Document NyBN6OnxDkLwa4Xav783aqVp

11V22/94 17:39 314 768 6279 USD LEGAL DEPT. @002/008 November 22, 1994 MEMO TO: FROM: Kevin Cahill Terry Briggs^ RE: River des Peres Stormwater Funds carondelet Plant Enclosed is information relative to the HOD funds the City of St. Louis received for flood enhancement work. As related to you on the telephone, the District would like to ensure it receives a fair share of the funds made available by HUD. The items enclosed give you a one page synopsis of the project and a two page chronology of the events leading up to this point. Presently, we are at odds with Alderman Gruen over the allocation of the HUD funds, since these funds would be utilized to enhance sewer work in an area serving the Monsanto Carondelet Plant, we are seeking your assistance in trying to secure an appropriate amount of the grant money. The HUD block grant funds must pass through Alderman Aboussie's committee. A call to him, if Monsanto is in support of the District's position, would be beneficial. Thanks for any help you can give us. Should you have any questions, please contact me at 768-6238. enclosures pc: John Koeper OSW 136921 STLCOPCB4036881 11/22/94 17:40 Q314 768 6279 USD LEGAL DEPT. @003/008 Lower River des Peres Flood Enhancement Project The Great Mississippi River Flood of 1993 caused millions of dollars in damage to homes, businesses and industries in the greater St. Louis area. One of the areas hardest hit was the lower reaches of the River des Peres. As a tributary to the Mississippi, the channel of this urban stream filled with backwater from the flooded river for more than eight weeks. Flood waters inundated the area from two sources; directly over the top of the River des Peres' levy constructed after the 1973 flood; and by infiltrating the stormwater sewers and streams feeding into the channel. The existing flood control methods employed by MSD rely upon plugs and balloons to plug the stormwater outfalls to the River des Peres and prevent backwater from entering the system. Temporary pumps are set up to carry stormwater runoff which normally runs into these stormwater structures up over the top of the River des Peres levee and into the channel. This system is inadequate to protect the neighborhoods from flooding. MSD, as part of a larger $190 million project to upgrade the sanitary and stormwater systems along the entire stretch of the River des Peres, was planning to build some improvements which also would help reduce flooding during high water stages along the Mississippi River. Through the use of Community Development Block Grant funds made available for flood enhancement work after the 1993 disaster, MSD is proposing to expedite construction of stormwater gate structures and pump stations designed to keep floodwaters from the River des Peres out of these facilities and thus out of homes, businesses and industries in these neighborhoods. community Development Block Grants Specifically, MSD would use the $3.1 million to construct four pump stations and three gate structures at the following St. Louis city locations: Pump stations 618 Marceau (Along Marceau east of Alabama) Poepping and Carondelet 7625 Alaska (Alaska at Primm) Tennessee at Schrimer Gate Structures Poepping at Carondelet "~ Marceau east of Alabama Germania and Primm While these improvements will help prevent flooding of homes, they will also help prevent two of the largest employers in this area, Monsanto's Carondelet Plant, and the Nordyne Company facility from flooding caused by backwater carried in the stormwater systems. DSW 136922 STLCOPCB4036882 . 11/22/94 17:40 314 768 6279 USD LEGAL DEPT. @004/008 Chronology of Events regarding the HUD Flood Enhancement Block Grant Given to the City of St. Louis March 1994 Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District retains the services of Jim Brown, lobbyist, to work on federal legislative matters. Brown notified the District the Department of Housing and Urban Development was making available $500 million for enhancement projects designed to reduce the potential for flooding in areas. This was part of a package of legislation designed to assist California in the recovery of the earthquake earlier in the year. Brown, who also works for the city of St. Louis, also notified the city of the availability of these funds. Had Brown not been working on behalf of MSD, it is doubtful the city would have received as much funding as it did. On March 9, the Executive Director of the city's Community Development Agency, Janice Washington, sent a letter to HUD, requesting funding under the emergency legislation. A letter was also sent by Congressman Gephardt to HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros requesting favorable consideration of the_ City's request. Included in that proposal was MSD's request. The request was specific so that HUD funds would ....go to the City of St. Louis, not the state of Missouri. That was done to prevent the state from controlling these funds. That is also why MSD was lumped into the city's request. MSD entered into this arrangement with the belief the funding, whatever was made available, would be specific to projects contained in the city's proposal. The city, we were told, could only identify $1.8 million in buy out funding under existing legislation dealing with community development block grants. April 1994 HUD award's $5.1 million to the City of St. Louis from the emergency funding legislation. Upon review of the award, it is discovered there are no contingencies about how the money was spent, even though the application was specific, (see April 25 memo.) DSW 136923 STLCOPCB4036883 11/22/94 17:41 0314 768 6279 MSD LEGAL DEPT. @005/008 HUD Grants page two September 1994 October 1994 From the time of the announcements, discussions have been held with Steven Acree of the City's Community Development Agency regarding the procedures to following receiving the HUD funding. Because HUD did not finalize procedures to following receiving the grants until late in the summer, a measure could not be introduced in the Board of Aldermen which went on their Summer break. Upon returning from summer recess, discussions resumed between the District and the city about allocation of the funds. MSD sent information at the request of Mr. Acree to CDA regarding the environmental impact of the project. Although Alderman Gruen had made overtures about the use of the funds for other purposes after the grant had been announced, it was not until this time that we discovered he wished to cut back the District's share and use a greater portion for sidewalk, park and other beautification projects in the flooded areas of his ward. A meeting was held with Peter Sortino and Alderman Gruen regarding the allocation of the HDD grants. The Alderman offered $2.5 million of the $3.1 originally intended for this project. The District rejected this offer and countered with $2.8 million, which is half the difference from, the original $3.1 and the $2.5 million suggested by Alderman Gruen. The current disagreement is primarily between MSD and Alderman Gruen who is still insisting on an ordinance for $2.5 out of fear not enough funds, would be available for the remaining infrastructure needs. Peter sortino, on behalf of the Mayor, is serving as a mediator. We believe the Mayor will go along with whatever is finally worked out between MSD, Alderman Gruen and Alderman Aboussie who will most likely handle the ordinance in his committee. Note: Attached are correspondences and news accounts of the on going efforts being made by the City of St. Louis, MSD, Congressman Gephardt and others in trying to secure these funds. Some of these items are noted in the previous outline. DSW 136924 STLCOPCB4036884 11/22/94 17:41 0314 768 6279 MSD LEGAL DEPT. @006/008 l|lll| City ofSl.LuuiS li CoMiinunli-y Development Agency t>tiVui.V1 t {fci'.i/'t.f* |4*l 0. WjetlinjIfcM* M)C* ce<uUi !>** i* March 9, 1994 Mr. Kenneth 0. Lange Manager ' IJ..X. Depart mem of Housing and Urban Development St. I .unis Fit-lei Office, Region VII 1222 Spruce Street Si. I.oui.t, Missouri 63IU3-7836 Rc: Remaining Un-met Flood Relief and ruhire Hazard Miligsuion Needs Dear Mr. linger Wiili il passage uf Tuhlic I aw ?03-211. Congress has appropriated an additional amount cit' Tiilu I i'uihIs foi emergency expenses resulting from the Midwest Floods of 1993, including authorization to utilize these funds for permanent measures that teducc the jxitciuial Tor future flood losses. ' The City of.Si. foul'scontinues to have un-met financial needs will) regard lo.cuuipleLing :*.n acquisition and relocation program in the area of the City's floodplain that was most severely affected by the 1993 flooding. In addition, the city has no identified source to fay for the completion of repairs lo infrastructure damaged by the flooding or public improvement measures to reduce the potential for future flood losses. We have detailed these needs cm the atniched list. Wc hupc wu are mil overlooked In the allocation of the additional Title I funds thru have jiiost recently been authorized by Congress. As-an-entitlemeru community, _wc have the 'inriiistnicturc" in place to administer these funds and we have a high proportion of low-income yeuple "-lio would he served. The lower River des Peres channel section of the City is nijpjo.cimuicfy ftfi% low-moderate income. Please let us know if wc can provide an additional informniion iliai would assist in the allocation process. Sincerely. DSW 136925 STLCOPCB4036885 11/22/94 17:41 314 768 6279 USD LEGAL DEPT. @007/008 CITY OF ST. LOUIS CURRENTLY UN-WET FLOOD RF.Mt'.t-* AND FUTURE HAZARD mitigation NKKDS Morel) 9. 1994 I. Acquisition and Optional Relocation Assistance Progrnmi Total *buy-uul" itica includes L7G parcels with 153 structures located or. them, 59 of which arc 50% Oi mute damaged. Many of our 50% or more damaged structures are side by side, in a broken teeth patten:, with other substantially damaged (but not 50% or more) suiicttues. Appiuaimtticly 60% of the residents in (his area arc low*moderate income. Our inability co acquire structures (hat are damaged less than $0<K. will luavc a low-income neighborhood with significant blighting influences exposed to future '.1 ending. Estimated total cost of acquisition and relocation: Currently available for acquisition and relocation (Emergency (.'DBG): Current. un-nict need to complete acquisition and relocations: S4.889.55U 53,283,562 1,605,988 Z. Clearance of Damaged Structures in Flood l'lulii: We will pursue Lhc possibility of funding this through the FEMA Section 306 Program, but at thrs time we have no identified funding to pay tor demolition. Estimated total cost of clearance: Currently available for clearance: CutTetii. uu-lliel need tu clcur iLmxgcd structures from flood plain: 5535,100 50 $535,100 3. ITcveution of Future Flooding: ` The Metropolitan Si. Louis Sewer District currently operates IU temporary pump siAiions along the River ties Peres channel In south St, Louis City and County. They only operate during high water stages on the Mississippi River. When the Mississippi River is In flood stage, backwater creeps up the lower River des Peres channel. Normally, tins channel carries storm water run-uff and lilllc flow. Storm water sewers discharging; rainwater directly into the channel must be plugged where the Mississippi RjvCr bucks up lu avoid rivet walci fiuiij inundating the .sewer system. When lhc storm water sewers arc plugged, pumps must be used when it is raining to pump the water normally flowing, into the sewers over the top of the River dcs Feres levee and iniu the channel. Dining a heavy r&in, these pumps eannet keep pace with the run-otY ana localized flooding occurs. If this type of makeshift system wire not in place, areas away from the actual UivCr dcs Peres channel itself would flood from the sewer system: not from overland fluuUmg. when ihc livei wnici (ops the levee. In addition, the 8-fool and 6-foul sanitary sewers running nenemh the lower River des Peres channel become inundated with river water when lhc channel itself is full of Mississippi River floodw&ter. Because of the walci piussuie created when the sewed ;tic full, the one-tau concrete slab manholes over :hese sewers .....i rtf ;r,n-> allowing sewage io mu with river water. Predominantly low- DSW 136926 STLCOPCB4036886 11/22/94 17:42 314 768 6279 USD LEGAL DEPT. @008/008 moderate income neighborhoods alnil approximately und-quarter ot' the length of the lower Kiver des Peres channel. Correcting these problems involve three phases; a. Pump stations rini(d |>crinancni pump sialiuns along the lower River des Peres. These would be similar to. (hose along the It. Louis riverfront and have the capacity to handle heavy rains. Current im-mct need to build pump stations; I'olenifully CDDG eligible portion (25%) 510,000,000 $2,500,000 b. Scwer Gate Structures Automated gate structures are needed to seal off the sewers leading into the lower River dcs Peres channel to prevent river water from entering the sewers and flooding neighborhoods away from the actual channel. Current plugs are temporary and sometimes full. Current un-met need ta build sewer gale structures; Potentially CDDG eligible portion (Z5%) Si),000,000 52,250,000 c. Rehabilitation of the Lower River des Peres Sanitary Sewer The snnicary sewers underneath the lower River dcs Peres channel must be replaced to prevent being saturated with flood water, this would prevent sewege from escaping the sewer and entering the river. Current un-mci need to rehabilitate sanitary sewer; Potentially CDDG eligible portion (25%) 542,000,000 10,500,000 Tutnl CDUCi-cliglljlc tin-met Hood relief unci future huiftrd mitigation needs: $i7,391,OSS DSW 136927 STLCOPCB4036887