[RP TownTalk] Maintenance of Wells Run culverts

[Jonathan Ebbeler]

Ben -

Thank you for bringing up a very important issue not only to myself but also to the Mayor and CM Thompson.  We have been working proactively, not reactively, with state and County officials to address the Wells Run situation.  I have been out of pocket due to a family medical emergency but if it wasn't stated Monday, it should have been, that the state is allocating budget money towards potential improvements of the culverts.  I had a brief conversation with town staff last week concerning this and I may have the facts slightly wrong but it looks like the town will be getting the attention from the highest levels that we have been lobbying for.

That being said,  I would caution about creating a quid pro quo situation regarding storm water management.  The current Wells Run from all information we have to date failed at all points in town and the Cafritz system is currently not connected nor built out into Wells Run.  Although in general terms replacing a previously developed site with development has impacts, it is a debatable concept that all development creates a situation worse than what was there before.  The short answer is 'it depends'.  It depends what is upstream, it depends what is downstream, and it depends how storm water is managed on site, it depends on the soil composition on-site.  To that extent, the town has done its due diligence to address the situation.

The Cafritz project has the following conditions it must meet as part of the legal agreement between the town and the developer:

1)       Storm water management must be managed using Environmental Site Design unless a more stringent standard is required

2)      Storm water quality and quantity must be managed on property so that impacts are no worse than if the site had been developed out as R-55 single family homes

3)      Storm water flowing from the property must not result in any degradation of water quality in any tributary to the NE Branch of the Anacostia River

4)      Storm water flowing from the property must be discharged at a volume and rate that does not exceed the capacity of off-site natural and man-made storm water outfalls, conveyance systems and management systems

The June 10th situation will continue to happen regardless of Cafritz or any other development without a significant investment in the storm water management systems downstream.  The current design is for at best a 10-year storm event.  By all accounts and measurements what happened on June 10 was well beyond a 100-year event.  The design capacity of the overall infrastructure was exceeded.

After the fact we discovered the County has not cleaned the culverts in several years reducing even more the design capacity.  The town has taken steps to address this and with the state budget money it looks like we are getting the attention we have demanded.  Covenant #4 with Cafritz predicates that in future events, on-site management and storage of water is required to the extent that discharge does not exceed the capacity of the 10-year storm event the downstream system is designed for.  That being said, if the upstream and downstream systems failed, as they did on 6/10, there will be impacts in the middle which unfortunately  reside in our town.

We have passed legislation and demanded that the system in totality be upgraded but this will be a project with many moving pieces that will take years to fully implement.  It is entirely reasonable that our PW department take steps in the meantime to ensure that the state/County are meeting their obligations to us and filling in on an emergency basis when they are not but we should exercise caution regarding taking over the tacit responsibility on a daily basis because once we do that becomes our responsibility in perpetuity when a more prudent approach is to ensure the responsible parties are living up to their obligations to us.

Best,

Jonathan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://riverdale-park.org/pipermail/towntalk/attachments/20141105/8e858fe8/attachment.html>