Have you reviewed and commented on Decatur’s draft Storm Water Master Plan? If not, you’re running out of time. We’re down to the last week of our month-long public comment period so make sure we hear from you by Friday, October 2.
Here’s all you do:
1. Review the draft
The following draft plan files are organized by section. Just click to download. Or, for additional context, you can watch last week’s overview meeting here.
Storm Water Master Plan: Executive Summary (3.3mb .pdf)
Storm Water Master Plan Volume 1: Report (16.4mb .pdf)
Storm Water Master Plan Volume 2: Appendices (32mb .pdf)
2. Submit your comments
Send comments directly to the consultant team by using the submission form here.
3. Engage with the consultant team
If you’d like to talk about the plan but were unable to participate in the meeting, get in touch. We’ll find a way to make sure your input is linked into the process.
Thereafter, changes based on public input will be implemented and the draft will work its way towards adoption — first in a City Commission work session, then a formal vote in a subsequent meeting.
Any recommended changes to existing regulations, or go-ahead on specific projects included in the plan, will subsequently become follow-through initiatives of their own, to be brought before the City Commission in a public meeting for approval and/or fund allocation as applicable.
Stay tuned as details become available.
Did you know that the City of Decatur has the second highest stormwater utility fee than any other jurisdiction in GA? Did you know that after the significant proposed increases, our fees will be more than three times other communities in GA? Did you know that the Stormwater Master Plan identified numerous stormwater problems through the City and the City proposes to fix them all (on public property) within 20 years with the new fees? I propose fixing the highest priority problems in the next 10-15 years and then revisit the Plan and move on the secondary issues after those are completed. Also if the community agrees to raise the fee to address the worst problems (project list A), then raise it only so far as to cover those expenses, not the entire wish list identified in the study (project lists A and B). Also developers will continue to come in and I propose making them fix infrastructure that will be impacted by their project at their expense, not ours. What do you think?
Thanks for your comment Catherine. We will note it in the comment response.
I did want to clarify one point above, the A and B tier projects are rated as the same frequency (1 year impact frequency), but the B projects had some sort of downstream issue that needed to be resolved first before tying in new systems. The C and D projects were projects for areas that experienced issues at a lower frequency (25 year storm), and these were not recommended for implementation during this master planning horizon.