Laserfiche WebLink
416 <br /> <br />community by community how much will be allocated to each community facility. Mr. <br />Frederick said that communities have a choice of 1) discharging higher levels and buying <br />credits from another utility; 2) upgrading their wastewater plan to meet the new <br />allocation, or 3) upgrading their plant to exceed the new allocation and sell credits to <br />other utilities. He said a decision needs to be made about what to do at Moore's Creek <br />and how to pay for it. Mr. Frederick said there is an issue with how allocations are done, <br />and urban users could bear the brunt of the cost. <br /> <br />Mr. Lynch asked if it would be cheaper to buy credit. <br /> <br />Mr. Frederick said Rivanna can look at that. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati said other similar communities could also suffer, and he asked if <br />there had been discussions about banding together. <br /> <br />Mr. Frederick said there have been some discussions. <br /> <br />Mr. Caravati suggested including the issue in the City's legislative package. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch said that rather than put it all at Moore's Creek he thinks it would be <br />better spent elsewhere. He said his main concern is if we spend $30 million and get <br />Moore's Creek completely clean he would be okay with that, but stuff is coming at us <br />from upstream. He said we should set our own goal internally and come up with our own <br />solution about how to get there. He said we could buy credit and use it for storm water <br />mediation which would be more cost effective. <br /> <br />REPORT: CONCEPT OF STORM WATER UTILITY <br /> <br /> Ms. Judy Mueller, Director of Public Works, said that the City is facing several <br />issues: unfunded federal mandates, an aging infrastructure and storm water needs. She <br />said that the top five drainage projects in the City are expected to cost over $1 million. <br />She said there are competing needs in the general fund. She said more urban <br />communities are looking at charging a storm water utility, with single residences paying <br />about the same, and others with more impervious surfaces paying more. She <br />recommended that Council create a utility. She said the residential average would be <br />approximately $50 per year and could be placed on the real estate bills. She said a lot <br />more can also be done with public outreach and education. Ms. Mueller asked Council if <br />they want to go in this direction as we start to look at the budget. She asked what <br />questions Councilors may have or what information may be needed. <br /> <br />Mr. Caravati asked would this not be regressive for low income families. <br /> <br />Ms. Mueller said no models have been found that deal with that issue. <br /> <br />Ms. Hamilton asked if there are categories of people who could be excluded. <br /> <br />Ms. Mueller said that can be explored. <br /> <br /> Mr. O'Connell said that bonds could be used to initially fund projects that have <br />been out there for years. <br /> <br /> Ms. Hamilton said the issue is more how we are going to do it. She said her <br />concern is that single family residences would pay the same regardless of their square <br />footage. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch said that remediation should be made available to residential as well as <br />commercial properties. Mr. Lynch said he agrees that we need to move forward and <br />provide more funding, but he is not sure a fixed tax is the best way. He expressed <br />concern with the projects put forward as there is nothing there that would involve <br />improving water quality. <br /> <br /> Ms. Kristel Riddervold, Environmental Manager, said that a new study is defining <br />those things. <br /> <br /> <br />