← Back to the list of projects

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

← Back to messages

Developer Offset Mitigation (DOM) FAQ

Posted by Lori Byron on 11 Mar, 2014
Category: Category 2 - about potential recommendations

Greetings CAC members, 

There have been a number of questions about the Developer Offset Mitigation program. I've tried to collect all of them, along with the answers from the City. The compiled FAQ is attached.

I'll post the specific answers to the questions that have already been posed individually on Basecamp. I will also add them to the Q & A log on the City's website. Can I ask a favor of some of you CAC members, too? This FAQ could be useful for the general Ann Arbor public as well, so before the City adds it to their website, can you review the FAQ and let me know if there are other questions that should be added?

Thank you for your time.

~Lori

Comments

Kathy Boris on 11 Mar, 2014:

Sorry— I think my reply goes better here. kb

Thank you to those who prepared this DOM FAQ document. Good information.

Regarding question #14:

Are the 620 FDD’s that were required by the MDEQ Admin Consent Order
included here?
If so, in which category?

Regarding question #18:

Who approved the U-M stadium expansion transaction described in this
question? Did A2 city council approve U-M’s payment of $10,000 per FDD?
If so, when?

Regarding question #19:

In the event that a DOM is necessary for a township development, and given
that the townships are outside the A2 city limits, within what area would
80% of the DOM’s have to be performed?
Could someone give an example of a township development from the recent
past that required a DOM? Where were the FDD’s done?

kb

Nick Hutchinson on 12 Mar, 2014:

To add to what Lori said, let us know if it is clear and understandable as well. We try out best to do this, but sometimes we forget to define key terms or use language that is too technical.

Kathy, I'm checking on the answers to your questions.

Patricia Marten on 12 Mar, 2014:

For the DOM program, has anything else been done, besides FDDs?  

There has been discussion that some of the building & growth out on Jackson Ave, is not being required to 'offset'.  Is this because they paid something towards the WTP (I believe I saw something to that effect) or ?

If so, how large is the area?  And are there other areas, that are exempt?

Thanks

Nick Hutchinson on 12 Mar, 2014:

Kathy, regarding your questions:
 
#14: The FDD's required by the consent order are included in the total for the City program.
 
#18: The transaction was approved by the Public Services Area Administrator at the time. A separate Council resolution appropriated the funds.  Let me know if you want to see the corresponding memo and resolution and I can find them and attach them.
 
#19: The mitigation would need to be performed in the district where the township flows enter the City's system. For example, a development in Scio Township (such as Suburban Chevrolet) performs disconnects in the west district, since this is where the development flows connect to the City's system. 

Judy Hanway on 13 Mar, 2014:

Nick, 

Do you have a deadline for getting back to you regarding questions/comments on this DOM FAQ packet? I haven't had time to read through all of it yet.  Thanks.

Charlie Fleetham on 13 Mar, 2014:

Judy - the FAQ will be on the agenda for next week.  Please feel free to either post questions on Basecamp or bring them to the meeting.

Charlie

Judy Hanway on 13 Mar, 2014:

Thank you  Charlie.

Jim Osborn on 13 Mar, 2014:

" is not being required to 'offset'.  Is this because they paid something towards the WTP."

During the meeting with the plant mgr, he mentioned that the feds had paid for part of Ann Arbor's sewage plant and the therefore some of the capacity was for future township development; If I remember correctly.

Can this be verified? But is it material to our task?

Charlie Fleetham on 14 Mar, 2014:

Frank Burdick asked me to post these questions about the DOM FAQ.  Lori - please add the  questions to the log. I will foward to Cresson.

Regarding Item #4:

Upon review of the UMICH Munger DOM calculation that is attached in Basecamp "files", the calculation reads:
1)        42,126 gpd x 4 (peaking factor) x 1.2 (system recovery factor) = 202,205 GPD
2)       202,205 GPD / 24 hours / 60 minutes = 140 gpm peak flow
3)       140 gpm / 4gpm per fdd = 35 fdds required.

   a. What is peaking factor definition?
   b. What is the system recovery factor definition?
  d. The 140 gpm referenced in line 2 above seems to imply a flow that exists 24/7.  Why is that?
  e. Per line 3, (4) gpm is used in this calculation.  Where does the City get this factor?  Why is 4 gpm used?  Why does the City not use    the 1.2 or 1.4 gpm rate as determined by the 2001 SSO Report?

   f. Per line 3 above:  4gpm  per fdd this project required 35 fdds ... UM Stadium calculation was 5 gpm, if this was applied to UM Munger: only 28 fdds would be required.  The State Revolving Fund utilized a flow rate of approx 10 GPM. If this was applied to UM Munger: Only 14 fdds would apply.   The 2001 SSO Report determined a flow rate o 1.4 GPM.  If this was applied to UM Munger: 100 FDDs would be required.  Who determines what flow rate to apply to each project?  Why is there such a wide discrepencey between 1.4 gpm to 10 gpm in the official use of these flow rates.

Regarding Item #7: 848 FDD have been performed per the report.
    a. How many of the 848 were performed by contractors NOT on the pre-city-approved contractor list?
    b. How many of the 848 received a Plumbing Permit for this work?
    c. What was the "Cost of Construction" amount as listed on the Permit application for each and all of these FDDS?
   d. What was the total revenue for Permit costs gained by the City for these permits

Regarding Item #8:  Statement reads that "Developers negotiate directly with homeowners."  Current evidence indicates that it is the pre-approved Plumbing Contractors who are the entities soliciting the FDD work and doing the negotiating with the homeowners. Please provide evidence that the actual Developer is in direct contact with the homeowners.


Regarding Item #17: The statement reads " the city does not get any fuds from developer."
   a. What funds were used to install the Curb Drain Lines on Iroquois Street in Ann Arbor
   b. Please confirm tha CDM wrote the Specifications for the DOM FDDs.
   c.Does CDMI manage the FDD installation of all DOM FDDs?
   d. How is the CDMI contract funded?  
   e.Is CDMI funded from the DOM and/or the Develelopers?  If not, is the contract funded under the current mandated FDD program?
   f. Why can't the developers pay the city a fixed fee in lieu of FDDS to help the city fund infrastructure imporvements budget.






Charlie Fleetham on 14 Mar, 2014:

Please find below responses  (italics)  to some of the Forced Ranking Community Values - in response to questions I have received:

All Ann Arbor homeowners (apartment residents and businesses)  should receive equal protection from sanitary backups.

Increasing user fees should not be a barrier to a solution that protects all Ann Arbors homeowners (apartment residents and businesses) from sanitary backups.

A uniform solution is desired . . . if some homeowners are required to get FDD – all eligible  homeowners (homes without sump pumps) in Ann Arbor should get FDD.

New infrastructure should not (permanently)  detract/destroy/limit our city’s natural features.


Patricia Marten on 15 Mar, 2014:

LORI--  Has this been added to Q. list?  Don't see it there yet?
Thanks,

Patricia Marten Wed, 12 Mar at 11:35am
For the DOM program, has anything else been done, besides FDDs?  
There has been discussion that some of the building & growth out on Jackson Ave, is not being required to 'offset'.  Is this because they paid something towards the WTP (I believe I saw something to that effect) or ?
If so, how large is the area?  And are there other areas, that are exempt?
Thanks

Lori Byron on 15 Mar, 2014:

Patricia, 

Yes, I have added it to the Open Questions list for the City. Thanks for bringing it forward.

~Lori

Lori Byron on 4 Apr, 2014:

[CITY]

Above, Pat asked: Q. For the DOM program, has anything else been done, besides FDDs? 

A. Yes, as was mentioned in the DOM FAQ and video, some developers have mitigated flows through other methods, such as:

  • Renovating buildings and replacing old fixtures with low flow fixtures
  • Disconnecting swimming pools from the sanitary sewer system
  • Demolishing or disconnecting buildings from the system

Q. There has been discussion that some of the building & growth out on Jackson Ave, is not being required to 'offset'. Is this because they paid something towards the WTP (I believe I saw something to that effect) or ?

A: In prior years, Scio Twp has paid for improvements that have occurred in the collection system to specifically serve the township’s contact capacity for the Jackson Road corridor.  Until the actual flows from the Jackson Rd corridor exceed the contracted capacity, the township is not required to mitigate flows from this particular corridor. The township is required to mitigate new flows coming from other township connection points.

Q. If so, how large is the area?  And are there other areas that are exempt?

A: The area is made up of the properties along Jackson Rd between Baker Road and Wagner Road.  All other township areas are required to follow the DOM requirements.

Judy Hanway on 10 Apr, 2014:

Lori,

Has the following question already been asked and answered?

Why does the City require pre-qualified contractors for the FDDP but not for the DOM? It seems there might be an issue with the DOM not doing the work to the City's specifications.

Thanks.

Lori Byron on 10 Apr, 2014:

Judy, 

No, that question has not been asked. I'll submit it to the City for response. You mentioned "there might be an issue with the DOM not doing the work to the City's specifications"  - any specifics you have on this would be helpful in following up.

~Lori

Judy Hanway on 10 Apr, 2014:

Lori,

I don't have any specifics--just the thought that homeowners in the Target areas were not allowed to choose any contractor they wanted to do the work. It states in the Homeowner Packet:

7. Can I use another contractor who is not pre-qualified? 
No. The City of Ann Arbor has developed a process for pre-qualifying contractors so that it is 
clear that they understand the methods and materials needed for a complete installation. Using 
other contractors would be more expensive for Ann Arbor to manage and would reduce the 
ability to support quality construction. With several contractors already pre-qualified, there is 
adequate choice for homeowners to make a selection. Exceptions to using the pre-qualified 
contractors may be allowed but the homeowner may not receive full reimbursement for all costs 
not pre-approved for work using pre-qualified contractors. Homeowners are encouraged to 
seek information/guidelines for reimbursement from FDD project staff before beginning work 
eligible for FDD funding. Contractors willing to do this type of work are encouraged to contact 
the city to seek pre-qualification status. 

So I'm wondering why the Developers aren't held to the same standard.

Thanks,

Judy

Kathy Boris on 11 Apr, 2014:

On this same topic, please don’t forget to answer my questions:
1) How many contractors applied to be pre-qualified FDD contractors?
2) How was the opportunity to apply made known to the plumbing community?
kb

Lori Byron on 11 Apr, 2014:

Thanks, Kathy. Your questions have been submitted to the City for response.

~Lori

Lori Byron on 9 May, 2014:

Here's the response to Judy Hanway's question, above:

Q. Why does the City require pre-qualified contractors for the FDDP but not for the DOM? It seems that this could create issues with the DOM not doing the work to the City's specifications.

A. The intent of pre-qualified contractors is to provide residents options for selecting a contractor that can perform the work and has a good understanding of the City’s FDD program.   DOM contractors are required to be licensed and the inspection/permitting process of the FDD is the same for the City’s program and the DOM program.  

Michelle Lovasz on 11 May, 2014:

I am interested in why the DOM is not held to pre-qualified contractors as those in the FDDP are?  I understand the response, the "A" to Judy's question, but it does not actually answer why.  "DOM contractors are requred to be licensed and the inspection/permitting process is the same for the City's program and the DOM program" appears to justify why the same process was not used, but then that raises the question of why pre-qualified contractors were required for the FDDP if they were in fact licensed and would go through the inspection/permitting process.

Lori Byron on 29 May, 2014:

From the City:

The intent of providing a list of pre-qualified contractors for the City’s FDDP was to assist residents in selecting a contractor from a list of contractors who are already familiar with the methods and materials of the FDDP program as opposed to putting the burden entirely on the resident to find a qualified contractor on their own. In addition, a resident does have the ability to hire a contractor not on the pre-qualified; however the reimbursement process is different. The property owner must contract with and pay the non-prequalified contractor and then the property owner would need to submit to City for reimbursement.