Combined Sewer Overflow Project
Port Angeles' Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) project is costing the City $42 million. Darlene Schanfald and Tyler Ahlgren have described the CSO project as "a $42 million bandaid."
Here's the link. You'll need to scroll down to page four.
This project is mandated by the state Department of Ecology. Darlene Schanfald and Tyler Ahlgren believe there is a more sustainable and more cost effective way to handle the City's stormwater.
Last May, Darlene Schanfald spoke to a meeting of the Port Angeles Business Association. She spoke in favor of disconnecting residential downspouts, which would allow stormwater to filter through the soil. She also favored planting trees for filtration. She said these methods were preferable to installing new sewer lines. She referred to the city of Saginaw, Michigan (warning: .pdf file) as an example of how this could be done.
She continued:
"The debate is to minimize it or to stop combined sewer overflow. The city is looking at how to minimize it. We are proposing ways to stop it...We are saying, use the money you have to upgrade and expand the stormwater collection system... low-impact development is the best way to clean stormwater, the best way to recharge our aquifers.”
Here are some more links.
Here's the link. You'll need to scroll down to page four.
This project is mandated by the state Department of Ecology. Darlene Schanfald and Tyler Ahlgren believe there is a more sustainable and more cost effective way to handle the City's stormwater.
Last May, Darlene Schanfald spoke to a meeting of the Port Angeles Business Association. She spoke in favor of disconnecting residential downspouts, which would allow stormwater to filter through the soil. She also favored planting trees for filtration. She said these methods were preferable to installing new sewer lines. She referred to the city of Saginaw, Michigan (warning: .pdf file) as an example of how this could be done.
She continued:
"The debate is to minimize it or to stop combined sewer overflow. The city is looking at how to minimize it. We are proposing ways to stop it...We are saying, use the money you have to upgrade and expand the stormwater collection system... low-impact development is the best way to clean stormwater, the best way to recharge our aquifers.”
Here are some more links.
posted by Tom Harper at 1:52 PM
10 Comments:
This project is mandated by the state Department of Ecology.
Isn't it kind of hard to fight them?
Actually, everyone should collect and use rainwater and stop paying water bills.
As Anami fairly correctly pointed out in an earlier posting (on another topic) this is an expensive boondoggle - a minimum of $50 million by the time it's finished - that will almost certainly have to be redone in the next five or six years. And who knows how much it will cost to do it a second time - but the initial $50 million will have been wasted.
Part of how we got to be stuck in this boondoggle is that prior City Councils ignored the problem for almost a decade - no budgeting for it, no real discussions or plans. My great disappointment with the current City Council is that a majority of them continue to support this expensive-but-useless project. It is sure to fail, does not address the real problem it is supposed to be dealing with, and, in case I haven't made
it clear, does nothing but cost us all a LOT of money.
Glenn Cutler is behind putting this project together physically, but the real fault for this situation can be atributed to Karen Rogers. It was on her watch that the City Council just sat and did nothing...
Yes --- I agree that prior city councils under the leadership of people like Rogers, Madsen and Williams laid the land mines for their successors to trip-over. The city will continue to suffer for years to come trying to straighten out the mismanagement messes they left. I had higher hopes for Kent Myers' ability to direct the city on a healthier path. If he has that ability, he is choosing not to use it. Another big waste of money on his salary.
It is mandated by the department of ecology but not to do it in a way that is how they did it in the 1800s.
A further evolution is not just a good idea but the EPA will require it to be so by 2015 making this project obsolete.
watch www.PortAngelesExaminer.info for an upcoming article on this.
LAter tonight or tomorrow we will be posting the speeches we will be giving during the public comment portion of Tuesdays city council meeting. If you cant make it get it live on your cell phone or computer by following @PAexaminer on twitter or find the summary and log of tweets at www.PortAngelesExaminer.info
I got a couple emails about this topic, here. Glad to see it. Sad that the PDN doesn't think it is important for the residents to know what is going on about this. This last Monday there was a meeting of the full City Council, with reps from the State Dept of Ecology present, to discuss the most expensive project in Port Angeles. No story about that in the PDN.
City docs show that 60% of residents will be paying over $8,000 for a problem they have nothing to do with. But, the majority of the current City Council members don't seem to care about that. City docs show that the problem that causes the sewage overflows are caused by "inflow", roof downspouts that can be disconnected for around $20, not $8,000. But the current city council majority doesn't seem to care what you will have to pay.
They seem to want to be able to cover their political butts. Staff tells the council that to cut off a roof downspout will cost $4,200 per house. Anyone can Google "roof downspout disconnect sewage overflow" and see numerous City websites from all over the country saying it costs around $20.
BBC, yes, the State has mandated a project. But what project? Any project, regardless of costs or impacts?
I met with Greg Zentner, the primary guy from Ecology who has been working with the City on this issue, a year ago last May (and who was at the meeting last Monday). At the beginning of that meeting, I put a big map of the City's storm water collection system on the table. He picked it up, and after looking at it, asked "Is this a proposed system?" It was obvious he had not seen it before, although he has been working with City staff on this issue for years. Even at last Mondays' meeting, Zentner was saying Ecology had not done it's job concerning this issue.
It is clear, and obvious the city residents are being saddled with a huge project that does not "fix" anything, and only attempts to contain the aftermath of a simple issue. City documents confirm there are no overflows without rain events. The rain causes the overflows. Keep the rain out of the system.
I'll be happy to discuss this project with anybody. My email is: tallgreen@earthlink.net
Thanks for your concern, Tyler Ahlgren
Please excuse another post from me on this topic. I don't want to clog up this thread with my posts, but I think the following points are important for those interested in the "CSO" project.
In my research, I discovered that cities such as Minneapolis have enacted a "Mandatory Disconnection Ordinance" that requires all facilities that put rain water into the city's sanitary sewer be disconnected within 90 days. The cities have done this specifically to address sewage system overflows.
But in Port Angeles, these existing connections are being allowed to stay connected. Why? Everyone knows it is the rainwater being put into the pipes that cause the overflows!
The City says 41% of the residences in the city have roof downspouts connected to the sewer system. That is thousands of houses. I did the simple math to calculate how much rain 3,000 houses put in, and found it exceeded the amount of the overflow events. (There are 7,200 service connections to the city's sewer). Even calculating for 1,500 average roofs still showed the overflows are caused by roof downspouts.
Again, anyone can Google what impacts rain from roof downspouts have concerning sewage overflows. This is not unique to Port Angeles.
There is a lot of information on how many average roofs cause what scale of overflows that can be found on other city websites.
How much? At $20 per downspout, and 3,000 houses, that is $60,000. If each house has 4 downspouts connected, that is $240,000. $80 per house, instead of over $8,000.
How long to achieve compliance with Ecology mandates? With the ordinance, homeowners are given 90 days. There could be no more sewage overflows by next winter, if the council took action now.
There is much more to this issue. Again, feel free to email me if you are interested in this topic. Tyler
This kind of "planned obsolescence" is a classic in government bureaucracies. By the time it's done, it's outdated. Why is that always the way it goes?
Just another way for that special circle of people to get taxpayer money into their pockets. If the Council supports homeowners fixing their own connections for under $100, where is the big money for the consultants? Come on people, get with the program and keep the special people in Port Angeles rolling in taxpayer money!
Anonymous has a big mouth and a few good points besides.
The money for this CSO project is approved under a concept by the city that it has to do what its told by Ecology and by extension the EPA. They could fight them but that would take courage. They would have to have disgust for the LEFT like I do.
The idea that storm water should be treated as sewage is stupid. Ecology does this to retain power over people. They hate people especially poor white people that have lived here for a long time (Disagree? Look at the Governors actions).
This city is over with as formed. It is shrinking in population and business while the property taxes go way up, the utilities go way up and the amount of city employees go up. Something has to go down: Amount of homeowners who give a shit is shrinking and the ones I know are activated and pissed off..
Soon Washington will have an income tax to pay off political debt to teachers unions. More taxes for weak government that won't stand up for its citizens!
My family has been here since the 1920's. We love Port Angeles but hate paying the city for more stupid LEFTIST ideas.
Post a Comment
<< Home