← Back to the list of projects

City of Ann Arbor SSWWEP - Citizens Advisory Committee Coordination — City of Ann Arbor

← Back to messages

Request for DOM and FDD accounting of FDD locations as reconciled with each developement project

Posted by Frank Burdick on 8 Feb, 2014
Category: No category

IT IS NOW TIME TO RESPECTFULLY REQUEST A FULL TABULATION AND RECONCILIATION OF WHAT HOMES/ADDRESSES THAT HAVE A FDD, WERE APPLIED TO WHAT PROJECT SINCE THE INCEPTION OF THE DEVELOPER OFFSET MITIGATION PROGRAM.

a. In addition, how many homes are remaining in the target neighborhoods that have yet to be disconnected?
b. How many of these homes are in the areas currently under the cease and desist moritorium?
c. How many FDD credits have been committed by the Planning Commision for upcoming projects?

EXAMPLE calculation  
For example.... let's use round numbers... as an illustration
 a.  100 homes remaining in the target neighborhoods
 b.  75 of these 100 homes are in Morehead, Churchill, Dicken, all under the moritorium
      This leaves 25 remaining available homes for FDDs.
c.    Recently approved FDD Credits by the Planning Commision
        35  UM Munger
          5  Briarwood Mall "out" buildings
         25 Cottage Inn new vertical expansion
         65  Total guessimated number of "banked" credits. Note, I have no idea about exact number of FDD credits
              that have been "banked" by the city for these and many other projects.  As with many other questions               to to the city, they remain unanswered and unacknowledged.

Hence, in this Example calculation. the City has approved projects requiring 65 FDDs, however there are only 25 remaining homes in the targeted neighborhoods available for an FDD.  Do the math.... in this example...the City is over committed by 40 credits.  This indicates to me that the City is doing one of 2 things:
1. Counting on volunteer homeowners in non-targeted neighborhoods to "pony up" and volunteer for sump pumps
or
2. The City has a Desired Outcome of the SSWWE CAC to reccommend the continuation of the FDD program  in order to re-deposit the moritorium homes back to the bank, and to open up the rest of the city for even more banked credits.  This was the plan in the 2001 SSO report and was re-stated by Mr. Hupy at the 9JAN meeting.

I would welcome any corrections to this example calculation and of course, real  data, including the data infered in the title of this question. 
Thanks

Comments

Joe Conen on 9 Feb, 2014:

Frank, I would offer my attempt at clarifying this. The “Moratorium” is
that mandatory FDDs have been suspended everywhere (the ordinance is
suspended), which essentially boils down to all the target areas.
DOM FDDs are* voluntary* and were not suspended and appear to continue
through 2013 (see FDD CAC meeting minutes).
I have no information whether the voluntary DOMs can continue to be
performed in target areas, although I was told by a plumbing contractor
that our home was not eligible since we had received the mandatory letter.
This does not seem to make sense, but is best info available.
I do not know whether the developers are encouraged or discouraged from
doing voluntary FDDs in target areas, but I would like to know.
I believe, after a brief review of DOM guidelines that developers are
generally allowed to seek volunteers anywhere, target area or not. Would
like to see this confirmed.
I don’t thing the DOM commitments are “banked.” They need to be completed
in real time with the development.

Robert Czachorski on 10 Feb, 2014:

There are many complex questions about the DOM and the City is prepping some information to share shortly.  We should also establish the portions of the DOM that are relevant to the scope of this project and this CAC, and those items that may still be important but not within the scope and focus.  We will be formalize this process at the CAC meeting on Thursday.

Kathy Boris on 10 Feb, 2014:

I would still like to have the link for the GIS program that shows sanitary
sewer pipes and storm water pipes in Ann Arbor. Has this been put
somewhere on Basecamp? I don’t see it.

kb

Frank Burdick on 10 Feb, 2014:


I am respectfully asking for an attributable source from the City, (NOT OHM or PI of FIYF) to counter this assumption that many citizens have:

The City has a Desired Outcome of the SSWWE CAC to reccommend the continuation of the FDD program  in order to re-deposit the moritorium homes back to the bank, and to open up the rest of the city for even more banked credits.  This was the plan in the 2001 SSO report and was re-stated by Mr. Hupy at the 9JAN meeting.

Charlie Fleetham on 10 Feb, 2014:

I don't believe Mr. Hupy stated the above on January 9.  We will check the video to be sure.

Frank Burdick on 10 Feb, 2014:

What Hupy said in reply to my question:  Was the FDD program ony supponsed to be a stop gap short term program as was stated by a previous member of the SSOE in 2001?  Hupy adamantly said no, this was not to be a stop gap measure and that the intention is for the FDD program to continue for many years for thousands more houses,  Hence, this is reason I believe that the City has a, (to borrow a Fleetham phrase) DESIRED OUTCOME of the SSWWE CAC to have us recommend the continuation of the FDD program in some fashion.  Hence, I state again:
The City has a Desired Outcome of the SSWWE CAC to recommend the continuation of the FDD program  in order to re-deposit the moritorium homes back to the bank, and to open up the rest of the city for even more banked credits.  

I would appreciate someone of authority with the CITY, and not OHM, PI, or anyone else, to provide a counter argument to this perception.  I hope that all of the CAC has access to this thread.

Nick Hutchinson on 11 Feb, 2014:

I was asked to be the project manager on this project, without having any previous involvement with the FDD program, for the specific purpose of taking a fresh look at the issue of sanitary sewer backups. OHM was hired for the same purpose.  CDM was specifically excluded from proposing on this project because of their past involvement with the FDD program.

So, I state:  The City does NOT have a predetermined desire for the SSWWEP CAC to recommend FDD as the solution to sanitary overflows going forward.