Gulfport City Council Stormwater Workshop - Nov 25, 2025
Gulfport City Council Stormwater Workshop - Nov 25, 2025
The Gulfport City Council convened a workshop to review a preliminary stormwater management plan and six proposed Best Management Practices (BMPs) presented by Advanced Engineering. Mayor Love emphasized that stormwater is the city's number one issue, noting the aging infrastructure and a projected cost of $75 million to complete the six identified projects. The primary goal was to discuss the proposed "defined level of service" (allowing up to 9 inches of water on streets in certain conditions) and project development assumptions, deliberately deferring detailed funding discussions until a Vulnerability Study is presented in January.
Consent Calendar
- Not applicable (This was a workshop; no formal votes or consent calendar items were processed).
Public Comments & Testimony
- Shauna Stone (3014 DuPont St.): Expressed strong concern that the focus on creating "pretty water retention centers" is detracting from fixing immediate drainage issues. Stated that neighbors' garages are flooding during standard rainstorms (3 inches) and that Town Shores and 58th Street areas face over a foot of water during the August flash flood event.
- Anna: Questions regarding the effectiveness of dredging Wood Ibis Pond due to groundwater tables and clarification on the drainage path of water from 26th/27th streets.
- Laura Oldaney (9th Ave S): Questioned the city's available budget against the $75 million estimate. Requested better public education materials and suggested engaging external experts like Megan (Tampa Bay Regional Planning), Forward Pinellas, and Diane Willis (rainwater harvesting expert) to brainstorm diverse solutions.
- Bob: Stated the objective is to remove rainwater from streets and return it to the bay. Suggested that pumping stations, as implemented by Pinellas County and Treasure Island, could be a viable solution to move water quickly, citing specific engineering plans.
- Michael Thornton (3014 DuPont St.): A mechanical engineer questioning the modeling assumptions. Asked if the report accounted for historical impacts of Town Shores and the Beach Park/Recreation Center blockages, tailwater reduction via check valves, and if pumping was evaluated as a mitigation measure during tailwater events.
- Scott Bernstein (Skimmer Point): Expressed concern that converting parks to water features poses a liability risk for families if children are unaware of the danger. Suggested that the PYCC Country Club remodel might be a strategic opportunity to coordinate infrastructure improvements.
Discussion Items
- Mayor Love:
- Outlined goals to assess the council's comfort with the "defined level of service" and project assumptions (e.g., not buying homes for storage).
- Clarified that the $75 million estimate is in today's dollars for the six projects, compared to the $13.5 million already spent on the sewer system over nine and a half years.
- Proposed deferring the funding discussion until after the January Vulnerability Study to establish a clearer path forward.
- Noted the water flow pattern from the northeast to southwest, emphasizing that addressing the NE section reduces the load on the SW section.
- Justin Keller (Advanced Engineering):
- St. Pete Water: Confirmed that water transfer from St. Pete is minimal and primarily affects the 49th Street system or Marina District, not the PYCC basin.
- Water Flow & Models: Explained that while modeling shows water flowing into Wood Ibis, much of it actually flows north or west via Bear Creek. Clarified that the model shows instantaneous maximums, not recovery times.
- Recovery Studies: Agreed to provide "recovery floodplains" to show how quickly water recedes after a storm, which would help prioritize projects based on lingering water issues.
- Dredging: Explained that dredging Wood Ibis Pond is unlikely to lower the water table effectively because the pond is a "wet pond" fed by the groundwater table; removing sediment does not remove the source volume.
- Pumping: Acknowledged the public's suggestions for pumps but noted that 8,000 GPM (17 CFS) scales are insufficient for the massive stormwater volumes (hundreds of CFS) associated with design storms in the PYCC area.
- Maps: Accepted feedback that the presentation maps were difficult to read and promised to provide high-resolution, labeled legends and GIS data in the final report by year-end.
- Councilmember Early:
- Expressed agreement with the "defined level of service" concepts (0, 6, and 9 inches).
- Project Assumptions: Questioned the assumption against converting green space to storage. Suggested using Climber Park, Caldwell Park, or the 27th/59th low point as holding ponds to avoid expensive road reconstruction.
- BMP Specifics: Asked about redundancy in outfalls for BMP 1 (54th Street) and the flow direction of BMP 2 (Golf Course). Requested a site visit to see the bypass systems at Wood Ibis.
- Councilmember Shaw:
- Agreed to investigate the use of green spaces (Climber Park, Caldwell Park, and the 27th/59th low point) as strategic storage areas, provided the safety and liability are addressed.
- Noted that current maps for the Golf Course bypass (BMP 2) were confusing and requested a tour of the actual site to understand the water flow.
- Councilmember Jackson:
- Agreed that using green spaces for water storage is a viable option to reduce costs and construction disruption, specifically mentioning moving projects from 15th to 13th to utilize open space near Caldwell Park.
- Councilmember Thanos:
- Noted that the 59th/27th low point is the lowest elevation in the city and questioned if buying that specific property and creating a pond there would be an effective solution.
Key Outcomes
- Council directed staff and engineers to re-evaluate the six project proposals with a specific emphasis on the feasibility of using existing public green spaces (Climber Park, Caldwell Park, and the 27th/59th intersection) as temporary or permanent water storage areas.
- Engineers agreed to provide a "recovery floodplain" analysis to demonstrate drainage speeds after storm events.
- City staff and engineers committed to producing high-resolution, labeled maps and a detailed written report with legends to be delivered by the end of the year.
- The Council decided to pause detailed financial planning until the Vulnerability Study is completed and presented in January.
- No formal votes were taken; the meeting concluded with a directive to continue dialogue and explore the new design concepts before returning to budget discussions.
Meeting Transcript
We always start on time. So welcome to uh everybody who was able to make it here tonight for our workshop. I think this is the fourth workshop we're having in eight months. Um trying to talk out things. So um we're gonna start with um roll call. Vice Mayor Thanos here. Councilmember Shaw present. Council Member Early Present. Mayor Love here. City Manager O'Reilly. Here. City Clerk Carico is present. Um Councilmember Jackson has asked me excuse me. All righty. So let's let me kind of start with a just a little bit of an overview, all right. Um I don't know how many of you I think a few of you might have been present for the presentation. We were um it was very overwhelming. Uh a lot of terms and acronyms that were uh not uh in my wheelhouse because I'm not an engineer. Um but I am extremely grateful to get the presentation. We needed it, we needed to, you know, start the forward motion and to me just hearing the presentation was the way to kick it off. Um as far as I'm concerned, and I don't know if everyone would agree with me, but I think that uh storm water is the number one issue in Gulfport. Um and the biggest one that we have to get um figure out how to get our wrap our heads around and what to how to move forward it with fixing it. Um I did ask enough questions that I was able to find out that um though there were a few improvements made in the nineties in Ward Four and the tangerine stormwater slash quality water improvement was made approximately fifteen years ago. Besides that, we have a very old system that was designed for life a long time ago. I think isn't our city about a hundred and twenty-five years old now? Okay. So um you know, we have an antiquated system and the fact that we've had so much weather change recently and that the storms came our way made us really aware that this has to be number one in our book. So just to kind of put it all into perspective why I might suggest that it was overwhelming. Approximately ten years ago, our previous city council decided to move forward on working on our um sewer system. And they put into place a 10-year program, and I think we're at about year nine, nine and a half on that right now. So to just kind of help you understand that the money, year today, so far in the last nine and a half years, we've spent $13.5 million on improvements in our sewer system. Okay. Based on the presentation the other night, if we were to move forward and complete the six projects in today's dollars, we're looking at 75 million. So 13 and a half million, 75 million. Needless to say, this is a big ticket item that needs some conversation. And of course, you've heard me say many times that how do you eat an elephant one bite at a time? Well, this is a gigantic elephant. So somebody asked, I think Vice Mayor Thanos asked me at the last meeting, what are we going to talk about? Okay, so let me just kind of say what my goals are here today. And of course, they can everybody can talk about anything they want to, but this would be my goals. I would like to think that as each of the council members would address uh the defined level of service that was presented to us and address whether they think that that is acceptable or not, and kind of compare that defined level of service to reality. Um when I say reality, I'm just suggesting that we do live in a coastal town right on the water, and uh uh the water's not receding, and it's not possible for a small city to fix everything for everybody in every circumstance. So decisions have to be made, all right. So that's one thing. I'm hoping we get we'll address a little bit the defined level of service. The second thing is I would like it if the council would address uh if they're comfortable, the uh project development assumptions. The that was a page that was made just before we went into the details of each of the projects. For example, one of the project development assumptions that was made was that we don't want to buy up homes to store to uh store our stormwater. So I would like for um council members to address that if that's one of the things that they've looked into. I know I have some thoughts on that matter.
openpublica.com