Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-02 Resolution RECORD OF RESOLUTIONS Daylan legal Blank Ca" Farm Na, 30045 ---._---- -_._--_._~- Resolution No. " 04-02 Passed H ' ~ ...., =.=.'C'=:'c:::=====:-t,.,----~.--.-~--~~- YL\R I A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE COLUMBUS METROPOLITAN I I WASTEWATER FACILITIES PLAN UPDATE AND URGING THE OHIO I EPA TO INCORPORATE THE ELEMENTS CONTAINED IN THE COLUMBUS PLAN INTO ALL CENTRAL OHIO CLEAN WATER ACT - URBAN WASTE TREATMENT (SECTION 208) MANAGEMENT PLANS. WHEREAS, the Columbus Metropolitan Facilities Plan Update addresses regional wastewater management needs through 2020 for the largely urban and suburban Columbus Metropolitan Facilities Planning Area (MFP A), and has a goal of protecting our water quality while meeting the demands of regional growth; and, WHEREAS, extensive public funds and time were expended by the City of Columbus over a 2-year period to update the Plan, including seeking the input of stakeholders throughout Franklin County; and, WHEREAS, the City of Columbus receiving the support of 15 municipalities representing 80% of the population of the MFP A for the final plan update, as well as the support of the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission (MORPC); and, WHEREAS, the existing centralized sewer systems have the capacity to treat wastewater throughout the area with an area wide waste treatment management that has been recognized by Congress under the terms of the Clean Water Act to be the environmentally superior method of wastewater treatment; and, WHEREAS, alternative wastewater treatment systems: distribute treated wastewater directly onto fields thereby possibly contributing to groundwater and other forms of non-point source pollution; prevent communities that have already constructed millions of dollars worth of sewer infrastructure from maximizing on their investment; impede the development of the existing centralized sewer systems; and for these reasons and others are banned under the Columbus Plan Update; and, WHEREAS, alternative wastewater treatment systems are not environmentally suited to much of the land inside the MFP A and are not regulated by the Ohio EP A other than the initial Permit to Install; and, WHEREAS, alternative wastewater treatment systems are inappropriate to urban areas and could promote the rapid conversion of remaining rural and agricultural land into developments of subdivisions at suburban densities, a practice in direct contrast to good land use planning; and, WHEREAS, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency is charged with the responsibility of protecting the environment and following the provisions of the Clean Water Act and City Council would strongly urge the Ohio EPA to support the planning decisions made by the overwhelming majority of jurisdictions that united collaboratively to develop a consensus; and, WHEREAS, the future environmental quality of Central Ohio will be directly impacted by the Ohio EPA's decision in this area; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Dublin, County of Franklin, State of Ohio, 2- of the members concurring: Section 1. That Dublin City Council does hereby urge the Director of the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency to incorporate the Columbus Metropolitan Facility Plan Update into all relevant Section 208 area wide waste treatment plans and to amend Ohio's water quality management plan within the earliest possible time frame to reflect this incorporation. RECORD OF RESOLUTIONS Daylan Legal Blank Co" Form No, 30045 :1 I 04-02 Page 2 !i Resolution No. .. Passed .. , ,I . ................., =cc==.:.:,c:=ccc=--===-...:..=:CC'.c::-+ YEAR Section 2. This resolution shall be in force and effect immediately upon its passage as provided under Section 4.04(a) of the Revised Charter. Passed thisllM day of , 002 ATTEST: ~C!- ~ Clerk of Council I hereby witify tbat wl)i()s of this Ord:no'lce/Resolulion were posted in the City of Duhlin in (l(wrdor.cl'! witl; S~dion 731.25 of the Ohio Revised Coda. ~ , '.J!~b r' - !lDlSf; /' CITY OF DUBLIN Memo Office of the City Manager ',- To: Members of Dublin City Council From: Marsha Grigsby, Acting City Manager \'i~ Subject: Resolution 04-02 Initiated by: Michelle L. Crandall, Management Assistant Jay Herskowitz, Assistant Director of Engineering, P.E., DEE Date: January 16, 2002 Attached please find Resolution 04-02 in support of the Columbus Metropolitan Wastewater Facilities Plan update. The City of Columbus, at the request of the Ohio EP A, has spent extensive time and money preparing this updated plan and has gathered the support of a majority of the suburbs and the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission. Recently the Ohio EP A released a draft plan for water quality protection in the Blacklick..Creek Watershed that is in direct opposition to the proposed Columbus Plan. An executive summary of the Ohio EP A plan, prepared by the City of Columbus, is attached, along with a related Columbus Dispatch article. This executive summary outlines the concerns the City of Columbus has with the Ohio EP A plan. If you are interested in the complete "preliminary analysis" prepared by Columbus, contact Michelle Crandall and she can e-mail or fax you a copy. This appears to be yet another area of dispute between cities and townships in Ohio. If the Ohio EP A plan were to be accepted as currently drafted, it would allow for townships to implement alternative wastewater treatment systems, and would add the Ohio EP A to each annexation process, further delaying the annexation of land into municipal corporations. If you have questions pertaining to any of this information prior to the January 22 Council meeting, please contact Michelle. Executive Summary And Preliminary Analysis Ohio EPA BUMP Prepared by City of Columbus Staff December 27,2001 Executive Summary The Ohio EPA is under a federal court order to update the Clean Water Act mandated Areawide Plan for water quality protection in the Blacklick Creek Watershed (BUMP). Last week, the Ohio EPA released a draft Blacklick plan dated December 7, 2001 that is at odds with the wastewater treatment service plan in the Columbus Metropolitan Facilities Plan Update and specifically rejects a ban of alternative wastewater treatment systems. Ohio EPA's draft plan substitutes its judgment for the decisions reached by a broad collaboration of entities and reflected in the Metropolitan plan. While the draft plan only addresses the Blacklick Watershed, the plan suggests that the approach taken by the Ohio EPA will be expanded to the remainder of the Columbus Metropolitan Facilities Planning Area. If the draft plan is adopted, it will result in significant negative impact on the environmental and economic health of Central Ohio as well as provide a catalyst for a fundamental shift away from the regional, comprehensive planning that has served Central Ohio well. The Ohio EPA draft plan: ~ Disregards the locally designed plan. Ohio EPA requested that the City of Columbus facilitate a regional wastewater planning process, at great expense in both rate-payer funds and stakeholder time. The resulting Metropolitan plan is widely accepted within the region, protective of water quality and techni~ally feasible. Yet, the Ohio EPA has disregarded that plan, substituting Ohio EPA staff judgment for the judgment of those entities that will be required to implement the plan and that will be served by it. (See Preliminary Analysis pp. 4- 7.) ~ Does not take into account the policy decisions of the overwhelming majority of Central Ohio. Collaborative efforts to address regional wastewater treatment needs resulted in a plan supported by the representatives of the overwhelming majority of stakeholders within the planning area including: City of Bexley, Village of Canal Winchester, City of Columbus, City of Dublin, City of Gahanna, City of Grove City, Village of Groveport, City of Hilliard, Village of New Albany, Village of Obetz, City of Pickerington, City of Reynoldsburg, Village of Riverlea, Village of Shawnee Hills, City of Upper Arlington, City of Westerville, Southwest Licking Community Water & Sewer District, Fairfield County and the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission. (See Preliminary Analysis pp. 4-7.) ~ Does not recognize the superiority of centralized sewers. It is widely recognized that large, regional, centralized sewer systems are environmentally preferable to small package plants. This fact has been recognized by Congress, by the Ohio Supreme Court, by U.S. EPA and by Ohio EPA. Yet Ohio EPA's draft plan fails to encourage this choice. (See Preliminary Analysis pp. 8-11.) >- Promotes alternative wastewater treatment systems. Despite the availability of centralized sewers throughout the planning area, billions of dollars of public investment in centralized sewers, the opposition of the representatives of the overwhelming majority of residents, the predominance of unsuitable soils, and the current lack of regulations governing the operation of alternative wastewater treatment systems, Ohio EPA's draft plan promotes alternative wastewater treatment systems in Central Ohio. (See Preliminary Analysis pp. 8-11.) >- Inserts the Ohio EPA into annexation. Ohio EPA, an agency with a mission of protecting the environment, is proposing to consider annexation issues in its permitting decisions. The annexation public policy debate is more appropriately addressed in other forums; in fact, the General Assembly has recently amended Ohio annexation law. (See Preliminary Analysis pp. 11-12.) >- Imposes new and ambiguous planning requirements on municipalities. Ohio EPA is imposing burdensome facility planning requirements in order for a municipality that contracts with the City of Columbus for treatment services to continue to serve its existing customers. (See Preliminary Analysis pp. 12-16.) >- Will prevent municipalities from serving newly annexed territory. Under the draft plan, a municipality will be unable to annex and provide wastewater treatment services to new territory until the municipality completes facility planning that has been reviewed and approved by the Ohio EPA. After March 2003, a municipality's authority to provide service to its present customers, even inside of its own corporate boundaries, will expire absent an Ohio EPA approved facility plan. (See Preliminary Analysis pp. 16-19.) >- Discourages regional collaboration. Rather than promote collaboration--and consensus building with a regional plan, Ohio EPA's plan will create a race by each individual jurisdiction to submit a costly, redundant facilities plan in order to claim disputed territory, while unjustifiably interfering with municipalities right to provide service. (See Preliminary Analysis pp. 19-21.) >- Is inconsistent with the Clean Water Act. The draft plan does not meet the requirements of Section 208 of the Clean Water Act, and is inconsistent with the goals of the Act. It is not a prescriptive plan that establishes how wastewater treatment needs are going to be met. Instead, it is a "plan to plan." (See Preliminary Analysis, pp. 21-22.) >- Ignores the historical failure of non-centralized systems in the region and Columbus' strong record of abating those failures with flexible policies. The City of Columbus has delivered responsible wastewater planning and implementation to the Central Ohio Region for decades. (See Preliminary Analysis, pp. 22-23.) Preliminary Analysis December 27,2001 Page 2 ,,-JQ../J~(( J^Y ,10 c::lct)~ I -.I r 111 I ~-'~ -~.,:~ '~--.u._\r:w l!ht Q:oIumbus Oisjlatdl Page1J3 . Criticism prompts state EPA' to . county plan reVIse sewer . The changes, expected to take two ing sewers in newly annexed tt>rritory until communi- to three months, should clear up ties submit additional sewer plans for state approvaL That, the city's analysis said, IVould thwart 'qev~lop- misconceptions, the agency said. ment "Obviously we thought thc (plan) had very'signifi- By Mali< Ferenchlk cant problems," Assistant City Attorney Susan :Ash- Dispatch CiTy Hall Reponer brook said. ''I'm very happy co hear it's gomg to be revised. We hope it's not a tweaking." Apparently stung by criticism from Colwnbus and Westerville Mayor Stew Flah(~rty has said the subur- its suburbs about a proposed sanitary-sewer plan for ban coalition behind the city remains strong. But he eastern Franklin County, the Ohio EP A has decided to appears to be growing weary of [he tug-of-w:ar betw~en revise it before public hearings even begin. Columbus and the state. Colwnbus and a coalition of suburbs have been "It seems to be a turf battle between the two," fighting the proposed state plan, which would allow alter- Flaherty said. "That's the consensus of most of the native sewage systems in the Blacklick Creek watershed communities out there. Let's put everyone at the Same that spread treated waste on fields and golf courses. table and discuss it" Colwnbus' proposed 20-year sewer plan for the area calls Koncelik said the revised Slate plan coupl~d with for a ban on such systems and is awaiting approval by the future meetings should clear up some miscon<;eptions. state Environmental Protection Agency. The revision could take two to three months, although By controlling central sewers, the city has con- Koncelik said he hopes it will be completed sOQner. trolled how much land suburbs can annex. The state, which also canceled <I Feb. 6 public hearing, In a 23-page analysis completed last month, Colwn- had expected co present a final plan to Gov. Bob Taft's bus officials scorched the state's draft report, saying office by the end of March. the EP A ignored not only Colwnbus' plan but also the Among those who will be \\'11 ching IS Hilliard Mayor overwhelming support of most of its suburbs. Tim Ward, who called the EPA draft "scandalol!S.u Sl,lch Joe Koncelik, assistant EP A director, said he alternative sewage-treatment syslems could threaten Big doesn't know what the agency will change but expects Darby Creek in western Franklin County, he said. it to do a better job of spelling out future sewer-service Tom Hart, executive direct< II of thc Building Indus- territories. try Association of Central Ohio. said centralized Sew- "Our plan could have been a lot more clear," Konce- ers give developers the flexibll1ty to build kige or lik said. "It means different things to different people. I small houses, but builders WclJlt an option in Ca:secen- think we didn't do a very goodjob." traJ sewers arcn't available. On Monday, the EPA canceled a meeting to discuss the "Plenty of times we're told no." Hart said. draft with Columbus and suburban officials and others. Michael Cochran, executive director of the' Ohio "Due to a number of comments already made Township Association, SUppOI1S the draft plan and said known to Ohio EPA, it became apparent that portions Columbus shouldn't be allowed to call all the shots. of the draft will need revision," wrote George Elmar- The city, Cochran said, thinks it has the "divine agily, acting EP A surface-water chief. right of kings" to control development . - , , The Columbus analysis said the state plan would - , prevent municipalities after March 2003 from extend- mferenchik@disll<ltch.com - - - - .