<strong>City</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Boca</strong> <strong>Raton</strong> Stormwater Management <strong>Master</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>Inventory <strong>of</strong> Stormwater SystemData used to populate the database was prioritized in the order <strong>of</strong> the list given above. In aneffort to provide the most reliable interpretation <strong>of</strong> this information, files were reviewed and datawas acquired beginning with the most recent application.Table 1 provides a sample <strong>of</strong> a portion <strong>of</strong> the database <strong>of</strong> information developed for the permitswithin the <strong>City</strong>. Due to the size <strong>of</strong> the database, access is best achieved electronically.B. <strong>City</strong>’s Stormwater SystemThe <strong>City</strong>’s stormwater system consists <strong>of</strong> a network <strong>of</strong> pipes, structures (inlets, manholes, weirs,gates. etc.), canals, and lakes. The <strong>City</strong> has identified over 6,200 linear feet <strong>of</strong> pipe that is itsresponsibility, 27 linear feet the responsibility <strong>of</strong> FDOT, 186 linear feet the responsibility <strong>of</strong>private entities, and 527,000 linear feet not attributed to an owner. The <strong>City</strong> claims over 7,000structures in its system and has identified 2,771 private structures, 886 State/County structures,and over 800 structures not attributed to an owner. While the <strong>City</strong>’s claim to ownership indicatesmaintenance <strong>of</strong> those components, the <strong>City</strong> considers the entire stormwater system within the<strong>City</strong> limits to be part <strong>of</strong> its MS4. The knowledge <strong>of</strong> which system components are and which arenot the responsibility <strong>of</strong> the <strong>City</strong> is important for work scheduling, budgeting, and responding toresident concerns. A comprehensive geographic information system (“GIS”) <strong>of</strong> the stormwatersystem within the <strong>City</strong> would be a valuable tool for staff and residents.The <strong>City</strong> has already taken the first steps toward the development <strong>of</strong> a GIS for its stormwatersystem. The <strong>City</strong> provided two GIS coverages <strong>of</strong> its stormwater system; one includes the location<strong>of</strong> the structures (catch basins, inlets, manholes, and headwalls), the other includes the linegeometry <strong>of</strong> the stormwater pipes connecting the structures. Each coverage has an associateddatabase <strong>of</strong> information. <strong>City</strong> staff used Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI)s<strong>of</strong>tware (ArcGIS) to create files known as shapefiles from the spatial information, and populatedthe associated databases with information about components <strong>of</strong> the existing system. The structuredatabase includes fields for the type, status, right-<strong>of</strong>-way type, owner, rim elevation, and up t<strong>of</strong>our invert elevations. The pipe database includes fields for the size, length, shape, material,owner, and up to four invert elevations. Figure 3 displays the provided stormwater systeminformation.To move this initial GIS effort to the next level, additional information to populate the databasesshould be gathered and input. Additional fields in the databases that would be useful to <strong>City</strong> staffinclude: date <strong>of</strong> installation, last inspection/maintenance date; and the source <strong>of</strong> the informationreported. Identification <strong>of</strong> the source will be important when work is being done to update thedata fields as newer/more accurate information becomes available (from completed projectsand/or surveys <strong>of</strong> existing conditions).A fully developed stormwater GIS will enable staff to better manage the stormwater programsrequired by permit and code. It is recommended that the <strong>City</strong> undertake the advancement <strong>of</strong> itsL/bocaswmp/a6016.01/InterimReport 11-27-07/r02Page 6MOCK•ROOS
<strong>City</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Boca</strong> <strong>Raton</strong> Stormwater Management <strong>Master</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>Inventory <strong>of</strong> Stormwater Systemstormwater GIS as a stormwater system improvement project that could be phased over severalfiscal periods.C. Palm Beach County & FDOT Stormwater SystemsSeveral major roadways traverse the <strong>City</strong>, and associated with them are stormwater managementsystems that in some locations are connected to the <strong>City</strong>’s system. In addition, larger roadwaysystems, such as I-95, <strong>of</strong>ten incorporate drainage areas adjacent to the roadway that are outsidethe road right-<strong>of</strong>-way. In order to understand and document these systems, a records search wasconducted with PBC Engineering and Public Works Department, the Florida Department <strong>of</strong>Transportation (“FDOT”) District IV Office, and FDOT West Palm Beach Operations Center.A search <strong>of</strong> the PBC Project List (updated February 12, 2007) was conducted and copies <strong>of</strong> therecord or construction drawings <strong>of</strong> the projects within the <strong>City</strong> were requested from theReprographics Department. Current project drawings, not available from the ReprographicsDepartment, were obtained from the Roadway Production Division.A formal records request was submitted to FDOT’s District IV Office for projects located withinthe <strong>City</strong>. This resulted in electronic and hard copies <strong>of</strong> roadway improvement projects, includingthe respective drainage design. A search <strong>of</strong> the drawings on site at the Operations Center wasalso conducted to locate additional record information. Maps containing FDOT outfall locationswere obtained from the Operations Center.PBC and FDOT stormwater system components were added to the stormwater network shapefiles,based on the design and record drawings received. The components’ jurisdiction and the source <strong>of</strong>the information were added to the associated databases. This information is shown, along with the<strong>City</strong>’s information, in Figure 3.D. Drainage Complaints SummaryThe <strong>City</strong> provided a hard copy <strong>of</strong> the Drainage Complaint Evaluation and Improvement Prioritiesreport that was completed by Williams, Hatfield & Stoner, Inc. (“WHS”) in July 1999. Thisreport evaluated and ranked each <strong>of</strong> the complaints in the <strong>City</strong>’s Resident Complaint Log throughan unspecified date in 1998. The <strong>City</strong> indicated that many <strong>of</strong> these complaints are still relevant.In addition, the <strong>City</strong> provided an electronic copy <strong>of</strong> its Resident Complaint Log spreadsheet. Thisfile included complaints in addition to those evaluated in the WHS report. There are 109complaint entries in the log. WHS evaluated 48 locations; the remainder have not been evaluatedby the process used in the WHS report.Using the address and description fields for each <strong>of</strong> the complaints, a shapefile <strong>of</strong> the location andapproximate extent <strong>of</strong> each drainage complaint was developed. The Complaint Log database wasconverted to an associated database for the shapefile that was created. Figure 4 depicts theshapefile and Table 2 is the associated database that was developed. The complaint map andL/bocaswmp/a6016.01/InterimReport 11-27-07/r02Page 7MOCK•ROOS