2010 were fairly average years in hydrology terms , but 2011 was holding off with a the worst droughts on record, followed by boom and development in Aspen was skyrocketing. The Recession The City began to see evidence of the City created a separate section of the states the following purpose: Therefore, the City of Aspen establishes this set of stormwater management policies to provide protecting local water resources from degradation. It is determined that the regulation of stormwater runoff discharges from construction and development activities and other construction activities in order to control and runoff rates and volumes, soil erosion, stream channel erosion, and nonpoint source pollution associated with stormwater runoff is in the public interest and will prevent City’s Engineering Department began a Construction to ensure that impacts from construction sites, such as noise, parking, dust, and excavations, were controlled and minimized. In 2008, Construction Mitigation Officers (CMOs) gan to also inspect and enforce the proper use of erosion prevention and sediment control (EPSC) exposed sites during storms and snowmelt. The ction site equipment, proper storage and disposal of materials such as concrete, and site stabilization and revegetation at project completion. In 2012, one CMO became dedicated to the inspection of EPSC measures and is now classified as the P11 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative URMP Updated, Water Quality Standards Adopted. pollutants from their own stormwater runoff before releasing from their property into the City’s stormwater system or the River. The u and a menu of Best Management Practices to meet the City’s new water quality standards. The URMP is well-known across the state and is referenced by other mountain towns. Development Review Impr the City had already begun to ramp up the review of new development and re ensure proper drainage and stormwater management techniques URMP and the transfer of the Development Review Engineer into the Engineering Department and under the supervision of the Stormwater Manager, development review has really improved. And therefore, compliance with stormwater stormwater system and the River have been reduced. In 2013, one additional FTE was added with focus on assisting the Development Review Engineer, which should result in a reduced backlog of project reviews and quicker review times. As-Builts and Maintenance Plans requirements during design, construction and post were not actually installing stormwater facilities as desig completely eliminated after the owner had received a Certificate of Occupancy (e.g. detention ponds were filled to provide more parking on the property). Therefore, the Engineering Department developed requi rements for the submission of As and stamped by an engineer to ensure that the site was built and will function as intended by the design – and Operations and Maintenance Agreements property stating that a stormwater management facility(s) is located on the property and that it will be properly operated and maintained per the Maintenance Plan. As Maintenance Agreement s, as well as site stabilization, are required before the Engineering Department will sign off on a Certificate of Occupancy. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative URMP Updated, Water Quality Standards Adopted. In 1973, very much so ahead of its time, Aspen adopted the Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP) which established regulations and guidelines for stormwater management from all new development in ef fort to reduce the impacts on the Roaring Fork River. Unfortunately this document was rarely used or enforced. In 2009, City staff working with a team of consultants, updated the URMP to include new hydrology based on Aspen-specific data, more explanatio and guidance for meeting stormwater management regulations, and requirements for each new and re-development to remove pollutants from their own stormwater runoff before releasing from their property into the City’s stormwater system or the River. The u pdated URMP provides principles for Low Impact Development and a menu of Best Management Practices to meet the City’s new water quality standards. The URMP is known across the state and is referenced by other mountain towns. Impr oved. Even before the establishment of the stormwater program, the City had already begun to ramp up the review of new development and re -development plans to drainage and stormwater management techniques . With the adoption of the updated URMP and the transfer of the Development Review Engineer into the Engineering Department and under the supervision of the Stormwater Manager, development review has really improved. And therefore, compliance with stormwater management regulations has increased and impacts to the City’s have been reduced. In 2013, one additional FTE was added with focus the Development Review Engineer, which should result in a reduced backlog of project Builts and Maintenance Plans Required. While sites were meeting stormwater management requirements during design, construction and post -construction inspections showed that many sites were not actually installing stormwater facilities as desig ned. In some cases, stormwater facilities were completely eliminated after the owner had received a Certificate of Occupancy (e.g. detention ponds were filled to provide more parking on the property). Therefore, the Engineering Department rements for the submission of As -Builts - surveys completed at the end of construction and stamped by an engineer to ensure that the site was built and will function as intended by the design and Operations and Maintenance Agreements – legally binding do cuments that follow the deed of the property stating that a stormwater management facility(s) is located on the property and that it will be properly operated and maintained per the Maintenance Plan. As -builts, Maintenance Plans, and s, as well as site stabilization, are required before the Engineering Department will sign off on a Certificate of Occupancy. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 8 In 1973, very much so ahead of its time, Aspen adopted the Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP) which established regulations and guidelines for stormwater management from all new development in fort to reduce the impacts on the Roaring Fork River. Unfortunately this document was rarely used or enforced. In 2009, City staff working with a team of consultants, updated the URMP to include new hydrology based specific data, more explanatio n and guidance for meeting stormwater management regulations, and requirements development to remove pollutants from their own stormwater runoff before releasing from their property into the City’s pdated URMP provides principles for Low Impact Development and a menu of Best Management Practices to meet the City’s new water quality standards. The URMP is Even before the establishment of the stormwater program, development plans to . With the adoption of the updated URMP and the transfer of the Development Review Engineer into the Engineering Department and under the supervision of the Stormwater Manager, development review has really improved. And impacts to the City’s have been reduced. In 2013, one additional FTE was added with focus the Development Review Engineer, which should result in a reduced backlog of project While sites were meeting stormwater management construction inspections showed that many sites ned. In some cases, stormwater facilities were completely eliminated after the owner had received a Certificate of Occupancy (e.g. detention ponds were filled to provide more parking on the property). Therefore, the Engineering Department surveys completed at the end of construction and stamped by an engineer to ensure that the site was built and will function as intended by the design cuments that follow the deed of the property stating that a stormwater management facility(s) is located on the property and that it will be uilts, Maintenance Plans, and s, as well as site stabilization, are required before the Engineering Department P12 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Jenny Adair Wetlands Constructed Although this project was completed before the inception of the Clean River Initiative is one of the most successful c omponents of Aspen’s program and is an award stormwater management facility. The wetlands were completed in 2007 excess TABOR funds approved by the citizens to be used for the water quality improvement project r entire project encompasses three underground vaults that remove large particles and debris, oil and grease ; two engineered wetlands that join together before entering a water quality settling discharges through a controlling orifice plate into the Roaring Fork River. Almost the entire western side of the City, between Mill Street and 7 of sediment and debris are removed from the vaults each year. It is estimated that the wetlands and water quality pond remove an additional removal of 24.2 tons each year. This project received the President’s Award which is the Associated Landscape Contractors of Colorado’s highest award. It was determined that the Jenny Adair wetland and eastern vault were built with extra capacit stormwater runoff. Therefore, in 2011, a diversion was installed in the Mill Street stormwater pipe near the intersection of Mill Street and Puppy Smith Road to divert into the Jenny Adair wetlands for tre Rio Grande Park Improved. Over 170 tons of sediment – that’s 17 dump trucks! – kept out of the River. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Constructed . Although this project was completed before the Clean River Initiative , it omponents of program and is an award -winning stormwater management facility. The wetlands were completed in 2007 using excess TABOR funds approved by the citizens to be used for the water quality improvement project r ather than returned to the taxpayer entire project encompasses three underground vaults that remove large particles and debris, oil and ; two engineered wetlands that join together before entering a water quality settling controlling orifice plate into the Roaring Fork River. Almost the entire western side of the City, between Mill Street and 7 th, drains to this regional stormwater facility. On average, of sediment and debris are removed from the vaults each year. It is estimated that the wetlands and water quality pond remove an additional 10.8 tons of sediment annually, resulting in an This project received the President’s Award which is the Associated Landscape Contractors of Colorado’s highest award. It was determined that the Jenny Adair wetland and eastern vault were built with extra capacit stormwater runoff. Therefore, in 2011, a diversion was installed in the Mill Street stormwater pipe near the intersection of Mill Street and Puppy Smith Road to divert 4 cfs of runoff from the Mill Street system into the Jenny Adair wetlands for tre atment. Rio Grande Park Improved. The Rio Grande Park area was identified by the citizen’s group kept out The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 9 ather than returned to the taxpayer . The entire project encompasses three underground vaults that remove large particles and debris, oil and ; two engineered wetlands that join together before entering a water quality settling pond that controlling orifice plate into the Roaring Fork River. Almost the entire western side drains to this regional stormwater facility. On average, 13.4 tons of sediment and debris are removed from the vaults each year. It is estimated that the wetlands and of sediment annually, resulting in an average This project received the President’s Award which is the Associated It was determined that the Jenny Adair wetland and eastern vault were built with extra capacit y for stormwater runoff. Therefore, in 2011, a diversion was installed in the Mill Street stormwater pipe near cfs of runoff from the Mill Street system by the citizen’s group as P13 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative the highest priority project for the entire this park and another major pipe network Together this represents 30% of the City the park, began to redevelop. Recognizing the op this area once, Parks and Engineering worked together to quickly design an integrated stormwater management facility that met the needs of the stormwater program while at the same time improved the park for its wide variety of users. Through a grant in 2006 , a vault similar to those at Jenny Adair was installed at the end of the pipe system that drains most of the eastern portion of downtown, before the pipe day Grande Park. This vault is located in the Rio Grande Recycle Center. Improvements , completed in 2012, utilized stormwater ponds into a state and the stormwater program was to create a facility that appeared to naturally fit into these settings land adjacent to a river – and one that would allow for close interaction of the publ result is a large forebay that directs a constant base flow through the park, with an engineered wetland on one side and a sand infiltration area that mimics a river sand bar on the other side. These two areas are inundated during stor m events to infiltrate runoff and remove pollutants. They combine into one small pond before passing under a bridge to the Theater Aspen tent. Beyond this bridge is Phase 2 of the project, to be completed in 2014. Phase 3 of the project will divert anot her large portion of flow from the Mill Street stormwater system into the western side of the Rio Grande Park. All three phases join together before discharging into the Roaring Fork River just downstream of the pedestrian bridge near John Denver Sanctuary. Based on the design, these stormwater improvements have the ability to remove between 90% and 99% of all particulates larger than 60 microns. The eastern portion of the park, Phase 1, can carry 19 cfs (larger flows are bypassed directly to the River) In brief, 30% of the City’s most polluted stormwater runoff will be directed through facility, pollutants will be removed, and a much cleaner stormwater runoff will be discharged into the river. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative the highest priority project for the entire Clean River Initiative. O ne major pipe network discharges this park and another major pipe network – the Mill Street system – runs adjacent to this park. of the City ’s runoff . In 2012, Theater Aspen, located within the heart of the park, began to redevelop. Recognizing the op portunity and the decreased impact this area once, Parks and Engineering worked together to quickly design an integrated stormwater management facility that met the needs of the stormwater program while at the same time improved for its wide variety of users. , a vault similar to those at Jenny Adair was installed at the end of the pipe system that drains most of the eastern portion of downtown, before the pipe day Grande Park. This vault is located in the Rio Grande Recycle Center. Phase 1 of the Rio Grande Park , completed in 2012, started from this daylight point and worked to redesign two under utilized stormwater ponds into a state -of-the-art stormwater facility. Two of the major goals of Parks and the stormwater program was to create a facility that appeared to naturally fit into these settings and one that would allow for close interaction of the publ ic and nature. The result is a large forebay that directs a constant base flow through the park, with an engineered wetland on one side and a sand infiltration area that mimics a river sand bar on the other side. These two areas are m events to infiltrate runoff and remove pollutants. They combine into one small passing under a bridge to the Theater Aspen tent. Beyond this bridge is Phase 2 of the project, to be completed in 2014. Phase 3 of the her large portion of flow from the Mill Street stormwater system into the western side of the Rio Grande Park. All three phases join together before discharging into the Roaring Fork River just downstream of the pedestrian bridge near Based on the design, these stormwater improvements have the ability to remove between 90% and 99% of all particulates larger than 60 microns. The eastern portion of the park, Phase 1, can carry 19 cfs (larger flows are bypassed directly to the River) . The western side of the park, Phase 3, can carry 9 cfs. In brief, 30% of the City’s most polluted stormwater runoff will be directed through facility, pollutants will be removed, and a much cleaner stormwater runoff will be discharged into the river. Rio Grande Park – Vital Stats: Made of natural materials Made to mimic Mother Nature Treats 30% of City’s most polluted runoff Ability to remove 95% of pollutants Estimated to remove 150 tons 15 dump tru cks per year The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 10 ne major pipe network discharges into adjacent to this park. . In 2012, Theater Aspen, located within the heart of decreased impact of only disturbing this area once, Parks and Engineering worked together to quickly design an integrated stormwater management facility that met the needs of the stormwater program while at the same time improved , a vault similar to those at Jenny Adair was installed at the end of the pipe system that drains most of the eastern portion of downtown, before the pipe day -lighted into Rio Phase 1 of the Rio Grande Park started from this daylight point and worked to redesign two under - art stormwater facility. Two of the major goals of Parks and the stormwater program was to create a facility that appeared to naturally fit into these settings – ic and nature. The result is a large forebay that directs a constant base flow through the park, with an engineered wetland Based on the design, these stormwater improvements have the ability to remove between 90% and 99% of all particulates larger than 60 microns. The eastern portion of the park, Phase 1, can carry 19 cfs . The western side of the park, Phase 3, can carry 9 cfs. In brief, 30% of the City’s most polluted stormwater runoff will be directed through facility, pollutants will be removed, and a much cleaner stormwater runoff will be discharged into the river. Vital Made of natural materials Made to mimic Mother Nature Treats 30% of City’s most polluted Ability to remove 95% of pollutants Estimated to remove 150 tons – cks per year P14 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Water Quality Demonstration Projects. projects have been installed in the City to test the methods for pollutant removal ability and to demonstrate for private developments the options available for stormwater treatment. Demonstration projects include rain gardens, biofiltration areas, and permeable paver systems installations includes the permeable paver system in the parking area f was learned during the design and installation of the projects that will guide future installations. These installments will be monitored for effectiveness and durability in the coming years. In addition to those desig ned and installed by the City, private developments have designed and installed best management practices, such as green roofs and paver systems that which City staff will be watching as well. Ute Avenue Pipe Upgrade: Glory Hole Park. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Water Quality Demonstration Projects. In addi tion to the larg e facil ities men tion ed above, several smaller water quality demonstration projects have been installed in the City to test the methods for pollutant removal ability and to private developments the options available for stormwater treatment. Demonstration projects include rain gardens, biofiltration areas, and permeable paver systems – one of the largest installations includes the permeable paver system in the parking area f or City Hall (shown below) was learned during the design and installation of the projects that will guide future installations. These installments will be monitored for effectiveness and durability in the coming years. ned and installed by the City, private developments have designed and installed best management practices, such as green roofs and paver systems that incorporate City staff will be watching as well. Ute Avenue Pipe Upgrade: This projec t was a redesign of one of the lowest functioning systems in town. This system was located very close to the bottom of Aspen Mountain where in the spring it sees high flows due to snowmelt. In May and June, this area is often flooded to the point of requ iring lane closures. To increase the flow capacity of the pipe going under Ute Avenue, the pipe diameter was increase from 12” to 30”. Before it couldn’t even handle a 2 yr. storm now it can handle a 10 yr. storm. The project was done in collaboration w ith the water dept. so that they could replace a water line close to that site at the same time. The city Parks dept. designed and implemented an aesthetic and functional outlet for the system into the The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 11 water quality demonstration projects have been installed in the City to test the methods for pollutant removal ability and to private developments the options available for stormwater treatment. Demonstration one of the largest Hall (shown below) . Much was learned during the design and installation of the projects that will guide future installations. These ned and installed by the City, private developments have designed and incorporate snowmelt, t was a redesign of one of the lowest functioning systems in town. This system was located very close to the bottom of Aspen Mountain where in the spring it sees high flows due to snowmelt. In May and June, this area is iring lane closures. To increase the flow capacity of the pipe going under Ute Avenue, the pipe diameter was increase from 12” to 30”. Before it couldn’t even handle a 2 yr. storm now it can handle a 10 yr. storm. The project was done in ith the water dept. so that they could replace a water line close to that site at the same time. The city Parks dept. designed and implemented an aesthetic and functional outlet for the system into the P15 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Inspected Entire Roaring Fork and Department and supporting staff Roaring Fork River, Castle Creek, and Maroon Creek. Staff inspected the river for illegal pipes, discharges, intakes, or diversions; dry weather flows; algae bloom s and other unusual sights streambank erosion; unnatural sediment build up; trash and debris; manmade bank stabilization; and bridge scour. Staff has noticed the health of the rive r change depending on the proximity to development and the presence of a healthy riparian buffer. Staff has removed trash and debris ranging from bottles and cans and construction materials to bicycles and rubber duckies. Roaring Fork Listed on 303d Lis Impaired Waters 1. This is the first time river stretches along the Roaring Fork have been listed. The impairments in river stretches pertaining to Aspen a the standards set for healthy aquatic life are not met in these reaches. Staff will continue investigating the listing of the Roaring Fork in Aspen. However, it is expected that a Total Maximum Dai ly Load (TMDL) will be issued that the City of Aspen will have to comply with. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Inspected Entire Roaring Fork and its Tributaries. Each year from 2010 - 2013 walked a section of river that flows through town, including the Roaring Fork River, Castle Creek, and the river pipes, discharges, intakes, or diversions; dry weather flows; algae s and other unusual sights ; streambank erosion; unnatural sediment build up; trash and debris; manmade bank stabilization; and bridge scour. Staff has noticed the health of r change depending on the proximity to development and the presence of a healthy riparian buffer. Staff has removed trash and debris ranging from bottles and cans and construction materials to bicycles and Roaring Fork Listed on 303d Lis t. Every two years the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) issues two comprehensive lists of the state of water in Colorado. The two lists, 305b and 303d, give detailed analysis of the major waterbodies and their individual compli quality standards. According to the CDPHE Division of Water Resources the designated uses for the Roaring Fork River are Primary Contact Recreation, Water Supply, Aquatic Life (cold), and Agriculture. Sections along the Roaring Fork River, along with a handful of its tributaries, have been placed on the 2012 Colorado Section 303(D) List . This is the first time river stretches along the Roaring Fork have been listed. The impairments in river stretches pertaining to Aspen a re listed as aquatic life (provisional). This means that the standards set for healthy aquatic life are not met in these reaches. Staff will continue investigating the listing of the Roaring Fork in Aspen. However, it is expected that a ly Load (TMDL) will be issued that the City of Aspen will have to comply with. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 12 2013 , the Engineering walked a section of river that flows through town, including the Every two years the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) issues two comprehensive lists of the state of water in Colorado. The two lists, 305b and 303d, give detailed analysis of the major waterbodies and their individual compli ance with water quality standards. According to the CDPHE Division of Water Resources the designated uses for the Roaring Fork River are Primary Contact Recreation, Water Supply, Aquatic Life (cold), and Agriculture. Sections along along with a handful of its tributaries, have been placed on the 2012 Colorado Section 303(D) List of . This is the first time river stretches along the Roaring Fork have been listed. The re listed as aquatic life (provisional). This means that Staff will continue investigating the listing of the Roaring Fork in Aspen. However, it is expected that a ly Load (TMDL) will be issued that the City of Aspen will have to comply with. P16 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 6. Min imum Control Measures Progress The program is set up as if the City were regulated by the State with a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Municipalities regulated by these permits must have a program with six minimum control measures: 1. Public Education and Outreach 2. Public Participation and Involvement (these two items are combined below for simplici 3. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination 4. Construction Site Runoff Control 5. Post-Construction (Permanent) Runoff Control 6. Pollution Prevention from Municipal Activity (Good Housekeeping) Each year, staff work to accomplish tasks related to these m the stormwater program. 1.1 School Presentations Each year, stormwater staff make p Roaring Fork Conservancy. The City owns an Enviroscape Model, which demonstrates on with food coloring and water bottles, the effects of land use and the traveling path of pollutants during rain events. School presentations parents. In 2013, presentatio ns were given to an 8 Conference, an 8 th grade science class at the Jenny Adair wetland stormwater principles. 1.2 Web Site Lots of information pertaining to the City’s Clean The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative imum Control Measures Progress The program is set up as if the City were regulated by the State with a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit. Municipalities regulated by these permits must have a program with six minimum control measures: Public Education and Outreach Public Participation and Involvement (these two items are combined below for simplici Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Construction Site Runoff Control Construction (Permanent) Runoff Control Pollution Prevention from Municipal Activity (Good Housekeeping) Each year, staff work to accomplish tasks related to these m inimu m measures and the overall Public Education and Involvement. and Outreach is the first Minimum Control Measure that the EPA requires MS4 permit holders to address. Cities must help their community membe understand the correlation between urban conditions, land use, rainfall-runoff and local aquatic resources. The point of this education is to teach the community of harmful actions and assist them in reducing their impact. The City has done this throu gh several avenues, reaching audiences of all ages. Each year, stormwater staff make p resentations to school age children , often in assistance to the Roaring Fork Conservancy. The City owns an Enviroscape Model, which demonstrates on with food coloring and water bottles, the effects of land use and the traveling path of pollutants during are very helpful in educating both the next generation bu ns were given to an 8 th grade girls at a Girls to Women Connection grade science class at the Jenny Adair wetland s, and a 5 th grade class Lots of information pertaining to the City’s Clean River Initiative can be found on the City’s web site, The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 13 The program is set up as if the City were regulated by the State with a National Pollutant Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit. Municipalities regulated by these permits must have a program with six minimum control measures: Public Participation and Involvement (these two items are combined below for simplici ty) m measures and the overall goals of Public Education and Involvement. Public Education and Outreach is the first Minimum Control Measure that the EPA requires MS4 permit holders to address. must help their community membe rs understand the correlation between urban runoff and local aquatic resources. The point of this education is to teach the community of harmful actions and assist them in reducing their impact. The City has done this gh several avenues, reaching audiences of all , often in assistance to the Roaring Fork Conservancy. The City owns an Enviroscape Model, which demonstrates on a small scale with food coloring and water bottles, the effects of land use and the traveling path of pollutants during are very helpful in educating both the next generation bu t also their Girls to Women Connection grade class on general River Initiative can be found on the City’s web site, P17 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative including guidance documents for development, floodplain information for residents located along the river, and general guidelines for residents to reduce their impact to the river. Information posted City’s web sites are able to be viewed anywhere because of the large number of part time residents. 1.3 Restaurant and Business Education After incidences of grease spills and illegal washing in town reach out to members of our restaurant and the health of the river and to encourage them to making posters and handouts and providing one on one education to those restaurants suspected of improper waste handling. 1.4 Storm Drain Markers Every few years, the community is stormwater system in Aspe n. Storm drain markers help to water on the street and our river. M remind people that whatever goes into the drain makes its way to the river. to get the community involved, not just educated, in river health and protection. DRAIN MARKERS) 1.5 Green Roof Research and Encouragement As a step to creating a suggested green roof detail for community members that w green roofs, the engineering department contacted all existing green roofs. The owners were asked what what could be improved. This informat Management Plan. 1.6 Native Planting Initiative A booth was set up at the Aspen benefits of plant ing native species. Native plantings do n homeowners were provided with expand the use of aesthetic native plants. 1.7 Wetland Plantings with Volunteers The stormwater improvements at Rio G reduce impacts on the Roaring Fork River. To engage the public and reduce planting cost, t days were organized to install all of the plants for the large regional stormwater treatment wetland. By having the local community install the plants it save the City thousands The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative including guidance documents for development, floodplain information for residents located along the river, and general guidelines for residents to reduce their impact to the river. Information posted are able to be viewed anywhere by anyone, which is important for the City of Aspen of part time residents. Education and illegal washing in town , staff determined that it was necessary to reach out to members of our restaurant community to educate them on the connection of their action and the health of the river and to encourage them to dispose of byproducts appropriately. This involved and handouts and providing one on one education to those restaurants suspected of Every few years, the community is brought together to he lp mark the inlets that lead into the n. Storm drain markers help to remind people of the connection between water on the street and our river. M arkers are implemented as a way to close that disconnect and remind people that whatever goes into the drain makes its way to the river. It is als o an important goal to get the community involved, not just educated, in river health and protection. (INSERT PIC OF STORM Encouragement As a step to creating a suggested green roof detail for community members that w green roofs, the engineering department contacted all known residences and commercial buildings existing green roofs. The owners were asked what successes they have seen with their This informat ion was used to create a new option within the Urban Runoff A booth was set up at the Aspen farmers market to reach out and educate the community of the ing native species. Native plantings do n ot require irrigation or fertilizers. Local free packets of native grass and wildflower seeds in an e aesthetic native plants. Wetland Plantings with Volunteers The stormwater improvements at Rio G rande Park are a phenomenal example of the City’s efforts to reduce impacts on the Roaring Fork River. To engage the public and reduce planting cost, t days were organized to install all of the plants for the large regional stormwater treatment wetland. By having the local community install the plants it save the City thousands of dollars as well as creates an The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 14 including guidance documents for development, floodplain information for residents located along the river, and general guidelines for residents to reduce their impact to the river. Information posted to the by anyone, which is important for the City of Aspen determined that it was necessary to educate them on the connection of their action dispose of byproducts appropriately. This involved and handouts and providing one on one education to those restaurants suspected of lp mark the inlets that lead into the of the connection between arkers are implemented as a way to close that disconnect and o an important goal (INSERT PIC OF STORM As a step to creating a suggested green roof detail for community members that w ant to implement known residences and commercial buildings with successes they have seen with their green roof and ion was used to create a new option within the Urban Runoff farmers market to reach out and educate the community of the ot require irrigation or fertilizers. Local seeds in an e ffort to rande Park are a phenomenal example of the City’s efforts to reduce impacts on the Roaring Fork River. To engage the public and reduce planting cost, t wo volunteer days were organized to install all of the plants for the large regional stormwater treatment wetland. By of dollars as well as creates an P18 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative opportunity to educate the comm unity 1.8 Local Park s and Stormwater Facility As there are many stormwater management systems located in local parks, tours are given to educate the public about what these parks do tours are conducted by request from other organizations and occur at the Jenny Adair wetlands or Rio Grande Park. Tours are provided by both the Engineering Department and the Parks Departme 2. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Detecting and eliminating illicit discharges is a very important part of the Clean River Initiative. Most often, discharges occur from restaurant and business owner activities, such as cleaning out dumpsters or waste in the alley, washing down equipment with soaps or solvents, dumping wash water, or leaking dumpsters. Staff is al so careful to identify leaking equipment or vehicles such as concrete trucks, fertilizer or pesticide applicators, and construction equipment with hydraulic leaks. Illicit discharges are determined through inspection and by community reports/complaints. require educating the public about the connection to the River and the hazards or threats posed by the illegal material. For repetitive offenders, the City can issue enforcement in the form of summons fines. 2.1 Storm System Inspection and Staff consistently try to correct and add any information gathered about the storm drain system. Information is updated in GIS and can include locations, pipe size, material, condition, and connections Iden tifying and recording the storm system helps to pinpoint the location/outfall where illegal discharges might impact the river. 2.2 Illicit Connections There is a possibility that developments along or near the river dump materials on land or through illegal piping straight into the river. As an attempt to identify any discharges or connections directly into walk a section of the River once a year. Trash is cleaned from the river along the way. Discharges are noted and The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative unity and build their investment in reducing impacts to the River s and Stormwater Facility Tours As there are many stormwater management systems located in local parks, tours are given to educate the public about what these parks do and why they are so important to the health of the river. tours are conducted by request from other organizations and occur at the Jenny Adair wetlands or Rio Tours are provided by both the Engineering Department and the Parks Departme Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Detecting and eliminating illicit discharges is a very Clean River Initiative. Most often, discharges occur from restaurant and business owner activities, such as cleaning out dumpsters or waste in the alley, washing down equipment with soaps or solvents, dumping wash water, or leaking dumpsters. so careful to identify leaking equipment or vehicles such as concrete trucks, fertilizer or pesticide applicators, and construction equipment with hydraulic leaks. Illicit discharges are determined through inspection and by community reports/complaints. Illicit discharges are often unintentional and simply require educating the public about the connection to the River and the hazards or threats posed by the illegal material. For repetitive offenders, the City can issue enforcement in the form of summons and Mapping Staff consistently try to correct and add any information gathered about the storm drain system. Information is updated in GIS and can include locations, pipe size, material, condition, and connections tifying and recording the storm system helps to pinpoint the location/outfall where illegal There is a possibility that developments along or near the river dump materials on land or through illegal piping straight into the river. As an attempt to identify any illicit or connections directly into the River, city staff once a year. Trash is cleaned from the river along the way. Discharges are noted and 7.5 miles of river walked 12 number of illegal dumping reports responded to 13 Hazardous Waste Disposal Days The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 15 and build their investment in reducing impacts to the River . As there are many stormwater management systems located in local parks, tours are given to educate and why they are so important to the health of the river. Most tours are conducted by request from other organizations and occur at the Jenny Adair wetlands or Rio Tours are provided by both the Engineering Department and the Parks Departme nt. Illicit discharges are often unintentional and simply require educating the public about the connection to the River and the hazards or threats posed by the illegal material. For repetitive offenders, the City can issue enforcement in the form of summons or Staff consistently try to correct and add any information gathered about the storm drain system. Information is updated in GIS and can include locations, pipe size, material, condition, and connections . tifying and recording the storm system helps to pinpoint the location/outfall where illegal miles of river walked total number of illegal dumping Hazardous Waste Disposal Days P19 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative checked upon. Several illicit connections and pumping operations 2.3 Household Hazardous Waste E The Environmental Health Department hosts several hazardous waste collection days throughout each year to allow homeowners to properly dispose of potentially hazardous items. This assists the Clean River Initiative by educating the public and into the stormwater system. 3. Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control educated in Classes?) Uncontrolled stormwater ru noff from construction sites can be a significant source of sediment and other pollutants in the River. Therefore the City has requirements for construction sites to meet through the Construction Management Plan, onsite inspections, and final stabilization. In addition to the stormwater requirements that the City places construction oper ators must also apply for State Stormwater Permit coverage if their project disturbs more than one acre or requires work directly on or near the River. 3.1 Plans Review and Site Inspections The City’s stormwater inspector reviews sediment control plans prepared by site designers prior to permit approval. Sites are then inspected regularly – at least once per month and as often as several times per week depending on complexity and potential stormwater impacts. The stor concerned citizens on issues of possible non 3.3 Classes for Design Engineers, Developers, Contractors and Sub As the co des and regulations for construction site stormwater management few years The City of Aspen has been met with some confusion on how requirements. Although these regulations foreign to contractors in the Valley 100 -150 construction sites inspected avg annually, 600-800 total 40 complaints responded to The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Several illicit connections and pumping operations have been discovered this way. Household Hazardous Waste E ducation and Drop-Off Days The Environmental Health Department hosts several hazardous waste collection days throughout each year to allow homeowners to properly dispose of potentially hazardous items. This assists the Clean the public and preventing household hazardous wastes from being dumped Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control (INSERT # of SITES INSPECTED? # of people noff from construction sites can be a significant source of sediment and other pollutants in the River. Therefore the City has requirements for construction sites to meet through the Construction Management Plan, onsite inspections, and In addition to the stormwater on construction sites, ators must also apply for State their project disturbs or requires work directly on or near Inspections The City’s stormwater inspector reviews erosion and sediment control plans prepared by site designers prior to permit approval. Sites are then inspected at least once per month and as often as several times per week depending on complexity and potential stormwater impacts. The stor mwater inspector assists the sites with compliance by identifying incorrect BMP installations, maintenance needs, or failing BMPs, and recommending solutions. Sites that are out of compliance are issued verbal warnings, corrections notices, or stop work o rders depending on the severity or possible impacts. 3.2 Collect Complaints of Noncompliance The stormwater inspector also responds to reports from concerned citizens on issues of possible non -compliance or off site impacts from construction sites. Design Engineers, Developers, Contractors and Sub -contractors des and regulations for construction site stormwater management have changed in the last few years The City of Aspen has been met with some confusion on how and why to meet thes regulations are not out of the ordinary for larger communities, some are contractors in the Valley . In order to educate, increase compliance, and decrease impacts to construction sites inspected The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 16 have been discovered this way. The Environmental Health Department hosts several hazardous waste collection days throughout each year to allow homeowners to properly dispose of potentially hazardous items. This assists the Clean from being dumped (INSERT # of SITES INSPECTED? # of people noff from construction sites can be a significant source of sediment and sediment control plans prepared by site designers prior to permit approval. Sites are then inspected at least once per month and as often as several times per week depending on complexity and mwater inspector assists the sites with compliance by identifying incorrect BMP installations, maintenance needs, or failing BMPs, and recommending solutions. Sites that are out of compliance are issued verbal warnings, corrections notices, rders depending on the severity or possible Collect Complaints of Noncompliance The stormwater inspector also responds to reports from compliance or off site impacts from construction sites. have changed in the last to meet thes e new are not out of the ordinary for larger communities, some are educate, increase compliance, and decrease impacts to P20 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative the stormwater system and the River, the s classes at City offices and on site to a broad range of audiences and covering broad to narrow topics. 4. Post-Construction Stormwater Management in New Development and Redevelopment The impervious surfaces associated with development which degrade s water quality and riparian areas. development is to reduce impervious surfaces, increase infiltration onsite before it can affect the River guide development through i nnovative site designs that development practices that ach ieve the goals of red Additionally the City requires long continue to achieve these goals post issued. City staff inspect the function of these private stormwater systems once every three years. 5. Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping in Municipal Operations The City also conducts activities that remove performed properly, such as street sweeping, regional capital projects. The stormwater manager has inspected all City facilities and potentially impactful operations to identify infrastructure or operation improvements needed to reduce the threat of impacts to the river. Stormwater staff work with other City staff infrastructure and perform ing daily municipal activities. This is done mostly through training and education. For example, City staff have been trained on locations of stormwater conveyances on or near their offic e locations and proper BMPs to implement in the case of spills Stormwater staff discuss with other staff ways to incorporate water quality controls into their daily or The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative the stormwater system and the River, the s tormwater manager and stormwater i nspector have offered classes at City offices and on site to a broad range of audiences and covering broad to narrow topics. Construction Stormwater Management in New Development and Redevelopment associated with development increases stormwater runoff s water quality and riparian areas. The best way to miti gate stormwater impacts from reduce impervious surfaces, increase infiltration and use practice the River . Therefore the City uses the Urban Runoff Management Plan to nnovative site designs that reduce imperviousness and ieve the goals of red ucing flows and improving water Additionally the City requires long -term operation and maintenance plans to ensure that properties continue to achieve these goals post -construction, after the Certificate of Occupancy has bee City staff inspect the function of these private stormwater systems once every three years. Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping in Municipal Operations In general, the City itself numerous activities that can pose a threat to water quality if practices and procedures are not in place to prevent pollutants from entering the activities include winter road maintenance, minor road repairs , utility projects, capital projects, automobile fleet maintenance, landscaping and park maintenance, and building maintenance. The City also owns more impervious areas such as streets, parking lanes, affordable housing, and City offices, than any other single entity and therefore has a ver y large impact on the River. activities that remove or prevent pollutants from reaching the river street sweeping, storm system cleaning , city facility retrofits and stormwater manager has inspected all City facilities and potentially impactful operations to identify infrastructure or operation improvements needed to reduce the threat of impacts to the with other City staff to protect the River, particularly when maintaining ing daily municipal activities. This is done mostly through training and education. For example, City staff have been trained on locations of stormwater conveyances on or e locations and proper BMPs to implement in the case of spills or exposed materials. Stormwater staff discuss with other staff ways to incorporate water quality controls into their daily or The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 17 nspector have offered classes at City offices and on site to a broad range of audiences and covering broad to narrow topics. Construction Stormwater Management in New Development and Redevelopment runoff and pollution gate stormwater impacts from use practice s to treat runoff Therefore the City uses the Urban Runoff Management Plan to reduce imperviousness and low impact ucing flows and improving water quality. term operation and maintenance plans to ensure that properties construction, after the Certificate of Occupancy has bee n City staff inspect the function of these private stormwater systems once every three years. the City itself conducts numerous activities that can pose a threat to water quality if practices and procedures are not in place to prevent pollutants from entering the River. These activities include winter road maintenance, , utility projects, capital automobile fleet maintenance, landscaping and park maintenance, and The City also owns more impervious areas such as streets, parking lanes, affordable housing, and City offices, than any other single entity y large impact on reaching the river when , city facility retrofits and stormwater manager has inspected all City facilities and potentially impactful operations to identify infrastructure or operation improvements needed to reduce the threat of impacts to the the River, particularly when maintaining ing daily municipal activities. This is done mostly through training and education. For example, City staff have been trained on locations of stormwater conveyances on or or exposed materials. Stormwater staff discuss with other staff ways to incorporate water quality controls into their daily or P21 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative routine activities. Stormwater staff also work regularly with ot capital projects to incorporate new ideas to better manage stormwater flows to remove pollutants. 5.1 Street Sweeping sweeping that the City should be very proud of. This sediment (and other pollutants that attach to sediment therefore out of the Roaring Fork River. 5.2 Vault Cleaning There are four large sediment vaults regional stormwater quality facilities that amounts of litter, debris, and sediment from the stormwater system. These vaults are cleaned several times each year and prevent tons of sediment from clogging harder to maintain regional facilities and from reaching the River. 5.3 Snow Removal As Aspen receives over 300 inches of snow each year, snow removal is a must for proper management of roadways. When the snow is rem oved many pollutants go with it, most importantly the sand that is applied for traction. 5.4 Pipe and Inlet Cleaning In order for the City’s stormwater system to function properly and effectively, it must be cleaned and maintained regularly. Stormwater staff within the Parks Department regularly inspects and cleans open swales, inlets, and water quality facilities, whil stormwater staff within the Streets Department cleans inlets and pipes. Some portions of the system require annual cleaning as it fills from heavy sanding or high traffic use, while other portions require less frequent cleaning. Most portions that requ stormwater staff are working diligently to chip away at that task. After systematic cleaning, staff also work to have the system videoed to analyze deterioration, cracks, or failing infrastructure. 6. Monitoring Program (insert pop out or table that summarizes our water monitoring data) In order to assess the City’s impact on the River, the effectiveness of the Clean River Initiative, and to determine if progress is being made from those studies conducted in 2005 and 2006, it is important for the program to operate a monitoring program. Monitoring Plan for stormwater outfalls by identifying all major outfalls into the River from the City’s Removal Method Avg Annual (tons) Street Sweeping 1100 The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative routine activities. Stormwater staff also work regularly with ot her departments when planning capital projects to incorporate new ideas to better manage stormwater flows to remove pollutants. The City of Aspen Streets Department weekly or bi depending on use. This vigorous approach to street sweeping that the City should be very proud of. This maintenance work keeps (and other pollutants that attach to sediment ) out of the C ity storm sewer system and therefore out of the Roaring Fork River. sediment vaults located upstream of regional stormwater quality facilities that removes large litter, debris, and sediment from the stormwater system. These vaults are cleaned several times each year and prevent tons of sediment from clogging harder to maintain regional facilities and from 300 inches of snow each year, snow removal is a must for proper management of oved many pollutants go with it, most importantly the sand that is applied for In order for the City’s stormwater system to function properly and effectively, it must be cleaned and maintained regularly. Stormwater staff within the Parks Department regularly inspects and cleans open swales, inlets, and water quality facilities, whil stormwater staff within the Streets Department cleans inlets and pipes. Some portions of the system require annual cleaning as it fills from heavy sanding or high traffic use, while other portions require less frequent cleaning. Most portions that requ ire less frequent cleaning have never been cleaned and stormwater staff are working diligently to chip away at that task. After systematic cleaning, staff also work to have the system videoed to analyze deterioration, cracks, or failing infrastructure. (insert pop out or table that summarizes our water monitoring data) In order to assess the City’s impact on the River, the effectiveness of the Clean River Initiative, and to determine if progress is being made from those studies conducted in 2005 and 2006, it is important for the program to operate a monitoring program. From 2009 – 2013, stormwater staff developed a Monitoring Plan for stormwater outfalls by identifying all major outfalls into the River from the City’s Avg Annual (tons) Total 2008 - 2013 6600 The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 18 her departments when planning capital projects to incorporate new ideas to better manage stormwater flows to remove pollutants. The City of Aspen Streets Department sweeps all roads weekly or bi -weekly depending on use. This is a vigorous approach to street litter, debris, and ity storm sewer system and Department regularly inspects and cleans open swales, inlets, and water quality facilities, whil e stormwater staff within the Streets Department cleans inlets and pipes. Some portions of the system require annual cleaning as it fills from heavy sanding or high traffic use, while other portions require less ire less frequent cleaning have never been cleaned and stormwater staff are working diligently to chip away at that task. After systematic cleaning, staff also work to have the system videoed to analyze deterioration, cracks, or failing infrastructure. (insert pop out or table that summarizes our water monitoring data) In order to assess the City’s impact on the River, the effectiveness of the Clean River Initiative, and to determine if progress is being made from those studies conducted in 2005 and 2006, it is important for 2013, stormwater staff developed a Monitoring Plan for stormwater outfalls by identifying all major outfalls into the River from the City’s P22 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative system, studying the development and land use that discharges to each outfall, and creating the standard The pollutant of concern for the River is TSS – Total Suspended Solids (basically, sediment). Other pollutants (metals, nutrients, hyrdocarbons, bacteria) tend to attach to sediment. Therefore by targeting sediment for removal, the City can feel confident that other pollutants that could be of concern are being removed as well. The Monitoring Plan is to measure TSS loads in the runoff discharging from the City’s outfalls into the River. The City has 9 major outfalls, such as the outfalls from Neale Avenue, Rio Grande Park, Mill Street, Gibson Avenue, and the Jenny Adair Wetlands. In 2013, only one of these outfalls was outfitted with a water quality improvement facility – Jenny Adair outfall. For monitoring purposes, staff collects samples at both the inflows into the wetlands and the outfall from Jenny Adair into the River. This allows staff to analyze the effectiveness of the wetl cleaner stormwater runoff discharges to the River. In 2012, a study was conducted by the Roaring Fork Conservancy to determine the biological health of the Roaring Fork near The City of Aspen. A Multiple of the biological life in the river. MMI scores are the primary aquatic life data type used in state water quality regulation. This study unfortunately determined that the water quality as shown by the biological health of the river degrades through town to a point of impairment. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative system, studying the development and land use that discharges to each outfall, and creating the procedures and priorities for taking samples from those outfalls during snowmelt or rainfall events. The City hires an intern each summer to implement the Monitoring Plan, analyze the data, and gain an understanding of the impacts and quality of water being discharged from the City into the River. In addition to outfall monitoring, stormwater staff also conduct analysis from specific BMPs, regional treatment facilities (like Rio Grande), and pollutant sources. collects samples at both the inflows into the wetlands and the outfall from Jenny Adair into the River. This allows staff to analyze the effectiveness of the wetl ands facility on removing TSS and providing cleaner stormwater runoff discharges to the River. by the Roaring Fork Conservancy to determine the biological health of the Roaring Fork near The City of Aspen. A Multiple Metric Index (MMI) was created to get an overview MMI scores are the primary aquatic life data type used in state water This study unfortunately determined that the water quality as shown by the biological health of the river degrades through town to a point of impairment. Monitoring Highlights: Avg TSS Load/outfall/storm: Ranges from 200 mg/L Max TSS Load/outfall/storm: Ranges from 2300 6200 mg/L Example: Jenny Adair Average inflow = 600 mg/L Avg outflow (after wetlands) = 64 mg/L For example: July 5, 2011: 3884 mg/L going in, 59 mg/L out Aug 6, 2014: 814 mg/L going in, 42 mg/L coming out Control Point: Stillwater Bridge Avg TSS Load/storm: 2 mg/L The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 19 system, studying the development and land use that discharges to each outfall, and creating the procedures and priorities for taking samples from those outfalls during snowmelt or rainfall events. The City hires an implement the Monitoring Plan, gain an understanding of the probable of water being discharged from the City In addition to outfall monitoring, stormwater staff also conduct analysis from specific BMPs, regional treatment facilities (like Rio Grande), and pollutant sources. collects samples at both the inflows into the wetlands and the outfall from Jenny Adair into the River. ands facility on removing TSS and providing by the Roaring Fork Conservancy to determine the biological health of was created to get an overview MMI scores are the primary aquatic life data type used in state water This study unfortunately determined that the water quality as shown by the anges from 200 – 600 from 2300 – mg/L mg/L coming mg/L coming out Control Point: Stillwater Bridge P23 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 7._Goals for 2014 - 2018 • Secure stable funding to replace the deficit created by the removal of th fee. • Define and begin a long-term the river and the effectiveness of the stormwater program. • Complete master planning for the remainder of the City’s large basins implementation strategy for each basin • Identify and construct water quality improvement projects to treat other large contributing basins. • Monitor existing and install other demonstration BMPs to improve runoff from City properties/facilities and to provide better support and guidance for private developments. • Research and create a program(s) to degraded riparian areas along the River in the City limits. • Improve the collection systems leading to Je • Improve understanding and compliance with the URMP and the EPSC requirements. • Refine the expectations and metrics used to measures the success of the Clean River Initiative to provide clearer goals and easier underst • Research the feasibility of a river management plan or system to manage water flows in the river to meet all of the needs of the river and the community it serves. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Secure stable funding to replace the deficit created by the removal of th e system development term biological monitoring plan to continue to measure the health of the river and the effectiveness of the stormwater program. Complete master planning for the remainder of the City’s large basins implementation strategy for each basin . water quality improvement projects to treat other large contributing Monitor existing and install other demonstration BMPs to improve runoff from City to provide better support and guidance for private developments. Research and create a program(s) to protect existing riparian areas and to degraded riparian areas along the River in the City limits. Improve the collection systems leading to Je nny Adair wetlands and Rio Grande Park. Improve understanding and compliance with the URMP and the EPSC requirements. Refine the expectations and metrics used to measures the success of the Clean River Initiative to provide clearer goals and easier underst anding of how well the program is performing. Research the feasibility of a river management plan or system to manage water flows in the river to meet all of the needs of the river and the community it serves. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 2008 - 2013 20 e system development monitoring plan to continue to measure the health of and develop and water quality improvement projects to treat other large contributing Monitor existing and install other demonstration BMPs to improve runoff from City to provide better support and guidance for private developments. protect existing riparian areas and to improve the nny Adair wetlands and Rio Grande Park. Improve understanding and compliance with the URMP and the EPSC requirements. Refine the expectations and metrics used to measures the success of the Clean River Initiative to anding of how well the program is performing. Research the feasibility of a river management plan or system to manage water flows in the P24 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Clean River Initiative City of Aspen The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Clean River Initiative 2014 Annual Report October 2014 City of Aspen Engineering Department 130 S Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 Initiative 2014 1 P25 II. The City of Aspen Clean River 1._Goals for 2014 The following goals were set • Review the existing URMP and update and policies. Since the adoption of the URMP in 2010, there have been advances in the industry and in options available to meet standards. Additionally, through the use of the manual, staff has identified confusing or missing language to apply the technical guidance, shifted thinking about certain applications, and adopted policies to cover gaps in the guidance. The URMP needs to be updated and re information. • Research and evaluate BMPs City’s specifications are needed for more effective water quality treatment and to ensure acceptance and endurance in the latest changes and advances in the industry and deliver the available. • Better coordinate and define roles st ormwater program and the addition of several water quality treatment facilities. Determine if additional staff is necessary to keep up with the maintenance needs of the program. • Write an Annual Report for 2014 This report will assist City Council, staff, and the public in their understanding of the purposes, operations, accomplishments, and plans for the Clean River Initiative. The report will also track the successes of the program as it rela • Decrease review times. With the frustration from our customers over the time needed for engineering department review of these designs, staff feels it is important to evaluate ways to streamline the design and review processes, better educate our customers on the requirements, and provide clearer communication of the requirements. • Improve relationships and increase compliance from construction sites through regular communication, classroo assistance. • Rewrite Stream Margin language protection of riparian areas, to provide better guidance for restoration, and to provide more clarity to properties planning to redevelop in those areas. 2. Funding, Budget, and Expenses The amount of revenue received from the property tax has been stable and consistent, averaging $830,000 annually. In 2014, the Finance Department is forecasting $811,70 Fee-In-Lieu (FIL) of Detention, however, have dropped significantly and are not expected to rebound because of a reduction in detention requirements. As of October 2014, $209,500 in FIL has been The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative The following goals were set and met for the Clean River Initiative in 2014: Review the existing URMP and update with corrections, simplifications, and current practices and policies. Since the adoption of the URMP in 2010, there have been advances in the industry and in options available to meet standards. Additionally, through the use of the manual, staff confusing or missing language , gained knowledge and understanding to apply the technical guidance, shifted thinking about certain applications, and adopted policies to cover gaps in the guidance. The URMP needs to be updated and re vised to reflect all of this and evaluate BMPs , both in Aspen and other similar cities, to determine if changes to City’s specifications are needed for more effective water quality treatment and to ensure acceptance and endurance in the community. It also important for the City to stay abreast of the latest changes and advances in the industry and deliver the most up Better coordinate and define roles for Streets and Parks staff given the growth of the ormwater program and the addition of several water quality treatment facilities. Determine if additional staff is necessary to keep up with the maintenance needs of the program. for 2014 and create a template to be used for future This report will assist City Council, staff, and the public in their understanding of the purposes, operations, accomplishments, and plans for the Clean River Initiative. The report will also track the successes of the program as it rela tes to the original goals for the program. With the frustration from our customers over the time needed for engineering department review of these designs, staff feels it is important to evaluate ways to review processes, better educate our customers on the requirements, and provide clearer communication of the requirements. Improve relationships and increase compliance from construction sites and internal projects through regular communication, classroo m style education opportunities and in the field Rewrite Stream Margin language to define the purpose of the stream margin, to provide better protection of riparian areas, to provide better guidance for restoration, and to provide more to properties planning to redevelop in those areas. Funding, Budget, and Expenses The amount of revenue received from the property tax has been stable and consistent, averaging $830,000 annually. In 2014, the Finance Department is forecasting $811,70 of Detention, however, have dropped significantly and are not expected to rebound because of a reduction in detention requirements. As of October 2014, $209,500 in FIL has been Initiative 2014 2 with corrections, simplifications, and current practices and policies. Since the adoption of the URMP in 2010, there have been advances in the industry and in options available to meet standards. Additionally, through the use of the manual, staff , gained knowledge and understanding of the ability to apply the technical guidance, shifted thinking about certain applications, and adopted policies vised to reflect all of this , both in Aspen and other similar cities, to determine if changes to City’s specifications are needed for more effective water quality treatment and to ensure It also important for the City to stay abreast of most up -to-date guidance given the growth of the ormwater program and the addition of several water quality treatment facilities. Determine if additional staff is necessary to keep up with the maintenance needs of the program. a template to be used for future Annual Reports. This report will assist City Council, staff, and the public in their understanding of the purposes, operations, accomplishments, and plans for the Clean River Initiative. The report will also track tes to the original goals for the program. With the frustration from our customers over the time needed for engineering department review of these designs, staff feels it is important to evaluate ways to review processes, better educate our customers on the requirements, and internal projects m style education opportunities and in the field to define the purpose of the stream margin, to provide better protection of riparian areas, to provide better guidance for restoration, and to provide more The amount of revenue received from the property tax has been stable and consistent, averaging $830,000 annually. In 2014, the Finance Department is forecasting $811,70 0. Fees from the of Detention, however, have dropped significantly and are not expected to rebound because of a reduction in detention requirements. As of October 2014, $209,500 in FIL has been P26 II. The City of Aspen Clean River collected and $140,000 has been requested approximately $70,000 for 2014. even less will be received in future years. Review Fees have increased and $180,000 has been collected to date. With increased staff in the Engineering Department, year than in any previous year. We anticipate and recommend this pace to continue. the current level of funding, we can only continue at this pace and maintain the required Fund Balance until 2019, at which point, the stormwater program will be reduced to a $200K budget. And even at this current pace, we program. Revenue Source 2014 Property Tax $811,700 Investment Interest Development Fees Permit Review Fees $200,000 Total $ 1,106,700 Expenditures 2014 Operating Costs $ Capital Expenditures $ Total $ 1 The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative collected and $140,000 has been requested for refund. Staff is estimating a total approximately $70,000 for 2014. With changes to the detention requirements, it is anticipated that even less will be received in future years. Due to increases in construction and development, Permit Review Fees have increased and $180,000 has been collected to date. With increased staff in the Engineering Department, more capital projects were completed this year than in any previous year. We anticipate and recommend this pace to continue. the current level of funding, we can only continue at this pace and maintain the required Fund Balance until 2019, at which point, the stormwater program will be reduced to a $200K - $300 And even at this current pace, we are not meeting the goals and intentions of the original Table 1. Revenue Table 2. Expenses 2014 2011 – 2013 Averages Original Program Est. $811,700 $848,932 $25,000 $17,517 $70,000 $149,165 $200,000 $99,640 $ 1,106,700 $1,115,294 2014 2011 – 2013 Averages Original Program Est. $630,500 $530,500 $794,000 $397,255 $ 1 ,424,500 $927,755 Initiative 2014 3 total collection of With changes to the detention requirements, it is anticipated that Due to increases in construction and development, Permit more capital projects were completed this year than in any previous year. We anticipate and recommend this pace to continue. However, with the current level of funding, we can only continue at this pace and maintain the required Fund Balance $300 K annual capital are not meeting the goals and intentions of the original Original Program Est. $860,000 ----- $1,200,000 ----- $2,060,000 Original Program Est. $860,000 $1,200,000 $2,060,000 P27 II. The City of Aspen Clean River 3. 2014 Water Year and Weather Report The water year of 2014 (Oct. 1, 2013 average precipitation. A large and late snowpack led to a significant spring runoff. This created large flows in the first week of June which is beneficial for the Roaring Fork River ecosystem. Following this high and early peak runoff, the flow in the river follows the median daily st little deviation. This has a positive impact for the ecosystem in the Roaring Fork River, especially with the past few years’ relatively low flows. The large snowpack provided water for the Roaring Fork River despite a dry Ju ne. This however did lead to slightly higher than average total suspended solids in the river when runoff occurred in July. July and August have both seen higher than average rainfall increasing the river flows at certain periods. The months July and Augus river’s ecosystem. 4. Highlights and Accomplishments for 2014 Decreased review times. In the past few years 2013, the Engineering Department’s review times on building permits rose to more than 60 days for any The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative 3. 2014 Water Year and Weather Report The water year of 2014 (Oct. 1, 2013 - Oct. 1, 2014) was characterized by slightly higher than and late snowpack led to a significant spring runoff. This created large flows in the first week of June which is beneficial for the Roaring Fork River ecosystem. Following this high and early peak runoff, the flow in the river follows the median daily st atistic of the river with very little deviation. This has a positive impact for the ecosystem in the Roaring Fork River, especially with the past few years’ relatively low flows. The large snowpack provided water for the Roaring Fork River ne. This however did lead to slightly higher than average total suspended solids in the river when runoff occurred in July. July and August have both seen higher than average rainfall increasing the river flows at certain periods. The months July and Augus t have caused little stress in the Highlights and Accomplishments for 2014 In the past few years , and with the return of high construction rates in 2013, the Engineering Department’s review times on building permits rose to more than 60 days for any Initiative 2014 4 Oct. 1, 2014) was characterized by slightly higher than and late snowpack led to a significant spring runoff. This created large flows in the first week of June which is beneficial for the Roaring Fork River ecosystem. Following this atistic of the river with very little deviation. This has a positive impact for the ecosystem in the Roaring Fork River, especially with the past few years’ relatively low flows. The large snowpack provided water for the Roaring Fork River ne. This however did lead to slightly higher than average total suspended solids in the river when runoff occurred in July. July and August have both seen higher than average rainfall t have caused little stress in the and with the return of high construction rates in 2013, the Engineering Department’s review times on building permits rose to more than 60 days for any P28 II. The City of Aspen Clean River permit. This delay was due in large part to not having the staff available to meet the demand. Howev er, another significant contributor to the of training for our customers. City Council approved a new Engineer I position for the Engineering Department in the fall of 20 13. In late 2013 and throughou angles to decrease review times providing clearer guidance; educating our customers; building better relationships; and streamlining our review process. By mid-year 2014, our review times had decreased to only two weeks improvement over the previous year and a significant accomplishment for the department. Rain Gardens at Gondola Plaza improving water quality is a goal for the City and require private development to meet this goal, i important that City projects make every effort to do so as well. It is even more important in streetscapes because some of the most polluted stormwater the City is generated on streets an d the only opportunity for treatment is in the right-of-way. gardens were installed in the bulb outs for the new pedestrian improvements at Gondola Plaza. gardens are used across the nation and are an excellent example of using street right-of - treatments. The public opinion of the rain gardens has been varied, which has generated many for education about stormwater treatment in the right of-way and the goals of the Clean River Initiative, helping to make that connection between urban landscape and river health. look at the rain garden design specifications it. The rain gardens began working imm from the stormwater system. New hydrology and decreased detention “It is refreshing to see a piece of legislation taking into consideration new information that results in a lessening of the burden on projects in our Community.” Bob Daniel – Gateway Management Company The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative permit. This delay was due in large part to not having the staff available to meet the demand. er, another significant contributor to the long review period was the misunderstanding and City Council approved a new Engineer I position for the Engineering 13. In late 2013 and throughou t 2014, staff focused very heavily on all angles to decrease review times – simplifying the process and requirements wherever possible; providing clearer guidance; educating our customers; building better relationships; and streamlining our year 2014, our review times had decreased to only two weeks improvement over the previous year and a significant accomplishment for the department. Rain Gardens at Gondola Plaza . Because improving water quality is a goal for the City and we require private development to meet this goal, i t is that City projects make every effort to do so as well. It is even more important in streetscapes because some of the most polluted stormwater runoff in d the only opportunity way. In 2014, two rain gardens were installed in the bulb outs for the new pedestrian improvements at Gondola Plaza. Rain used across the nation and are an excellent -way for stormwater The public opinion of the rain gardens has been varied, which has generated many opportunities stormwater treatment in the right - goals of the Clean River Initiative, to make that connection between urban landscape and river health. It also required staff to rain garden design specifications with a refined eye and a better design has developed from it. The rain gardens began working imm ediately, removing two 5-gallon buckets full of New hydrology and decreased detention . In September, Council approved an amendment to the URMP to update rainfall data and hydrology decrease detention requirements. Staff discovered that NOAA had released new rainfa ll data for the Aspen area and asked a consultant to examine if changes were possible for the design guidelines in the URMP. NOAA had not released new data for the area since 1973, so the additional 40 years of information was a significant contribution t better overall understanding of climate in this area. The “It is refreshing to see a piece of consideration new information that results in a lessening of the burden on projects in our Community.” Initiative 2014 5 permit. This delay was due in large part to not having the staff available to meet the demand. review period was the misunderstanding and lack City Council approved a new Engineer I position for the Engineering t 2014, staff focused very heavily on all the process and requirements wherever possible; providing clearer guidance; educating our customers; building better relationships; and streamlining our year 2014, our review times had decreased to only two weeks – a vast It also required staff to with a refined eye and a better design has developed from of polluted particles In September, Council approved an amendment to rainfall data and hydrology and to detention requirements. Staff discovered that ll data for the Aspen area and asked a consultant to examine if changes were possible for the design guidelines in the URMP. NOAA had not released new data for the area since 1973, so the additional 40 years of information was a significant contribution t o providing a better overall understanding of climate in this area. The P29 II. The City of Aspen Clean River new data shows smaller rainfall events, and describes return storms as smaller events. Therefore, City’s storm sewer system is not undersized in many locations previously thought Additionally, the consultants showed that the effect of detention on decreasing capacity needs in the system is negligible. Therefore, design requirements in those areas were decreased and changes were made in the URMP to reflect this information. City and development. Research new BMPs, Updates to the URMP The City requires developers to install BMPs that are sometimes difficult or expensive to install or maintain. In 2014, staff observed and researched the effectiveness of existing BMPs, both in Aspen and in other similar cities, to determine if changes to the City's specs are needed for more effective removal of pollutants, better acceptance by property owners, or to ensure longer lifespans of the BMP. Staff monitored and test several demonstration projects in the City and took a tour of the rain gardens u the rights –of-way in Portland, Oregon (there are over 600). Staff also met with local designers and homeowners, and representatives from other mountain towns to discuss the successes and failures of BMPs they are familiar with. Staff used this in formation to modify BMPs in the URMP – modifications that will hopefully be approved by Council this winter. Targeted Education for Concrete Contractors. pollution, correction notices, and red tags for concrete wash-outs and trucks spilling concrete out onto City streets. Concrete carries many pollutants that are harmful to the river and not easily removed even in our large regional treatmen Additionally, concrete hardens quickly and can plug, block, or damage the City’s infrastructure, increasing maintenance and repair needs and flooding threats. It became apparent to staff that the concrete sub-contractors in the valley had v connection between their actions and the river. Therefore, staff targeted education efforts to the The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative new data shows smaller rainfall events, and describes return storms as smaller events. Therefore, storm sewer system is not undersized in many locations previously thought Additionally, the consultants showed that the effect of detention on decreasing capacity needs in the system is negligible. Therefore, design requirements in those areas were decreased and changes were information. This change will result in significant cost Updates to the URMP The City requires developers to install BMPs that are sometimes difficult or expensive to install or maintain. In 2014, staff observed and researched the effectiveness of existing BMPs, both in Aspen and in other similar cities, to determine if changes the City's specs are needed for more effective removal of pollutants, better acceptance by property owners, or to ensure longer lifespans of the BMP. Staff monitored and test several demonstration projects in the City and took a tour of the rain gardens u sed in way in Portland, Oregon (there are over 600). Staff also met with local designers and homeowners, and representatives from other mountain towns to discuss the successes and failures of BMPs they formation to modifications that will hopefully be approved by Council this Education for Concrete Contractors. Concrete has been a significant source of off pollution, correction notices, and red tags for sites in town. There have been several incidences of illegal outs and trucks spilling concrete out onto City streets. Concrete carries many pollutants that are harmful to the river and not easily removed even in our large regional treatmen Additionally, concrete hardens quickly and can plug, block, or damage the City’s infrastructure, increasing maintenance and repair needs and flooding threats. It became apparent to staff that the contractors in the valley had v ery little understanding of our requirements and of the connection between their actions and the river. Therefore, staff targeted education efforts to the Initiative 2014 6 new data shows smaller rainfall events, and describes return storms as smaller events. Therefore, the to be undersized. Additionally, the consultants showed that the effect of detention on decreasing capacity needs in the system is negligible. Therefore, design requirements in those areas were decreased and changes were This change will result in significant cost -savings to the The City requires developers to install BMPs that are sometimes difficult or expensive to install or maintain. In 2014, staff observed and researched the effectiveness of existing BMPs, both in Aspen and Concrete has been a significant source of off -site sites in town. There have been several incidences of illegal outs and trucks spilling concrete out onto City streets. Concrete carries many pollutants that are harmful to the river and not easily removed even in our large regional treatmen t facilities. Additionally, concrete hardens quickly and can plug, block, or damage the City’s infrastructure, increasing maintenance and repair needs and flooding threats. It became apparent to staff that the ery little understanding of our requirements and of the connection between their actions and the river. Therefore, staff targeted education efforts to the P30 II. The City of Aspen Clean River concrete industry by intercepting sub enforced, and why. Staff hopes this helps receive better compliance and fewer incidences involving concrete in the future. New Stream Margin L anguage Code, but is administered by Communit been a source of confusion and contention with our customers needs of each department. In 2014, staff representatives from each department examined the language and drafted new language that is better able to explain why it is important to protect and maintain a stream margin, defines an appropriate stream margin size that meets the goals the City has for river management, and provides more clarity to properties l stream margin about allowable uses and restoration requirements for the stream margin. Staff will seek public input on this draft language in the fall of 2014 and will be presenting the language to P&Z and City Council for approval in 2015. Significant Infrastructure C pollutants which can drop out into pipes and inlets causing clogging, blockages, and potential damage to the system. In order for the system regional treatment areas, the system must be cleaned periodically. While vaults are cleaned out regularly and problem inlets are cleaned as often as possible, a focused effort to clean the has never been done. In 2014, funds previously earmarked for a staff position in Streets was transferred for the purposes of contracting these services out. The effort is currently underway, and staff expects over X linear feet of pipe to b e cleaned this year. Staff plans to continue this effort annually, targeting a new portion of the system until all of the City’s infrastructure has been cleaned. At that time, a routine schedule, prioritizing portions of the system and frequency of maint adhered to. Rio Grande Park Finished. Park area was identified by the citizen’s group highest priority project for the entire Initiative. The City’s eastern pipe network discharges into this park and another major pipe network The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative concrete industry by intercepting sub -contractors on-site to go over the City’s regulations, how the enforced, and why. Staff hopes this helps receive better compliance and fewer incidences involving anguage . The City’s stream margin language is housed in the Land Use Code, but is administered by Communit y Development, Engineering, and Parks Departments. It has been a source of confusion and contention with our customers and has not always exactly met the needs of each department. In 2014, staff representatives from each department examined the language and drafted new language that is better able to explain why it is important to protect and maintain a stream margin, defines an appropriate stream margin size that meets the goals the City has for river management, and provides more clarity to properties l ocated within or planning to develop in the stream margin about allowable uses and restoration requirements for the stream margin. Staff will seek public input on this draft language in the fall of 2014 and will be presenting the language to P&Z and City Significant Infrastructure C leaning. The City’s stormwater system carries a number of pollutants which can drop out into pipes and inlets causing clogging, blockages, and potential damage to the system. In order for the system to function properly to reduce flooding and convey stormwater to regional treatment areas, the system must be cleaned periodically. While vaults are cleaned out regularly and problem inlets are cleaned as often as possible, a focused effort to clean the has never been done. In 2014, funds previously earmarked for a staff position in Streets was transferred for the purposes of contracting these services out. The effort is currently underway, and staff expects e cleaned this year. Staff plans to continue this effort annually, targeting a new portion of the system until all of the City’s infrastructure has been cleaned. At that time, a routine schedule, prioritizing portions of the system and frequency of maint enance required, will be set and Grande Park Finished. The Rio Grande by the citizen’s group as the highest priority project for the entire Clean River pipe network discharges into this park and another major pipe network – the The Park was designed to remove 90 of pollutants. I n its first year of operation it removed 96% on average. Average TSS Inflow = 100 mg/L Average TSS Outflow = 4 mg/L Control Point TSS = 2 mg/L Initiative 2014 7 site to go over the City’s regulations, how the y are enforced, and why. Staff hopes this helps receive better compliance and fewer incidences involving The City’s stream margin language is housed in the Land Use y Development, Engineering, and Parks Departments. It has and has not always exactly met the needs of each department. In 2014, staff representatives from each department examined the language and drafted new language that is better able to explain why it is important to protect and maintain a stream margin, defines an appropriate stream margin size that meets the goals the City has for river ocated within or planning to develop in the stream margin about allowable uses and restoration requirements for the stream margin. Staff will seek public input on this draft language in the fall of 2014 and will be presenting the language to P&Z and City The City’s stormwater system carries a number of pollutants which can drop out into pipes and inlets causing clogging, blockages, and potential damage to to function properly to reduce flooding and convey stormwater to regional treatment areas, the system must be cleaned periodically. While vaults are cleaned out regularly and problem inlets are cleaned as often as possible, a focused effort to clean the entire system has never been done. In 2014, funds previously earmarked for a staff position in Streets was transferred for the purposes of contracting these services out. The effort is currently underway, and staff expects e cleaned this year. Staff plans to continue this effort annually, targeting a new portion of the system until all of the City’s infrastructure has been cleaned. At that time, a routine enance required, will be set and The Park was designed to remove 90 – 99% n its first year of operation it Average TSS Inflow = 100 mg/L Average TSS Outflow = 4 mg/L P31 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Mill Street system – runs adjacent to this park. Together this represents 30% of the City’s runoff. park has been under construction for stormwater improvements since 2012 a but finishing work and landscaping) by the end of 2014, providing a fully functioning regional water quality improvement facility. The Park has been designed with many unique and innovative features including sand fil ters that resemble river sand bars, engineered wetlands, aerating water falls, and bioretention swales. All of this has been built with natural, sustainable materials such as tree trunks and boulders, rather than typical engineering m pipes and metal weirs. The Park was designed to remove 90 operation it removed 96 % on average. It is gaining recognition in the State as a state stormwater facility and the City should be proud of its achievement with this Park. 5. Min imum Control Measures Progress The program is set up as if the City were regulated by the State with a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Municipalities regulated by these permits must have a program with six minimum control measures: 1. Public Education and Outreach 2. Public Participation and Involvement (these two items are combined below for simplicity) 3. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination 4. Construction Site Runoff Control 5. Post-Construction (Permanent) Runoff Control 6. Pollution Prevention from Municipal Activity (Good Housekeeping) Each year, staff work to accomplish tasks related to these m the stormwater program. Public Education and Involvement. Measure that the EPA requires MS4 permit holders to address. members understand the correlation between urban conditions, land use, rainfall aquatic resources. The point of this education is to teach the community of harmful actions and assist them in reducing their impact. The City has done this t ages. 1.1 School Presentations The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative runs adjacent to this park. Together this represents 30% of the City’s runoff. park has been under construction for stormwater improvements since 2012 a nd should be finished (all but finishing work and landscaping) by the end of 2014, providing a fully functioning regional water quality improvement facility. The Park has been designed with many unique and innovative ters that resemble river sand bars, engineered wetlands, water quality ponds, aerating water falls, and bioretention swales. All of this has been built with natural, sustainable materials such as tree trunks and boulders, rather than typical engineering m aterials such as concrete pipes and metal weirs. The Park was designed to remove 90 – 99% of pollutants and in its first year of % on average. It is gaining recognition in the State as a state City should be proud of its achievement with this Park. imum Control Measures Progress The program is set up as if the City were regulated by the State with a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit. Municipalities regulated by these permits must have a program with six minimum control measures: Public Education and Outreach Public Participation and Involvement (these two items are combined below for simplicity) Detection and Elimination Construction Site Runoff Control Construction (Permanent) Runoff Control Pollution Prevention from Municipal Activity (Good Housekeeping) Each year, staff work to accomplish tasks related to these m inimum measures and the overall Public Education and Involvement. Public Education and Outreach is the first Minimum Control Measure that the EPA requires MS4 permit holders to address. Cities must help their community embers understand the correlation between urban conditions, land use, rainfall aquatic resources. The point of this education is to teach the community of harmful actions and assist them in reducing their impact. The City has done this t hrough several avenues, reaching audiences of all Initiative 2014 8 runs adjacent to this park. Together this represents 30% of the City’s runoff. The nd should be finished (all but finishing work and landscaping) by the end of 2014, providing a fully functioning regional water quality improvement facility. The Park has been designed with many unique and innovative stormwater water quality ponds, aerating water falls, and bioretention swales. All of this has been built with natural, sustainable aterials such as concrete 99% of pollutants and in its first year of % on average. It is gaining recognition in the State as a state -of-the-art The program is set up as if the City were regulated by the State with a National Pollutant System (MS4) permit. Municipalities regulated by these permits must have a program with six minimum control measures: Public Participation and Involvement (these two items are combined below for simplicity) inimum measures and the overall goals of Public Education and Outreach is the first Minimum Control must help their community embers understand the correlation between urban conditions, land use, rainfall -runoff and local aquatic resources. The point of this education is to teach the community of harmful actions and assist hrough several avenues, reaching audiences of all P32 II. The City of Aspen Clean River Each year, stormwater staff make p school age children , often in assistance to the Roaring Fork Conservancy. The City owns an Enviroscape Model, which demonstrates on a small scale with food coloring and water bottles, the effects of land use and the traveling path of pollutants during rain events. School presentations 1.2 Web Site Some changes were made to the City’s website this year for the Building, Engineering, and Community Development portions of the website to better assist businesses, developers, and contractors with the permitting process. This new one information from the URMP. Additionally, all pertinent Engineering Department policies have been added to the Engineering Department webpage. 1.3 Wetland Plantings with Volunteers The stormwater improvements a t Rio Grande Park are a phenomenal example of the City’s efforts to reduce impacts on the Roaring Fork River. To engage the public and reduce planting cost, t days were organized in 2014 to install all of the plants for the large regional stor wetland. By having the local community install the plants it save the City thousands creates an opportunity to educate the River. 1.8 Local Park s and Stormwater Facility The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Each year, stormwater staff make p resentations to , often in assistance to the Roaring Fork Conservancy. The City owns an demonstrates on a small scale with food coloring and water bottles, the effects of land use and the traveling path of pollutants during rain events. School presentations are very helpful in educating both the next generation bu t also their parents. In 20 presentations were given to an 8 Girls to Women Connection Conference 7th grade science class at Aspen Middle School about groundwater and surface water flows and how they affect the river (using the Enviroscape Model). Some changes were made to the City’s website this year for the Building, Engineering, and Community Development portions of the website to better assist businesses, developers, and contractors with the This new one -stop shop i s called the Business Navigator page and includes information from the URMP. Additionally, all pertinent Engineering Department policies have been added to the Engineering Department webpage. Wetland Plantings with Volunteers t Rio Grande Park are a phenomenal example of the City’s efforts to reduce impacts on the Roaring Fork River. To engage the public and reduce planting cost, t to install all of the plants for the large regional stor mwater treatment wetland. By having the local community install the plants it save the City thousands of dollars as well as creates an opportunity to educate the community and build their investment in reducing impacts to the s and Stormwater Facility Tours Initiative 2014 9 are very helpful in educating both the next t also their parents. In 20 14, presentations were given to an 8 th grade girls at a Girls to Women Connection Conference , and the grade science class at Aspen Middle School about groundwater and surface water flows and how they affect the river (using the Enviroscape Some changes were made to the City’s website this year for the Building, Engineering, and Community Development portions of the website to better assist businesses, developers, and contractors with the s called the Business Navigator page and includes information from the URMP. Additionally, all pertinent Engineering Department policies have been t Rio Grande Park are a phenomenal example of the City’s efforts to reduce impacts on the Roaring Fork River. To engage the public and reduce planting cost, t wo volunteer mwater treatment of dollars as well as and build their investment in reducing impacts to the P33 II. The City of Aspen Clean River As there are many stormwater management systems located in local parks, tours are given to educate the public about what these parks do and why they are so important to the health of the river. Stormwater Manager gave 3 tours of the new Rio G by the Roaring Fork Conservancy. One of these tours was provided to Administrator of Water for EPA and her staff (pictured), who was most impr facility and our coordination with our Parks Department. An additional tour was provided to representatives from Vail, Eagle, Avon, and Eagle County who are considering developing a Clean River Initiative similar to the City of As pen’s. The Parks Department also provided tours of this facility in 2014 to audiences ranging from local pre-school teachers to traveling landscape architects. Additonally, PBS (the national Public Broadcasting Station) filmed a special about John Denve r and the improvements to the John Denver Sanctuary, including its importance for cleaning water. The segment will air later in 2014. 1.8 Newsletters, Newspapers, and News Stations The Stormwater Manager filmed a segment in the spring for Grass Initiative and the connection between the mountain, the storm drain on a community street, and the The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative As there are many stormwater management systems located in local parks, tours are given to educate the public about what these parks do and why they are so important to the health of the river. 3 tours of the new Rio G rande Park facilities this year instigated or planned One of these tours was provided to Nancy Stoner, the Acting Assistant of Water for EPA and her staff (pictured), who was most impr essed with the gorgeous facility and our coordination with our Parks Department. An additional tour was provided to representatives from Vail, Eagle, Avon, and Eagle County who are considering developing a Clean River pen’s. The Parks Department also provided tours of this facility in 2014 to audiences school teachers to traveling landscape architects. Additonally, PBS (the national Public Broadcasting Station) filmed a special r and the improvements to the John Denver Sanctuary, including its importance for cleaning water. The segment will air later in 2014. and News Stations The Stormwater Manager filmed a segment in the spring for Grass Roots to discuss the Clean River Initiative and the connection between the mountain, the storm drain on a community street, and the River. The segment has continued to air throughout the year. The Clean River Initiative also contributed to several arti cles for ZGreen News environmentally friendly methods for removing snow and ice and one about the improvements at Rio Grande Park. There were several newspaper articles written about the Clean River Initiative as well, including the changes to rainfall data used by the City and the possibility of mud slides in the area. 2. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Detecting and eliminating illicit discharges is a very important part of the Clean River Initiative. Most often, Initiative 2014 10 As there are many stormwater management systems located in local parks, tours are given to educate the public about what these parks do and why they are so important to the health of the river. The instigated or planned Nancy Stoner, the Acting Assistant essed with the gorgeous Roots to discuss the Clean River Initiative and the connection between the mountain, the storm drain on a community street, and the River. The segment has continued to air throughout the year. The Clean River Initiative also contributed to cles for ZGreen News – one about environmentally friendly methods for removing snow and ice and one about the improvements at Rio Grande Park. There were several newspaper articles written about the Clean River Initiative as well, including the rainfall data used by the City and the Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination etecting and eliminating illicit discharges is a very Clean River Initiative. Most often, P34 II. The City of Aspen Clean River discharges occur from restaurant and business owner activities, such as cleaning out dumpsters or waste in the alley, washing down equipment with soaps or solvents, dumping wash water, or leaking dumpsters. Staff is al so careful to identify leaking equipment or vehicles such as concrete trucks, fertilizer or pesticide applicators, and construction equipment with hydraulic leaks. Illicit discharges are determined through inspection and by community reports/complaints. unintentional and simply require educating the public about the connection to the River and the hazards or threats posed by the illegal material. For repetitive offenders, the City can issue enforcement in the form of summons or fines. 2.1 Storm System Inspection and Staff consistently try to correct and add any information gathered about the storm drain system. Information is updated in GIS and can include locations, pipe size, material, condition, and connections Identifying and recording the storm system helps to pinpoint the location/outfall where illegal discharges might impact the river. After the City’s work this year clean and video inlets and pipes, several hundred linear feet of inspection will be logged into GIS. 2.2 Illicit Connections There is a possibility that developments along or near the river dump materials on land or through illegal piping straight into the river. As an attempt to identify any the River, city staff walk a section of the River way. Discharges are noted and checked upon. been discovered this way. 2.3 Household Hazardous Waste Education The Environmental Health Department hosts three year to allow homeowners to properly dispose of potentially hazardous items. This assists the Clean River Initiative by educating the public and into the stormwater system. 3. Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control Uncontrolled stormwater ru noff from construction sites can be a significant source of sediment and other pollutants in the River. Therefore the City has requirements for construction sites to meet through the Construction Management Plan, onsite inspections, and The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative discharges occur from restaurant and business owner activities, such as cleaning out dumpsters or waste in the alley, washing down equipment with soaps or solvents, dumping wash water, or leaking so careful to identify leaking equipment or vehicles such as concrete trucks, fertilizer or pesticide applicators, and construction equipment with hydraulic leaks. Illicit discharges are determined through inspection and by community reports/complaints. Illicit discharges are often unintentional and simply require educating the public about the connection to the River and the hazards or threats posed by the illegal material. For repetitive offenders, the City can issue enforcement in the and Mapping Staff consistently try to correct and add any information gathered about the storm drain system. updated in GIS and can include locations, pipe size, material, condition, and connections . Identifying and recording the storm system helps to pinpoint the location/outfall where illegal discharges After the City’s work this year to clean and video inlets and pipes, several hundred linear feet of inspection will be logged into GIS. There is a possibility that developments along or near the river dump materials on land or through illegal river. As an attempt to identify any illicit discharges or connections directly into staff walk a section of the River once a year. Trash is cleaned from the river along the way. Discharges are noted and checked upon. Several illicit c onnections and pumping operations Waste Education and E-Waste Drop-Off Days Health Department hosts three electronic waste collection days throughout each year to allow homeowners to properly dispose of potentially hazardous items. This assists the Clean educating the public and preventing household hazardous wastes from being dumped Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control noff from construction sites can be a significant source of sediment and other pollutants in the River. Therefore the City has requirements for construction sites to meet through the Construction Management Plan, onsite inspections, and 1.1 miles of RF R iver walked 2 illegal dumping reports responded to 3 E-Waste Disposal Days Initiative 2014 11 discharges occur from restaurant and business owner activities, such as cleaning out dumpsters or waste in the alley, washing down equipment with soaps or solvents, dumping wash water, or leaking so careful to identify leaking equipment or vehicles such as concrete trucks, fertilizer or pesticide applicators, and construction equipment with hydraulic leaks. Illicit discharges are Illicit discharges are often unintentional and simply require educating the public about the connection to the River and the hazards or threats posed by the illegal material. For repetitive offenders, the City can issue enforcement in the Staff consistently try to correct and add any information gathered about the storm drain system. There is a possibility that developments along or near the river dump materials on land or through illegal or connections directly into once a year. Trash is cleaned from the river along the onnections and pumping operations have waste collection days throughout each year to allow homeowners to properly dispose of potentially hazardous items. This assists the Clean from being dumped iver walked illegal dumping reports responded to Waste Disposal Days P35 II. The City of Aspen Clean River final stabilization. In addition to the stormwater requirements that sites, construction oper ators must also apply for State Stormwater Permit disturbs more than one acre or requires work directly on or near the 3.1 Plans Review and Site Inspections The City’s stormwater inspector reviews prior to permit approval. Sites are then inspected regularly several times per week depending on complexity and potential stormwater impacts. The stormwater inspector assists the sites with compliance by identifying incorrect BMP installations, maintenance sub-contractors. Therefore this year, efforts were focused on contacting and educating the concrete industry. 3.3 Classes for Design Engineers, Developers, Contractors and Sub As the co des and regulations for construction few years The City of Aspen has been met with some confusion on how requirements. Although these regulations foreign to contractors in the Valley the stormwater system and the River, the stormwater manager and stormwater i classes at City offices and on site to a broad range of audi 4. Post-Construction Stormwater Management in New Development and Redevelopment The impervious surfaces associated with development which degrade s water quality and development is to reduce impervious surfaces, increase infiltration and onsite before it can affect the River guide development through i nnovative site designs that development practices that achieve the goals of red Additionally the City requires long continue to achieve these goals post issued. City staff inspect the function of these private st 5. Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping in Municipal Operations 137 construction sites inspected 8 complaints responded to 50 cons truction community educated in 6 classes/formal onsite training The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative In addition to the stormwater requirements that the City place ators must also apply for State Stormwater Permit coverage if or requires work directly on or near the River. Inspections The City’s stormwater inspector reviews erosion and sediment control plans prep ared by site designers prior to permit approval. Sites are then inspected regularly – at least once per month and as often as several times per week depending on complexity and potential stormwater impacts. The stormwater compliance by identifying incorrect BMP installations, maintenance needs, or failing BMPs, and recommending solutions. Sites that are out of compliance are issued verbal warnings, corrections notices, or stop work orders depending on the severity or poss ible impacts. 3.2 Collect Complaints of Noncompliance The stormwater inspector also responds to reports from concerned citizens on issues of possible non or off site impacts from construction sites. staff received many reports of inci dences with concrete contractors. Therefore this year, efforts were focused on contacting and educating the concrete Design Engineers, Developers, Contractors and Sub -contractors des and regulations for construction site stormwater management have changed in the last few years The City of Aspen has been met with some confusion on how and why to meet these regulations are not out of the ordinary for larger communities, some are contractors in the Valley . In order to educate, increase compliance, and decrease impacts to the stormwater system and the River, the stormwater manager and stormwater i nspector have offered classes at City offices and on site to a broad range of audi ences and covering broad to narrow topics. Construction Stormwater Management in New Development and Redevelopment associated with development increases stormwater runoff s water quality and riparian areas. The best way to miti gate stormwater impacts from reduce impervious surfaces, increase infiltration and use practice the River . Therefore the City uses the Urban Runoff Managem nnovative site designs that reduce imperviousness and achieve the goals of red ucing flows and improving water Additionally the City requires long -term operation and maintenance plans to ensure that properties continue to achieve these goals post -construction, after the Certificate of Occupancy has been City staff inspect the function of these private stormwater systems once every three years. Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping in Municipal Operations construction sites inspected truction community educated in Initiative 2014 12 place s on construction coverage if their project ared by site designers at least once per month and as often as several times per week depending on complexity and potential stormwater impacts. The stormwater compliance by identifying incorrect BMP installations, maintenance needs, or failing BMPs, and recommending solutions. Sites that are out of compliance are issued verbal warnings, corrections notices, or stop work orders ible impacts. Collect Complaints of Noncompliance The stormwater inspector also responds to reports from concerned citizens on issues of possible non -compliance or off site impacts from construction sites. Last year, dences with concrete contractors. Therefore this year, efforts were focused on contacting and educating the concrete have changed in the last to meet these new are not out of the ordinary for larger communities, some are educate, increase compliance, and decrease impacts to nspector have offered ences and covering broad to narrow topics. Construction Stormwater Management in New Development and Redevelopment runoff and pollution gate stormwater impacts from use practice s to treat runoff Therefore the City uses the Urban Runoff Managem ent Plan to reduce imperviousness and low impact ucing flows and improving water quality. term operation and maintenance plans to ensure that properties construction, after the Certificate of Occupancy has been ormwater systems once every three years. P36 II. The City of Aspen Clean River The City also conducts activities that remove performed properly, such as street sweeping, regional capital projects. 5.1 Street Sweeping street sweeping that the City should be very proud of. This sediment (and other pollutants that attach to sediment) out of the C therefore out of the Roaring Fo rk River. 5.2 Vault Cleaning There are four large sediment vaults regional stormwater quality facilities that amounts of litter, debris, and sediment from the stormwater system. These vaults are cleaned several times each year and prevent tons of sediment from clogging harder to maintain regional facilities and from reaching the River. 5.3 Snow Removal As Aspen receives over 300 inches of snow each year, Removal Method Avg Annual (tons) Street Sweeping 1100 The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative In general, the City itself numerous activities that can pose a threat to water quality if practices and procedures are not in place to prevent pollutants from entering the activities include winter road maintenance, minor road repairs , utility projects, capital projects, automobile fleet maintenance, landscaping and park maintenance, and building maintenance. The City also owns more impervious areas such as streets, parking lanes, affordable housing, and City offices, than any other single entity and therefore has a ver y large impact on the River. activities that remove or prevent pollutants from reaching the river street sweeping, storm system cleaning , city facility retrofits and The City of Aspen Streets Department roads weekly or bi depending on use. This vigorous approach to street sweeping that the City should be very proud of. This maintenance work keeps (and other pollutants that attach to sediment) out of the C ity storm sewer system and rk River. sediment vaults located upstream of regional stormwater quality facilities that removes large litter, debris, and sediment from the stormwater system. These vaults are cleaned several year and prevent tons of sediment from clogging harder to maintain regional facilities and from receives over 300 inches of snow each year, Avg Annual (tons) Total 2014 (to date) 1235 Initiative 2014 13 the City itself conducts numerous activities that can pose a threat to water quality if practices and procedures are not in place to prevent pollutants from entering the River. These activities include winter road maintenance, , utility projects, capital automobile fleet maintenance, landscaping and park maintenance, and The City also owns more impervious areas such as streets, parking lanes, affordable housing, and City offices, than any other single entity y large impact on reaching the river when , city facility retrofits and The City of Aspen Streets Department sweeps all weekly or bi -weekly depending on use. This is a vigorous approach to maintenance work keeps litter, debris, and ity storm sewer system and P37 II. The City of Aspen Clean River snow removal is a must for proper management of roadways. When the snow is rem pollutants go with it, most importantly the sand that is applied for traction. 5.4 Pipe and Inlet Cleaning In order for the City’s stormwater system to function properly and effectively, it must be cleaned and maintained regularly. Stormwater staff within the Parks Department regularly inspects and cleans open swales, inlets, and water quality facilities, whil inlets and pipes. Some portions of the system require annual cleaning as it fills from heavy sanding or high traffic use, while other portions require less frequent cleaning. Most portions that requ frequent cleaning have never been cleaned and stormwater staff are working diligently to chip away at that task. After systematic cleaning, staff also work to have the system videoed to analyze deterioration, cracks, or failing infrastructure. 6. Monitoring Program In order to assess the City’s impact on the River, the effectiveness of the Clean River Initiative, and to determine if progress is being made from those studies conducted in 2005 and 2006, it is important for the program to operate a monitoring program. The City hires an intern each summer to Monitoring Plan, analyze the data, and water being discharged from the City into the River. also conduct analysis from specific BMPs, regional treatment facilities (like Rio Grande), and pollutant sources. The City has 9 major outfalls, such as the outfalls from Neale Avenue, Rio Grande Park, Mill Street, Gibson Avenue, and the Jenny Adair Wetlands. In 2014, two of these outfalls have been outfitted with a water quality improvement facility Jenny Adair wetland and Rio Grande Park. For monitoring purposes, staff collects samples at both the inflows into these facilities and the outfalls from these facilities into the River. This allows staff to analyze the effectiveness of the stormwater improvements on removing TSS and providing cleaner stormwater runoff discharges to the River. 6._Goals for 2015 • Improve inventory and mapping of infrastructure (both private and public) in GIS • Improve record keeping for construction site compliance The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative snow removal is a must for proper management of roadways. When the snow is rem most importantly the sand that is applied for traction. In order for the City’s stormwater system to function properly and effectively, it must be cleaned and maintained regularly. Stormwater staff within the Parks Department regularly inspects and cleans open swales, inlets, and water quality facilities, whil e stormwater staff within the Streets Department cleans inlets and pipes. Some portions of the system require annual cleaning as it fills from heavy sanding or high traffic use, while other portions require less frequent cleaning. Most portions that requ frequent cleaning have never been cleaned and stormwater staff are working diligently to chip away at that task. After systematic cleaning, staff also work to have the system videoed to analyze deterioration, cracks, or failing infrastructure. In order to assess the City’s impact on the River, the effectiveness of the Clean River Initiative, and to determine if progress is being made from those studies conducted in 2005 and 2006, it is important for monitoring program. The City hires an intern each summer to Monitoring Plan, analyze the data, and gain an understanding of the probable impacts and water being discharged from the City into the River. In addition to outfall moni toring, stormwater staff also conduct analysis from specific BMPs, regional treatment facilities (like Rio Grande), and pollutant The City has 9 major outfalls, such as the outfalls from Neale Avenue, Rio Gibson Jenny Adair of these outfitted with a water quality improvement facility – wetland and Rio Grande For monitoring purposes, staff collects samples at both the inflows these facilities and the outfalls into the River. This allows staff to analyze the stormwater on removing TSS and providing cleaner stormwater runoff Improve inventory and mapping of infrastructure (both private and public) in GIS Improve record keeping for construction site compliance Monitoring Highlights: Avg TSS Load/outfall/storm = 230 mg/L Max TSS Load = 858 mg/L at the Gibson Ave outfall Example: Jenny Adair Average inflow = 253 mg/L Avg outflow (after wetlands) = 48 For example: Aug 6, 2014: 814 mg/L going in, 42 Initiative 2014 14 snow removal is a must for proper management of roadways. When the snow is rem oved many In order for the City’s stormwater system to function properly and effectively, it must be cleaned and maintained regularly. Stormwater staff within the Parks Department regularly inspects and cleans open e stormwater staff within the Streets Department cleans inlets and pipes. Some portions of the system require annual cleaning as it fills from heavy sanding or high traffic use, while other portions require less frequent cleaning. Most portions that requ ire less frequent cleaning have never been cleaned and stormwater staff are working diligently to chip away at that task. After systematic cleaning, staff also work to have the system videoed to analyze In order to assess the City’s impact on the River, the effectiveness of the Clean River Initiative, and to determine if progress is being made from those studies conducted in 2005 and 2006, it is important for monitoring program. The City hires an intern each summer to implement the probable impacts and quality of toring, stormwater staff also conduct analysis from specific BMPs, regional treatment facilities (like Rio Grande), and pollutant Improve inventory and mapping of infrastructure (both private and public) in GIS Monitoring Highlights: 230 mg/L = 858 mg/L at the Gibson Ave Jenny Adair mg/L going in, 42 mg/L P38 II. The City of Aspen Clean River • Update capital plan based on new master plan information and 2014 construction costs • Evaluate replacement funding sour funding to replace the deficit created by the removal of the system development fee. • Define and begin a long-term the river and the eff ectiveness of the stormwater program. • Refine the expectations and metrics used to measures the success of the Clean River Initiative to provide clearer goals and easier understanding of how well the program is performing. The City of Aspen Clean River Initiative Update capital plan based on new master plan information and 2014 construction costs Evaluate replacement funding sour ce for lack of fees and new capital plan. funding to replace the deficit created by the removal of the system development fee. term biological monitoring plan to continue to measure the health of ectiveness of the stormwater program. Refine the expectations and metrics used to measures the success of the Clean River Initiative to provide clearer goals and easier understanding of how well the program is performing. Initiative 2014 15 Update capital plan based on new master plan information and 2014 construction costs ce for lack of fees and new capital plan. Secure stable funding to replace the deficit created by the removal of the system development fee. monitoring plan to continue to measure the health of Refine the expectations and metrics used to measures the success of the Clean River Initiative to provide clearer goals and easier understanding of how well the program is performing. P39 II. Page 1 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: April Long, P.E. – Stormwater Manager THRU: Trish Aragon, P.E. – City Engineer Scott Miller – Capital Asset Director DATE OF MEMO: October 30, 2014 MEETING DATE: November 3, 2014 RE: Updates to the URMP REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff is requesting feedback on recommended changes to the Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). DISCUSSION: Over the last couple of years, staff have been evaluating ways to improve our customer service and reduce review times for permit applications. We have heard frustrations from our customers over the complexity and practical application of requirements in the URMP. In the fall of 2013, staff visited engineering firms in the Valley to hear recommendations of how the URMP and permitting process could change to better suit their customers’ needs and still achieve the goals of the Clean River Initiative. Staff used this feedback to identify confusing or missing information and adopted policies to cover gaps in the guidance. Additionally, since the adoption of the URMP in 2010, there have been advances in the stormwater treatment industry and in options available to meet water quality standards. And, through the research and observance of the practical applications of best management practices (BMPs) here in Aspen and in other cities, staff have developed new ideas and shifted thinking about certain applications. Therefore, we recommend the URMP be updated and revised to reflect all of this information. In September of this year, Council approved several changes related to new rainfall data and decreased detention requirements. Those changes have been adopted and are currently in practice. In addition to those changes, the major changes suggested are summarized below, by Chapter. (Minor changes, corrections, clarifications have been left out for simplicity but can be discussed or listed at Council’s request). • Chapter 1 – Policy and Permit Requirements P40 III. Page 2 of 2 o New Table 1.1 to clarify what activities require a permit, the level of design and review required, and to include policies/requirements for landscape and grading, driveways, and interior remodels. o Update to Section 1.3 to reference new Engineering Design Standards and to remove duplicate efforts or information. o Update checklists in Appendix A to include most recent requirements and any proposed changes to the manual. o Add a new section that describes the sub-basins of the City and the general requirements within those basins. • Chapter 5 – Detention o Add the option to use dry wells for detention purposes (dry wells have previously only been allowed for water quality treatment). • Chapter 8 – Water Quality o Add an effective impervious area reduction (a credit) for tree canopies on a property. o Significantly modify the following existing BMPs: Bioretention Areas – modify soil media to allow wider range of plant growth, simplify to allow rain gardens with lesser design requirements Grass Buffers – modify to give more credit, to encourage sheet flow from roofs onto lawns instead of downspout connection or area drains into pipes Sand Filters – provide clearer guidance and incorporate missing detail Dry Wells – modify specification and detail to allow for easier regular maintenance, lessen size requirements to allow smaller drywells if possible o Add the following new BMPs: Green Roofs (previously referred to Urban Drainage Flood Control District for guidance on green roofs) Modified Suspended Pavement System (basically, Silva Cells; will need a pre-treatment mechanism to remove sediment) RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: If changes are acceptable, recommend return to future Council meeting for adoption of changes by Resolution. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: None. P41 III.