ALS000027
To: Jeffrey Kitchens, Chief
ADEM Water Division
P.O.Box 301463
Montgomery, AL 36130-1463
Dear Mr. Kitchens:
I am requesting a public hearing regarding this permit. The permit draft requires action to be “to the MEP”. However, the SWMP (2021) for Hoover is focused on doing the MINIMUM possible. In addition, the city is not encouraging or even accepting public involvement. My comments are as follows.
Stormwater Management Program (SWMP). These requirements shall be met by the development and implementation of a Storm Water Management Program Plan (SWMPP) which addresses the Best Management Practices (BMPs), control techniques and systems, design and engineering methods, public participation and education, monitoring, and other appropriate provisions designed to reduce the discharge of pollutants from the MS4 to the MEP, protect water quality, and satisfy appropriate water quality provisions of the Clean Water Act. (page 5)
Older neighborhoods have experienced flooding and pollutants entering their property and homes for many years. The history is:
August 7, 2017
RESOLUTION 5632-17– DECLARATIONS OF PUBLIC PURPOSE REGARDING DRAINAGE REPAIRS Napier Declaring public purpose (2017) and not approving repairs. The City Attorney read Resolution No. 5632-17. This would authorize the repair of the drainage structure located in the backyard at 1808 Napier Drive. The funds needed to accomplish said repairs are authorized from the capital projects fund in an amount not to exceed $5,000.
RESOLUTION 5633-17. This would authorize the repair of the drainage structures located in the front yards at 1812 and 1816 Napier Drive. The funds needed to accomplish said repairs are authorized from the capital projects fund in an amount not to exceed $60,000.
Mr. Lyda made a motion to continue Resolution No. 5633-17 to the call of the chair. This motion was seconded by Mr. Greene. On voice vote the motion carried with one “Nay” vote from Dr. Middlebrooks.
July 16, 2018
2 ND READING ORDINANCE NO. 18-2391 – AMEND MUNICIPAL CODE – STORM WATER FEES The City Attorney had the second reading of Ordinance No. 18-2391. This would amend the Municipal Code to provide additional storm water fees to the city as allowed by Alabama law, and to set forth the city’s storm water program. Mr. Lyda made a motion to adopt Ordinance No. 18-2391. This motion was seconded by Mr. Greene. Mr. Smith called for questions or comments from the Council or the audience. Mr. Rod Long, City Engineer, commented that the city currently receives $110,000 annually in storm water fees and it is anticipated that this ordinance will increase those fees to the $300,000 to $400,000 range. The revenue will be used to continue with the ADEM program the city has for storm water quality; but the main expenditure will be to meet new permit post construction regulations.
Dr. Middlebrooks commented that Resolutions 5630-17 through 5634-17 regarding declarations of public purpose for drainage repairs were tabled to the call of the chair on August 7, 2017. He requested that a portion of the funds be utilized to make those repairs should the Council decide to adopt the resolutions. Mr. Smith commented he would support bringing those items back before the Council at the next regular meeting but no later than the meeting after that.
The issues on Napier etc. were not brought back to the council.
June 30, 2021
Three years later, the Napier and Paulette Drainage study was complete but not presented to the community until November. The recommendations have not been addressed. The report recommends “For Napier “a 42-inch relief culvert should be added to direct a portion of the flows to the downstream receiving channel. An existing culvert is also recommended to undergo improvements to improve the inlet conditions.” And “On Paulette Drive, a maintenance project is recommended to remove a significant amount of rocks and sediment to restore the capacity to the existing channel’s capacity. The removal of the material would reduce flooding enough to contain at least the 10-year, 6-hour design storm.” Page 22
None of the recommendations for the Napier and Paulette drainage study have been addressed at this time.
October 6-7, 2021 to current
Sanitary sewer leaks due to flooding of stormwater system (MS4) are a regular problem on Paulette, in part due to the problems on Napier. The city spent $41,600 to complete emergency repairs on Paulette but did not fix the problem for the long term.
The debris was removed at Paulette, but has accumulated once again. Thus, debris and sediment are flowing into waterways. Further, the stormwater infrastructure seems to have caused problems with the sanitary sewer manhole in the street adjacent to the Paulette temporary repairs. Is water flowing from one drain to the other?
The stormwater infrastructure on Napier and Paulette is constantly filled with debris and sediment. This drains into the MS4.
September 2023
The current (2023) Mayor’s budget calls for another drainage study for Green Valley on Frank Ave. Nothing has been done to address the 2021 Napier & Paulette drainage study.
July 2023
There has been an orange cone in the street on Paulette where the sanitary sewer and storm sewer are adjacent. There has been previous contamination of the storm sewer from the sanitary sewer. It is not clear why the cone appeared and remains. A concern is that cross-contamination is on-going because the storm sewer had not been repaired or maintained in decades.
In each situation past performance of the city was to do nothing or the minimum possible. This is not consistent with the intent of the Clean Water Act or the NPDES permit. The problems are long-term and systemic. Citizens care about clean water, health and safety. This section of the draft needs to be more explicit in defining what is in the spirit of the NPDES, not just vague minimums the city can justify.
2. two (2) BMPs emphasizing public involvement... Annually, seek and consider public input in the development, revision and implementation of the SWMPP (page 6)
The 2022 MS4 states, on page 33, “The current SEMP Plan and latest annual report are made available on the City’s website. The City will accept public comments and input on the SWMP Plan anytime during the year. During the preparation of the annual report, the City will evaluation any comments received to determine if the SWMP Plan should be updated.”
I have begged the city to listen to citizen concerns. There is no forum, except city council meetings, to transmit concerns to the city. No one listens and there is no response to our concerns.
The public involvement must be a two-way system, the draft allows this to be the city telling the residents with no guarantee of the city receiving and accepting input.
Thank you for your consideration of my comments and the potential for a meeting.
Regards,
(Your name and address)
(Your Signature and date)
ALS000027
To: Jeffrey Kitchens, Chief
ADEM Water Division
P.O.Box 301463
Montgomery, AL 36130-1463
Dear Mr. Kitchens:
I am requesting a public hearing regarding this permit. The Public Education and Involvement are also a concern. My comments will explain why I think a public hearing is necessary.
The section that is of concern to me “The Permittee shall further develop/revise, implement and enforce an ongoing program to reduce, to the MEP, the pollutants in any storm water runoff to the MS4 from qualifying construction sites.”, “Site plan review may be prioritized based on criteria outlined in the Permittee’s SWMPP and may include, but is not limited to, size and location within priority watersheds. The plan review process will also consider potential water quality impacts; 5) A mechanism for the public to report complaints regarding pollution discharges from construction sites;”. The city is not supposed to allow a new development to have a negative impact on adjacent property. This happens often in Hoover and my property is one of those. When the land was cleared for Smith Farms my property experienced extreme water event. The ditches and culverts were not able to handle the water and then the water flooded my property. There is a huge hole with exposed sanitary sewer suspended about 5 feet above this hole. The city allowed new development and did not maintain city drains (there is a hole in the culvert under the street). The only way to get the damage the city caused fixed is to sue them. The Permit should have a statement about their responsibility when they make mistakes.
Another part that is not done is “Public Education. Each year, the Permittee shall implement a minimum of four (4) BMPs, which includes two (2) BMPs emphasizing public education and two (2) BMPs emphasizing public involvement... Annually, seek and consider public input in the development, revision and implementation of the SWMPP”. I have gone to city council because the staff won’t talk to me about the stormwater on my street. They have listened and done nothing, then were rather rude to me. They do not want anyone to know there are problems and don’t want to hear or respond to our concerns.
Name and address
(Your Signature)