CITY OF OWASSO
Roadway To Implementation – How A Small Oklahoma
Community Adopted A Successful Stormwater Program
Ana Stagg, PE, CFM, Meshek & Associates, PLC
Roger Stevens, City of Owasso
1437 SOUTH BOULDER AVE., SUITE 1080  TULSA, OKLAHOMA 74119  918.392.5620 (P) 918.392.5621 (F)  WWW.MESHEKENGR.COM
 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
–
ABOUT OWASSO
–
WHAT HAPPENED
 PROJECT APPROACH
–
MASTER PLANNING PROCESS
–
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM
–
IMPERVIOUS AREA STUDY
–
CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS
 PROJECT SCHEDULE
 QUESTIONS
AGENDA – THE PROCESS
 SPEAKERS QUALIFICATIONS
ROGER STEVENS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

Served as Owasso Public Works
Director 2002-2007

Currently serves as Owasso Public
Works Director since 2007

Over15 years of experience in civil
engineering, management
consulting and municipal
government.

Certified Water and Wastewater
Works Operator OK-20972(B) OK95405(A)

Employed with the City of Owasso,
Public Works Department, since
1991

Member of INCOG (Transportation
Technical Committee)

Member of the Owasso Economic
Development Authority

BS, Civil Engineering, 1993 Florida
Institute of Technology
Member of the Owasso Annexation
Committee

ME, Environmental Engineering,
1997, Cornell University
1997 Eagle Award Winner for
Excellence in Public Service

At City of Owasso, Public
Department, since 1991. (P.S. In
1980, I was only 8 years old).

Certified Floodplain Manager OK06-00048

Oklahoma PE 20914

Certified Water and Wastewater
Works Operator OK-20972(B) OK95405(A)



MBA, Business Administration,
2003, Northwest University, Kellogg
Graduate School of Business
ABOUT THE SPEAKERS
ANA STAGG, CONSULTING ENGINEER
Country
State
Counties
Incorporated
United States
Oklahoma
Tulsa, Rogers
1904
Government – City Manager
• Mayor
Steve Cataudella
• City Manager Rodney J Ray
Area
• Total
10.1 sq mi (26.0 km2)
• Land
10.0 sq mi (26.0 km2)
• Water
0.1 sq mi (0.06 km2)
Population (2000)
• Total
18,502
• Density
1,844.4/sq mi
Annual Budget
•General
$ 5.5 million
•Utility
$ 7.3 million
Website
www.cityofowasso.com
ABOUT OWASSO, OKLAHOMA
Coordinates: 36°17′25″N 95°49′43″W /
36.29028°N 95.82861°W / 36.29028; -95.82861
growth rate was 7.5%.
 2000, population of
18,502.
 2010, population
projected at 35,000.
 2000-2003, voted as
the highest growth
rate in Oklahoma for
cities of at least 10,000
people.
 2000-2010, Owasso
transformed from a
small rural community
to a thriving suburban
city.
2000-2010 OWASSO BLOSSOMS…
 1990-2000, annual
planning documents
 Secure new financing
resources
 Upgrade priority
infrastructure
 Improve essential services
 Support development
WITH GROWTH CAME PROSPERITY…
 Update critical master
 Overtopped bridges
 Roadway closures
 Public objection
WITH GROWTH CAME RUNOFF…
 Increased flooding
DEVELOPING A PLAN OF ATTACK…
DON’Ts
 Apply a watershed approach
 Be reactive
 Listen/inventory all
 Ignore the problem
complaints
 Investigate partnering
opportunities
 Use quantitative
prioritization processes
 Explain implementation plan
in detail
 Provide ample comment
periods
 Employ process mediators
 Consult experts
 Follow up with
agreements/promises
 Start without a plan
 Overlook the watershed
effect
 Act in response to the
squeaky wheel
 Use qualitative prioritization
processes
 Neglect (overreact to)
development
 Forget already developed
areas
FORMULATING THE PLAN…
DO’s
 Beginning of Process –
USE QUESTIONNAIRES
 Following Inventory Phase
 Review Mitigation Measures
 Draft Plan – OBTAIN
PUBLIC BUY-IN
 Public Hearing @ Planning
Commission for Final Plan
 City Council / County
Commission Public Hearing
for Final Plan – MAKE IT
FORMAL
SEEK PUBLIC SUPPORT EARLY…
 Start Early – DO IT OFTEN
 Television Coverage
 Public Meetings
 Newspapers
 Radio/TV Public
Announcements
 Community/Civic
Groups
ADVERTISE AND COMMUNICATE…
 Utility Billing Inserts
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
 Appointees of Elected
 City Manager/Asst. City
Officials
Manager
 Flood Victims
 Building Officials
 Planning Commission
 Utilities
 Board of Adjustment
 Emergency Management
 Floodplain Board
 Interested Citizens
 Parks & Recreation
 Economic Development
 Floodplain Manager
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT OPPORTUNITIES…
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
WHAT’S THE BENEFIT?
 Existing problems
 Prevent new problems
 New land development
 Correct existing problems
 Increased impervious area
 Enhance the community's
 Speeding up surface flow
with paved streets and
parking lots, lawn areas
instead of pasture, etc.
(resultant shorter times of
concentration)
 Loss of floodplain and
resultant loss of floodplain
storage
 Constructed channels that
speed up the water
through a reach
safety, environment and
quality of life
EXPLAINING WHY A PLAN IS NECESSARY…
WHAT’S THE CAUSE?
approach to…
–
Problem areas
inventory,
–
Alternative evaluation,
–
Development of
solutions, and
–
Prioritization of projects.
 Allows Hazard Mitigation
Plan – Appendix – Inclusion
 Facilitates Grant Funding
Step One:
Organize to Prepare the
Plan
Step Two:
Involve the Public
Step Three:
Coordinate with Other
Agencies and
Organizations
Step Four:
Assess the Hazard
Step Five:
Assess the Problem
Step Six:
Set Goals
Step Seven:
Review Possible Activities
Step Eight:
Draft an Action Plan
Step Nine:
Adopt the Plan
Step Ten:
Implement, Evaluate, and
Revise
FOLLOWING FEMA’s PROCESS…
 Provide detailed, logical
Application Process
 Enables Flood Plain Maps
FEMA 10-STEP PROCESS
Revisions (CLOMRs)
14
 Regional Stormwater
Detention/Retention
 Channelization,
Bridge/Culvert/Storm
Sewer Replacement
 Acquisition of Buildings in
PREVENTION OPTIONS
 Regional Stormwater
Detention/Retention
 Acquisition of Property in
the Floodplain
 Stricter Regulatory
Controls
the Floodplain
 Floodproofing
SELECTION AND PRIORITIZATION
 Flood Damage Reduction
Benefits
 Increased Safety
 Nuisance Flooding
Abeyance
 Allowance for Future
Development
 Multi-use Facilities Where
Possible
COVERING DETAILS…
MITIGATION OPTIONS
10-YEAR FLOODPLAIN MAPPING
100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN MAPPING
FLOODPLAIN VISUALIZATION
ILLUSTRATING RESULTS…
2-YEAR FLOODPLAIN MAPPING
IMPLEMENTING THE ($30-MILLION) PLAN…
17

Protect human life, health, and property;

Minimize public and private storm and
flood losses from stormwater runoff in the
City;


 (2003) Master Planning starts
 (2003) Ordinance 754
Provide for development of Stormwater
Master Plan which will define the existing
and future drainage system, identify
drainage facilities improvements and
project long-range capital improvements
requirements; and
establishes Stormwater
Management Program
 (2003) Resolution 2003-07
establishes ($2.50/ESU)
Service Fee…
Comply with the Phase II Stormwater
Management regulations.
ORDINANCE 754 (2003)
Customer Type
Residential
Non-residential
Meters > 2-inch
Meters < 2-inch
No. of
Customers
Annual
Unit
Charge
–
1 ESU – residential
–
3 ESU – nonresidential (w/ water
meters > 2-inch)
 (2003) Stormwater Program
Total
7,450
$30.00
$ 223,500
65
310
$30.00
$90.00
$ 1,950
$ 27,900
$ 253,350
starts w/ annual budget of
$265,000
SECURING FUNDING…
ORDINANCE 754 (2003)
is completed
 Over 30 Projects identified
 Total cost of program is over
30 projects and $20 million
 Top Ten Projects = $2.5
million
 Implementation @
$250,000/year > 10 yrs
 (2005) Commissioned
“Impervious Area Utility Fee”
 (2005-present) Find Partners
PHASE I OF IMPLEMENTATION…
 (2005) Master Drainage Plan

Detail edge of pavement, building
outlines and other impervious
planimetrics

Use developed polygons to measure
impervious areas

Determine size of Equivalent Service
Unit (ESU) for Owasso

Average ESU = 2,500 to 3,000 sq.ft

Recommend fee and estimate revenue
DELIVERABLES

Map of impervious surfaces linked to
GIS parcel data

Database containing:
IMPERVIOUS AREA STUDY…
TASKS
– Number of ESU’s per parcel
– Corresponding billing amount

Data Table developed in a format to
facilitate linkage to billing department
accounts

Customer Web Viewer identifying
parcel impervious area and/or ESU’s
20
 Phased implementation used
potential 600% increase nonresidential revenues
to mitigate impact…
 (2005) Commercial Service
Charge Implementation
Customer Type
Residential
Non-residential
Total
–
FY 05-06 25% of Fee
–
FY 06-07 50% of Fee
–
FY 07-08 75% of Fee
–
F Y 08-09 100% of Fee
FY 05-06
FY 06-07
FY 07-08
FY 08-09
$ 240,000
$ 45,000
$ 255,000
$ 90,000
$ 270,000
$ 135,000
$ 285,000
$ 180,000
$ 285,000
$ 345,000
$ 405,000
$ 465,000
IMPLEMENTATION OF IMPERVIOUS AREA
STUDY FINDINGS…
 Impervious Study revealed
PARTNERS WANTED
 Immediate 150% increase
 Tulsa County
in Non-Residential Fee
 2005-2006 Revenues
estimated at $285,000
 Potential annual revenues
of $480,000
 Maximum debt ability…
– 6%, 15 yr, $4.6 M
– 6%, 20 yr, $5.5 M
 Need…
– Top Priority > $6.7 M
– Total > $20 M
 Oklahoma Water
Resources Board
 Development Community
 FEMA - HMGP
CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS…
STORMWATER UTILITY FEE
 (May 2000) First complaints
recorded
 (June 2003) Study
commissioned
 (July 2003) Council
approves immediate action
 (August 2003) Design
completed
 (October 2003)
Construction begins
 (December 2003)
Construction ends
 Cost to City = $250,000
CITY BEGINS IMPLEMENTATION…
GOLF COURSE USED TO REMEDIATE RESIDENTIAL FLOODING
 (2004) Complaints received
on newly constructed
residential subdivision
 (2004) City commissioned
study finds errors in
engineering assumptions
 (2004) Developer asked to
construct remedial actions
 (2005) Necessary
improvements constructed
and functional
 Cost to City = $0
NEW DEVELOPMENT HELD TO STANDARDS…
DEVELOPER AGREES TO CONSTRUCT REMEDIAL DETENTION
detention facility serves as
Regional Detention
 Developer contributed land
and built facility
 City contributed 70% of
cost
 Total project savings of
$600,000
2006 DEVELOPERS STEP TO BAT…
 Residential development
 Provides remedial storage
for downstream residential
structures
 Provides detention storage
to future development
 Enables larger
development of retail
space
 Uses Fee-In-Lieu and
OWRB Loan for financing
 Project Value = $3 MIL
 Project Cost = $1.8 MIL
 City Cost = $0
2008 CITY HITS HOME RUN…
GARNETT REGIONAL DETENTION
– 2006-present, Phase II Program compliant
– 2009, new FIRM maps adopted (City’s MDP maps)
– 2011, Completing GIS inventory of stormwater
infrastructure
– 2010-2011, $1.5 million Stormwater Budget
– 2010-2015, $6.5 million earmarked for Stormwater
Improvements
OWASSO LOOKS AHEAD…
– 2003-2010, Over $5 Million spent in Stormwater
Improvements
CITY OF OWASSO
QUESTIONS?
Roadway To Implementation – How A Small Oklahoma
Community Adopted A Successful Stormwater Program
Ana Stagg, PE, CFM, Meshek & Associates, PLC
Roger Stevens, City of Owasso
1437 SOUTH BOULDER AVE., SUITE 1080  TULSA, OKLAHOMA 74119  918.392.5620 (P) 918.392.5621 (F)  WWW.MESHEKENGR.COM