Grand County faces an urgent need for improvements to its storm drainage system, and the cost for the most immediate needs will total $14 million, Grand County Council members were told Tuesday. Overall improvements to the county’s storm drainage system could cost as much as $34 million, according to the draft Grand County Storm Drain Master Plan update completed by Horrocks Engineers, of Pleasant Grove, Utah, and presented to the council this week.

The storm drain plan was originally created in 1997, and has not been updated since that time, county officials said.

Many of the problems identified in the plan are the result of changes or damage to existing drainages caused by past road construction, property development or farming, the plan states.

“Storm water runoff is a difficult resource to manage,” the plan states. “In a dry climate such as Utah’s, existing drainage ways are often dry and, to the inexperienced, may appear to be prime places to construct buildings.”

The report notes that, especially in Spanish Valley, changes to existing drainages have had long-lasting effects and have created a potentially dangerous situation for residents in the area.

“Spanish Valley has several historic drainage ways that flow from the hills on each side of the valley to Pack Creek. Some of these drainages have been altered or removed over the years due to road construction, development and/or farming. Excess storm water has caused areas of localized flooding due to these changes in the natural drainage ways. In the past, this flooding has not caused significant damage due to the nature of the agricultural area. However, the construction of homes in some of these areas has increased the risk of significant damage due to flooding.”

Grand County Engineer Mark Wright also presented separate document that focused on design criteria for storm drainage requirements in Spanish Valley. Wright noted that developers must currently research four different documents to learn what the county’s storm drain criteria are.

“The plan update identifies a 33-million-dollar need and we have no identified funding. Perhaps the council would like to schedule a workshop to go over the funding,” Wright said, after he explained that impact fees charged to developers will pay for only a portion of the drainage needs caused by new development.

Existing needs must be paid for by the county, Wright said.

“How it will fit in with the budget process [for 2010] I’m not sure,” council chairman Bob Greenberg said. He suggested that the upcoming budget preparation for next year would be a good time to hold a workshop focused on drainage improvements.

The drainage plan update evaluates the existing storm drainage system, and identifies and recommends needed improvements. It prioritizes and estimates the costs of a long list of recommended improvements. Priorities were established using a formula that accounts for potential damage to commercial property, residential property, and streets. It takes into account the potential for damage from a 10-year flood event and a 100-year flood.

What is missing from the formula is “county input.” The council must place its own ranking on the list of 42 needed drain channel system improvements and 37 storage basin improvements identified in the update.

There was no discussion of if, when, or how the council intends to make its rankings.

A series of maps in the update shows existing facilities, including drainage channels, culverts, and retention ponds – and the recommended improvements.

The update also discusses funding mechanisms, taxes being first among them. Grants are suggested, as are utility fees. A table compares utility fees imposed by jurisdictions ranging from $9 per month in Sacramento, Calif. to $1 per month in Lindon, Utah.

The plan also discusses impact fees for new development, along with the suggestion that those fees, which were originally established in 2004, should be increased at least to account for inflation.

A special improvement district option could offer one alternative to using a utility fee, “but it may require the support of local voters. The cost for commercial and industrial development could be increased because these areas tend to generate more storm water management problems,” the update states.

“Are any of [the priority needs] ‘shovel ready’,” council member Audrey Graham asked. She said if they were, some funding might be available through the federal economic stimulus program approved earlier this year by Congress.

“A vast majority could be ready in 18 months,” Wright said, adding that environmental studies are needed in order to get any of the projects to the point where work could begin.