The school board.

Yeah, you probably got a bus driver, right?

No, I think that all these things happened when they cleared out the snow creek.

Oh, when they yeah, they caught it.

So they had to use skid steers for a lot of that.

I know I watched that.

Yeah, yeah, so that's why there's more torn up than usual.

Yeah.

That's real crazy.

Yeah.

Yeah.

So if the school system because that is the inlet and the cover for the storm drain.

So at some point that becomes yours.

T and the S.

Not if it's in the bus loop.

The pipes underneath.

Anything in the on school property is responsibility of the school.

So just so does the school contact T and ES to fix it?

No.

They have buildings.

Yeah, they have facilities people.

If you if you ping them on it, so they're not on three of one so you want it.

Um they should drop it.

Yeah, so I'll probably have to ask the school board to spend that.

Does these photos were taken this morning?

It could be one of those things they may turn around because it might have been a contract in it where they were under the city purview, and they said, Hey, can you get a contract under this bus loop?

Yeah.

Yeah.

So there may be a little argument back for it.

Yeah.

Well, they've been doing things.

So you saw the one column that they which they moved from by the fire hydrant and they stuck it on the but it's tilted in such a way that somebody stepped on it.

Go down with it.

No, I'm not putting it.

Yeah, the lid, yeah.

Well, that's what the square is called on top is the lid.

Yeah.

Okay.

Well, you can see it it is dislocated and tilted.

Yeah.

It picked up a little bit.

Yeah.

Yeah, they got a whole long list.

They're about to start their paho paloosa, too.

Yes.

I'm keying those also.

Some that were bad enough that they I went down the road the next day and it already been fixed, which is pretty nice.

I was like, yeah, yeah.

I was I figure that means a lot of people probably were oh yeah.

They've been trying to get to, and then they can't do it in this weather.

Well, right, yeah, it's gonna warm up and they're gonna kick off their paho paloosa.

Yeah, yeah.

Yeah, these couple storms really screwed it up.

Hey, John, uh are people online?

Yeah.

Um the advisory group, I think we have Mark.

It's a new guy, right?

Yeah.

Yeah, that that would be me.

It's uh for some reason it's labeled as Howard.

Um I can't seem to change it.

That's okay.

I think that might be it.

Yeah, she actually might be a little bit late.

I don't know if we want to wait for a few more.

Well, that's your own six thirty-five.

Six.

Oh good point.

Thirty-five and uh join us when they join us.

So welcome everybody.

Um we have uh a lot fewer people than usual at the meeting.

I asked uh I mean to say so that she could be familiar with the meeting, but also people could meet her to a latest addition to a team.

So do you want to say a couple things about yourself, Amy?

Sure.

Um to meet you.

I'm Amy Cobb and I started at the city about six months ago.

I work in the uh transportation environmental services, specifically in the stormwater section with Jesse.

Um and um I guess about three months ago I took over the uh flood resilience plan when uh Jessica, I think um city, so on that as well as some other smaller stormwater projects throughout the city.

So look forward to all of you.

How are you?

Can't wait for interior city hall wheel.

That's right, yeah.

So from we just got going um in the likely joining us online.

Have you met you haven't met, right?

No.

No, first uh committee meeting for our okay Mark folk, welcome.

Thank you.

Well, we'd like to think so.

Um would you like to uh do yourself and tell us how you need it up all of you for this group?

Uh yeah, so Martin said I'm currently a member of uh uh BFAC.

And as you know, we have a liaison to the uh to the stormwater criminal committee that was Chris Ferrara who left and uh I volunteered to to go ahead and take his place as uh as liaison.

So pleasure to meet everybody.

Welcome.

Happy to have you here.

Right.

Yeah, we would just go around it being Amy who's joining us in the city as well as Mark is joining us a member of the committee.

Hi Mark.

Well, as usual we have a pretty package in done.

Um is five enough for quorum.

Yeah, hold a minute.

Oh how word is there.

Oh, that's actually more okay.

No, that's uh that's a quirk of Zoom that I can't seem to change for some reason the link shows up as Howard, so that's just uh that's just me.

Oh yeah, it's because I grabbed it out of his email probably.

I went to the first one I can find.

Oh, that skipped probably.

But I think for quorum too for voting, no waiting and it has to be people in person.

Right.

Yeah, I so zoom doesn't count.

Yeah, so we'll hold the minutes, but we can still have the updates and um at least talk through our thoughts on budget stuff because we can still discuss, we just don't hold a vote for anything.

Very good.

So should we go ahead with the update?

Let's go.

Yeah.

Okay.

Um we're expecting sign and seal drillings in April.

Um we are making our way uh south on Commonwealth with the waterline relocation.

So they actually began uh the week of February 23rd.

Um so they're making pretty good progress.

I think they're close to the intersection at Reed at this point.

Um earlier this week we had to relocate a capital bike share to accommodate their work.

So that's been moved to uh West Reed.

Um it's temporary for now, but it may be their long term to just be throughout the lifecycle or the lifespan of our full project.

Um, but we need to get some approvals for that.

But for the time being, that'll stay there.

Um so yeah, the this stage is really about the utility relocations.

We're trying to clear the right-of-way for our project.

We're starting with water and then um gas and verizon have some work that'll feed in afterwards.

Um anticipated timeline is to go out to bid in early 2027 after these utility relocations, um, with an estimated summer 2027 start.

Um the other efforts we're looking at is uh we we have several projects in the Arlandria area um going on around the same time.

So we're we're taking a holistic look at that to make sure we can coordinate traffic impacts and schedules.

Um so that's a larger effort.

Um, myself and others at the city are are working through any questions on that one.

Did we ever get any more?

I know there were some questions at one point about Glebe where Ashby drops in, the roundabout and Lake Land stuff.

Where are we on that portion of the project?

We're coordinating that um right now that's not it, it's gonna come in later.

It's not holding up our project.

We there's funding and right-of-way discussions that need to be had.

Um, the goal is to do this all at once.

So we're we're digging once.

Uh we also have a decent amount of time of where we get to that intersection with our project.

Um but they're they're on slightly different path at this point, but we are um trying to keep that one moving.

The commonwealth can keep moving even while that is still makes sense.

Cool.

What about electrical?

We don't have to worry about electrical relocation.

We don't, I don't think we have any dominion relocations for this project.

Yeah, yeah.

I think it's a roundabout.

If there may be one for the roundabout portion of the project, but for the culvert construction, uh I don't we're not uh no relocation.

There is some stuff we need to do with them for the um the field.

They need to think de-energize a few of those lines because we're gonna be using the softball field at the north as a staging area.

Um, and lots of you know, take power off of some of those lights temporarily, but other than that, uh no major impacts.

The combined sewer um, so we're just talking about nethergate here.

We've we pulled the pin-given project to discuss with run because they're they're a joint effort at this point.

Um so for nether gate, uh we we received 30% design in early December.

Um we have received our NPS permit for utility investigation and geotechnical borings along GW parkway.

So that was a big step.

Um so we're trying to get back out in the field um March 23rd, and we'll be there until around April 8th.

Um so we're we're basically just getting survey data for the utilities of this project has a tunneled pipe, so we just need to make sure there's no potential utility impacts.

Um, and we also need to do some geotechnical investigation to support that tunneling.

Um, so those that's the next step.

Um so we're we're making good progress.

We we have the permit in hand, so that that's moving.

Which now another game.

I looked into the minutes.

There are a bunch of permits you need.

There's two major stages of permits.

Uh, this one is to do the utility investigation.

So basically the initial can we get on the right-of-way to survey?

So we have that permit.

The the larger permit that we need is to have our infrastructure on their right-of-way.

Um, so that's a right-away permit.

We are working with them.

We still we need to feed them information as the project progresses too.

But that's probably the larger effort is getting the right-of-way permit.

So checking for utilities is done by geotechnical.

These two separate firms.

And these are subcontractors who are one's basically mapping out all the utilities in the field, and another after we have that information, we we put our boring locations, and that's where we uh you know do the borings for the soil analysis.

We want to do the utilities first so we make sure we're not hitting anything.

And you need to miss them, miss the utilities when you bore.

Exactly.

Yeah, so that's why we have the utilities going out first.

Um, and then once we have that, we'll we'll put in our boring locations, and then we'll they'll mobilize for the the geotech warnings.

And that's all one permit.

Yes.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yep.

You want to take this one out?

Yeah, sure.

Um so as we know, uh, we are still uh evaluating the looking about the existing flooding grant program better, uh it was a property level uh flooding measures and uh the current currently we're focusing on reviewing the existing data.

We're looking into uh approach and we're evaluating the program framework uh with our consultant uh for both uh Pete Gibbon and Hoofsran as they are the pilot program.

So that's where we are right now with us too.

I wasn't here in the last meeting.

Um out of the country folklore, but in the meeting minutes, it looks like you guys were doing um an arcade analysis.

Is that still ongoing?

It says through December 2026.

Yeah, yes, it is still going.

Okay.

So is it so then it's not a hundred percent that residents are gonna have to go through the flood grant program and that there's gonna be possibly like a separate way to handle residents doing flood mitigation projects within these areas, the host run and picking given.

I mean, that's not just a done deal if this analysis is still going on.

Yeah, but yeah.

Okay, if the analysis is through December 2026, then it's gonna be through a whole other year.

So another flood season potentially for the area.

Luckily, we've we've been very lucky the past couple years, but we don't know this year.

Um the weather's been very strange the past few weeks.

Um but you know, what is the ultimate of the now to help residents right for this next flood season?

Um I I would imagine that there should be some interim, you know, program that can be a short-term solution, you know, whether it's the flood, you know, grant program or not, um, that residents could use for a 2026 calendar year until the analysis is completed, right?

So in other words, we're just telling residents I'm sorry, no answer happened.

We've been waiting on roll for a couple of years, but now we're gonna wait another year, you know, for an analysis.

Um that doesn't mean a solution, it just means an analysis, right?

So I think that we have to have an interim solution before this next season.

The analysis is for a solution though.

I know, but that's another year out.

We're going through a whole other year, and there's residents that want to do something now.

Is there an option that they could do something beyond for these areas with the flood grant program can support now?

Yeah, unfortunately, we have to go through this whole thing because we can't just say, hey, you you're gonna get extra money and that's it, right?

Because we have the rest of the city we have to contend with.

So we have to put something together that's equitable.

Yeah, right.

And so that's that's the reason for going through the whole analysis to how much it's gonna cost, what kind of what would it look like if the you know an extension of the current grant program, how much money is the criteria to say this is this is why you get that funding.

We also have people once this goes up, that there's you know should be funding available in these two areas, and that program should you know we should know what that looks like and have gone through council all the way up through council, where that's what we've had to do in the past.

Um be other areas or like what about yeah.

I mean, there's I do so we're so it's kind of it's real.

So what happened with that funding then like that was kind of a placeholder, but there was funding allocated like upper 20s, it kind of kept changing like every you know, every time we presented the estimate was different, but is that funding being allocated towards other projects, or is that something that can be used within these areas?

I guess what I'm trying to say is we can't just program public funds on private property without some kind of rationale of what the why are we doing this?

So we went through the whole thing with the flood grant program, right?

And depending on what kind of property we've ever so it's pretty equitable across the city, so we have to have something like that for this extension of the program.

So we can't just say, hey, your flight, here's some extra money over here, because then it's the people over here and the people over there, and we have to really be clear on what the criteria is, where the areas are, you know, why we're doing it.

Did we get analysis back?

I know we've been asking for a while about like um maybe in a way to approach with a flood grant program, seeing how many people you know applied versus the funding that's still available and like what percentage they ended up having to spend, you know, like like my neighbor, for example, her estimate was 40,000, you know, to help flood mitigation, and she just simply can't do that.

You know, she's flooded multiple times in you know a particular house.

Um, you know, and so I didn't know is there's a way that that data's kind of been gathered on maybe what people spent overall versus what they're being reimbursed or what estimates they can send in to say, hey, if we have extra funds now, maybe the bar can be raised for some residents that need to put additional funds in.

You can't really raise the bar unless it's got to be equitable.

Well, I know I'm not saying just for the not I'm not saying just for Gibbon and Post Run, I'm saying holistically, you know, is are there funds available to do that?

Or that's what we need to look at the whole thing too because it's going to be we don't know how much it's gonna cost for each of these areas.

So is this analysis looking at just Pit given and hoofs run?

Correct and then with the idea that it could be scaled to potentially use it in other areas as well.

Yeah, exactly.

They'll start the pilot programs that uh we have data.

Well, that's what I kind of brought up the conversation is why not these other areas, you know.

It's like, well, we have a we have a large capacity project planned, you know, for do it or you know, East Mason.

So why can't they get the money first now?

We may find out that we can't really you know mitigate the flooding like we want to.

So they may be one of those areas, but that's kind of the question too.

Once we roll this out, these two areas, there's gonna be plenty of people saying, Why not my area?

Yeah, so that's why it's it's taking longer instead of just kind of saying, Hey, here's what we're gonna do.

We'll up in here, we'll do that.

And it's just a kind of a uh a numbers exercise, right?

It's just dollar exercise.

We really have to make sure this is equitable and it's not we don't want we don't want to roll this out, somebody starts shooting holes in it, and we have to let people back and stop and say, Well, you can't get this money now, and then we went through you know December, and now you still can't get it, yeah.

So it really has to be kind of ironclad.

Comparing to the a larger capital project that was planned, that could be kind of seven years to five years.

This is probably pretty quick compared to that.

The original for the analysis, though.

But that's gonna be then used for design.

Like, is that is that how well it's gonna be used to what is the program look like?

Oh, okay.

Some of that may say oh, cities just need, you know, because we're the city won't be doing the work, right?

So we're looking at different things.

So not so no longer an analysis for an engineering solution, it's analysis programmatically.

Yes, yes.

Okay.

So you can consider it as a design.

Okay, yeah.

So yeah, okay.

It's not like we're doing analysis, then we're doing design or yeah, okay.

That that makes more sense.

That's what's getting at, and we want to come out of that analysis with solid recommendations that we're bringing to management of the chain.

Here's all the criteria.

You this is solid, this is why we can do it.

Let's get going to do it.

Okay, and that's because you've looked at all the engineering solutions.

You looked at, I think the part of number like five of them.

Yeah, and none of them protect from the 10-year store, and none of them or three out of the five, four out of the five were not financially feasible.

And so the the talk is that there has to be this was just speculative, and now you're doing the program analysis because might not work.

Yeah, I and then this back to the drawing board a third or fourth time, we're losing count, and the folks who live there are losing patience, and they should be.

Um that there will be a house by house solution.

It will likely have to go through the BAR.

You spent 70,000 on yours.

Uh 35 in the front, and there's about equal in the back, but I did something a little different with ours.

So I made it more aesthetic to matching old town than just a flood mitigation solution.

And that was written in my statement in the submission.

Um for the flood grant program about four years ago now, maybe five.

Whenever it started, it was the first one of the first submissions.

Yes.

And the in the historic district, the others might have to do the same.

And the bar will have to be involved.

The bar members I've talked to haven't heard about this yet.

No, we're kind of keeping it here, what we're hoping.

The bar was difficult to get through.

And a lot of residents won't know how, but we talked about that, right?

About maybe ways that we could help circumvent, you know, some of that.

Because then I had to go before city council and then like and get voted in to do it.

Yeah.

Yeah.

So might have to get approved before city council specifically because of um the easements, which a lot of people again are also potentially going to face because the easement map, as we learned several years ago, is uh a bit odd in old town.

Some of it goes through people's front of their houses.

So they would have to go before city council to do any mitigation.

Um so yeah, there's there was conversations that we've had over the past couple years about are there ways that we can help as a committee, you know, right like to help residents get through this process, you know.

I mean, I happen to know it because I was on the bar, right?

But there's a handful of residents, most of them have not had that experience and are gonna find that daunting.

Yeah.

And you're an architect, you did your own drawings.

I did, and I stand to I got reciprocity and bridging to do.

And most folks are going to have to go to an architect if they can even find one.

You yeah, I mean, yes and no.

Some of the some of the flood mitigation solutions won't necessarily involve that, but some will.

Some will involve some engineering design.

Um, our neighbors does, but you know, some of them in our neighborhood, you know, don't necessarily, they can be smaller, you know, recommendations from vendors.

Yeah.

Um I don't know anyone in our neighborhood that went how to go to an architect.

But we don't have the same restrictions all to help us.

Yeah.

So yeah, so the bar was colours, and it was, you know, internal thing.

Yeah, so it's gonna be a mix, right?

Yeah, yeah.

And these are historic houses, they can't be abandoned or bought up and torn down.

Um there are a lot of there are a lot of complications here.

And meanwhile, the folks and it's combined sewer water, it's not just storm water, meaning it's it's sewage, there are issues associated with that too.

Um, the folks the longer this takes, the worse it is, the more exposed they are any chance of pri pushing the priority up.

It's it's just gonna take that long.

I think that also includes to go to council too, if I'm not mistaken.

I have to go back and look at the schedule.

But yeah, I think that's like suited in nuts.

So you expect to be before council in December.

Yeah.

Is there a more detailed schedule that the committee could see just to have an understanding of how that analysis would work for those areas?

Yeah, I would just say I know we've been talking about this, and I'm gonna try and tell you what you can say and not say, but we have not talked to the communities around those run culture.

Okay, right.

So we kind of want to have something put together because there's a lot more people than there are picking it.

Yeah, right.

It's a lot of folks, so we just haven't talked to them yet because you're grinding on took us so long, it's just finally go right because that's what we're talking about.

Because that's sewer water.

Well, it's uh I mean, but this analysis is combining both groups as it really should.

So we have to take the whole and keep that in mind too.

Because post-run is you know, an infant was in a pack and play, and the mom got it out just in time.

So it's there's a lot of there's emotions everywhere, but we have to take that into consideration, all of these moments and conversations too.

So the intent is to have one solution, one set of rules for both.

Yes.

That could be scaled to others if possible.

So citywide program.

It would be these two areas that you could scale it as the criteria rhythms or presents itself, right?

Because that's why I brought up to wit.

We have a large capacity project, one of the next ones is to wit over here in East Basin and to it.

We might combine those, but we gotta see what we're doing over there first a little bit more.

Um, so my point is like we make we have other large capacity projects we may or may not find a solution.

So then I would think that's where we extend it, or there may be there's some discussion where we just extend it if we can everywhere.

I don't think we have funding for that.

We don't know until we go through this analysis, and then we can scale that analysis a little bit too.

I don't believe the criteria is wide enough, but wide enough to scale, but strict enough to be impact in the Xerxes for a little bit because I don't think you know, depending you don't want somebody that's not there to go, hey, we're gonna do all this stuff and we're gonna do aesthetically somewhere else, and we're not really flooded much, but you know, and that's some of the concern we had to begin with that people would abuse the program.

But hey, where's my you know 20,000 dollars or whatever to do that to all this?

We need to come up with what's it look like?

Is it a 20 is 30 to 10?

What's the match?

So there's a lot of details in it, right?

It might not be 5050 or it could be something else, or it might stay 1550.

I don't know.

But there's a lot of details in it, and we need to have solid or talking to management.

Who's working on we are you mean who this is um the attorney uh we haven't got there with them yet?

So they're layer, yeah, they'll be later depending on what what kind of recommendations come out.

We'll have more than one, right?

We'll have different ways you can do it.

Hey, we recommend this one because of this, and depending on who's weighing in, they may say, well, that was not gonna work because of this.

We need to think about doing this a little different, maybe.

Um, so we're just not there yet to start talking internally to the city attorney and the manager knows, right?

Manager's office knows, but we haven't brought those city attorneys in yet, right?

This could be a difference of like they told us like we don't want you to go out there and tell people what to do.

Which vendors do the vendors, but we want to provide some stuff, like we want to provide some more educational material, right?

Here's how you get through it, right?

Here's how you work with a contractor and get some quotes.

Because I think that was the conversation some people were having.

So that's kind of driven us to say let's add this in to some of these other things as well.

Um but yeah, we the city attorney we have to bring in pretty soon.

But based on the feedback we got from the original program, we kind of know which way they are.

They're not gonna say, Oh, yeah, go out there and put a two and a half foot wall, and then here comes the three feet, right?

That kind of thing.

They're gonna not gonna want to be as us to be as prescriptive as actually some other localities that more prescriptive, or I think prescriptive, they help you more in the engineering and give you solutions, but I don't see that happening here.

So it's within TNES.

What had been DPI?

Yeah, so it's us working on with a consultant.

Is level scratch involved still because you know they're right across the street from us and they flood just like we do whenever we flood the school floods with the silver.

They're not if they're involved in the conversation about you know, because for them the flick break program is not like necessarily applicable the way it's written now.

It's not like it's not applicable.

So to know, like are they are they concerned?

Are they involved in conversations with the city about mitigating the school?

Uh well, we we have coordinated with them from the PIT and given side that and I know they had some development projects in the pipeline, so we have given them updates.

Um you could do the tanks or other solutions, like it wasn't applicable.

Well, yeah, I think we had some grading, and I I had reached out in the past to just kind of get a status update because that that may help um if if they're able to grade away from the facility.

Um we haven't had a a crazy amount of engagement, but we have you know given them an update on where we stand, yeah.

Yeah, I would just imagine an elementary school that floats with sewer water would be equally concerned.

Yeah, yeah.

Uh John, I think you guys something going on up here.

Sure.

All righty, must be covered.

Okay, so um, I think I'm gonna take it from here talking about the neighborhood spot projects.

Um lot of these, so I'm gonna move a little quickly if I have any to drill down on any of them if there are questions.

So first up, we have the Belfont storm train improvements project.

Presently that we have received 60% design.

We're continuing our third-party utility engagement, and we're in the process of responding to public comments that we received from our community meeting.

Uh so we'll continue to review 60% design over the current period.

Um, we're forecasted to issue comments and um continue our third-party utility engagement over the next period.

Clifford Fulton and Manning Street Storm Sewer Improvement Project.

We recently completed 100% design.

Um, we have resolved the need for fiber relocation to Manning Street.

So that will not be necessary at this point in time.

And that also clears the way for us to move into our construction procurement process because there are not any utilities in the way blocking our project at this point.

So what's going on with the fiber?

They are they are not going to worry about it.

Yes, right.

They've decided that they're gonna allow that line to be impacted, and there should not be any community impact from that.

Presently they are not servicing anyone through that line.

So yes, easy solution for everybody.

Um we have issued comments on 100%.

We should get final design back here soon.

I am pretty optimistic that we will get approval with this submission.

Sometimes I'm wrong, but I think we're we're looking pretty good.

Um I'm anticipating that we're gonna issue our first notice for construction where we start telling people that uh fiscal letter.

So sorry telling people they should remove their private property improvements in the right of way and expect some changes to um their trash recycling collection and that we've got a construction project planned.

We didn't get a ton of attendance at the last community meeting, even though we're putting the meeting advice out there.

So we're trying to I was really impressed with the letters, and if and when people complain, I'm gonna just shoot them away.

Okay, did a great job.

Um I want to make sure that is like in the record publicly stated that like y'all did a great job of getting information out.

So yeah.

Thank you.

We will we will be ready um and happy to answer questions when they when they go up.

It will be interesting to see how trash is done.

Yes, yeah.

Do we know kind of what the prescribed like so because the alleyway is going to be completely blocked due to the construction process?

Um, we're gonna be moving collection to the fronts of homes.

So it'll be along Fulton, the front of Fulton, and it'll be along the front of Manning.

Okay.

Um, it's not ideal, but trash cans will be because there's only one house that has a driveway.

Yes.

So yeah, that's gonna be it won't be it won't be the most how long are we talking again?

Um I would say plan on around six to nine months.

Hopefully, it will be quicker.

Nine nine would be the long end of it.

All right, we may be a little faster, but yeah.

Okay.

Um do everything we can to get out of there as quick as we can.

And so we're also preparing the public construction solicitation.

Right.

Next slide.

Oh, no, you already won it.

Thank you.

Um, so then we have the Edison Street Storm sewer upgrades.

So this project was previously approved.

Right now we are in the right of way phase where we're trying to clear the right-of-way and coordinating with our utility partners throughout the city.

Um, we are monitoring their relocation planning in progress.

So we have relocations for Washington Gas and Virginia American Water.

We're meeting with them on a bi-weekly basis.

They're advancing through um, they're done with design at this point.

They're trying to get in position for construction, and they are also talking with the public to secure some specific permissions that they need.

Um, we hosted a brief meeting with the Hume Spring, or now we have we attended a meeting with the Hume Spring Civic Association to answer some questions about this project in February.

Um, and so we were in the process of responding to public inquiries.

The gas relocation is forecast presently to occur between June and July.

We'll probably run until September, October is what it seems like, and the water relocation would follow that.

Next up is the four-mile run and hooks run, inlet insulation enhancement project.

So we've received 30% design on that project.

Um, we are currently under 30% design review, and we are continuing to coordinate with our utility partners.

Um, we're forecast to complete review over the next period, and we're gonna of course continue to coordinate with utility providers.

So Hume Avenue Storm Drain bypass.

Um we had some final design comments that lingered a little bit, but we have finally gotten those resolved, and it's back in and under review.

I think we will get our approval this time.

Um that should pretty much round out that design phase of the project.

We are monitoring the utility relocation planning and progress.

Um, and we have a public meeting planned for March 23rd, which is I believe next Monday.

Um, forecasted to resolve fiber conference by the end of June.

Maybe a very similar situation to what happened on Clever Full Demanding, but we're still sort of digging into exactly what that could look like.

Um, and the gas main relocation is then forecasted to complete by July August, and that's right around what we would be starting construction, assuming things go according to plans.

Mount Vernon and Edison dual call replacement project.

Um, we received 100% design over this period, and we began 100% design review.

We're negotiating uh temporary construction permissions with you select uh private entities right now, and we are forecasted to complete the 100% design review that would put us into the final design phase, most likely, and um, we're gonna continue pushing on the negotiation of construction permissions.

I think this is the first time in these meetings.

I've heard the term temporary construction permissions.

Okay.

What does that mean?

So if we need to work on private property, we may need where we do need to secure their permission to work on property property.

That can be uh super formal in the form of uh legalese agreement that we all sign, or it can be more casual in the form of um a right of entry agreement, which is more casual than a uh easement.

Sometimes if it's very minor impact, the property owner will just allow us to verbally proceed.

And we in some cases we'll feel comfortable with that.

Really depends on how critical uh use of the spaces to the project.

It's super critical, we're gonna want to have all the legal lease to make sure that we have all the rights provisions.

It's something that um it's a fence that is in the way and it's a chain link fence.

Maybe we would feel comfortable with just verbal permission from the property owner if they think it's okay that we move it slightly and then put it back at the end of the project.

So it really varies.

Um they're temporary, right?

So the idea is not that we are permanently acquiring any of the space, it's just what we need in order to complete construction, be restored back to existing conditions or better.

We're not gonna put a broken fence back, right?

Um so that's that's all I'm trying to communicate.

It's not just getting out of the specific legal pathway that we're taking and emphasizing that it's a temporary impact.

And on rare occasions, it has to go to court or be on the host.

It ideally we stay out of court, yeah.

That's why I said rare occasions.

Yes, right.

I mean, if that sounds like something maybe didn't didn't go exactly the way we we planned it if that were to be the case.

So um I don't think you're wrong, but I I'm we're not trying to go to court for anything.

No, I know that's okay.

That answer your question.

Yeah, so it's a form of temporary eminent domain.

I don't it's imminent domain, it's implies some some sort of hostility that I don't think this is.

This is more of a it's a conversation, they've got an issue that we'd like to fix.

Um, we maybe we can't fix it from the public right-away, or maybe we can fix it mostly from the public right away, but we need uh to temporarily borrow a little space and we talk with them about it.

It's not a threatened situation, which I think imminent domain sometimes implies a little bit more contentious, yeah.

Yeah, so that that's not this is typically people who uh want our help, and it's just a legal mechanism to make sure that if we move forward with a very expensive public project, um that we could bring it to fruition and don't get caught in the lurch essentially.

Thank you.

Yep.

So the Mount Vernon Cold-sacca and Inlet, excuse me, Mount Vernon Cold Sack Inlets and Alley Storm Sewer Improvements Project.

We just completed uh the revised 90% design review and issued comments, and so that means we are currently under 100% design.

Um I think we had our public even back in January.

So we're taking those comments that we got and uh incorporating them into our design, and that's why we haven't had another meeting yet because we're still in process of developing that that final design.

So we're expecting to receive 100% design over the next period.

We begin that review, begin construction procurement process at that point in time as well, and before we go to construction, there will of course be another public meeting, but that's may not be in the next period.

Then the Valley Drive Storm Drain Improvements Project.

We completed 90% design, we began 90% design review.

We're working with our utility partners as well.

Um, and then over the next period, we are gonna complete 90% design review, begin 100% design, and we should be able to finalize our utility relocation design.

So that one is even close to the end as well.

Is this the one where there was the issue of the infrastructure had to be on prop on private property?

Or is it a different one?

I I recall what you're talking about.

I think that was one of the things that we they were investigating over the last period.

Um I would need to follow up with the project manager.

I think that our desire from an efficiency standpoint is that we can keep it in the right way.

Less public impact, less permissions means faster, faster to get to construction.

Um so I think that's what they were trying to do.

I'd have to ask the PM specifically what they settled on.

But I can get back to you on that.

Thank you.

And the PM is project manager.

Yes, the project manager.

That's not you.

Um not on this project, no, it's not um, but on some of these projects it is.

So who would be the project manager?

Um, so this is what this is why L, I believe.

Cool.

Um he's not here today, but you've seen it.

Oh yeah, he was here.

Right.

Okay, yep.

Okay, and then this one's long.

So West Reed and Dale Street Storms are improvements.

This one has a good amount of stuff going on with it right now.

We received final design approval, so design is complete.

Um, we are in the process of negotiating some temporary construction permissions.

Um there, but just kind of ran out of space.

We're preparing for a public meeting, which we're gonna host in April, early April, I believe it's the first Monday of April 4-7.

Um, and we are beginning our construction procurement process.

So we're developing the solicitation, it is not posted at this point in time, but the solicitation is under development.

Um the next period, we're forecasting that the water main relocation will begin in June.

Um, so that's on West Reed, and the gas main relocation would begin in August.

That's their forecasted dates.

We are coordinating with our utility providers, they are a third-party entities, so it's not exactly possible for us to prescribe when they will mobilize, but we can uh partner with them closely and help them see the need and the urgency behind it.

So we're trying to keep these dates from shifting.

Um got the public meeting on 4-7, and ideally we will post the construction solicitation as well over the next period.

You'll let us know about the public meeting.

Yes, I will make sure that you guys are tagged on the invite for that.

Absolutely.

Thank you.

Okay, so we have a new spot project called Buddy Ford Outfall and staircase rehabilitation.

Um, so this project is focused on uh restoring an outfall.

I think you can see kind of in that picture on the left that this outfall area has um degraded a little bit, it's kind of undermined, and it is near the William Ramsey Elementary School.

Um there's a and an outfall still homes run, also near the Jerome Buddy Ford Nature Center.

Is that near the trail that goes down kind of towards the bigger cut down the slope to the trip?

Okay, and he's out there.

So this is um it's not keep focused project.

We want to keep our storm server systems functioning as intended.

Um, I think the scale scale of this is large enough that we have um our project management team signed to it.

It's some technical difficulties or technical complexities with trying to traverse the steep slope, and um as you can see, if we we need to react where the storm server system is undercut, right?

So we're trying to figure out what we're gonna do about that big head cut that is working its way up towards the outpull area, which you can kind of see that gray concrete.

Okay, there's a picture.

Yep, it's worth a thousand words.

Um then your there's your explanation, yeah.

Um, what do you so?

What am I looking at in that picture on the bottom left?

Okay, so other than a fallen tree.

So the fallen tree, so that's laying across a stream channel.

Look at what I'm right.

And if you look behind the tree, the tree is really not ideally positioned, but if you look behind the tree, there's that's where our pipe uh so this pipe output here.

I did my mouse right here is a head wall.

So it's uh and what is a head wall?

So it's like a rectangular, it's just where the pipe meets grade.

So it's a pipe discharge where the water comes out of the stream.

So from the storm drains um on the streets, they're going into a pipe.

Right.

It's not big enough to be a cauldron.

Smaller, smaller than that, yeah.

Um, and then the pipe.

So the pipe works its way through the streets.

And then it gets to there, and it and the pipe comes out of the hillside.

Yes, yeah.

And the water at that point is running not in a pipe, but in a drainage ditch.

Or some tributary streams.

This is pretty eroded.

So what what we think happened was this when this was constructed, there's a lot of uh rock here.

I think what happened was they hit the rock and basically outballed above the rock, and since then the water just kind of undercut, washed away all the soil sitting on the rock.

So what what we're trying to do is come in and build back a storm sewer system to let it drop down to the channel elevation.

So this is basically like a 25 foot drop once you get to the actual outfall.

So we're trying to, you know, if you have a storm sewer system that that can reduce the energy, so it's a shallower outfall slope.

So am I looking uphill or downhill here?

You're looking uphill.

So this is the top of the hill here.

And so the water comes out right here, and then it flows down through that drainage ditch.

Yeah, and I this is the drainage ditch has been ruined by the erosion.

Yeah, yeah.

It's kind of a natural drainage ditch.

Right.

Yeah, this wasn't really intended.

This is kind of in undercut.

So it it yeah, this is basically just formed from the water over time.

Oh, so it wasn't there.

Not in this form.

But created by erosion.

Yes.

And at some point the water gets to the bottom of the hill.

Yes, so kind of where it's and it enters Holmes Run.

That's correct.

What button date bucket will this be on it from?

So this is actually coming out of it's added in here because we're all working on everything.

We're trying to capture those things, but this is actually coming out of streaming channel maintenance.

Okay, that was because my question was before the stormwater utility be where would this have been?

Stream that's yeah, okay.

Yeah, so basically all of our we have a couple new orgs since then.

Yeah, but that's stormwater utility funds all of them.

So we do this, we do sediment removal and camper run is coming up pretty soon.

We didn't include that in here.

This one just kind of got included because we're doing a lot of work on it.

Yeah, I mean it looks needed, sure.

Yeah, yeah.

So what are you going to?

So there's this ditch that has been created by erosion.

There's a drainage ditch.

There's dirt on top of it, but less than there was when originally.

And there's rocks underneath it that aren't going to move, go very far.

So what are you going to do?

So what we're planning on doing is where this head wall is, this pipe, we're going to put a manhole that drops down.

So a large manhole, so we can kind of drop that grade so it's all within a pipe system, and then have a another outfall pipe that's flatter.

So when that outfalls at the the bottom, the interface with the channel, it's a much lower energy.

Um, because right now you have a huge slope, so the water's moving but at a higher velocity.

So basically putting storm sewer back to kind of get down that grade.

So you're good.

So a manhole, that means the water's going to come out of the pipe and go straight down, down, down, down, 25 feet down.

Right.

Um there'll be a uh drain cover over the manhole.

Sure.

So nobody falls in.

Yep, correct.

And it gets to the bottom, and it goes out almost straight.

Right.

Yeah.

Flat into Holmes Run, and you can then rebuild the embankment and you won't erode.

Correct.

But yeah, that's that's essentially what we're doing.

And I don't dare ask what the picture in the bottom middle.

It's supposed to be an area map, that's why I think that's what it was.

But yeah, there's some storms and sanitary lines in there that's running a helping uh the readability.

But yeah, that's just location showing the Buddy Ford nature center right here, and then this is the project location.

He has the red box.

So we wanted to introduce the project, it'll be incorporated into the deck of projects that are further up.

It won't have pictures next time, but I wanted to sort of give a little background.

Yeah.

Okay.

And then I think there's one more.

Okay.

So then the other one, we have another new project.

It's called Sky Hill Road Storm Drain Extension.

Um, this one is uh part of the old group of projects that we identified through task order 35.

Um, so we have some additional capacity or being able to bring a few more of those in.

Um this is a storm drain extension project.

So Sky Hill Road presently, uh it's got a lot of slope on it, and right where it hits Chaney's lane, it has a storm sewer system, but on Skyhill Road, there is not uh a storm sewer system.

So we are looking at bringing the pipe system up the street and putting in, likely putting in some inlets, but we're reviewing the planning phase.

So we're reviewing um how effective we can be with that project, right?

It's very early.

Right.

So I don't think I see an alley off of either of those streets.

So that means we probably have some gas in the street because I'm sure those homes have gas, right?

So we're trying we're identifying what could come up with this, and we're taking a look at what our scope is.

So what you know, what is the expected scope of the project, but we think it's gonna be something with storm drains.

All right.

Good.

I think Luke's all on.

Yeah.

Hey, good evening.

Yeah, Luzanne with Sandy Division.

Um, I'll be uh providing uh status update on Santa Sue projects.

Um we have two types of project to help mitigate uh basement backup and flooding.

And the first type of project uh is to use trenchless technology to line our center seals, manhills, and ladders, and to keep the groundwater and rainwater out of the sewer system.

So uh on this slide, this map shows the various areas we plan to do uh trenchless rehab.

Um so in twenty twenty-four to twenty twenty-five, we had finished um lining work to the main heroes and main lines in area one, which is uh dairy east, and the uh ladderal rehab design was subsequently completed in September 2025.

Uh but the rehab construction for ladder was put on hold because uh we wanted to have our own rehab contract to move forward doing the rehab work for the rest of the area, uh including dairy east.

So we worked with purchasing to uh develop the encore contract.

So an invitation to bid uh went out December 2025, January 2026.

Uh we've got a few bits, and currently we have two contractors identified.

Uh uh, it's in the process of ordering contract, and uh so the first thing we're gonna do is to uh issue a PO under this contract to do the lateral rehab in dairy east, and the construction is anticipated to begin around uh May or June 2026, and then in the yellow area, which is dairy west.

Uh it is just uh slider behind uh the dairy east.

Uh we got 100% disaster middles and had a minor comments, and we anticipate to uh receive a final signature set next month.

Um this project has two phase.

Um we're gonna do the uh mainline rehab first, which takes about a year, and the construction is anticipated begin around June or August of 2026, and then the second phase of the project is lateral rehab that's gonna pick up around in uh July, August 2027.

Um then on this map, the rest of the areas, um the blue North Ridge, uh the pink bright heights, and those projects do in the planning phase.

We are trying to wrap up reports and recommendations.

Um questions before we move to the next slide.

What is the lateral construction gonna look like?

Like how invasive is that gonna be so we previously did the inspection and we have identified you know some city-owned laterals have cracks, holes, uh fractures, and then we're gonna doing a similar work.

It's called a CIPP lining or P liner.

Okay, and we're either to seal the connection, you know, when the ladder comes in, highest in the city seal, there's this connection point.

Sometimes uh we notice that the connection is broken, so that has become the source of groundwater getting to the seal system.

So we can use top hat, we can use T-liner, and then there's just different uh methodology to seal the system.

So it's really just going through like manholes to do a liner, it's not digging up and replace it's not correct.

Okay, yeah, the liner will be installed through the uh manual.

We're putting to the uh into the other at the main hole on the other end, and then they're gonna just inflate the the the liner and using air uh and then cue it with water, uh steam or a UV light, and then once that is done, it it basically the line is gonna bottom to the host pipe.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

All right, so let's go to the next slide.

Okay, so uh the second type of project we have here.

It requests you know, excavation in open cut, and then uh either we upsize existing city seals, you know, with larger diameter pipes uh along the existing alignment or building new CO lines and uh diverting flow from one location.

There's a deficiency capacity from another location.

Uh there's a good amount of capacity.

So the first project we have here is called uh a seal capacity upsizing project number one.

Uh on this project, we are basically upsizing uh Santa SEOs at five locations.

I think it is it's hard to read Ashby uh Alexandria, Warnut, uh Maple.

Um we're pretty much at this time we pretty much finish the project, and we're just to finalize our punch list items and then uh and then we'll move move ahead close close out this project.

Um the second project is a uh 600-block Columbus seal separation project.

So this one is different from the first one.

This one is uh kind of reroute the seal line and a building new CEO lines to divert flow from the combined seal system to uh a separate Santi CEO system.

Um the seal lines, all the main hill construction have been complete.

And when I talked to the project manager last week, I was told uh uh they are currently working on the curb gutters, and by the time we have in this meeting, probably this is done.

So uh we're gonna soon close this out of this project.

Next slide, please.

Um the third project is Madison Street and ASAF Street seal replacement project.

Uh we are upsiding some uh storm seal lines, combined seal lines over here.

Uh constraints start in November, and uh we just substantially completed the project uh yesterday, and then we're gonna move forward into uh punctualist items and close out the project.

The next project is the uh 400 block Wolf Street seal upsizing project.

Uh this project involves upsizing some undersized uh six inch sandy seals and some undersized uh 15 inch combined seals.

Um construct construct beginning January 5th, and at this time all the seal lines are construction being done and all the main holes being started with the exception of one main hole, which is a uh uh really large manhole because uh this main has like five pipe connections.

Uh we're we I know this the forecast shows here shows here that it's gonna complete by July, but we're actually ahead of schedule.

So I think we should be able to get this project wrapped up in next two months.

And next slide.

And this last project, uh it's a colony avenue seal separation project, another flow diversion project that uh divert flow from the combined seal to a separate SEO system.

Uh we got the 100% design submitted on uh December 2025.

Uh, we still have some comments, so that went back to um the consultant, and we anticipate to receive uh revised 100% design sometime this month or early next month.

Any questions on the uh seal upsizing project or flow uh seal separation projects?

Very good.

Thank you, appreciate it.

Thank you.

So were you doing the comments?

Um you were going to highlight something.

What am I highlighting?

I don't know.

That's a really high number of web page views.

Was that because of the 600 snow creature?

Might have been the snow if I had to guess why the numbers are so high.

Probably.

But it's on the store automation.

It's a good point.

Yeah.

A high number of views.

Yeah.

Where's the utility fee?

Because we just closed out our um credit for uh credit window.

Well, it looks like the letter numbers would be all good.

There you go, Dan.

There's a lot of clicks too.

Yeah.

There's a lot of engagement there that hasn't been.

Yeah, to have kind of dropped off.

But not at the expected places, which is what's interesting interesting.

Given that the credit program window clubs.

Yeah, we're looking at types of super systems.

So doing some research.

So I did notice actually that one of the newsletters was put out by Zebra.

I wonder if that's I bet that has a lot to do with this.

Because I actually reached out to John and I was like, John, were you behind this?

Like, did you did you go to them and like hey?

And he was like, No, they just picked it up.

I wonder it would be interesting to narrow down on some of those numbers and see if it happened in just the last, I think it was in the last like two weeks that it happened.

And if a lot of them were, I bet that had a lot to do with it.

But I think that's also telling for future engagement.

Trying to kind of maybe utilizing more of a media list too.

Next one more complex.

Yeah, the next one's probably more what we're gonna highlight is there's the tailor tail run infrastructure meeting on March 26th.

Uh stabilizing the uh infrastructure, mostly sanitary, but some of the storm um project.

Yes.

It's gonna it's just gonna be a webinar too.

So it wasn't a plan meeting, but what we came out the 30%.

Some of the um some of the folks were kind of pushing back, hey what are you why are you doing this?

And so we're doing another alternative to show, and we gotta pick one of those so we can get going on the 60 percent.

So it's kind of a we were we're really only tasked to do 30, 60, 90 and complete.

Right, but this could be we don't want to cook a 60 percent plan.

They go, What the hell are you doing?

So we want to go and say, hey, these are the two approaches where you have like four or five days for feedback, and then we're gonna move forward for that.

You'll let us you'll let us know about the information for the webinar.

The information, let me check this out in three language, um Harry.

Uh is our Hispanic.

Is it on the calendar?

Yeah.

Okay.

Yeah.

So yeah, it's just a Zoom link.

Yeah.

And we can forward you if you like, we'll do that uh tomorrow.

Yes, I think that'll be good.

The uh flood action newsletter is going out next month.

Uh every other month, and also just want to highlight it's a birth month coming up in April, so there'd be things all during April.

Um to highlight you know, things that we're doing or whatever.

Things that you can do, you know, people can do join in and volunteer stream cleanups and that kind of stuff.

Very good.

Thank you, Jesse.

This is for you, Amy.

Thanks.

I'll give a quick update on the blood resilience plan.

Um we're approximately 8% complete on the plan, and we have an upcoming hybrid meeting on April 16th at Charles Houston Recreation Center.

Uh the format's gonna be QA session, and the content will basically cover uh what we've done so far, as well as a high-level overview programmatic and policy recommendations that are gonna be included in that uh flood resilience plan.

Um and there you can see uh projected timeline.

We're anticipating a public comment period on the draft in June uh before it goes to council for their review throughout the summer from July through September, and then hopefully with a completion uh whether the adoption of the FRP by council will be completed by September.

Any questions?

Yes, yes.

Um small area plans, for example, and transportation plans and urban forestry plans and so on and so forth.

Um to guide particulars committees and commissions the city has so the zone the planning commission is guided by this the small area plans, the transportation the city council adopt a transportation plan.

To what degree will this committee be guided by the flood resiliency plan in the way that the planning commission is guided by small area plans and the transportation commission is guided by the transportation plan.

I don't know what those plans look like exactly in our case though.

Will we have will we produce a carrier say a roadmap for how we're going to carry the program that we have not just on the CIP side but also on policies, regulations, recommendations because we want the resilience land to be on encompassing, not just getting the benefits from infrastructure.

We want on the software put it measure to be part of coordinated effort to make the city more.

So that's what they get at all.

Sorry, go ahead.

So I guess in the way I think of the best way to kind of because yeah, small area plans say you can do you know, that you can do this here, you must do this here.

So it does set those requirements, if you will, in those areas, you know, small area plans, transformation plans.

So this kind of says part of it is uh prioritization of our projects that are past the 10-year plan.

So right in Casca, we had a number of projects that are prioritized through Casca, and then we took a look at them and said, well, based on this other anecdotal information, Alex 311, talking to people with that kind of thing.

It changed it may change just a little bit, or this one's closer, let's move it up here to find it.

Um so we went through that, we did some mapping, but like Dan was saying, we're also looking at um like citywide, uh, for instance, our water quantity requirements come from the state, right?

They'll come from the state.

And we're not super, we're not more stringent than on water quantity.

We are quality on earth is water quantity, it's like detention, slow it down the water when it's coming off site, hold it on site and let it off slowly, that kind of thing, right?

This committee started when they had to go work through Richmond to get funding for storm water.

The whole purpose behind that was like that the city already had funding mechanisms for water quality.

Think about the river and mitigations and all that.

We didn't have a mechanism to find water quantity, which is what uh is water quantity.

Well, it's it's also to use that also that was used private funds on public, or excuse me, public funds on private property, yeah.

So the one way I guess I'd say that this flood resilience plan kind of does what you're saying, right?

The small air plan is if you're and that's why I was going to quantity like now if you're doing a developer redevelopment project, right?

You have to the pre must meet them, the post must meet the pre.

So it's really holding the line, right?

It's not making it better.

We're built out full of impervious area.

We're holding the line back to a standard at the early late 80s 90s, right?

So if you come in and do a redevelopment, you have to be pre-imposed.

Yeah, I'll take out a couple parking spots every year or something.

I'll put a little grass in.

Yeah, I gotta do nothing else.

Right.

So what we're trying to say, we're coming up with is you have to do more, right?

Post needs to be better than pre.

Not like it shouldn't be acting maybe like it was a forest, but it needs to be better in those incremental ways of different projects.

We will get a reduction over time.

Right.

So it's kind of telling is telling the development community and staff, hey, when you're going to do these calculations, you need to show that you're doing better.

And in my small part of the small area plan, what we look at is water quality or water quantity or those kind of things.

Whatever.

Um, because the sum of us is instead of meeting the 10%, you got to make the 20%, right?

Landmark Van Dorn, you got me 40%, right?

So that's the way we do it.

Like you said, like you're you're rightly saying, use these things to kind of go above and beyond and make people do things a little bit differently.

So that's one you're looking at if you're in the regulator floodplain right now, and you have to do your your bottom floor has to be one foot above that flood elevation, right?

Should it be one and a half?

Should we do something?

Should they have to do a little bit more?

You know, so that's what we're looking at is no, you need to do a little bit more, so you're more resilient, we're more resilient as a city.

So that's the best way I could say that some of the things in the flood presenting is planning is like you know, analogous, I think, to a smaller area transition.

Thank you.

Very good.

Well, thanks.

Lisa, are you online?

Um yes, good evening, Lisa Jaiton from maintenance.

And of course, we're getting closer um to the construction of this project from host front and culvert top slab reconstruction.

And this is the phase two of the culvert repairs.

So we are working with our contractor now, and they're developing their proposal and pricing.

So we are tentatively scheduling a neighborhood meeting at the site, which is the park between Walnut and Oak Street, and uh, we're looking at that on Wednesday, April 1st, like around noon.

Um, so we'll be sending out notices.

I'll send it out to the group here.

I guess it was Rosemont Civic Association, and then we were gonna send out to all the neighbors on Oak Street and Walnut Street as well.

So to invite you all to the meeting.

So we're looking at um probably once we get the proposal and we go through the finished finalize the procurement process.

We're looking probably I'm gonna guess at the end of April, beginning of May, but as soon as we meet, you know, we'll have a better idea of that because that's in about two weeks.

So at that point, we may have the proposal at that point, and then we'll know more about the schedule of the project.

So we can talk about that at the meeting, and we're definitely gonna you know notify everybody and then do our normal public notification through e-news and social media as well.

Any questions?

Okay, thank you.

And then this is one of our largest uh storm sewer maintenance activities.

We're doing CCTV and cleaning of all the storm sewer going by drainage sheds.

So in this one, we're working in the four-mile watershed.

Uh, we've been working in this one, it's at the largest shed in the city, so it's it's taken.

I guess we started last June, so we're about 97% complete.

And we have found four projects so far, and so we have done the repairs and uh four sewers.

We've had to replace the pipes due to they were damaged or collapsed pipes, and we're coming up with about another four or five as well.

So we're moving along, and when we see collapsed pipe or bigger bigger issues, we fix them.

But in the meantime, we're as we go through where CCTV and cleaning the pipes, cutting the roots or whatever other issues are involved with that.

What it'd be possible to get information on where those were.

One of the questions I had for this this meeting was there there's been a lot of roads uh through Del Ray in the past few weeks that are kind of rolling closures, things are being opened up, and it's unclear if it's Virginia American Water.

I know they're doing some work in the city, it's unclear if it's some of this work being done.

Um kind of know like what what you found and like where they were.

Oh, sure.

So what we have a our contractor's insight, so they're out there every day of weather permitting, working in certain areas, and right now they're in the four-mile run watershed.

So I can certainly provide that information to you.

But and so we're in four mile run area, Del Ray.

Yeah, which I guess Del Ray is in that area.

So yeah, I can let you know that.

Half of the right is four-mile watershed, and then small.

Yeah, so we we'll see it.

And also, there are a lot of utilities out there as well.

Virginia American, Washington Gas, and they're constantly doing repairs and upgrades.

So yeah, we'll see.

We can talk to the permit center and see what's going on as well.

I'll provide that next time.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Is this the sensor?

Um it's also Bell's Crown.

Is that what Lucy's talking about?

Or is that a different type?

That's the one at the Pen Given neighborhood.

Yeah, it looks like it is the sensor that somebody take down the panel cover, right?

Because we have one on the inside.

Yeah, we saw one the other day.

Like we've seen we knew that there was one on the inside, but then we saw this the other day.

And that's why it's just showing John Bob to see what it was.

So I was just curious if it was a different sensor.

Yeah.

Yeah, we didn't know what it was.

But it was the same like same manhole.

There's another pick hole on the other side where the core is going down.

Yeah, that's what it is.

It's all takedown.

Oh I don't know why they would have that on top using their yeah, they usually they're attached to the invert.

Yeah.

Yeah, we've never seen it on the outside before.

You have one from above, it has needs to be able to reflect.

So that's we're just curious.

Yeah, we're like, oh, they must be doing some new testing.

All right, let's move on.

Yeah, so Camille.

Hey everybody.

Um so we just closed out another very successful stormwater utility credit season where we collect applications from December 1st to February 15th of each and every year.

Um, we do not accept them outside of that time frame because we do go into a very very extensive billing process with very large Excel spreadsheets, but I do enjoy an Excel.

So here we are.

Um, so as you all know, a few years ago we did update the program so that our residents can now receive up to 50% off of their stormware utility fee.

Um they can do anything from many many of our water quality practices to our uh dry flood proofing flood mitigation practices.

Um and so uh this year we kind of consider it one of our quote unquote off years.

So it's an every two-year credit cycle.

So um during our first year of the program is our on year when lots of people joined.

So, like last year was our on year, next year it's gonna be our on year.

Um, that's when they're renewing their their application.

So this is kind of our second year when most people have already joined.

Um, and this is just kind of the people who are learning about it, join on the second year, and they still have a two-year credit cycle, if that makes sense.

So they won't have to renew until in two years.

So um, December 1st, 2027, they'll get a lovely email from me saying, hey, time to renew.

Um, so usually we have about seven eight people.

So this year we have over 126 people that have applied.

So we had almost double.

I really want to say that that's awesome.

That's because of you guys telling your communities, continuing to talk about this program, continuing to get it out.

Um, the Zebra did something with it.

Um, we've had lots of HOAs do different things with it.

So we're really excited.

This year, um, we gave away 47,000 in stormware utility credit funds.

And um, one application, which was from Park Fairfax HOA, uh covered over 1600 up um uh condos, and so that was almost half of the amount of money we gave away, which is awesome because they're doing great things there for stormwater.

Um, so it is something that's definitely deserved.

Uh so next year we will be renewing um over 300 applications.

Um just to kind of give you guys a perspective.

So that means that this year, this 300 applications from last year are also going to be getting their credits.

Um, so we are giving away again money for people doing things to protect the water quality on their own property.

So uh we deeply appreciate it and hope that you guys continue to talk about this program.

Let them know that there is a credit window.

Um, and uh that is different than our flood medication grant program, which is rolling, and I will be quiet now because I'm sure I'm over my 30 seconds.

All right, thank you, Camille.

Yep.

All right.

So this one's gonna be one as me.

Do we oh perfect?

Okay, um, wonderful.

So the next and what time do we have this room until nine nine, but we're not gonna go that way.

Yeah, yeah, but I was I was thinking we had 8:30, and I was gonna try to, which will aim.

I think we can do this in that time.

That's that's gonna be the goal.

So as you all know, every yeah we I love how John has aimed to answer these three questions.

So the next three slides, um, I think they were sent out prior, so hopefully you've had a chance to look at them, but they cover the three questions that we always try to answer.

Question one is the city's investment in stormwire mitigation directed to the most urgent problems.

Question two is the city making sufficient progress in addressing the problem.

And question three are planned expenditures adequate to address the stormwater flooding problem.

Um he would like us to have this discussion at this point, obviously, because he's got to get started on some of our deliverables.

Yeah, jump in.

I'm sorry, I should have done that too.

You're okay.

No, you're good.

Um, I like discussion, so please feel free.

I don't love just talking all the time.

Um, but I think it's always good to recenter ourselves back on some of these questions to make sure that we're staying aligned with what the purpose of this committee really was founded for.

Um, and so in helping with that discussion on each of these slides attached to each of the questions, um, John pulled up some data points, um, which as I was kind of preparing, some have already been updated a little bit, which I think will help with our discussion.

Um, but some of the the factual analysis data points he has on the left and his observations on the right.

Um, and if anything is off in any way, again, this is the time to talk about it.

Yeah, okay, thanks.

Yeah, go for it.

Put their hand down.

Um, it's from project increase from eight to sixty million dollars.

I'm not sure what that means.

I I was thinking that that one looked like a typo, and which it's kind of the fact that that hoofs run and Pitt and Gibbon are now together and that analysis, or was the main thing that I flagged to talk about as being a development since he put this together.

Well, I thought not a development one.

Well, I think put it together as quick as he goes back to me saying we haven't talked to that neighborhood, yeah, and it would be bad for us to pull this out and not have talked to them.

So that's gonna need to happen before we get to the end of this in December, right?

We're not gonna wait to the very end to talk to them, but we need to give it a little bit more.

Similar to number five.

Is that gonna be the same?

Not one of that has happened in the budget.

Okay, that has happened in the budget.

Okay.

We need to make a bunch of budget changes for FY28 and for who's from because we're just not quite there.

You know, so we were gonna do some stuff.

We're like, well, let's just put put what's in there.

Let's next budget will have some changes in it.

Um also on the right, the observations.

We came and talked to you all.

There is not 107 million dollars that is not appropriated, but unexpended, blah, blah.

That was the discussion we had during the last meeting.

Yeah, well, the the meeting before last, actually, too.

Right.

Where we showed you all that there's less than eight million dollars that have been identified.

Um we had a meeting this morning, and we were just looking at all the projects, and there's some of that.

Where John's talking about a little some of these projects, you know, where he's saying multiple mid-sized projects.

Well, there's Cliff Fultmanning, there is Commonwealth, uh, or there's Mount Vernon Cal de Sachs, which he may have new bypass, there's Edison and Dale, there's West Ray, there's Mount Vernon and Dual Cowers.

We have a lot of projects right now.

We've been talking about this.

We got a lot of projects that are almost complete design.

Ready to kick off on construction.

Yeah, yeah.

And so Jonathan was talking about that where we're having kind of this like um regional MOT.

We've been what's an MOT.

Um sorry, uh movement of trans uh traffic, right?

Maintenance of traffic.

Yeah.

So maintenance of traffic.

What is that?

So when you have all these projects going around, you have to have flaggers, you have to have detours, you have to you're gonna shut down a lane, you might shut down two lanes, a bike lane.

So that's that's kind of all under that MOT, right?

Maintenance of traffic traffic, somehow projects will involve all flood control projects will have uh maintenance traffic because they're in the right-of-way.

Not all, some aren't, but they'll have some degree.

I don't think that hill sucked.

Buddy Ford might not, but you squirrels, you need to go this way, right?

Yeah, yeah.

So um you might have to detour some Girl Scouts.

Some girl scouts on the trail.

Gotcha.

Um, so I'd say all that to say we're you know, we're having to look at that area because we have so many projects in that area, right?

And part of those projects are in Orlandria, right?

Which is kind of equity area too.

So there's a lot of floating up there, right?

So we're gonna have a lot of projects that are going to construction here shortly.

Yeah, a lot of projects.

So that that number is a little high.

I mean, uh, there was only so much information they had that John can get his hands on, and so they took us a while to crunch it.

That's what you saw a couple meetings ago where it's it's less than eight million.

Um that is hasn't been identified.

For me, I know.

So the the bullets that I wanted to kind of jump in the discussion on that I'd love to hear the group's thoughts on is looking at all of this.

It's not the budget's not important, obviously it is, but for me, when I think about is the city investment directed to the most urgent problems.

I kind of start with that list he has number one, right?

And of those five, um, two are remaining, two are now kind of are we hoping to use as pilots, so it's not that they are not going to address.

We're hoping to really expand the flood grant program if we're able.

Um, I think uh the one that gets me is Braddock is still on the list, but we we don't have it on any kind of long-range plan.

So for me, it kind of go ahead and sorry.

So it is currently if you go to the um the proposed right.

This is the proposed FY27 to 36 uh 10-year plan, right?

CIP.

You're planning to spend a quarter million to uh enlarge the inlets, that will work sometimes, but it won't work all the time.

So there's there's two things on here.

The near term is the inlets.

So in the near term, we're going to include inlets in the Braddock and West area in one of our other projects, right?

So that's instead of doing a separate one, we're just rolling those into what we've called phase two, four-mile run inlets.

We call it phase two because try to keep from phase one.

We have grandma.

Well, even though it's not in four mile run, it's four run post run, truncated.

Okay, so that's the comment that that I had on the minutes.

Um Jesse just mentioned how to fix it.

Yep.

Yeah, I think we did fix it.

Yeah.

So that's actually awesome.

Because my question that I put is is there an opportunity here?

So knowing that Braddock is in fact on that 2736.

So the near term is the inlets, right?

So we got to make sure that the pipes underneath can handle more water if they can, more and less three groundlets, and then we have some funding, uh, about a half million dollars in the out years, um, just to throw kind of have some money and and show it in in the launch range plan and 10-year plan is the Braddock and West Flow mitigation.

Is there any plans from Wamana to do anything at Braddock similar to what they did at King?

Um let me answer it this way, because I don't uh I mean, have you heard?

I guess so.

So yeah, there are some plans for upgrades to the Bradford Metro Station, and we have begun some discussions with them.

Some very preliminary discussions.

Hey, there's a pipe that goes on to your property now if we'd like to be able to do CCTV pipe.

Have you looked at it?

What kind of shape is it in?

So some of those um early discussions, and then you know, we were kind of talking about those uh potential uh fixes.

There were two different places, right?

There's option one and two, and they're kind of really deep.

One's over kind of near where the uh the over the railroad overpasses, and the other one's kind of in the middle there.

Yeah, and I call it in the middle if you will, you know, right?

There's kind of an island in there.

Of course, transportation has different ideas of what they want to do in there too.

So we gotta work with them.

So the hope is like, hey, can we put some on a property?

Yeah, and I don't think that's gonna happen because we're talking about underground parking, you know, kind of different potential.

Yeah, it's all real conceptual stuff that they'd be like, oh, we're thinking maybe we do this, maybe we do that.

It's like okay, let's keep talking.

Yeah, and see if there's anything that we can do together to help in that area.

So, with that, that those were the points that I had kind of come up with.

Uh, does anyone else have any other items or thoughts on that question particularly again?

Is the city's investment in stormwater mitigation directed to the most urgent problems?

So is that half a quarter million dollars in the out years for the product road metro?

Is that you don't seriously expect to fix those problems with that amount of money?

No, is that amount of money sitting there just as a placeholder?

It's a little bit of placeholder, but also with start design.

Because the other thing we did here, I'm glad you asked that question.

The other thing that we did in the 10-year plan that we were told to do here, right with a budget together, right?

We had some plans they always said, okay, here's what we need to do instead of having a funding schedule that we've had this whole time, right?

We've got a 10-year plan funding schedule where council was how much can you push in there?

Just cram as much money as you can, you know, and we're like, wait a minute, wait a minute.

Um, but we did cram what we could in there, but it's not a delivery schedule, right?

So that we're not delivering on that schedule.

So we were told this time, okay, take the projects you have next in line, which are in the the 10-year plan, the previous one too.

So we took that list, and it you'll see in the proposed budget talks about what we did to that list.

So come with that leaves off the list, right?

Because we're going on it or whatever.

Here's where we're at.

So here's the next ones.

And so we took the next of the list and we lined them up in the delivery schedule.

So in there you will see a uh a first smaller number, like for do it, this is a smaller number, maybe it's 2.8 or something like that million for design.

And then after a couple years, you see 12.9 for construction.

So we tried to lay it out like that and hold ourselves to that delivery schedule.

So that paltry sum in the out here for Braddock for for Braddock and West is just for planning and design.

Getting it, yes, planning and design, getting it started.

That probably will not fund all the design.

But as we laid them out and we said we're gonna put it in this 10-year plan, and for the other things that we have in the plan, it worked out with us as much money as we could put in that last year, is that is the half a million, right?

And so the idea would be we start working on that, we say we can do X, Y, and Z, and here's what we're gonna do.

The the the next 10-year plan.

Well, next year you should see more money, right?

There should either be more money, because it's probably gonna cost more to design that the poultry song.

And then a couple years later, you would see a construction if it's moving forward, right?

So this next one is kind of planning feasibility.

What we did for this the study, which is hey, here's a couple things you might be able to do, right?

So then you got I mean, there are a lot of constraints there, yeah.

And the city doesn't have a lot of wiggle room to do much, and it's what 50 acres that drains into like one.

Yeah, and it's I think we I think it was some it was a pretty large range between like 25 and 75 million.

So it's a really large range.

So you're as we dig into it with the first you know, first tranche of money, then that number that will shrink.

And the range will shrink.

And a different part of TNS in the same proposal to put bike lanes and take away the people's parking dangled in front of a folks aroundabout there.

And then the roundabout disappeared, maybe that's further down the line, maybe they but if they want to re bit rebuild with a roundabout, then that's the time to dig once and put a gigantic cyst, whatever it's called, underground vault, whatever it is, under the roundabout.

Well, the it'll take if you look at just the rough, the rough surface area, it'll be bigger than that.

I'm just I know I'm getting into details, but that yes, when if they're doing something or mod is doing something and we can do something nearby there, you know, connect to the pipes and everything, then that'd be the time to do it.

They're they're pretty far out.

So I'm I don't think they're gonna get to what we do.

Anyone else have any thoughts on that?

And not just Braddock, but more generally the question at large.

I think there's more things that could have been put here.

I one of the points that I had was I think that one of the biggest wins of this program have been the spot improvement projects.

And I know he goes into that on slide two with question two, but I think it's if we're answering this question, um, I I don't think that you can talk about this without talking about you know it when he pulled the numbers together at that point, they were 14 projects completed under spot.

Um I think that says a lot.

I know personally with what I've seen on our street, those larger inlets have made a huge difference at the more common storms.

Yeah.

Um the other night when this wall line came through.

The water was not our concern, and that's a big deal.

It is, yeah.

Yeah.

I mean, I granted I wasn't standing near the front of our house because of the tree.

So I wasn't watching the road as much as I probably could have been or should have been.

They're like down trees.

I just go in the middle of the street.

Safe, it's safe now.

There's no fiber going.

I mean 200 euro or however many year old trees expands five homes.

We're just like please staring the ground.

Yeah.

Um, but don't fall on our houses.

Well, I mean, it I'm not exaggerating when I say it spans five homes.

So when we watch it storms, we're watching the tree, but generally I'm watching the road.

And every time I looked at the road, this this and it was a lot of rain that came down.

I mean, we got like half an inch in like 15 minutes.

Um I did not see the street hypermeters, it wasn't watching it as close.

So I I do I think that it if we're having this discussion, I think we can also put those the the major win of the spot improvement projects here, too.

And I kind of think that's the biggest win that we've seen overall.

Anyone else then um this has been touched on in previous meetings by John and others going forward.

This committee is going to need more information on the financial picture.

Um a systematic way, like you provided one or two or three meetings ago.

In order to make the kinds of judgments that John has outlined for us.

And there's a big difference between a hundred between a hundred and it's seven million and eight million.

There's a big difference, and part of that is John struggled, he struggled with the rest of us to try to figure this out on his own.

Um, so we're going to need um better information on the finances as a whole, um, the receipts and expenditures and how much money is left over going forward in order to um complete the deliverables that are sought from us by the the city manager of the city council.

And I know that's more work for staff, but it kind of has to be done.

Yeah, I guess uh I think one good sorry, no go ahead.

I think one good example was the Betty Ford project.

Like it it's a great project, but my first thought was if we have to defend a rise in stormwater utility fee that was created to prevent flooding that impacts homes.

That was why I asked that question because I can't, as much as I think that project is absolutely worth the money it's going to be put into it.

If somebody were to come to me and say, Well, why is this on the list?

Who how many homes are being impacted by that?

I feel like we have to be ready to at least know where to go, even if we don't know the answers.

And I think it's a good example of being able to see a quick snapshot of like in prior presentations, it was always so helpful to have like the funding streams for each project, for instance, just because it gave that level of transparency that I think I'm very fearful 2027 and beyond, as we have more and more people come on council that we're not around for 2020, that we are going to have to do more defending of the money that we are asking people to pay into this, and so having that level of transparency all the time, I think helps us also be better advocates for the program for the funding, and it helps us answer the questions.

So hopefully I'll have to answer a fewer.

And the worst part is so many of these projects which flood a lot of places seriously are reaching dead-ends.

That is let's say that again.

So many of these do you mean the big the large ones?

The two and gibbon chimber branch bypass.

That's but that's when you say so many, that's like two out of um with the number here, 14.

Well, at least we've done that.

Yeah, I think that's where we have to talk about the spot improvement projects and pull that that into the consideration because they're what we always thought in the beginning was that they would be very small projects, and we've seen those are actually much larger in scale, scope, and budget than I think anyone realized initially.

I think that's where we have to talk about the spot improvement projects and pull that that into the consideration because they're what we always thought in the beginning was that they would be very small projects, and we've seen those are actually much larger in scale, scope, and budget than I think anyone realized initially.

And so there's also um there's a budget question that came in.

So we responded to the budget question.

Um it's in a way different format than it used to be.

Yeah, it's on the um Alexander VA.gov slash budget.

Yep.

So if you go down to the um the CIP and operating.

So yeah, go and go into the CIP and operating, and then you get two two different lists, and you scroll down to the capital improvement program and click on stormwater management.

Well, so that'll give you the proposed.

And then we've got the numbers that you and I worked on.

I'm gonna go ahead because it rolls into this discussion, but can we move to slide two?

Question two while we're talking this, and that's is the city making sufficient progress in addressing the problem.

I feel like this we're we're these two questions go hand in hand 14 completed 14, and that's the instruction we're not started yet.

Well, there's several dimensions to this slide that is probably worth bringing up.

I suppose we really one is what's of course the capacity of time to tackle new projects.

It's money, of course.

But there's others are more subtle, like for example, what's the capacity of the city to take on huge construction campaign that goes in different places of the city and interrupts traffic and disrupts businesses?

So those things have to be it's like a Jenka game, they all have to be working very much uh well, otherwise there will be somebody's going to have uh adverse impact on their realities.

Yeah, so but that's kind of what they the background for us that are implemented in the program, how we jump with the different restrictions, and of course, if you ask me that we're doing actually quite a bit.

I think you you heard the weren't construction or 100% design complete many times during the presentation of that uh Rich gave on the project.

So we're we get it there now.

What we're thinking, okay.

Can the city really take on us open holes everywhere we these big problems are?

We've actually in the middle of that decision making because we do find three projects that kind of carry in the same spot and almost at the same time.

We have to do magic actually to stretch those schedules so that we wouldn't be uh in the complex.

So that's I I offer that as a background, but I'm pretty sure answers to these this question here.

I think the pump station's been really illuminating to a lot of those concerns, right?

That's true, and just the discussion around that good, bad, better, worse, whatever opinion may be out there, but to see when a project is met with a lot of pushback questions, and we haven't had that with these projects, and now I they're very different projects.

I I get that too, but I've watched that discussion and been even more thankful for the discussions we have in here, if that makes sense.

That makes sense.

We're very careful.

Do we have a timeline for the spot projects on border?

Are we only counting the cities?

Like the city year or like June origin of June, or is this the calendar here?

Like in other words, like what's the timeline to show within this, you know, period.

This is what we anticipate in the next timeline, you know, the 14.

I think that'll help if we can show some kind of a baseline of one.

Which of those projects are scared?

We do we do we fill out the master schedule or is it the media?

We so I think that's the origin of all the numbers.

Is that original schedule that we created that had it didn't look quite as nice and maybe a little bit less detail, but it had a lot of uh projects on there.

So as we've completed them, we dropped them off from the reporting and eventually we converted to the the new format that I think looks a little bit nicer and provide something a little bit more detailed schedule.

So that's what I go ahead and do.

Yeah, I think it would be good to like note that in this that this is the totality, and then this is when they we started tracking them because I mean that was a newer effort, right?

As we were going through like these large projects, I think it's just important to show that the city shifted to understanding the importance of not just these longevity projects, but trying to you know mitigate, you know, throughout with the capabilities that you have with the resources and funding.

Um so yeah, I would add some kind of a note to that.

Yeah, because it's had improvements and residents do see that, right?

Like people only see the construction side, but they don't see anything else that you're doing, but you know, the planning and design.

So I think noting that would also help kind of make that you know argument that these spot improvements are so important.

Um question on the host run bypass and number five.

So this is the one.

So the note on the other slide that was number five is different.

It's different host run project that we're saying went up to the 60 million.

This one we're saying is the one that's similar to Pit and Gibbon, but there's not a solution, or is it the same?

I'm sorry, same one.

It is okay.

Yeah, yeah.

But then but this one, isn't this the one that we're saying again, like on the slide that we talked about in the beginning of this meeting, right?

That there was Pit and Gibbon and there was host run, where both weren't really feasible, you know, design wise.

So then why are we still noting that went up to 60 million if that's not an option?

So I think that was the the piece that I flagged is we needed to these were just his thoughts and notes to help lead discussion.

I think he put that together ahead of that again.

This isn't public, right?

Yeah, I don't think it goes back to that.

He's trying to not say he's not trying, he's trying to treat the same thing that we did on Pit and Gibbon because we haven't talked to the neighborhoods.

Yeah, okay.

That's what he's trying to do there.

He's trying to monitor that when we're like, okay, here's the deal.

We know this is a public committee, but here's the deal, and we need to go talk to folks as we're getting this spooled up.

So the the reason I was kind of picking at it, just well, one I wanted to make sure I had an understanding before I asked my next question.

Um, is that for the funding then?

So for the pit given, it was originally estimated around like the 28, and then now there's four million allocated.

Is that for the analysis that's going on to fund that, or is that a placeholder for something else?

Because then could the 24 million is that being used towards other you know, larger efforts that are going on right now?

So I think what we're talking about right now is so that funding is not the stormwater utility, it's the sanitary sewer fund.

And the other thing that they're dealing with right now is having to buy four million gallons at the wastewater treatment plant.

It's gonna be, I want to say 40 million dollars, right?

40 million gallons or for so 4 million gallons of throughput for the for the uh for Alex Renew, right?

If you're gonna send 4 million gallons daily to Alex Renew, they're gonna have to do a lot of upgrades, right?

Oh great.

We have we have some they call it capacity, right?

So there's gonna be capacity issues in the future.

So where's this four million gallons coming from?

It's coming from everybody flushing the toilets and go to the sinks and everything, right?

Right, but they're doing that anyway, because you got more people, there's growth, right?

So growth needs more capacity.

Well, so they're saying in this time horizon of the growth, we're gonna need this capacity.

We gotta start designing and funding and building this these capacity projects out of plan.

So I was going to read it was asking for additional funding.

So again, because of the capacity of people that is working in the area.

Yeah, there's needed funding for the additional capacity for future growth.

Yeah, okay.

So that's where this funding is now being allocated that would have gone to Pit and Gibbon, but doesn't we don't have a project for that yet?

So why put 20 million, you know, on a hold if it could be used elsewhere?

Is that so now is it going to like Alex Renew and other projects?

Some of that is so what they've done in the um sanitary sewers, CIP.

And if you look at the two, I don't think see that either.

So it should be um budget.

And then you see down in here.

So Pitt and Gibbon in the in the proposed, if you looked at it, has the four million dollars from FY26, and you don't see anything now in FY27.

But if you crawl up to Alex Renew Wastewater treatment plant capacity, 22 point or 22 million 242,000.

So that really just got shifted up.

Okay.

And actually, Aaron right now is at a budget meeting because Monday got postponed because of the potential weather where they're talking about that.

Okay.

So they needed to go ahead and make that move in the budget.

I already talked to some of the people on site.

Um, because of that need for that upgrade, they need to show that funding where it needs to be.

Hey, we've we're putting the money here, there's discussions going on, there's memos flying around, so that needed to go ahead and be done.

We didn't have that driver, ours is more complex, there's more people.

So we said, okay, let's hold off on like talking about this until we have a little bit better idea what it would look like.

Okay, right.

So was the four million expense just on the study that's already taken place, or is that being held for a future?

I think that's being held.

Oh, okay.

What's going on with the the pilots?

What we've been talking about looking at it, we're funding that.

Yeah.

Stormwater utilities funding all of that right now because it's gonna look like a flood vacation grant, right?

So we said, hey, this is just something we should be funding.

Okay, you know, but not the large project, the 20 million dollar project or something we're gonna look at doing.

So Jesse, is that similar for host run then?

So, what is host run look like?

Um, because uh it was on the other slide, so I don't remember the number.

Um the funding, like is that a similar structure to what happened?

Well what we done uh what we did in the host run funding.

Can you sorry, what was the other number?

Those uh previous the most run.

Um the one on the first slide was something was off on it.

Oh, okay.

That was the line specifically that increased from eight to sixty.

Yeah, it wouldn't have six million.

It didn't increase from eight to sixty.

Okay.

Eight million is what the really early rough order magazine costs for the design was.

Okay, and then there was sixty million coming behind it construction, so it didn't increase.

It was not, it was a it was the small, it was the it was the design versus the construction, similar to what you talked about with looking for right.

And so some of that money has already come through, right?

As far as in this budget authority, they haven't bought bonds and we're not paying off bonds, and we're not paying interest on you know, uh borrowing right now, but right if you in the proposed stormwater utility tenure plan, there's two million dollars in FY27, right?

And then and then FY28, there's 38,440,000.

The thought is that 38440.

We're not doing a project because that's not gonna do a project anyway, is going to go down.

So as we go through this analysis, we start talking to people, that that number is not going to be in there for the next budget for next 10-year plan.

It's going to be a smaller company.

It's going to be a smaller number, and it's probably gonna be spread out a little bit, it's going to be dependent on what the analysis says.

How much money do we need?

Right.

So being again, you know, it will be talking at sanitary, but right now the thought is then the funding for all the program would probably come from some part of the utility.

And so you might see numbers on here, which you're probably gonna see if we're not gonna do the project, it goes away.

There's a write-up why it went away, and then you'll see the if if it's just the uh like an add-on to the flood grant, you see the money down in the flood grant, and there'll be changed language in the flood grant.

So this is also for the two pilot areas to fund this, uh blah blah blah, you know, that kind of thing.

Yeah, but we just weren't ready to make all those changes yet.

That makes sense.

I was just curious of where the funding is going and how it's being allocated, right?

Because I know you can't just sit on it and it also expires over time, so it's like you have to.

It doesn't expire, but you can't sit on it, get smacked.

Oh, yeah, well, yes.

Yes, so the city funds, once you have them within the budget, you you don't have to expense them by a certain fiscal year.

There's yeah, CIP is not use it or lose it.

That's what we call operating, right?

The year after year.

And I think we have some discussion.

We talked about more capital before, yeah, yeah.

We had that conversation before federal, yeah.

Okay.

Um, yeah, so we we would have that funding.

And so they're gonna hold us to these.

And you guys are gonna hold us to these schedules, right?

So we gotta get started on Duit.

Yeah, right.

And this next fiscal year.

And actually I think we yeah, that one and then the next one after that is East Mason, that kind of thing.

We'll continue to look for grants to see if we could, you know, use that grant money or whatever too.

But this is more of a delivery schedule now for those large capacity projects.

And we just have that's the one downside of not breaking out all these spot projects and the individual pages.

Yeah.

The other downside is have to deal with this individual pages sometimes.

Um but I think what I need to do too is probably send around that spreadsheet that we talked about in November.

So you see the eight million dollars there.

I did it's like less than eight now.

It's actually less.

I don't know if we got sent them around.

That's why I was kind of like wondering about it.

But yeah, now I guess it was more, and I think I've got to write this time is eight.

Because it also shows that we have um six million dollars the spot projects that we're gonna be spending money on, and that's just the ones some of the ones we talked about here, we're adding more.

So just for the next fiscal year, you're saying throughout.

Um probably in the next fiscal year or two, I'm gonna give it two years because most of these are coming.

Valleys at 90%, Belfonts probably at get close to 90, I think.

No, that was a while.

Yeah, that's what yeah, so click folds close, no to means get closed.

There's other ones on here that I've spent put on here because it's not the funding from like 26.

I mean, so if we look at question three, our plan expenditures are equally.

Yeah.

Um you mentioned that four million twenty billion went from given given to Alex Renew.

It's it's it's shown in our 10 year plan as the wastewater treatment plant capacity.

The money for Pit and Gibbon and the other gate is not coming out of the stormwater utility, it's coming out of the combined sewers CIP is the sanitary sewer tasting plan.

The sanitary sewers tenure plan.

So it's not stormwater utility money to start with.

Correct.

So when it goes someplace else, it it's because it's coming out of a different pot.

Well, it was never what you mean.

Right.

Yeah, so so this so it's more of like just moving it in the year.

So the bottom line is still gonna stay the same.

You took the 24 from Pitt and Gibbon and you created this Alexander wastewater treatment, you got the same bottom line.

Right.

So the second question becomes if there is an individual solutions and matching funds given will that be coming out of the sanitary that's likely to come out more easily.

Because it's going to be a modification of the plug grant.

Okay, that that's that's something that's a policy thing.

Yeah, project.

We need to think about and discuss next time.

Uh so it'd be explained.

Okay.

It'd be a use of the funding since we had this funding identified for us from COVID bypassing.

It'd be a use of that funding.

So what we have in next year, we're showing an FY28, the 10-year plan, and we all know that they're only approved one year, right?

Right.

That's all I think.

Right.

So um yeah, and we have 38.4 million dollars in FY28 or Mr.

COVID bypass.

So the thought is that funding would be used for these at least these two pilot areas public areas because it's from Cobra and PIC data.

Because I can we gotta be able to argue to an auditor why do you use that money?

And if you're putting in combined sewer pipes, right?

And kind of uh building onto the combined area, that seems a little that's that's harder to argue.

But if you're keeping water, whatever may be in that water away from the structure and not get in the structure, then I think we can argue that's that's just that's a flooding issue, and that's stormwater.

Can I make sure that I typed this correct?

Um if the flood grant program is expanded for pit and given, it will change in policy.

It will be a change in policy that allows additional public funds to go to private areas.

This will be a change because the original budget was going to be coming from sanitary funding.

Missed something, yeah.

Okay.

I think it's the difference between a combined sewer system project.

Yeah, and a why makes sense.

I just wanted to make sure that I typed it correctly.

Okay.

Yeah.

Yeah, because you could also note, you know, like the CSO versus CSS and like the difference between those systems.

Yeah, you know, because that's the way I think it's defined.

Yeah, separate storm sewer combined sewer.

Yeah.

So that's that was the decision that was it made sense.

But I think now it also makes us into it this way.

So it's just not a project.

Is that the only one that's in the combined?

Another, yeah, that's right.

Yeah, but that one's going on.

So yeah, but that one has a solution, and we'll be moving forward.

Okay.

Right.

So then this is the only one that would be potentially even if the um if the analysis turns out where there is an option to kind of expand on the flood grant program some way, right?

To where it recovers this, then this might be the only one that is kind of with that nuance, or have there been other you know, notices within the combined stream, you know, stormwork sewer that needs to that might turn into some more paper.

I think the former is true, the probably would be the only one.

Okay, I don't think we're seeing well, but we could also promote direction another game.

Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

It'd be very helpful.

Yeah, that's right.

All right, exactly.

I want to be mindful of time.

So I want to run through these three questions again, and I'm gonna kind of go through the discussion points I have because we haven't actually outright answered any of them, but I think we have a lot of discussion points that will lead to answers, if that makes sense.

So, again, question one is the city's investment stormwater mitigation directed to the most urgent problems.

Two, is the city making sufficient progress in addressing those problems?

Three, are planned expenditures adequate to address the stormwater flooding problem.

Um overview of the discussion.

So those five projects that we discussed bullet in the first bullet to list the large capacity projects.

Two are remaining about to start construction, two are in the process of being adjusted, um, potentially being used as pilots to expand the program.

One radic is still off.

I I said off the list.

I need to correct that because I said is there an opportunity?

And yes, it is on a proposed um ten year CIP for fiscal years 27 through 36.

Uh, I've got some detail there that we discussed.

Um I think only looking at large capacity projects is not the way to look at this.

We also need to include the wins from those spot projects as well, because that tells a big big story and touches a lot of people.

Uh I do have a note here about discussing the host run shift as well and being mindful of that.

Um I've got the note from Dino going forward about needing more financial information, uh so that we don't struggle to understand those and produce the deliverables that we have to do.

Um like Dan's point about the capacity of staff to take on your projects.

What's the budget?

What is the capacity of the city to take on a large campaign that would be disruptive to residents to businesses?

Um, and how this team specifically has worked really well in that environment.

Um the importance of having the timeline, Christine's point, uh, the number of projects that have been completed over time, but kind of shows the totality of the work that's been done so far and how that would be impactful to this particular deliverable.

Um I also included a note um Jesse, the overview of how the budget layout, this the smaller numbers up front that represents the design stages with larger funding numbers later on in the CIP that will be more of an estimated placeholder for construction budgets.

Yeah, so there's been a big change in that approach.

Yeah.

So when we say you know, construction is lagging behind the funding, that's because the funding approach was push all you can in there at that one time, just cram it all in the construction is mighting be fine.

Yeah, just funding.

That's what C he said here a couple of times.

The construction program is doing slower than the funds generated each year by the stormworking.

And that is because of the function of the way the team was put together.

The tenure was put together, and hopefully now.

Just go ahead and you know, front load because like you're saying, it looks as if you're not you know expending those funds because then you're gonna be deemed on not expensive.

Unless you're not expending them, yeah, it's like the government, we're not allowed to do that.

Any we have to phase it out, otherwise we get data non-expensing.

So I think it was also like share the public we're doing something, share the comment.

Yeah, we got to the point of like fair to the city, it kind of works counterintuitive, right?

Because it doesn't it kind of looks to the public then that you guys were front-loaded, why aren't you doing anything?

Well, you are that you cannot invoice an expense, you know, the larger amounts until you get to construction.

Yeah, so that makes sense.

Yeah, so maybe this is I think that's important to note the way that you're changing the way the funding is happening because the public will see a difference.

Yeah, for the large classic way, yeah.

Yep.

Are there any other things that we should include kind of in this?

I think it's important to define what urgent means for John, like you weren't urgent, but you know, there could be so many ways to approach that.

Is that urgent as in well, how many key pool is this effecting, right?

Or is this urgent as in square footage wise?

What is flooding, right?

Doesn't always account to people.

Um, you know, or is it getting the spot improvement projects done quickly?

So it's urgent, like, hey, this is something fast we could do, so let's knock out the spot improvement, right?

Make that a priority, and then we'll come back to studying this long-term.

You know, if you don't have enough resources and capacity to do both.

I just think it's important to understand what urgent is people, square footage, time, cost.

Well, always we get money from a couple of sources.

And and then we have to use it within a time.

So that shifts priority, something that was scary coming has to take the back seat because we have to use this money time.

Yeah, I think that would be good to know that, right?

Because like people don't people don't know that.

So I think like that would have to absolutely go into the urgent scale that maybe we wouldn't see publicly, right?

But you guys know, hey, you know, I have to allocate this at this time for this use, you know, and so maybe that shifted a project in urgency.

So I think maybe it's just something to note, you know, on how you guys break things.

All right.

So I will include John and then I'll send you all of these.

And if you want to, I don't know if it's helpful just to include this within the minutes or not, but feel free to do that if you would like.

I'll make sure that John has them as well.

Sure.

Um thing I also back in November I I did that I didn't do in our last meeting that I wanted to do again was kind of the um actions, ideas, and decisions, and just roll back through those at the end of the meeting so that we can make sure that I've notated everything and we've got it kind of got it ready for the minutes.

The two I didn't really have any issues or big decisions that we've we've talked about.

Obviously, we'll send this to John write up.

But under actions, I did have two, so correct me if I've got missing any.

Um so the question for Lisa, what for Storm sewer projects were completed in March, and then um Jesse to send around the budget spreadsheet that we talked about last fall.

And the other one was uh another email that Camille sent over the Taylor run.

I sent it to you and John and Dan.

Okay.

For that for that meeting.

So send around.

I guess.

Oh, I was gonna send it to everyone.

Yes, but uh send it tomorrow.

Okay.

That was the um the invitation, right?

Right.

Okay, and which run, Taylor?

Yes, okay, application.

Right.

Is there anything else that I that anyone would like me to include?

Yeah.

I just got this right before the meeting.

Um we we put in a um an application request for um a level settled up earmark funding.

Sorry, I was trying to get to it.

And um for e drive.

So e drive is off of um Quaker.

There's kind of a there's pretty much a concrete K Uy or Q-U-A-Y.

K E Y.

Oh yeah.

So Key Drive is off of um Quaker, north of Janey's, and there's kind of this stream that comes down through there is in a concrete channel and it goes under the driveways of a lot of houses.

Yeah.

So um, we were bored anyway.

So we get these requests to come in hot and heavy, right?

So I guess real fast of like what project can you put in for federal earmark and buyers and uh warner's office.

This is around two million dollars.

So we scramble a little bit, we figure out what it is.

We've done that with Clifford Fulfin, right?

We've done it with note being, and now this note of being for my run drive.

And so this year is the the key drive project.

So it the early uh ROM, yeah, we're a forward magnitude cost is like almost 2.3 or 4 or something, but they kind of cap out the two million, so we're asking for two million, two million is better zero, right?

Yeah, so um all that to say Dana sent me something said hey be great to have a letter of support for this project address to Warner 10k.

I'm sorry.

Um so I just got this later today and said she gave me a couple addresses and said, Hey, is there anything we could get with a letter of support?

We don't have form, so uh but since you raised it.

Um what on earth are you going to do with this thing?

What do you mean?

With the stream, it has a name.

It does not, it's a tributary is what I would say a tributary to me.

Was it Taylor run around the area?

Um we don't know totally.

That's that's what the work is.

Yeah, starting.

We've had complaints on this, and so the work is just in the early planning phases.

Um what we're gonna do to that.

Does it flood?

It doesn't have any rainfalls, so it's in bad shape too, right?

So what they just concrete culture, and there's a roach, and then there's a big pipe that the driveway goes over.

Yeah, pretty much all these driveways, yeah.

I guess they thought it was thicker glover back in the day.

Um, so we're gonna do what we can on there.

We just don't we don't know what all it's gonna be.

Some of it's gonna be structural, but yeah, maybe if we can make the bigger areas or whatever, we have to do it's we're gonna have to do the process, but so Dana's just looking for some letters of support to send you know for us to send to those folks who those two offices.

As soon as possible.

Yesterday.

Oh, I'm telling you, yeah.

Last week is when I was told about this.

So it's like get some together.

Here we go.

We did, yeah.

Our problem money can you sign it, I think vice chair.

I think we entire group way.

Yeah, is that doable?

Well, I'm looking at Dino because he's the uh from the vice chair, not on behalf of the committee, no problem.

Yeah, and you could circulate it to the committee and we legally I would have to circulate that way, I would have to legally circulate it one to one.

It has two or more gets in the sunshine.

Two emails, but if we were like if I if I wanted to get committee buy into it, I would need to go like one to one.

Oh, I think even with blind copy, we won't tell.

Yeah, if you are we still getting funding from the feds for Cleveland Comp one.

We've never got the funding on the fence.

We reposed we put it put in an application for federal funding, and then we got denied.

Got denied.

Yeah, it was very early on in the community flow preparedness fund, the state fund now that you know we got a pretty good idea about we've got a good bit of money.

It was very early on, and so we didn't get a big chunk from the state either, but we had a successful in getting some pretty good.

I think over five or six million dollars, just these projects in the waterfront fund, too.

Yeah, yeah, we thought we had something there, but I remember a big chunk, yeah.

It's gonna be good or something, right?

All right, well, are there any other discussion points that we need to address?

It's not and it's going to make motion, which we don't have forms in public comments, yes, public.

Do we have anybody on the attendees list that would like to ask a question?

I think we have I have no hands raised.

Who's on the up?

I think John Craig was on earlier, but something type of boom sounds like 12 minutes to the heck out.

All right, so no public comment.

Sorry.

All right.

No question.

Yeah, of course.

Oh, it was posted an article.

Okay.

No motion can be like.

It was good to see everyone.

It's great to see you.

Yes.

Thank you, Madam My Share.

Thank you for your patience and me getting here later.

I don't remember the version.

Okay.

I just want you to be able to meet.

Nothing here.

Yeah, yeah.

I mean the people.

Yeah, I love those like some part of this.

Yeah, yeah.

Oh nice.