Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stormwater Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fortify Lauderdale officials present Phase 2 stormwater prioritization plan; commissioners press for equity and clarity on design storms
Summary
City and consultant outlined methodology to rank ~17 Phase 2 neighborhoods into 12 projects grouped across three time bands (start dates 15–18 months; completion targeted by 2033). Commissioners pressed staff on rainfall-design values (10-year = 8.7 in/24‑hour; 100‑year 72‑hour ≈ 18.5 in), weighting of neighborhood feedback vs. FEMA data, and distribution across commission districts.
Abby Kuram, interim public works director, and consultant Rob Taylor (Hazen & Sawyer) presented the Fortify Lauderdale Phase 2 stormwater prioritization methodology and schedule, explaining staff will return with an analytically ranked list of projects for commission review and adjustment.
Rob Taylor summarized the approach: three primary data inputs (resident-reported flooding collected in neighborhood meetings and online surveys; FEMA repetitive-loss property data; and the city’s updated stormwater model), a Level of Service (LOS) analysis that scores roadway inundation and expected structure flooding, and a normalization process that produces 0–1.0 scores for comparability across neighborhoods. The consultant said the initial plan is to consolidate 12 projects into three time-based groups and aim for overall completion by 2033.
Commissioners requested technical clarity about design storms. Taylor stated the 10‑year 24‑hour event used in current LOS scoring is 8.7 inches of rainfall and that a 100‑year 72‑hour planning metric is approximately 18.5 inches; he explained the 72‑hour total tends to concentrate into a shorter, intense 24‑hour peak that drives conveyance and pump-station design. “That means that we would expect that storm event to happen once every 10 years… we can expect an 8.7 inch rainfall within a 24‑hour period,” Taylor said. Roberto Benor, stormwater division manager, used a bell‑curve analogy to explain how a three‑day storm can produce a high 24‑hour peak that becomes runoff rather than infiltration.
Staff proposed weighting LOS more heavily than neighborhood feedback (initial suggestion ~75/25) because LOS stems from uniform modeling, while neighborhood reports vary in participation and are anecdotal. Commissioners said neighborhood participation rates vary by area and asked staff to consider participation weighting, equity across commission districts and recent localized changes (for example, Bay View infrastructure work) that may not be fully reflected in historical data. Rob Taylor said the analytic ranking would be brought back to the commission, and commissioners could apply limited subjective adjustments (staff recommended moving projects at most one group to preserve overall fairness and schedule predictability).
Staff emphasized limits: some low‑lying locations cannot reasonably be brought to a 10‑year roadway standard without prohibitive cost; in those places the design focuses on protecting structures and evacuation routes and on storage/ponding strategies combined with conveyance and pumping.
Why this matters: The prioritization will determine the sequence of multi‑neighborhood infrastructure investments, influence which communities receive early construction and mitigation, and set expectations for protection levels under current and future climate horizons (staff cited planning horizons to 2040 and 2070).
What’s next: Staff and consultant will return with a ranked list and proposed groupings for commission review, and commissioners asked for more granular neighborhood identification and clearer documentation of weighting choices.
