Code Blue Implementation

1,397 views

Published on

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,397
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
11
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • NEMO stands for Nonpoint Education for Municipal Officials. NEMO was created in 1991, and is based at the University of Connecticut’s Cooperative Extension System.
  • Review of stormwater campaigns around the country Understood limitations of affecting behavior Wanted to mimic MD’s use of irreverent humor Operated with limited budget Primary goal: get the website out
  • With suggestions for partnering with local non-profit groups (this worked in at least one town)
  • Refer to Handouts: Pet Waste Strategy and Outreach Overview (detailed through coming slides)
  • Code Blue Implementation

    1. 1. Code Blue Implementation Engaging the Regulated Community in Developing LID and Stormwater Standards M. James Riordan, AICP, LEED AP MaryAnn Nusom Haverstock Lorraine Joubert
    2. 2. Connecticut LID and Stormwater General Permit Stakeholder Process Jim Riordan, AICP, LEED AP October 20, 2011
    3. 3. <ul><li>Project Overview </li></ul><ul><li>Investigation of Alternatives </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Background Data-Identification of Alternatives </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>General Consensus Building </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Advantages and Disadvantages </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Debating Alternatives </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Selecting Alternatives (Dot Voting) </li></ul><ul><li>Identifying Preferred Policy Structure </li></ul><ul><li>Implementation </li></ul>Agenda
    4. 4. Overview Project
    5. 5. When the Project Began <ul><li>DEEP had a draft stormwater general permit out for stakeholder review </li></ul><ul><li>Draft permit required use of LID measures to match pre- & post-development runoff volume </li></ul><ul><li>Building industry groups very resistant to this approach </li></ul><ul><li>Other stakeholders voiced concerns </li></ul>
    6. 6. Project Purpose <ul><li>Build low-impact development (LID) into stormwater general permits (SGPs or GPs) and policy: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Connecticut Stormwater Quality Manual </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Connecticut Guidelines for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Partner-driven process </li></ul>
    7. 7. Project Specific Objectives <ul><li>Establish LID approach for SGP </li></ul><ul><li>Incorporate performance goals and criteria in SGPs </li></ul><ul><li>Identify mechanisms to give LID priority attention </li></ul>
    8. 8. Elements of a Policy Framework <ul><li>Runoff volume as an indicator </li></ul><ul><li>Relationship between runoff volume and pollution control </li></ul><ul><li>Permit limits relative to storm size </li></ul><ul><li>Guidance with performance criteria </li></ul><ul><li>Stormwater utilities </li></ul>
    9. 9. Meeting Schedule <ul><li>Partner Workshop 6 on July 28 was added to review the final draft guidance documents </li></ul>
    10. 10. Partners
    11. 11. Partners
    12. 12. Partners
    13. 13. Webpage to Transmit Information http://www.ct.gov/dep/cwp/view.asp?a=2719&q=459488&depNav_GID=1654 Or Google … “ CTDEEP stormwater LID evaluation”
    14. 14. Project Flow Chart
    15. 15. Background Data Identifying Alternatives
    16. 16. Methods of Data Collection <ul><li>Two Basic Methods: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Web searches and webpage mining </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Interviews with stormwater managers and partners </li></ul></ul>
    17. 17. State Information & Interviews <ul><li>We collected information from the following States: </li></ul><ul><li>Alaska </li></ul><ul><li>Arizona </li></ul><ul><li>California </li></ul><ul><li>Florida </li></ul><ul><li>Idaho </li></ul><ul><li>Maine </li></ul><ul><li>Massachusetts </li></ul><ul><li>Minnesota </li></ul><ul><li>Nevada </li></ul><ul><li>New Mexico </li></ul><ul><li>New Hampshire </li></ul><ul><li>New York </li></ul><ul><li>Oklahoma </li></ul><ul><li>Oregon </li></ul><ul><li>Pennsylvania </li></ul><ul><li>Rhode Island </li></ul><ul><li>Vermont </li></ul><ul><li>Washington </li></ul><ul><li>West Virginia </li></ul><ul><li>Wisconsin </li></ul>
    18. 18. Findings - Performance Standard <ul><li>What types of performance standard are used? </li></ul>Type of Standard Examples Runoff Volume <ul><li>WQV (1”, 0.5”, 25%, etc.); require or encourage LID </li></ul>Pollution Reduction (linked to volume) <ul><li>80 or 90% TSS </li></ul><ul><li>Turbidity </li></ul><ul><li>Nutrients </li></ul><ul><li>Sensitive sites </li></ul>Performance standard <ul><li>Area set-aside for LID </li></ul><ul><li>MEP and narrative </li></ul><ul><li>Imperviousness reduction </li></ul>
    19. 19. Findings - Giving LID Priority <ul><li>What types of standards are used to establish priority? </li></ul>Type of Standard Examples Runoff Volume <ul><li>Percentage or Fraction of WQV </li></ul>Performance standard <ul><li>MEP and narrative </li></ul><ul><li>Imperviousness reduction requirements </li></ul><ul><li>Area set-aside for LID </li></ul>
    20. 20. Telephone Interviews <ul><li>Interviewed 27 partners </li></ul><ul><li>Fuss & O’Neill placed calls </li></ul><ul><li>Interviews were loosely based on an interview questionnaire </li></ul><ul><li>Significant Divergence of Opinion </li></ul>
    21. 21. Identifying Alternatives & Decision Criteria Consensus Workshop
    22. 22. Consensus Workshop Resolution Discuss consensus Create a matrix Discuss implications 10 minutes Context Purpose Workshop Question Process Warm-up 10 minutes Brainstorm Your list Team list Pass up first round 15 minutes Clustering 4 – 6 pairs Pass up round two Tag clusters Pass up remaining cards 10 - 15 minutes Naming Discuss largest cluster 3 – 5 word name Remaining clusters 10 - 20 minutes
    23. 23. Card Storming Results
    24. 24. Card Storming Results <ul><li>Criteria Identified </li></ul><ul><li>Economic Market Viability </li></ul><ul><li>Education </li></ul><ul><li>Clear and Understandable </li></ul><ul><li>Practicable-Flexible </li></ul><ul><li>Legal Administrable </li></ul><ul><li>Environmental Benefit </li></ul>
    25. 25. Identifying Advantages & Disadvantages of Alternatives Carousel Workshop
    26. 26. Carousel Workshop Nonregulatory Performance Standards Pollution Reduction Standards Regulatory Stormwater Utilities Additional Alternatives
    27. 27. Station Setup - Name of Alternative Strengths Benefits Weaknesses Dangers
    28. 28. Combined Card Storming-Carousel Results
    29. 29. Combined Card Storming-Carousel Results
    30. 30. Alternatives Debating
    31. 31. Purpose of the Workshop <ul><li>Examine ideas about how alternatives work together </li></ul><ul><li>Have an open dialog about alternatives </li></ul><ul><li>Leverage collective knowledge </li></ul>
    32. 32. Dot Voting Selecting Consensus Alternatives
    33. 33. Purpose of Dot Voting <ul><li>Identify alternatives for immediate development </li></ul><ul><li>Determine how alternatives compare with criteria </li></ul><ul><li>Determine how alternatives fit best together when considering criteria </li></ul>
    34. 34. Dot-Voting Results
    35. 35. Observations <ul><li>Strong interest in nonregulatory alternatives. </li></ul><ul><li>Compliment of regulatory and nonregulatory alternatives; and alternatives within the nonregulatory category. </li></ul><ul><li>Need enabling legislation for the stormwater utility guidance document to work. </li></ul><ul><li>Adjusted standards could be part of the LID manual and SGP. </li></ul>
    36. 36. Debating Structure Preferred LID Policy
    37. 37. Context for Discussion <ul><li>Consider Five “Design” Scenarios </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Redevelopment or a highly urbanized setting </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>New residential development </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>New industrial or commercial development </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Development in a sensitive area </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Roadway projects </li></ul></ul>
    38. 38. Topics for Discussion <ul><li>Form of the LID Manual? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Stand-alone manual </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Appendix to Stormwater Manual and Soil Erosion Guidelines </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Full rewrite of the Stormwater Manual and Soil Erosion Guidelines </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Giving LID Priority? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Require a fraction of runoff is managed using LID </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Require a set-aside area </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Maximum extent practicable </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Another idea? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Incorporating Performance Goals and Criteria in General Permits? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>LID manual referenced in SGP </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Incorporate specific LID standards into SGP </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Incorporate manual reference and LID standards in SGP </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>LID manual, but no reference or standards in SGP </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Adjusted Standards for Areas of Concern? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Redevelopment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sensitive areas </li></ul></ul>
    39. 39. Consensus <ul><li>LID manual and performance standards in SGP </li></ul><ul><li>Appendices first, then full rewrite </li></ul><ul><li>Adjusted standards for some areas </li></ul><ul><li>Use LID to the Maximum Extent Practicable </li></ul>
    40. 40. Breakthrough Moment for Permitting <ul><li>Preference for performance standard </li></ul><ul><li>Site developer/designer selects management measures </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>LID measures </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Conventional treatment controls </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Or some combination thereof </li></ul></ul></ul></ul>
    41. 41. LID & Permitting <ul><li>Draft permit maintains a volume based performance standard, but </li></ul><ul><li>LID is no longer a must </li></ul><ul><li>LID updates to the SWQ Manual & E&S Guidelines completed and incorporated by reference into the draft permit </li></ul><ul><li>Consensus from building & environmental groups on this approach </li></ul>
    42. 42. SNEAPA Municipal Land Use Evaluation Farmington River Watershed MaryAnn Nusom Haverstock - DEEP Bureau of Water Protection & Land Reuse October 20, 2011
    43. 44. Watershed Management <ul><li>Watershed Management is an integrated approach addressing all aspects of water quality and related natural resource management, including pollution prevention and source control. </li></ul><ul><li>(2004 CT-DEP Stormwater Quality Manual) </li></ul>
    44. 45. LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT <ul><li>LID is a site design strategy intended to maintain or replicate predevelopment hydrology through the use of small-scale controls integrated throughout the site to manage runoff as close to its source as possible. (2004 CT-DEP Stormwater Quality Manual) </li></ul>
    45. 46. DEP Municipal Assistance <ul><li>Farmington River Enhancement Grant </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Municipal Land Use Evaluations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Received funding from Supplemental Environmental Project (SEP) from previous enforcement action </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Funding to benefit the Farmington River Watershed and all towns in the watershed </li></ul></ul></ul>
    46. 47. Farmington River Enhancement Grant <ul><ul><li>Municipal Land Use Evaluation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Request for municipal proposals in 2008 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Review of local Regulations and Ordinances </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Remove barriers to low impact development in current regulations </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Revise regulations and ordinances to encourage LID techniques in future development </li></ul></ul></ul></ul>
    47. 48. DEP Municipal Assistance <ul><ul><li>Municipal Land Use Evaluations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>10 towns in the Farmington River Watershed </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Evaluate current local regulations and ordinances </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Revise regulations to remove barriers to low impact development </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Hold workshops with guest speakers including DEP programs, NEMO and University of New Hampshire Stormwater Center </li></ul></ul></ul>
    48. 49. Municipal Land Use Evaluation <ul><li>Municipalities subcontract expertise as needed by town: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Legal/Regulatory </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Facilitation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Environmental science </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Planning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Engineering </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Town approved all submittals by their subcontractor. DEP approved all Project deliverables as specified in scope of work. </li></ul></ul>
    49. 50. Municipal Land Use Evaluation <ul><li>Farmington River Watershed </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ten Towns submitted applications and granted funding (recommended upper limit of $50,000 in RFP): </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Avon - $50,000 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Barkhamsted - $44,305 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Colebrook - $35,000 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>East Granby - $37,000 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Harwinton - $35,000 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>New Hartford - $47,100 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Plainville - $50,000 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Simsbury - $25,000 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Torrington - $25,000 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Winchester - $35,000 </li></ul></ul></ul>
    50. 51. Municipal Land Use Evaluation <ul><li>Typical DEP/Municipal Scope of Work </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Form local land use committee </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Contract with services as appropriate for town </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Review municipal regulations as specified when drafting scope with DEP. (Focus on zoning, subdivision and wetlands) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Draft regulatory revisions with municipal committee and consultant </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Present findings / vote to adopt regulatory revisions </li></ul></ul>
    51. 52. Municipal Land Use Evaluation <ul><li>Additional project work within some scopes include: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Town specific Engineering Standards </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>LID and stormwater management design manual </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ecological and Resource Assessment </li></ul></ul>
    52. 53. Summary - Town of Avon Municipal Land Use Evaluation Project <ul><li>$50,000 – Village Center focus </li></ul><ul><li>Hired Milone & MacBroom, Inc. </li></ul><ul><li>Meetings with Planning & Zoning Commission, Inland Wetlands Commission, Natural Resources Commission, Ensign Bickford (significant land owner), and the public. </li></ul><ul><li>Adopted Avon Village Center zoning regulations in 7/2011. </li></ul><ul><li>Draft regulations have been prepared for future adoption, to include: Proposed Design Guidelines, Proposed Changes to Zoning Regulations and Subdivision Regulations </li></ul><ul><li>Draft Master Mixed Use Development Plan and proposed changes to the Plan of Conservation and Development were also prepared for future adoption by the Planning & Zoning Commission. </li></ul>
    53. 54. Summary - Town of Barkhamsted Municipal Land Use Evaluation Project <ul><li>$44,305 - municipal land use regulatory evaluation, road ordinance evaluation and biodiversity study. </li></ul><ul><li>Group included First Selectman, Planning and Zoning Commission, Inland/Wetlands Commission and Conservation Commission and town residents. </li></ul><ul><li>Hired Dr. Michael Klemens, Cary Institute, Biodiversity study </li></ul><ul><li>Martin Connor, AICP and Tom Grimaldi, PE for technical review of regulation and ordinance changes. </li></ul><ul><li>Enacted changes to Inland Wetlands Regulations to incorporate LID definitions and practices. </li></ul><ul><li>Will present amendments to the Planning and Zoning Commission and Board of Selectmen in April for their action to incorporate LID practices in the zoning regulations and in the construction of roads and driveways in Town. </li></ul><ul><li>Potential resistance for proposed private road regulations. </li></ul>
    54. 55. Summary - Town of East Granby Municipal Land Use Evaluation Project <ul><li>$37,000 </li></ul><ul><li>Created a Land Use Committee made up of the regular members of IWC and PZC </li></ul><ul><li>Hired Glen Chalder of Planimetrics & Steve Trinkaus PE as professional consultants to aid in the technical review </li></ul><ul><li>Consultants are drafting changes to Zoning & Inland Wetlands Regulations & Engineering Standards: Changes included impervious surface coverage, parking requirements, driveway standards & added a new Stormwater Management section including maintenance agreements </li></ul><ul><li>Considering changes to Ordinance to allow the Town to charge the developer for a professional review of build LID features to ensure their proper functioning </li></ul>
    55. 56. Summary - Town of Harwinton Municipal Land Use Evaluation Project <ul><li>$35,000 </li></ul><ul><li>Stakeholders included our First Selectman, land use commission members, a member of the Land Conservation Trust, Harwinton’s Highway Supervisor and two members from a local contracting business. </li></ul><ul><li>Contracted with Glenn Chalder of Planimetrics and Trinkaus Engineering to assist in review of desired regulation changes. </li></ul><ul><li>Enacted changes to the Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Regulations, Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Regulations. </li></ul><ul><li>Changes in the regulations were coordinated with town manual: Recommended Low Impact Development Techniques – Design & Construction Standards . A Stormwater Maintenance Agreement with facility owner provides for long term maintenance. </li></ul>
    56. 57. Summary -Town of Plainville Municipal Land Use Evaluation Project <ul><li>$50,000 </li></ul><ul><li>Consulting firms of Planimetrics & Trinkaus Engineering </li></ul><ul><li>Established a Land Use Committee consisting of the P & Z Commission members </li></ul><ul><li>Held stakeholder meetings with local contractors, design firms, land use attorneys & with Plainville Engineering, Public Works and Roadways </li></ul><ul><li>Adopted “Low Impact Development and Stormwater Management Design Manual” </li></ul><ul><li>Reorganized, revised and adopted Zoning, Subdivision and Wetland Regulations to remove “LID” barriers and require adherence to the new Low Impact Development and Stormwater Management and Design Manual </li></ul>
    57. 58. Summary -Town of Simsbury Municipal Land Use Evaluation Project <ul><li>$25,000 - part of Town Center charrette planning process. </li></ul><ul><li>Established Board of Selectmen charrette subcommittee to oversee process including MLUE work including 8 members, land use chairs and First Selectman. </li></ul><ul><li>Included LID work in charrette process. Enabled LID inclusion into Town Center Code by inclusion into final charrette Report (June, 2010) and final draft of Town Center Code (February 18, 2011). </li></ul><ul><li>Worked with Univ of New Hampshire Stormwater Center and held LID workshop for Town Engineers in Simsbury. </li></ul><ul><li>Solicited 3 proposals for completion of detailed LID and Light Imprint work to finish MLUE requirements. </li></ul><ul><li>Town Center Code adopted by Zoning Commission April, 2011. Enable completion of LID/LI MLUE work by consultant. </li></ul>
    58. 59. Summary -Town of Simsbury Municipal Land Use Evaluation Project
    59. 60. Summary - Town of Torrington Municipal Land Use Evaluation Project <ul><li>$25,000 </li></ul><ul><li>Created a 12 person stakeholders group Group included City staff, Mayor, City Planner, ZEO, business leaders & commission members (1 per board) </li></ul><ul><li>Hired Planimetrics & Ken Hrica PE as consultants </li></ul><ul><li>Enacted changes to Zoning & Inland Wetlands Regulations & Engineering Standards: Changes included Conservation Subdivision, impervious surface coverage, parking requirements, driveway standards & added a new Stormwater Management section including maintenance agreements </li></ul><ul><li>Enacted changes to City Ordinance to allow the City to charge the developer for a professional review of build LID features to ensure their proper functioning </li></ul>
    60. 61. Summary - Town of New Hartford Municipal Land Use Evaluation Project <ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>$47,000 </li></ul><ul><li>Established 12 member stake holder’s group Planning and Zoning, Inland Wetlands, Economic Development, Board of Selectman, MDC, Conservation Commission (2), a local farmer, a local business owner (2), and our Fire Chief and Highway Supervisor. </li></ul><ul><li>Hired Martin Connor AICP, as our Planner and Lenard Engineering as our Engineer. </li></ul><ul><li>The Inland Wetlands Commission Adopted changes to their regulations to incorporate Stormwater management. Also the upland review area was increased from 50 ft to 100 ft. The Adopted changes were based on DEP’s Inland Wetland and Watercourse Department’s suggestions and publication, “Guidelines – Upland Review Area Regulations Connecticut’s Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Act. </li></ul><ul><li>Proposed changes to the Zoning and Subdivision Regulations were presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission is currently in the process of rewriting their entire set of regulations. The LID regulations were written to be incorporated into these new regulations. The Commission views these changes favorably. </li></ul>
    61. 62. Summary - Town of New Hartford Municipal Land Use Evaluation Project <ul><li>Some of the proposed changes to the Zoning Regulations include: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Stormwater Management Plan requirements, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>reduced front yard minimum yard setback requirements, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>changes to landscaping requirements, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>reduced parking requirements, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>allowing a fee in lieu of parking </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>add LID terms to definitions, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>increase amount of pervious surface. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A new Section, “Stormwater Management Standards,” proposed to be added to the Zoning Regulations. </li></ul></ul>
    62. 63. Summary - Town of New Hartford Municipal Land Use Evaluation Project <ul><li>Proposed changes to the Subdivision Regulations include: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Requirements for Stormwater Management Plans, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>changes to Subdivision Map Requirements, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Site Plan Requirements, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Construction Plans and Grading Plans to incorporate LID, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>reducing pavement widths for new streets and replacing bituminous curbs with grass swales where appropriate. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Changes have been proposed to Subdivision Regulations, Appendix A, Roadway Construction Standards updating Roadway Cross Sections to include LID and eliminate inconsistencies. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Changes have been proposed to Subdivision Regulations, Appendix D Road Ordinance regarding raising inspection fees for new streets.  </li></ul></ul>
    63. 64. DEP - Municipal Assistance <ul><li>New DEP Web Page: www.ct.gov/dep/watershed </li></ul><ul><li>Watershed Municipal Outreach </li></ul><ul><li>http://www.ct.gov/dep/cwp/view.asp?a=2719&q=464958&depNav_GID=1654 </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Brochure for Green Capitols Project walking tour: http://www.ct.gov/dep/lib/dep/water/watershed_management/wm_plans/lid/green_capitols_brochure.pdf </li></ul></ul></ul>
    64. 65. DEP NPS PROGRAM HTTP://WWW.CT.GOV/DEP/CWP/VIEW.ASP?A=2719&Q=325628&DEPNAV_GID=1654&DEPNAV=| <ul><li>Program Oversight </li></ul><ul><ul><li>MaryAnn Nusom Haverstock – 424-3347 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Watershed Managers </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Eric Thomas - 424-3548 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Susan Peterson – 424-3854 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Chris Malik – 424-3959 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Lakes Management </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Chuck Lee – 424- 3716 </li></ul></ul>
    65. 66. When The Prescription Is Education, What’s A Municipal Official To Do? Lorraine Joubert and Lisa Philo, RI NEMO SNEAPA, October 20, 2011 Phase II Storm Water Permit:
    66. 67. The Plot <ul><li>The Project setup </li></ul><ul><li>Gadgets you can use to meet Phase II Education requirements </li></ul><ul><li>Mission accomplished? </li></ul>Phase II education? …this one is under control.
    67. 68. The setup: <ul><li>RI has 39 cities and town, 41 regulated MS4s. </li></ul><ul><li>Goal - help all meet education/participation requirements using consistent messages. </li></ul><ul><li>Funded by the RI DOT with a grant from the U.S. Federal Highway Administration “to support compliance with state and federal stormwater requirements.” </li></ul><ul><li>Project was “up and running” in 2006 to 2011. </li></ul>
    68. 69. The Allies <ul><li>The Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management provides oversight to ensure compliance with the RIDEM stormwater permit program. </li></ul><ul><li>The Southern Rhode Island Conservation District has facilitated the development of many materials, and </li></ul><ul><li>An active advisory committee has been integral to the program. </li></ul>Tell me, Miss Moneypenny. Did you ever think the DEM and DOT would be stormwater allies?
    69. 70. N onpoint E ducation for M unicipal O fficials RI NEMO provides training and technical tools to help local decision makers manage impacts of changing land use on water resources. RI NEMO is part of the URI Cooperative Extension Water Quality Program and a member of the National NEMO network.
    70. 71. Our Dual Identity for this project
    71. 72. The Enemies <ul><li>Municipal officials, trying to meet their Phase II permit requirements </li></ul><ul><li>The general Rhode Island public, who (we think!) needs to know about stormwater </li></ul>The Target Audience
    72. 73. The Gadgets <ul><li>In an effort to reach residents across the state, RI NEMO implemented a Statewide Public Education Campaign in the Summer of 2008: </li></ul>
    73. 74. A Logo
    74. 75. The Website RIStormwaterSolutions.org
    75. 76. Humor
    76. 77. Quarterly Newspaper Cartoon Ads Names of local water resources mentioned here!
    77. 78. Consistent Messages
    78. 79. Coupons
    79. 80. Bulk Purchase Offers
    80. 81. Community Workshops with URI Master Gardeners
    81. 82. Youth Education
    82. 83. Youth Education
    83. 84. Rain Gardens
    84. 85. Organizing Gadgets: Strategies <ul><li>Pet Waste </li></ul><ul><li>Storm Drain Marking </li></ul><ul><li>Reaching Businesses </li></ul><ul><li>Youth Education </li></ul><ul><li>Rain Gardens </li></ul><ul><li>Local Examples </li></ul>
    85. 86. Specialized Training for MS4s <ul><li>New RI Stormwater Design and Installation Standards Manual </li></ul><ul><li>Public Works Facility good housekeeping. </li></ul><ul><li>LID for Linear Transportation Projects </li></ul><ul><li>Stormwater utility district series Fall 2011. </li></ul><ul><li>Presentations at: www.uri.edu/ce/wq/NEMO/ Workshops-Support </li></ul>Your attendance is expected
    86. 87. The Latest Standards and RIDEM LID Guidance
    87. 88. Mission Accomplished? <ul><li>Municipal stormwater coordinators wear many hats. </li></ul><ul><li>Most towns do not have sufficient resources for stormwater education – statewide approach more cost effective. </li></ul>
    88. 89. Small victories… <ul><ul><li>Stormwater in the news via print, electronic media. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Stormwater information, cartoons and articles trickling into town publications, web sites. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Town environmental fairs held with a stormwater twist. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Pet waste stations, storm drain marking common. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Youth education expanding at schools, farmers markets. </li></ul></ul>
    89. 90. … .Future direction with a Sequel? <ul><li>Promote Youth Education </li></ul><ul><li>Continue statewide outreach with basic level of local participation. </li></ul><ul><li>Establish “model” outreach with TMDL. </li></ul><ul><li>Support use of LID through local ordinances. </li></ul>
    90. 91. RI NEMO is funded by the RI Department of Transportation as part of RIDOT’s Storm Water Management Program under the RI Stormwater Solutions project, in partnership with the RI Department of Environmental Management. For more information go to: www.RIStormwaterSolutions.org Acknowledgments
    91. 92. Thank you for your time <ul><li>Lorraine Joubert URI Cooperative Extension, RI NEMO </li></ul><ul><li>(401) 874-2138 </li></ul><ul><li> ljoubert@uri.edu </li></ul><ul><li>Resources at: </li></ul><ul><li>RIstormwatersolutions.org </li></ul><ul><li>www.uri.edu/ce/wq/NEMO </li></ul>

    ×