This Chapter lists recommendations for addressing concerns identified in Chapter 2 of this Master Plan. Similar to the format of Chapter 2, the recommendations have been divided into town-wide and watershed specific recommendations and the issues have been grouped by type (street flooding, building flooding, pond flooding, streambank erosion, and water quality). For organizational purposes and future reference, each issue has been assigned a unique identification number.

Each issue, concern, or opportunity (from Chapter 2 and Chapter 3) is restated in simple terms, and then followed by an evaluation of the promising alternative solutions (if applicable), a discussion of the recommended improvements, and an estimate of the associated costs. The cost estimates are provided for budgeting purposes only. A copy of these cost calculations is included in Appendix 4. They are based on field observations and limited data. Actual cost of construction and design may be more or less depending on additional information that would be gathered during the design phase. For the issues that had several promising solutions, CBBEL explored the solutions and narrowed them down to the best solution with input from the Town of Fishers staff. Table 5-2 at the end of this Chapter provides a summary of the recommended improvements. Chapter 6 of this Master Plan will focus on implementation of the recommendations identified.

 - Jump to Watershed Index -

There are a number of recommendations that should be implemented at a Town-wide level because of the benefit they provide to the entire community and not the individual watershed. These include recommendations pertaining to drainage policy, pollutants of concern, unstudied streams and flood studies, streambank erosion, reducing flood losses, land use planning, and green initiatives.

TW1

Issue

There is a need for guidance of what agency or department has authority over various waterways.

Recommended Improvement

As part of the development of this Master Plan, Table 5-1 clarifies the roles and responsibilities of the various agencies and departments that have authority over the waterways in the Town of Fishers was developed. This table, or a more refined version of it, is recommended to be distributed at Town offices and published on the Town web page. The estimated cost is minimal to reprint and publish this table on the Town’s web page. Since the desired table is readily available it is a high priority for implementation with minimal cost to the Town of Fishers.

TW2

Issue

Current Stormwater Management Ordinance and Technical Standards requires post-construction BMPs to remove 80% Total Suspended Solids (TSS) from stormwater runoff but does not target other pollutants of concern. These include nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus), metals, and E.coli typical runoff from particular land use or identified in the State 303(d) List of Impaired Waters and Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Studies.

Recommended Improvement

To address this issue, several potential solutions were explored. The following is a summary of each of the solution that was investigated:

1. Do nothing. It is assumed that nutrients, metals, and E.coli will be adequately captured with 80% TSS removal.
2. Update the Stormwater Management Ordinance and Technical Standards to include removal requirements for nutrients, metals, and E. coli. The estimated cost is $2,500 to draft such language for local adoption and implementation.

Based on the goals and performance criteria established for this Master Plan (Chapter 4), it is recommended to update the Stormwater Management Ordinance and Technical Standards to include additional pollutants of concern and 303(d) listed impairments (#2 above). Since the Town of Fishers’ Stormwater Management Ordinance and Technical Standards is currently undergoing review for the potential to be updated, in partnership with the City of Noblesville, City of Westfield, and Hamilton County updates, the priority for implementing this recommendation is high.

TW3

Issue

Stream channels respond to land use influences in the watershed. Streambank erosion is a significant issue that impacts the chemical, physical, and biological health of the stream. Measures must be taken to minimize streambank erosion and its impact on water quality.

Recommended Improvement

To address this issue an array of potential solutions were explored. These include adding a channel protection volume requirement and LID BMPs to the Stormwater Management Ordinance and Technical Standards. The following is a detailed discussion of the each promising solution investigated:

1. Add a channel protection volume requirement to the Stormwater Management Ordinance and Technical Standards. Channel protection is typically achieved by matching the post-construction runoff volume and rate to the pre-settlement condition for all runoff events up to the bankfull flow. The bankfull flow in most Indiana streams correlate with 1.5- to 2-year flood event flow. However, due to difficulties in determining the pre-settlement conditions, the net control of runoff resulting from a 1-year, 24-hour storm in proposed conditions is established as the standard for channel protection. The estimated cost is $2,500 to draft language for local adoption and implementation.
2. Promote the use of LID BMPs to intercept stormwater at the source, filter, temporarily store, and slowly release runoff to receiving streams reducing streambank erosion. The estimated cost is $15,000 to identify appropriate LID BMP practices, and draft language for local adoption and implementation.

Based on the goals and performance criteria established for this Master Plan (Chapter 4), both solutions are recommended. Since the Town of Fishers’ Stormwater Management Ordinance and Technical Standards is currently undergoing review for the potential to be updated, in partnership with the City of Noblesville, City of Westfield, and Hamilton County updates, the priority for implementing this recommendation is high.

TW4

Issue

In general, the public has a limited understanding of the implications of the floodplain mapping designations and the associated risk to individual properties. A method to better communicate the risk may enable the public, as well as planners and engineers, to better understand the risks of development in a given area.

Recommended Improvement

Use existing Flood Insurance Study (FIS) study models and Hamilton County 1 foot contour interval mapping to create flood depth maps. These maps would visually show the public the anticipated flood depths during the selected frequency of flood. These maps can also be used for emergency action plans to show available exit routes and the depth of water that could be encountered at various locations for evacuations. An example of a small portion of such a map is provided. (insert depth sample image)The estimated cost of doing this is about $500 per mile of stream, assuming that detailed flood studies are already available. If the entire length of studied streams in the planning area were to be mapped in this way, the estimated cost would be about $ 20,000. This cost could be shared between the Town and the County since many of the streams are regulated drains.

TW5

Issue

Drainage infrastructure only lasts so long before it begins to deteriorate or fail. Circumstances such as wind or ice storms can also impact the ability of the system to function. In order to maintain the drainage system, a system to fund regular maintenance activities needs to be in place. We need to word this part differently as we already have a system in place to maintain infrastructure on an as need basis. May need to clarify here if you are trying to indicate that the Town should maintain private creeks, etc. that are not regulated as they currently do not.

Recommended Improvement

1. Maintenance of stormwater infrastructures is one of the purposes for which the stormwater utility has been established. Adequate funds should be allocated such that they are available for regular maintenance of the non-regulated portions of the system (those portions not under the County Surveyor’s jurisdiction) as well as for unforeseen circumstances. An initial estimate of required budget for such work is $20,000. As Town staff gains experience in the needs of the Town system and the associated costs, this estimate can be refined for future annual budgets.
2. Work with the County Surveyor’s Office to discuss the feasibility of the assessment of regulated drain fees for maintenance of regulated drains that are not currently on assessment rolls, as needed, and to ensure that maintenance is regularly performed on the regulated drains. A rough estimate of required staff time expense is $500 for this coordination.

The Association of State Floodplain Managers' Adverse Impact Toolkit.

TW6

Issue

Damage due to flooding occurs and creates expense for the Town and its residents to repair, recover, or replace flood-damaged property.

Recommended Improvement

To address this issue several potential solutions were explored. These include prohibiting new critical facilities in the floodplain, participate in the Community Rating System, and promoting No Adverse Impact floodplain management policy. The following is a detailed discussion of the each promising solution investigated:

1. Prohibit new critical facilities from being built in the 0.2 percent annual chance (500-year) floodplain. FEMA defines critical facilities as those facilities that provide services to the community that should be functional before, during , and immediately after a hazard event. The estimated cost is $1,000 for Town staff to amend the zoning ordinance and have it approved by Town Council.
2. Promote a No Adverse Impact (NAI) floodplain management policy. NAI is an approach that ensures the action of any one property owner, public or private, does not adversely impact the property and rights of others . It can be used to effectively address flooding issues to reduce flood peaks, flood stages, flood velocities, streambank erosion and sedimentation. The estimated cost is $7,500 for a consultant to educate developers and incorporate this concept into development ordinances.

Based on the goals and performance criteria established for this Master Plan (Chapter 4), both solutions are recommended. Since limiting the placement of critical facilities in the floodplain is a typical public safety practice, standard language to prohibit the development of critical facilities in the floodplain (#1 above) is readily available and is highly recommended. Similarly, the addition of a NAI floodplain management policy (#2 above) is a high priority recommendation because of its effectiveness to reduce flood impacts and that ASFPM has developed a “toolbox” to guide implementation.

City of Denver's Urban Drainage and Flood Control Program

Central Indiana Land Trust
Green Infrastructure Project

TW7

Issue

Use existing plans, programs, and policies to improve water quality and reduce flood problems.

Recommended Improvement

To address this issue a number of potential solutions were explored. These include creating good development practice materials for developers, establishing overlay zones for stormwater and flood conveyance, integrating the Central Indiana Land Trusts’ Green Infrastructure Project findings, implementing elements of the Town’s Strategic Plan as they relate to stormwater management, and review development ordinances for improved stormwater management. The following is a detailed discussion of the each promising solution investigated:

1. Develop something similar to the City of Denver’s Urban Drainage and Flood Control District mini-CD brochure for developers. This tool is an effort to illustrate how developments, using a number of local case studies, can make money, increase the local tax base, and preserve the natural and beneficial values of the floodplains. The estimated cost is $10,000 for a consultant to gather local case studies and present them in a user friendly CD format.
2. Establish overlay zones to preserve the function of essential stormwater and flood conveyance systems. Overlay zones typically provide for a higher level of regulations and may be applied to stream corridors, floodplains, drainage ditches, and stormwater infrastructure. The estimated cost is $5,000 for Town staff or a consultant to incorporate this concept into development ordinances.
3. Integrate the recommendations from the Central Indiana Green Infrastructure Project in the Town’s Strategic Plan. The Central Indiana Land Trust (CILTI) has been working to develop maps of key working lands and natural landscapes critical to the maintenance and enhancement of green infrastructure network in Central Indiana. This includes hubs, cores, and corridors of forests, wetlands, and aquatic systems. This plan could be used to help guide how and where future development occurs in the Town of Fishers. The estimated cost is $2,500 for Town staff or a consultant to review the Green Infrastructure Project and incorporate it into the Town’s Strategic Plan.
4. Continue to implement the goals of the Town’s Strategic Plan as they relate to stormwater management. These include: regulation and management of stormwater quantity and quality in the Town; reduce the hazard to public health caused by excessive stormwater runoff; regulate the introduction of pollutants to the stormwater drainage system; prohibit illicit discharge into stormwater drainage system; establish legal authority to carry out all inspections, monitoring, and enforcement procedures necessary to ensure compliance; and seek compliance with Phase II regulations.
5. Review Fishers’ local development codes to determine how stormwater friendly they are. The EPA, Center for Watershed Protection, and the Upper White River Watershed Alliance have each developed similar tools to allow an in-depth review of the standards, ordinances, and codes that shape how development occurs in your community. The estimated cost is $2,000 for Town staff or a consultant to review development ordinances and fill out the Code and Ordinance Worksheet.

Based on the goals and performance criteria established for this Master Plan (Chapter 4), 2 promising solutions were recommended for implementation. These include CILTI’s Green Infrastructure Project (#3 above) and review of the local development codes (#5 above). The priority for implementation of the CILTI project is low since it has not yet been released or effectiveness of the information is not known. Reviewing the development codes is a high priority and should be completed in conjunction with the updates to the Stormwater Management Ordinance and Technical Standards.

TW8

Issue

Promote stormwater-related green initiatives.

Recommended Improvement

To address this issue several potential solutions were explored. These include meeting the goals of the IDEM CLEAN Community Challenge projects and promoting grass-roots neighborhood green projects. The following is a discussion of the each promising solution investigated:

1. Implement IDEM Comprehensive Local Environmental Action Network (CLEAN) Community Challenge projects as they relate to stormwater management. These include increasing the number of planting projects that incorporate native plants and trees by 5% and increasing the number of ordinances and incentives that encourage “green” design by 5%. The estimated cost is $2,500 for Town staff or a consultant to review existing ordinances, draft, and adopt language and method of tracking implementation.
2. Promote grassroots neighborhood-based green initiatives to store and filter pollutants carried by stormwater runoff at the source including rain barrels, rain gardens, green roofs, etc. The Town of Fishers should partner with the Hamilton County SWCD to promote existing Urban Conservation programs. The estimated cost is minimal since it is taking advantage of existing programs.

Based on the goals and performance criteria established for this Master Plan (Chapter 4), both solutions are recommended. Implementing IDEM CLEAN projects is a high priority recommendation that should be easily achieved through the requirements of the updated Stormwater Management Ordinance and Technical Standards. Promoting neighborhood-based green initiatives is a medium priority since it requires time to coordinate, promote, and implement a successful grass-roots program.

Nine watersheds drain land in the Town of Fishers.

The following sections target the stormwater and flooding problems in the 9 different watersheds in the Town of Fishers. The problems listed here were from Chapter 2 and 3 of this Master Plan and include street flooding, building flooding, water quality, pond flooding, streambank erosion, and localized flooding.

Use the list below, or select the watershed from the graphic on the left to read about specific recommendations for each watershed.

1. Mallory Granger Ditch-White River Watershed
2. Vestal Ditch-White River Watershed
3. Carmel Creek-White River Watershed
4. William Lehr Ditch-Stony Creek Watershed
5. Sand Creek-Mud Creek Watershed
6. Headwaters Mud Creek Watershed
7. Thorpe Creek-Geist Reservoir Watershed
8. Flatfork Creek-Fall Creek Watershed
9. McFadden Ditch-Lick Creek Watershed

The above discussion highlights 79 issues for 145 problem areas identified in Chapters 2 and 3 of this Master Plan. The recommendations can be summarized into the following number of items in each category: 8 town-wide, 40 street flooding (map identification A and AR), 71 building flooding (B and BR), 4 water quality (C), 14 pond flooding (D and DR), 3 streambank erosion (E), and 13 local flooding (F).

Table 5-2 provides a summary of the recommendations for improvement and addressing flooding and water quality concerns in the Town of Fishers. The table is sorted by town-wide recommendations and then by each of the 9 watersheds and includes:

• Issue Identification Reference Number,
• Brief description of the issue,
• Map identification number,
• Watershed name,
• Brief description of the recommended improvement,
• Estimated cost for the Town of Fishers, Estimated cost for the County, landowner, etc.,
• Priority for implementation,
• Basis for priority determination, and
• Responsible party for implementation.