Posted April 17, 200619 yr Sewer district unveils plans $2 billion in repairs to be considered BY DAN KLEPAL | ENQUIRER STAFF WRITER The Metropolitan Sewer District will unveil its plan today for spending more than $2 billion to fix its aging and leaky system. Officials for Hamilton County and the city of Cincinnati will get the plan first. Then, starting next week, a series of public meetings will be held during which sewer users can learn about the 380 projects that will eventually triple their sewer bills. Owners of the 217,000 homes and businesses connected to the system will pay for the improvements through annual rate increases. Hamilton County Commissioner Todd Portune said he will be looking carefully to make sure the projects are sequenced in a way that makes sense financially. Read full article here: http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060417/NEWS01/604170345/1056
April 17, 200619 yr How much of this money is for Mill Creek issues? (I'm just asking a host of questions today! So much I don't know a damn thing about, all coming up today!)
November 30, 200717 yr Sewer rates going up Mandatory fixes mean big costs BY JESSICA BROWN | November 29, 2007 Hamilton County residents served by the Metropolitan Sewer District will see a 12 percent increase in their sewer bills next year - and more than 40 percent over the next three years. Next year's increase amounts to about $53 a year. And it won't end there. Sewer rates likely will increase 12 percent again in 2009 and in 2010. And still more increases will be on the way. Because of a 2004 court settlement, the county agreed to revamp the county's aging sewer system. The result: Residents will continue to see double-digit increases for the next two decades, according to county officials. The sewer district is trying to find ways to offset the increases and the county commissioners might even team up with other governments to lobby Congress for help. "The issue of rate increases projected for next year and down the road is one that, as a matter of policy, is of grave concern to this board and elected leadership in this region," commission president Todd Portune said Wednesday at a public hearing on the rate increase. "We are greatly concerned about the impact these rate increases will have on our (residents) and businesses if they continue to go up without help from the federal government." Read full article here: http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071129/NEWS01/711290357/1077/COL02
November 30, 200717 yr This is brutal. If these rate increases go through, there will be a mass exodus from the county.
November 30, 200717 yr ^??? Isn't MSD cheaper than anyone else in the region currently? Quality is second to none! I not sure people are going to move away because they can flush without IT COMING BACK UP! The other option is letting it go like much of our other infrastructure in this country.
November 30, 200717 yr You are both right. The rates will be rather draconian but it starts from a pretty low level and it is needed for the environment or so says the feds. Teaches us to want indoor plumbing. There are probably some privy pits in the West End and OTR that we could start using again.
November 30, 200717 yr I don't know about other MSDs, but if you think 10-12% rate increases for the next 20 years is cheap . . .
December 5, 200717 yr Hamilton County population: 1970 924,017 1980 873,224 1990 866,288 2000 845,303 Source: Hamilton County Data Book, Hamilton County Regional Planning Commission
December 5, 200717 yr Now take those numbers and factor in the revised Census numbers... Suburban communities, in Hamilton County, have thus far successfully revised their total numbers for an additional 20,248 residents. The City of Cincinnati has was the first in this challenge process - having their numbers revised to account for an additional 22,583 residents. That creates a total of 42,830 residents that were previously not counted. I do not argue the population drop in the 70's and 80's...but the recent numbers are hardly indicative of a "mass exodus." In all actuality the county may very well be gaining population (albeit minimal). I'm just saying that if there is doubt about the whole issue than I don't think that you can clearly state (in either direction) that the county is heading in one direction population wise. 1990: 866,288 2006: 888,133 (revised number)
December 5, 200717 yr "Suburban communities, in Hamilton County, have thus far successfully revised their total numbers for an additional 20,248 residents. The City of Cincinnati has was the first in this challenge process - having their numbers revised to account for an additional 22,583 residents. That creates a total of 42,830 residents that were previously not counted. 1990: 866,288 2006: 888,133 (revised number)" Did you get this number from the Census, or did you just add the challenge numbers to the county estimate? Please show that these residents were not previously counted in a different jurisdiction, and that the total estimate for Hamilton County has increased. (Did the census revise Cincinnati upward, but Forest Park downward?) These are the jurisdictions that won their challenges in 2007. Amberley village OH 10/30/2007 3,230 3,537 Delhi township OH 10/30/2007 29,831 31,147 Green township OH 10/30/2007 56,655 61,144 Silverton city OH 10/30/2007 4,627 5,180 Symmes township OH 10/30/2007 14,236 15,744 Blue Ash city OH 11/09/2007 11,537 12,689 Colerain Township OH 11/09/2007 56,508 62,205 Springfield township OH 11/09/2007 35,335 39,755 Wyoming city OH 11/09/2007 7,575 8,372 Yet, the Census did not change the county estimate. 2000, Census 845,303 2000, estimate 845,273 2001, estimate 843,993 2002, estimate 844,569 2003, estimate 840,362 2004, estimate 836,547 2005, estimate 832,250 2006, estimate 828,487 2007, estimate 822,596 Source: U.S. Census web site
December 5, 200717 yr if the component jurisdictions of the county changed, but the balance of the county did not, the methodology of the census bureau is flawed
December 5, 200717 yr Read the methodology at the Census site. I don't understand it completely, but I'm working on it. Simplified, it seems that they estimate change in population by county, and then allocate the population among the jurisdictions within the county. Another way to think of it is that they know a child was born in Hamilton County, because they have a copy of the birth certificate; but since they don't know where he lives, they have to estimate based on some assumption. They thought he lived in Forest Park, but he really lives in Cincinnati. The City Manager then filed a challenge based on number of building permits, and the census reallocated that individual to Cincinnati, but they DID NOT revise the county estimate. They did not revise the state estimate or the national estimate, either. The Hamilton County Fact Book states that 26 jurisdictions gained population from 1990 to 2000 and 22 lost population, for a net loss.
December 5, 200717 yr basically the census bureau can't add population to the total census count of X, so if there was a gain of y in jurisdiction A there has to be a loss of y in Jurisdiction B as to not disrupt X
December 5, 200717 yr Yes...that is their policy, but that doesn't mean that it is right. If they have revised the population of neighborhoods, in the county, by this large of an amount and in the largest of the jurisdictions...I just don't see how they could revise others down accordingly. Their revised numbers will continue to reflect their projection models and not the revised tallies...we'll have to wait until 2010 for the actual numbers.
December 5, 200717 yr Basically fighting over numbers on the in-between censuses particularly with the challenges is a waste. The census doesn't increase the national numbers so they have to move the numbers around. My guess is that the accelerated decline in Hamilton Cty has probably leveled off though the numerical decline in the family size in the inner ring suburbs might push the overall numbers down a bit.
December 5, 200717 yr My guess is that the accelerated decline in Hamilton Cty has probably leveled off though the numerical decline in the family size in the inner ring suburbs might push the overall numbers down a bit. True, but I think the 2010 count is going to reflect a reversal in the trend more due to $3, $4 (or whatever it will be in 2010) gas. To some respect, we are already seeing this!
December 5, 200717 yr The gasoline price has two effects, though. One school of thought is that with the end of cheap gasoline, people will move back from the suburbs to the city. Another school of thought says that the whole economy will suffer, including cities. Apparently, we are experience a combination of the two. Suburban sprawl continues, but at a slower pace. There is renewed interest in city living. But oh, how are the first ring suburbs going to come out?
December 6, 200717 yr Perfect timing: http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2007/12/03/daily42.html
December 6, 200717 yr The gasoline price has two effects, though. One school of thought is that with the end of cheap gasoline, people will move back from the suburbs to the city. Another school of thought says that the whole economy will suffer, including cities. Apparently, we are experience a combination of the two. Suburban sprawl continues, but at a slower pace. There is renewed interest in city living. But oh, how are the first ring suburbs going to come out? Look at deer park high school enrollment numbers (7-12) 02- 694 03- unavailable 04- 660 05- 618 06- 593 07- 583
November 14, 200816 yr MSD awaits EPA go-ahead for green projects Business Courier of Cincinnati - by Dan Monk The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency might be cooking up a $1 billion turkey for Hamilton County taxpayers this Thanksgiving. Hamilton County Commissioner Todd Portune said the agency will reject a $128 million package of green-infrastructure improvements proposed last year by the Metropolitan Sewer District of Greater Cincinnati. That, said Portune, will add up to $1.5 billion to the cost of complying with federal water quality rules. The sewer district proposed green remedies to deal with up to 14 billion gallons of rainy-weather overflows in the county each year. The green improvements would use rain gardens, restored wetlands and green roofs to keep storm water out of sewers, reducing the need for temporary storage facilities. Storm-related sewer overflows led to an EPA lawsuit alleging Cincinnati’s centuries-old sewer system violated the federal Clean Water Act. The lawsuit was settled in a 2004 consent decree calling for more than 300 capital-improvement projects to keep local sewers from backing up. Read full article here: http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2008/11/17/tidbits1.html
November 14, 200816 yr Right now my firm is working on a project in the Anacostia Water Front in Washington D.C. that is very similar to what Portune is talking about. One of the things that has really been bothering me about the "Downtown Renaissance" (don't take this the wrong way) is the lack of cohesive planning. For example take the Gateway Quarter streetscape renovations. A portion of them have recently been completed and I believe that another portion is slated to start soon, and there was no green initiative taken to address storm water. There are many things that could have been done to reduce or mitigate stormwater runoff - Bio-retention cells, permeable pavers, LED lighting and the list could go on and on. We really need to create a vision before we keep piling on more and more investment money. With out a guideline the same thing will happen at the Banks. It is imparative that the leaders see this before we move forward. I'm so fired up right now that I think i will compose a letter to the council as well as the county. And for those of you who are interested here is the link to the project that I was talking about. http://www.planning.dc.gov/planning/cwp/view,a,1285,q,571105,planningNav_GID,1708.asp
November 14, 200816 yr Almost every city in America has a billion+ dollar mandate to fix sewers. Indy is saving about $300 million via green approaches, but I haven't heard of anyplace that has gotten away with not having to do anything. The complaining I hear in the article is a waste of time. The Clean Water Act is a huge unfunded mandate on our cities, but there's nothing you can do about it. Tell Obama to fix that one, if he's Mr. City Friendly.
November 14, 200816 yr It's been my understanding that quite a few cities took care of this in previous decades when there was federal money available. Cincinnati, and others, didn't act on that money and thus missed out. I'm not sure how much validity there is to that though.
November 14, 200816 yr I think some cities like Chicago were able to get federal money for their Deep Tunnel project. But I think the key to those places is that they were able to sell it as flood control, which the feds will give money for. Plus Chicago has long had political clout in DC for its pet projects.
November 15, 200816 yr They've been talking about a deep tunnel roughly beneath the Mill Creek from the river to Evendale or thereabouts for at least 10 years.
December 5, 200816 yr After EPA rejection, it’s back to drawing board for MSD Business Courier of Cincinnati - by Dan Monk The U.S. EPA formally rejected a 20-year plan for sewer upgrades that Hamilton County officials were hoping would cost less than $2 billion. Now, the Metropolitan Sewer District of Greater Cincinnati has until March 25 to come up with a new – and more costly – plan to keep Cincinnati’s aging sewers from overflowing into local homes, rivers and streams. The upgrades were ordered by a 2004 consent decree that settled an EPA lawsuit alleging the sewer system violated the federal Clean Water Act. The sewer district was hoping to use rain gardens, green roofs and other natural solutions to divert water from the sewers. The EPA instead has pushed for construction of a 5.7-mile tunnel to temporarily store 160 million gallons of sewage during heavy rain. The tunnel and sewer connections to it would cost nearly $1 billion. More than 500 smaller sewer upgrades also would be built. Read full article here: http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2008/12/08/tidbits1.html
December 8, 200816 yr $3 billion is pretty steep for a city the size of Cincy. This is what is bankrupting Birmingham. Indy and Columbus are about half that amount.
January 27, 200916 yr Cincinnati Stormwater A new approach to an old problem The story begins in the latter part of the 19th century. Cincinnati—along with its sister cities across the developed part of the nation—began replacing outhouses and septic fields with sewers. These sewers carried sanitary wastes—from sinks, toilets, showers, and so on—and storm runoff away from residential areas and into the nearest stream or lake. Eventually, the sewers were hooked into treatment plants where the wastewater was filtered and cleaned before being released back into the environment. (Cincinnati’s first water treatment plant opened in 1953.) Flash forward to the 1980s and 1990s. Development increasingly placed a heavier load on this aging system as paved areas (roads, parking lots, etc.) grew and stormwater inputs increased. Heavy rains would overwhelm the sewers’ capacity, so the overflow was diverted directly into the environment. All told, Hamilton County’s overwhelmed sewer system released approximately 14 billion gallons of overflow annually. During these periods of heavy rains, raw, untreated sewage would sometimes back up into basements and into streets and lawns. Although Cincinnati’s sewer overflow problems are worse than those of many other cities because of its geography, hilly topography, soil types, and other issues, the above scenario is not unique to Cincinnati. It is being played out across the nation. Like Cincinnati, many cities are operating under consent decrees—federal court orders are mandating that they fix these problems. Read full article here: http://www.stormh2o.com/november-december-2008/cincinnati-green-infrastructure-2.aspx
January 27, 200916 yr You can also find out more information on this topic on the website for the innovative Mt. Airy Rain Catchers program: http://www.mtairyraincatchers.org/
January 27, 200916 yr I think the big one is permeable pavement. Can you imagine all the stormwater that currently goes into sewers not having to go through the system anymore!
February 23, 200916 yr Not Cincy specific, but relevant... Repairs to sewer systems mean higher rates Sewer rates in Ohio and across the United States are climbing to help cover multimillion-dollar renovations of outdated infrastructure. The recent federal stimulus package includes $4 billion for ready-to-go sewer projects nationwide, less than a quarter of what had been requested. Ohio will receive about $224 million. During the past three decades, federal officials have increased standards for treating water and preventing contamination of waterways by overflow of raw sewage, industrial waste and storm water. At the same time, they've slashed funding for those projects. The National Association of Water Companies, which includes 300 U.S. sewer systems, reports that federal funding has dropped from about 78 percent to only 5 percent. Read full article here: http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20090223/NEWS0108/902230365/1055/NEWS
February 24, 200916 yr Honest question here: Does anyone know the situation regarding sewer credits as it pertains to potential OTR development? Thanks. (Reference)
February 24, 200916 yr They've been talking about this over on the streetcar thread: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,9.5850.html
February 24, 200916 yr They've been talking about this over on the streetcar thread: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,9.5850.html Yes, but I would prefer this discussion stay here as the streetcar/light rail thread is an already enormous discussion that is difficult for even the regulars on UrbanOhio to follow. We can discuss this issue in more depth here as it is a legitimate concern facing development in our region.
Create an account or sign in to comment