|
Redwood City Stormwater Roadmap
<br />Recommended Assessments
<br />September 2025 6-5 Schaaf & Wheeler
<br />6.1.9 Public Outreach
<br />Public meetings should be held to inform the community on the anticipated projects, schedule,
<br />benefits, and cost estimates.
<br />Estimated Cost: $30,000 to $50,000
<br />6.1.10 Funding Feasibility Study
<br />As further outlined in the “Funding Program” section, the two most viable options for ongoing
<br />stormwater funding are a special tax or a property-related fee. Each option requires a different
<br />approval process. A special tax, such as a parcel tax or Community Facilities District (CFD),
<br />requires two-thirds approval from registered voters. A property-related fee, like the one
<br />implemented in the City of San Mateo, is subject to a majority vote of property owners but must
<br />be supported by a cost nexus, making it less flexible than a special tax.
<br />To determine the most viable long-term funding path, the City should conduct an initial funding
<br />feasibility study. This study would include preliminary rate calculations for both funding
<br />mechanisms, evaluate their impact on different stakeholder groups, and guide public opinion
<br />research. The outcome of the study will help the City identify the most viable funding strategy
<br />based on community feedback and technical feasibility.
<br />Estimated Cost: $50,000 to $100,000
<br />6.1.11 O&M Assessment
<br />The O&M Assessment is intended to evaluate the effectiveness, efficiency, and completeness of
<br />Redwood City’s current stormwater management practices. While Public Works Services (PWS)
<br />conducts routine maintenance of pump stations, catch basins, concrete-lined channels, and
<br />lagoons, the City does not currently operate under a formalized stormwater management program
<br />with standardized inspection frequencies, procedures, or documentation protocols. This
<br />assessment would identify where operational gaps exist and recommend formal practices to
<br />improve system reliability, regulatory compliance, and asset longevity.
<br />The assessment should include a detailed review of current maintenance practices,
<br />responsibilities, and equipment. Interviews with City staff should document what types of
<br />maintenance and inspection activities are currently performed (e.g., visual inspection, sediment
<br />removal, vegetation management), who performs them, what equipment is used, how tasks are
<br />scheduled, and how work is tracked and reported. The assessment should evaluate how these
<br />practices differ across infrastructure types, such as storm drain pipes, culverts, channels, levees,
<br />and pump stations.
<br />Informed by this review, the assessment should develop updated standard operating procedures
<br />(SOPs) for maintenance and inspection tasks. These SOPs should clearly outline inspection
<br />intervals, responsible parties, required tools, and data to be collected. SOPs should be created
<br />for key asset types, including catch basins, manholes, pipe systems, culverts, open ditches, and
<br />outfalls.
<br />Another focus of the assessment should be the City’s current asset management systems. The
<br />City should evaluate how maintenance data are tracked, whether through GIS, spreadsheets, or
<br />asset management software, and assess opportunities to improve consistency, accuracy, and
<br />11.A. - Page 28 of 53
<br />459
|