Stormwater Management Master Plan - MSD

Louisville and Jefferson CountyMetropolitan Sewer DistrictStormwater ManagementMaster PlanAugust 2010

Stormwater Management Master PlanEXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe Stormwater Management Master Plan (SMMP) was developed for Louisville Metro by theLouisville and Jefferson County Metropolitan Sewer District (MSD). MSD assumedresponsibility of the community’s public stormwater system, along with the flood protectionsystem, in 1987. The basis of this SMMP was MSD’s original Watershed Master Plan, whichwas created in 1988 as part of the Stormwater Drainage Master Plan. The purpose of this plan isto help effectively manage present and future regional stormwater drainage in Louisville Metro.It should be noted that the SMMP is not a flood study or a floodplain management program. Theprimary objective for the SMMP is the promotion of stormwater drainage management practicesin the context of a regional program; however, this plan was prepared in coordination with thefloodplain management plan, which is part of the Louisville Metro Multi-Hazards Plan.Furthermore, stormwater quality is addressed in more detail through the Stormwater QualityManagement Plan (SWQMP), which is part of the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer SystemPermit (MS4), and applicable portions of the Integrated Overflow Abatement Plan (IOAP),which is part of MSD’s Project WIN.DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREAAll areas affecting surface water runoff in Louisville Metro, which for the purposes of this reportincludes all of Jefferson County, Kentucky, are included in the SMMP. Louisville Metro is ariver city located along the Ohio River. The area is drained by two major drainage systems: theOhio River and the Salt River. The Salt River drains into the Ohio River at the southwestern endof Jefferson County. A large portion of Jefferson County lies within the broad floodplain of theOhio River; however, about 17,600 acres of this floodplain, including downtown Louisville, areprotected by a 28.9 mile long flood protection system. The flood protection system, which wasbuilt by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, protects the area from Beargrass Creek to PondCreek.Four distinct topographic regions exist within Louisville Metro. These topographic regions arethe Flood Plain, Knobs, Central Basin, and Eastern Uplands. The Flood Plain and Central Basinregions are both characterized as generally flat, while the Knobs and Eastern Uplands regions areboth characterized as generally hilly. Elevations in Louisville Metro range from about 382 feetabove sea level, which is the pool stage of the Ohio River below the McAlpine Lock and Dam, toin excess of 900 feet along the southern boundary.STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REGULATIONSThrough the SMMP, MSD Design Manual, Louisville Metro Floodplain ManagementOrdinance, and Louisville/Jefferson County Erosion Prevention and Sediment ControlOrdinance, a watershed-by-watershed approach to regional management of stormwater drainageis taken. Other permits, such as the Kentucky Pollutant Discharge Elimination SystemAugust 2010 Executive Summary Page 1

Stormwater Management Master PlanGreen infrastructure and post-construction requirements for new development are currentlyunder development and are anticipated to be required as part of the new MS4 Permit expected tobe issued in late 2011 or early 2012. One aspect of these anticipated requirements that willbenefit the stormwater management program is the application of a water quality volumerequirement. It is anticipated that the first 0.75 inches of the 80% stormwater runoff event willbe required to be infiltrated, treated, or otherwise managed for new development projects.The Louisville/Jefferson County Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Ordinance requiresdevelopments with 2000 square feet or more of disturbance and developments within 50 feet of asensitive feature as defined by the ordinance to obtain a Site Disturbance Permit. The SiteDisturbance Permit requires an EPSC plan to be developed which achieves 80% design removalof total suspended solids that are generated by the site. The design storm to be used is the 10-year 24 hour SCS Type II storm event.STORMWATERMANAGEMENT MASTERPLANThe SMMP is divided into 12sections. The first section is thePlanning Methodology section. Theremaining 11 sections are theindividual sections for each of the 11watersheds located in LouisvilleMetro. The 11 watersheds includeMiddle Fork Beargrass Creek,Muddy Fork Beargrass Creek, SouthFork Beargrass Creek, Cedar Creek,Floyds Fork, Goose Creek, HarrodsCreek, Mill Creek, Ohio River/City,Pennsylvania Run, and Pond Creek.Each individual watershed section isbroken down into three sections:Watershed Study Area, Modeling,and Action Plan.Planning MethodologyThe Planning Methodology section describes the overall watershed on a countywide basis aswell as the overall stormwater management policies. General information is included for theentire county regarding physiography, topography, geology, soils, and the Ohio River Floodwall.August 2010 Executive Summary Page 3

Stormwater Management Master PlanIndividual Watershed PlansWatershed Study AreaThe Watershed Study Area section includes a general description of the watershed, topography,geology, soil characteristics, land use, and descriptions of any regional basins or major channelimprovement projects that have been completed. This section also includes a description of anynatural stormwater features located in the watershed that will be protected, such as parks,wetlands, and conservation easements.Further information specific to the floodplain of each watershed can be found in the LouisvilleMetro Multi-Hazards Mitigation Plan, including information such as the number of floodpronebuildings and critical facilities, historical flooding information, development trends, and naturaland beneficial functions of the floodplain.ModelingThe Modeling section includes descriptions of the various models that have been completed foreach stream within the watershed. Models have been developed for each of the 11 watersheds.In general, detailed modeling was accomplished using the USACE software, HEC-HMS andHEC-RAS or HEC-1 and HEC-2. The SCS Type II, 24 hour design storm was used. Whereavailable, calibration was done using historic stream gauge data. In the absence of stream gaugedata, regression equations for Jefferson County were used. These regression equations arepresented in “Estimation of Peak-Discharge Frequency of Urban Streams in Jefferson County,Kentucky, U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Investigations Report 97-4219.” The 1percent annual chance return interval was modeled for the existing and future conditions. Insome cases, the 10, 2, and 0.2 percent chance events were also modeled.Action PlanThe Action Plan section includes specific requirements new development must follow withineach watershed. General stormwater management requirements for new developmentthroughout Jefferson County were described previously in the section labeled “StormwaterManagement Regulations.”The Action Plan section also lists any proposed stormwater projects located within thewatershed. MSD is planning several different types of stormwater projects throughout thecounty. Two of these types of projects include combined sewer projects and green infrastructureprojects that are part of the IOAP. The purpose of the IOAP is to improve water quality, controlcombined sewer overflows, and eliminate sanitary sewer overflows throughout the county.Small scale drainage projects proposed by MSD are included in the program Project DRI.Larger scale projects, such as the study of Upper Mill Creek Basin in the Mill Creek Watershedand the Aluma Basin in the Pond Creek Watershed, are also listed in the Action Plan section.August 2010 Executive Summary Page 4

Stormwater Management Master PlanWatershed MapsMaps are also included for each watershed. These maps include an aerial map, drainage map,soils map, land use map, and floodplain map for each individual watershed. Larger watershedswere broken into two or three sections for clarity in the maps.August 2010 Executive Summary Page 5

Stormwater Management Master PlanTABLE OF CONTENTS1.0 PLANNING METHODOLOGY1.1 INTRODUCTION1.2 WATERSHED STUDY AREA1.2.1 GENERAL1.2.2 OHIO RIVER AND FLOODWALL1.2.3 PHYSIOGRAPHY1.2.4 TOPOGRAPHY1.2.5 GEOLOGY1.2.6 SOILS1.3 MODEL METHODOLOGY1.3.1 TOPOGRAPHIC MAPPING1.3.2 HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUPS1.3.3 LAND USE1.4 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT POLICIES1.4.1 GENERAL POLICIES1.4.2 MUNICIPAL SEPARATE STORM SEWER SYSTEM (MS4)1.4.3 INTEGRATED OVERFLOW ABATEMENT PLAN (IOAP)/GREENINFRASTRUCTURE1.5 WATERSHED MASTER PLANS1.5.1 GENERAL1.5.2 PLAN CONTENTS2.0 MIDDLE FORK – BEARGRASS CREEK2.1 WATERSHED STUDY AREA2.1.1 GENERAL2.1.2 TOPOGRAPHY2.1.3 GEOLOGY2.1.4 SOILS2.1.5 LAND USE2.1.6 REGIONAL BASINS/CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS2.1.7 LOCAL BASINS2.2 MODELING2.3 ACTION PLAN2.3.1 WATERSHED REQUIREMENTS2.3.2 PROPOSED PROJECTS3.0 MUDDY FORK – BEARGRASS CREEK3.1 WATERSHED STUDY AREA3.1.1 GENERAL3.1.2 TOPOGRAPHY3.1.3 GEOLOGYAugust 2010 Table of Contents Page 1

Stormwater Management Master Plan3.1.4 SOILS3.1.5 LAND USE3.1.6 REGIONAL BASINS/CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS3.1.7 LOCAL BASINS3.2 MODELING3.3 ACTION PLAN3.3.1 WATERSHED REQUIREMENTS3.3.2 PROPOSED PROJECTS4.0 SOUTH FORK – BEARGRASS CREEK4.1 WATERSHED STUDY AREA4.1.1 GENERAL4.1.2 TOPOGRAPHY4.1.3 GEOLOGY4.1.4 SOILS4.1.5 LAND USE4.1.6 REGIONAL BASINS/CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS4.1.7 LOCAL BASINS4.2 MODELING4.3 ACTION PLAN4.3.1 WATERSHED REQUIREMENTS4.3.2 PROPOSED PROJECTS5.0 CEDAR CREEK5.1 WATERSHED STUDY AREA5.1.1 GENERAL5.1.2 TOPOGRAPHY5.1.3 GEOLOGY5.1.4 SOILS5.1.5 LAND USE5.1.6 REGIONAL BASINS/CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS5.1.7 LOCAL BASINS5.2 MODELING5.3 ACTION PLAN5.3.1 WATERSHED REQUIREMENTS5.3.2 PROPOSED PROJECTS6.0 FLOYDS FORK6.1 WATERSHED STUDY AREA6.1.1 GENERAL6.1.2 TOPOGRAPHY6.1.3 GEOLOGY6.1.4 SOILS6.1.5 LAND USE6.1.6 REGIONAL BASINS/CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTSAugust 2010 Table of Contents Page 2

Stormwater Management Master Plan6.1.7 LOCAL BASINS6.2 MODELING6.3 ACTION PLAN6.3.1 WATERSHED REQUIREMENTS6.3.2 PROPOSED PROJECTS7.0 GOOSE CREEK7.1 WATERSHED STUDY AREA7.1.1 GENERAL7.1.2 TOPOGRAPHY7.1.3 GEOLOGY7.1.4 SOILS7.1.5 LAND USE7.1.6 REGIONAL BASINS/CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS7.1.7 LOCAL BASINS7.2 MODELING7.3 ACTION PLAN7.3.1 WATERSHED REQUIREMENTS7.3.2 PROPOSED PROJECTS8.0 HARRODS CREEK8.1 WATERSHED STUDY AREA8.1.1 GENERAL8.1.2 TOPOGRAPHY8.1.3 GEOLOGY8.1.4 SOILS8.1.5 LAND USE8.1.6 REGIONAL BASINS/CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS8.1.7 LOCAL BASINS8.2 MODELING8.3 ACTION PLAN8.3.1 WATERSHED REQUIREMENTS8.3.2 PROPOSED PROJECTS9.0 MILL CREEK9.1 WATERSHED STUDY AREA9.1.1 GENERAL9.1.2 TOPOGRAPHY9.1.3 GEOLOGY9.1.4 SOILS9.1.5 LAND USE9.1.6 REGIONAL BASINS/CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS9.1.7 LOCAL BASINS9.2 MODELING9.3 ACTION PLANAugust 2010 Table of Contents Page 3

Stormwater Management Master Plan9.3.1 WATERSHED REQUIREMENTS9.3.2 PROPOSED PROJECTS10.0 OHIO RIVER/CITY10.1 WATERSHED STUDY AREA10.1.1 GENERAL10.1.2 TOPOGRAPHY10.1.3 GEOLOGY10.1.4 SOILS10.1.5 LAND USE10.1.6 REGIONAL BASINS/CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS10.1.7 LOCAL BASINS10.2 MODELING10.3 ACTION PLAN10.3.1 WATERSHED REQUIREMENTS10.3.2 PROPOSED PROJECTS11.0 PENNSYLVANIA RUN11.1 WATERSHED STUDY AREA11.1.1 GENERAL11.1.2 TOPOGRAPHY11.1.3 GEOLOGY11.1.4 SOILS11.1.5 LAND USE11.1.6 REGIONAL BASINS/CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS11.1.7 LOCAL BASINS11.2 MODELING11.3 ACTION PLAN11.3.1 WATERSHED REQUIREMENTS11.3.2 PROPOSED PROJECTS12.0 POND CREEK12.1 WATERSHED STUDY AREA12.1.1 GENERAL12.1.2 TOPOGRAPHY12.1.3 GEOLOGY12.1.4 SOILS12.1.5 LAND USE12.1.6 REGIONAL BASINS/CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS12.1.7 LOCAL BASINS12.2 MODELING12.3 ACTION PLAN12.3.1 WATERSHED REQUIREMENTS12.3.2 PROPOSED PROJECTSAugust 2010 Table of Contents Page 4

Stormwater Management Master PlanLIST OF APPENDICESAPPENDIX AAPPENDIX BAPPENDIX CFINAL RECOMMENDED CSO GRAY INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTLISTFINAL RECOMMENDED GREEN DEMONSTRATIONS PROJECTLISTPROJECT DRI PHASES I-III PROJECT LISTAugust 2010 Table of Contents Page 5

1.0 PLANNING METHODOLOGY

Stormwater Management Master Plan1.0 PLANNING METHODOLOGY1.1 IntroductionThis document is the Stormwater Management Master Plan (SMMP), which was developed forthe Louisville and Jefferson County Metropolitan Sewer District (MSD). MSD assumedresponsibility of the community’s public stormwater system, along with the flood protectionsystem, in 1987. A variety of processes, methodologies, techniques, and computer models havebeen employed in the SMMP. These applications and corresponding results are discussedherein. The basis of the SMMP was MSD’s Watershed Master Plan, which was created as partof the Stormwater Drainage Master Plan in 1988.The SMMP is intended to compile related reference and data documents. It is a process whichMSD can utilize to affect present and future regional management of stormwater drainage. Indoing so, stormwater drainage facilities (e.g. storm sewers, detention basins, and greeninfrastructure) will be employed within a comprehensive planning context.As a final prefatory note, it should be emphasized that the SMMP is not a flood study or afloodplain management program. The primary objective for the SMMP is the promotion ofstormwater drainage management practices in the context of a regional program; however, thisplan was prepared in coordination with the floodplain management plan, which is part of theLouisville Metro Multi-Hazards Plan. Furthermore, stormwater quality is addressed in moredetail through the Stormwater Quality Management Plan (SWQMP) and applicable portions ofthe Integrated Overflow Abatement Plan (IOAP).1.2 Watershed Study Area1.2.1 GeneralThe SMMP includes all areas affectingsurface water runoff in Jefferson County,Kentucky. Jefferson County is anapproximately 375 square mile politicalsubdivision within the much larger 203,900square mile physiographic Ohio River Basin,which embraces parts of fourteen states. Thelarge drainage system originates in theAllegheny Mountains, flows generally in asouthwesterly direction converging withDowntown Louisville along the Ohio Rivernumerous tributaries, and eventually dischargesinto the Mississippi River. A little less than one-half (91,170 square miles) of the Ohio RiverBasin lies upstream of Jefferson County.August 2010 Planning Methodology Page 1

Stormwater Management Master PlanThe Jefferson County area is drained by two major drainage systems: (1) the Ohio River and (2)the Salt River. The Ohio River receives discharges from Mill Creek, Beargrass Creek, GooseCreek, Harrods Creek, and the combined sewer system. Cedar Creek and Pennsylvania Rundischarge into Floyds Fork, which in turn, discharges in the Salt River. The Salt River alsoreceives discharge from Pond Creek near its confluence with the Ohio River.In this report, eleven major watersheds are defined and are geographically shown in Figure 1.1.These watersheds are based on the drainage systems mentioned above. Table 1.1 provides asummary description of the general characteristics of each watershed. Each of these watershedsis discussed in detail in the following sections and throughout the plan.1.2.2 Ohio River and FloodwallA large portion of Jefferson County lies within the broad floodplain of the Ohio River; however,about 17,600 acres of this floodplain, including downtown Louisville, are protected by a 28.9mile long flood protection system. The first phase ofthe system, which protects the area from BeargrassCreek to just south of Rubbertown, was completedby the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) in1957. A second phase was completed in the late1980’s. The second phase protects southwestJefferson County, from Rubbertown to Pond Creek.The floodwall system is built to protect JeffersonCounty from floods equivalent to the historic floodevent of 1937, with three feet of freeboard.A study of the Ohio River and the floodwall systemas they relate to the goal of stormwater managementFloodwall near 10 th Streetin the SMMP was not required. As indicated inSection 1.1, the SMMP is intended to addressmanagement of stormwater drainage and not floodplain management which is directly associatedwith the Ohio River and the floodwall system. Further floodplain management informationregarding the floodwall can be found in the Louisville Metro Multi-Hazards Plan.1.2.3 PhysiographyJefferson County is located in the north central portion of Kentucky, as shown in Figure 1.2, onthe south bank of the Ohio River, approximately 600 miles below its headwaters at Pittsburgh,Pennsylvania.The entire county lies within the outer Blue Grass region of the Appalachian Plateau, a portion ofwhich was once a vast plain extending from east of Lexington, Kentucky westward to Indiana.The Ohio River, with its attending streams, has eroded the plain and effectively reduced most ofthe surface in Jefferson County below its original elevation.August 2010 Planning Methodology Page 2

LegendJefferson County BoundaryWatershedsFIGURE 1.1 WATERSHEDBOUNDARY MAPHARRODS CREEK714222GOOSE CREEKMUDDY FORKBEARGRASS CREEK26464MIDDLE FORK BEARGRASS CREEK60CITY/OHIO RIVER26465SOUTH FORK BEARGRASS CREEK64FLOYDS FORK265NO SCALEMILL CREEKCEDAR CREEK31WPOND CREEK61265PENN. RUN31EJ:\gis_records\project_mxd\WatershedMasterPlan\overview_11x17.mxd65Copyright (c) 2009, LOUISVILLE AND JEFFERSONCOUNTY METROPOLITAN SEWER DISTRICT (MSD),LOUISVILLE WATER COMPANY (LWC),LOUISVILLE METRO GOVERNMENT, andJEFFERSON COUNTY PROPERTY VALUATIONADMINISTRATOR (PVA).All Rights Reserved.This is a product of MSD GIS Services and Records.

KentonCampbellBooneBallardCarlisleHickmanFultonMcCrackenGravesGallatinPendleton BrackenCarroll GrantMasonOwenLewis GreenupRobertsonJefferson CountyHenryHarrisonOldhamFlemingBoydNicholasCarterScottShelbyFranklinBourbonRowanBathElliottLawrenceSpencerFayetteMeadeBullittAndersonClarkMenifeeMorganJessamineJohnsonHendersonBreckinridgeNelsonMercerPowellMartinUnionDaviessHardinWashingtonWolfeMadisonEstillMagoffinBoyleWebsterLeeMcLeanLarue MarionFloydBreathittOhioGraysonPikeLincolnCrittendenJackson OwsleyHopkinsTaylorRockcastleKnottHartCaseyPerryMuhlenbergGreenButler EdmonsonCaldwellClayAdairPulaski LaurelLeslie LetcherLyonWarrenMarshallBarren MetcalfeRussellChristianTriggTodd LoganKnoxHarlanCumberlandWayneSimpson AllenMcCrearyWhitleyMonroeClintonBellCallowayLivingstonHancockTrimbleWoodfordGarrardMontgomeryNO SCALEFIGURE 1.2Jefferson CountyLocation MapCopyright (c) 2009, LOUISVILLE AND JEFFERSONCOUNTY METROPOLITAN SEWER DISTRICT (MSD),LOUISVILLE WATER COMPANY (LWC),LOUISVILLE METRO GOVERNMENT, andJEFFERSON COUNTY PROPERTY VALUATIONADMINISTRATOR (PVA).All Rights Reserved.This is a product of MSD GIS Services and Records.J:\gis_records\project_mxd\WatershedMasterPlan\counties.mxd

Stormwater Management Master PlanTable 1.1Watershed CharacteristicsWatershed Drainage Area Major Stream USGS Stream Gauges(sq mi) SystemsMiddle ForkBeargrass Creek25.1 Middle ForkWeicher CreekMiddle Fork @ Old Cannons LnMiddle Fork @ Lexington RdMuddy ForkBeargrass Creek8.8 Muddy Fork Muddy Fork @ Mockingbird ValleyRdSouth ForkBeargrass Creek27.1 South ForkBuechel BranchSouth Fork @ Trevilian WySouth Fork @ River RdCedar Creek (1) 11.2 Cedar Creek Cedar Creek @ Thixton RdFloyds Fork (2) 284.0 Floyds ForkChenoweth RunPope LickFloyds Fork @ Old Taylorsville RdFloyds Fork @ Bardstown RdChenoweth Run @Ruckriegal PkwyChenoweth Run @ Gelhaus LnGoose Creek 18.6 Goose Creek Goose Creek @ Old Westport RdGoose Creek @ US Hwy 42Little Goose Creek @ US Hwy 42Harrods Creek (3) 92.0 Harrods CreekWolf Pen BranchSouth Fork HarrodsSouth Fork HiteMill Creek (4) 34.2 Mill CreekUpper Mill CreekBig RunCane RunBlack Pond CreekOhio39.8 Combined SewerRiver/City (5) SystemAugust 2010 Planning Methodology Page 5N/AMill Creek Cutoff @ Cane Run RdMill Creek @ Orell RdOhio River @ 2 nd Street BridgeOhio River @ McAlpine LocksOhio River @ KosmosdalePennsylvania 6.9 Pennsylvania Run Penn Run @ Mt Washington RdRun (1)Pond Creek 89.3 Pond CreekNorthern DitchSouthern DitchFern CreekPond Creek @ W Manslick RdPond Creek @ Pendleton RdNorthern Ditch @ Preston HwyFern Creek @ Old Bardstown RdBrier Creek @ Pendleton RdNotes:(1) Outlets into Bullitt County to Floyds Fork Watershed.(2) Only 103.9 square miles in Jefferson County studied in SMMP, remainder in Henry, Oldham, Shelby,Spencer, and Bullitt Counties.(3) Only 15.3 square miles studied in SMMP, remainder in Henry and Oldham Counties.(4) Studied in two parts in SMMP. Upper Mill Creek is 19 square miles and Lower Mill Creek is 15 squaremiles.(5) Not studied in detail in the SMMP.

Stormwater Management Master PlanWide valleys, broad rolling uplands, and highlands with deep, steep-sided valleys and narrowridge crests are common. Stream beds are of fairly uniform slope and side slopes are in aconstant state of change as lateral erosion increases.Elevations in Jefferson County vary from about 382 feet above sea level, which is the pool stageof the Ohio River below the McAlpine Lock and Dam, to in excess of 900 feet along thesouthern boundary. Selected elevations in Louisville are shown in Table 1.2.Table 1.2Elevations in LouisvilleLocationElevation(ft)Courthouse 462Iroquois Park 761Louisville International Airport 475Anchorage 720Coral Ridge 490Fern Creek 715Jeffersontown 711Kosmosdale 449Middletown 721Prospect 460Valley Station 4521.2.4 TopographyFour distinct topographic regions exist inJefferson County as listed below and shown inFigure 1.3.Flood PlainKnobsCentral BasinEastern UplandsThe “Flood Plain” is a strip of land borderingone-half to five miles wide along the OhioRiver. The Flood Plain extends from the SaltRiver in the southwest, north to downtownLousiville, and continues northeast to theOldham County line. The lowest elevations in theFlood Plain Region as seen from Iroquois ParkAugust 2010 Planning Methodology Page 6

FIGURE 1.3Topographic RegionsGeologic Cross Sectionof Jefferson CountyNO SCALE65CLARKSVILLEJEFFERSONVILLE716422NEW ALBANYST. MATTHEWS264LOUISVILLE60FLOODPLAINEASTERN UPLANDS64SHIVELY31WKNOBSCENTRAL BASINHIGHVIEW265OKOLONAVALLEYSTATIONFAIRDALE6531ETOPOGRAPIC REGIONSCopyright (c) 2009, LOUISVILLE AND JEFFERSONCOUNTY METROPOLITAN SEWER DISTRICT (MSD),LOUISVILLE WATER COMPANY (LWC),LOUISVILLE METRO GOVERNMENT, andJEFFERSON COUNTY PROPERTY VALUATIONADMINISTRATOR (PVA).All Rights Reserved.This is a product of MSD GIS Services and Records.J:\gis_records\project_mxd\WatershedMasterPlan\topographic.mxd

Stormwater Management Master Plancounty are found in this region and generally range from 430 to 440, with occasional terraces to460. The area is best characterized as flat to gently rolling and with very flat sloped stream beds.Mill Creek and the combined sewer system drain the majority of this region.The “Knobs” region covers a triangular area in the southwestern portion of the county boundedapproximately by Iroquois Park on the north, South Park Hills on this southeast, and theSouthern Railroad on the southwest. The hills in this region have been highly dissected bystream erosion. Side slopes of 30% to 50% are common, and this region contains the highestelevations in the county, probablyapproaching the level of the originalAppalachian Plateau. These steep sidedhills rise 300 to 400 feet above theirsurroundings and numerous streamsoriginate here. The majority of thesestreams drain to Pond Creek, which haseroded a trench, effectively bisecting thisregion from east to west.The west central portion of the county,bounded approximately by I-264 on thenorth, Shepherdsville Road on the east,and the “Knobs” region on the south andwest, is the “Central Basin.” This is aformer slack-water region of shallowKnobs Regions as seen from Iroquois Parksoils and nearly flat terrain withelevations ranging between 450 and 500. Various improvements to the Northern and SouthernDitch systems have helped alleviate the lack of natural drainage in the region.The “Eastern Uplands” cover the remainder and largest portion of the county. This region ischaracterized by gently rolling to hilly plains to moderate to very steep valleys. Elevations rangebetween 500 and 800. Goose Creek, Harrods Creek, Floyds Fork, and the Beargrass Creeksystem drain this region.1.2.5 Geology1.2.5.1 Historical GeologyThe rocks that underlie Jefferson County were formed several hundred million years ago duringthe Paleozoic Era of Geologic Time. During this period, a vast area of what is now NorthAmerica was under ancient seas. Sedimentary processes allowed deposition of layers ofmaterials onto the sea floor and shoreline. Subsequently, these sediments underwent lithificationand became limestones, dolomites, shales, and siltstones.In general, limestone and dolomite are accumulations of calcium carbonate and/or magnesiumcarbonate precipitated from both sea water and the remains of organic sea life which extractedAugust 2010 Planning Methodology Page 8

Stormwater Management Master Plancarbonates from the water. Shale is formed from fine clayey particles which are eithertransported from land by winds or washed into the sea by the streams and then deposited on thesea floor. Siltstone is generally formed from deposits which accumulate near shorelines, such asvery fine grains of quartz.Over the last 300 million years, gentle uplifting of the continental mass has raised thesesedimentary rocks to their present elevation, producing fractures and undulations of varyingmagnitudes.The Quaternary glacial outwash in the “Flood Plain” is much younger than the rock it overlays.This unique formation was deposited some 15 to 30 thousand years ago when the extremesouthern edge of continental glaciers were just north of the Ohio River. Great masses of mud,sand, and gravel pushed by the ice were washed into a river bed much deeper and wider thannow exists. As the glaciers receded northward, leaving behind deep unconsolidated sediments,normal drainage conditions were restored, and the river formed in approximately its presentlocation.1.2.5.2 General StratigraphyStratigraphy is a branch of geologic study concerned with the form, arrangement, distribution,and mutual relationships of sedimentary rocks.In Jefferson County, rock lies in nearly horizontal beds, or strata. Structurally, these beds rangefrom a few feet to several hundred feet in thickness, and gently dip toward the southwest.The oldest of these rocks, Ordovician, is found in the Floyds Fork area of the “Eastern Uplands.”They consist of randomly alternating layers of limestone, dolomite, and occasional thinly-beddedshales.To the west, younger Silurian rocksoutcrop in the Goose, Beargrass, and FernCreek systems. They consist oflimestone, dolomite, and occasional shalelayers.Progressing further west, and continuinginto younger strata, a thin basal layer oflimestone comprises the lower Devonianrock encountered near the BeargrassCreek system of the “Eastern Uplands.”Upper Devonian rock is comprised of athick layer of black shale, whichunderlies most of the Central Basin.Ohio River at Cox ParkAugust 2010 Planning Methodology Page 9

Stormwater Management Master PlanThe youngest rocks in Jefferson County are Mississippian and are found in the “Knobs” region.They consist of a very thick basal clay shale layer, a middle layer of silty shale and interbeddedsiltstones, and an occasional thin upper layer of limestone.1.2.5.3 Geologic ErosionAs the continental mass of North America rose in elevation, the down-cutting action of therunning water increased its relentless attack on the land surface. The various sedimentary rocktypes have eroded at different rates and by different processes.The most distinctive property of limestone, and to a somewhat lesser degree, dolomite, issolubility. In general, materials in these rocks chemically react with water to gradually dissolve,yielding sinkholes, solution channels, and caverns. Fractures in rock strata serve as conduits forthis activity and greatly accelerate the process.Shale is a structurally laminated sedimentary rock which exhibits high impermeability whenunexposed to the atmosphere. Once exposed, however, rapid disintegration occurs owing tocontact with moisture and temperature fluctuation. In fact, shale erodes much faster than otherexposed sedimentary rocks, and rarely forms any prominent topographic features.Siltstone, much like its larger grained-size sandstone counterpart, is a very erosion resistantmaterial. Having a very even-granular, well-stratified structure, siltstone tends to stand out inrelief against over- or underlying rocks and is well documented “ridge former.”1.2.5.4 Relationship of Erosion and TopographyThe topographic regions of Jefferson County are a direct result of the selective erosionalcharacteristics of its geologic structure, excluding the “Flood Plain” which is a product ofdeposition.In the Mississippian rocks of the “Knobs” region, vast areas of the upper limestone have beentotally removed by solutioning and gradual erosion. In the process, water has migrateddownward into the softer shales and highly resistant siltstones. As the more easily eroded shalesdisintegrate, the siltstone becomes undercut, creating overhangs, which eventually fall as theirweight overcomes their horizontal strength. This process has led to the formation of steep,rounded-top hills. An excellent example is observed in the road cuts along the Gene SynderFreeway just west of I-65.The upper Devonian shale of the “Central Basin” displays the characteristic impermeability ofhorizontal, fissile shales. In a former geologic age, overlying rocks were eroded away and theshale’s surface was subsequently subjected to inundation during the Quaternary glacial period.An alluvial mantle, 0 to 50 feet thick and deposited onto the shale in the ponded lake bed, nowprotects it from the atmosphere. Groundwater is unable to penetrate the nearly horizontal strataand as a result, the local water table is high and many areas are marshy.August 2010 Planning Methodology Page 10

Stormwater Management Master PlanThe lower Devonian, Silurian, and Ordovician rocks which underlie the “Eastern Uplands” arebeing eroded in a combination of processes. Most notably, the solutioning of limestones anddolomites has deepened and widened stream valleys. Sinkholes and small caverns are commonon plateaus and in cliffs of this region. These natural conduits carry surface waters intounderlying rocks where chemical reactions enlarge solution channels. Eventually, much of thiswater finds its way back to surface streams in the form of springs. Where interbedded shales areexposed, the more resistant carbonates are undercut, leading to rock falls which widen valleys.An excellent example is the “Big Rock” locality in Cherokee Park.1.2.5.5 Parent MaterialParent material influences the textural, chemical,and mineralogical properties of soils. In JeffersonCounty, parent material is extremely variable.About seventy-five percent of the county’s soilsdeveloped in residuum derived from the underlying,nearly horizontal beds of sedimentary rocks. Theremaining twenty-five percent developed in localalluvium.1.2.6 Soils1.2.6.1 Factors of FormationSoils are formed through the complex interaction ofparent material, topography, climate, livingorganisms, and time. A change in any one of these“Big Rock” in Cherokee Parkfactors affects the soil-forming process and theresultant soil characteristics. The importance of eachfactor differs from place to place, even within short distances. However, in Jefferson County,parent material and topography, more than the other factors, account for differences among soils.1.2.6.2 Topographic FactorsTopography in Jefferson County ranges from nearly level, to gently rolling, to very steep. Therange of slopes is mostly from zero to twenty percent, although thirty to fifty percent is commonin the “Knobs” region.Topographic effects in areas of level terrain are such that large amounts of water can infiltratethe soil and percolate downward through it. Little or no soil is lost through geologic erosion, andthere is a continuing accumulation of material. In rolling terrain, the rate of geologic erosion isslightly less than the rate of soil formation, and soils will form and mature. In steep terrain onlysmall amounts of water can infiltrate and as a result, geologic erosion is rapid and soil material isremoved as rapidly as it forms.1.2.6.3 Relationship of Soils and Topographic RegionAugust 2010 Planning Methodology Page 11

Stormwater Management Master PlanThe General Soil Map contained in the NRCS Soil Survey of Jefferson County graphicallyrepresents the correlation between soil associations and topographic regions. Table 1.3 providescorrelation between soil types and topographic regions in Jefferson County.Table 1.3Soil Type By Topographic RegionRegionSoilSoil TypeAssociationFlood Plain 1 Wheeling-Weinbach-HuntingtonKnobs 24Memphis-Loring-ZanesvilleWestmoreland-Litz-MuskinghamCentral Basin 3 Zipp-RobertsvilleEastern Uplands 567Russellville-Crider-DicksonCrider-CorydonBeasley-Fairmont-RussellvilleThe NRCS Soil Survey also contains pertinent information regarding engineering properties ofthese soil associations. These include description, depth to rock, unified and AASHTOclassifications, permeability, and depth to seasonal high water table.The physical properties of the soils and rocks found in Jefferson County vary greatly dependingupon location. Regarding surface water runoff, several implications and concerns arise.Lacustrine deposits and clay soils become plastic when wetted and are prone toslump and/or slide. In areas such as these, over steepened cuts should be avoided.Shale exposures are unstable, and once wetted, they disintegrate very rapidly.Drainage ditches cutting through or into shale can be expected to undergo bankfailure and channel siltation. In addition, the weight of large impoundments ofwater for detention purposes may induce stresses in shale which cause regionalinstability and, in areas of high relief, lead to landslide activity.Limestone and dolomite exposures are much more stable, but these rocks aresusceptible to karstic-type weathering. The use of sinkholes as conduits for stormdrainage should be avoided. Introduction of water accelerates the solutioningprocess, enlarges underground voids and leads to subsidence of overlying terrain.Springs within Devonian limestones and Silurian limestones and shales furnishmuch of the water for streams in the “Eastern Uplands” topographic region. Fornew channels or existing channel improvements, care must be taken to avoidaccidentally sealing off existing springs, thereby, mitigating any unpredictableresults due to the alteration of normal groundwater flows.August 2010 Planning Methodology Page 12

Stormwater Management Master Plan1.3 Model MethodologySpecific stream modeling details are described in further detail in the watershed chapters.Models have been developed for each of the 11 watersheds. In general, detailed modeling wasaccomplished using the USACE software, HEC-HMS and HEC-RAS or HEC-1 and HEC-2.The SCS Type II, 24 hour design storm was used. Where available, calibration was done usinghistoric stream gauge data. In the absence of stream gauge data, regression equations forJefferson County were used. These regression equations are presented in “Estimation of Peak-Discharge Frequency of Urban Streams in Jefferson County, Kentucky, U.S. Geological Survey,Water Resources Investigations Report 97-4219.” The 1 percent annual chance return intervalwas modeled for the existing and future conditions. In some cases, the 10, 2, and 0.2 percentchance events were also modeled.1.3.1 Topographic MappingThe SMMP has been subdivided into 11 major watersheds. Each watershed was furthersubdivided for modeling purposes. The watersheds and subbasins were delineated using contourinformation, along with combined and separate storm sewer information, from the LouisvilleJefferson County Information Consortium (LOJIC).The number of subbasins into which a watershed is divided is primarily a function of the numberof locations at which drainage discharges are desired. Since the locations of interest will varythroughout the life of the SMMP, the number of subbasins may increase with time.Close inspection of various components within each watershed revealed unique features andfacilities which act as hydrologic breaks, or nodes (e.g. reservoir outlets, stream confluences,major bridges, culverts). Nodes define the logical locations of the outlet point of a subbasin. Aparticularly important feature which can serve as a node is a gauging station, since the data that itrecords can be used to calibrate hydrologic models.1.3.2 Hydrologic Soil GroupsA necessary step in determining surface runoff through use of SCS methodology concerns thelocation of hydrologic soil groups by watershed. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s NaturalResources Conservation Service (NRCS) has performed detailed studies of Jefferson County.The Soil Survey of Jefferson County was referenced to obtain soil information for this study.Part 630, Chapter 7 of the NRCS National Engineering Handbook describes the hydrologic soilsgroups pertinent to Jefferson County. This information is summarized in Table 1.4.Based on the NRCS survey, soil types fall into one of four NRCS categories. In the unsurveyedurban areas, soils were put into an unclassified group and were designated as “U”, bringing thetotal number of categories to five. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (such as B/C,B/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second letter is for undrained areas.August 2010 Planning Methodology Page 13

Stormwater Management Master PlanTable 1.4Hydrologic Soil GroupsSoil Classification Runoff CommentsPotentialA Very Low Soils have high infiltration rates even whenthoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of deep,well to excessively drained sands and gravels. Thesesoils have a high rate of water transmission.B Low Soils having moderate infiltration rates whenthoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly ofmoderately deep to deep, moderately well to welldrained soils with moderately fine to moderatelycoarse textures. These soils have a moderate rate ofwater transmission.C Medium Soils having low infiltration rates when thoroughlywetted and consisting chiefly of soils with a layer thatimpedes downward movement of water, or soils withmoderately fine to fine texture. These soils have alow rate of water transmission.D High Soils having very low infiltration rates whenthoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of clay soilswith a high swelling potential, soils with a permanenthigh water table, soil with a claypan or clay layer ator near the surface and shallow soils over nearlyimpervious material. These soils have a very low rateof water transmission.UnclassifiedSoil types will likely vary and must be checked bysoil borings on a location by location basis.1.3.3 Land UseThe SCS Curve Number method was used to determine surface runoff. This method requires acombination of soil and land use data. Land use data was obtained using information fromLOJIC for both existing and proposed land uses. Future land use conditions were based on fullydeveloped conditions based on current zoning. For more information regarding developmenttrends in each watershed, see the Louisville Metro Multi-Hazards Mitigation Plan.1.4 Stormwater Management Policies1.4.1 General PoliciesThrough the SMMP, MSD Design Manual, Louisville Metro Floodplain ManagementOrdinance, and Louisville/Jefferson County Erosion Prevention and Sediment ControlAugust 2010 Planning Methodology Page 14

Stormwater Management Master PlanOrdinance, a watershed-by-watershed approach to regional management of stormwater drainageis taken. Other permits, such as the Kentucky Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(KPDES) General Permit For Stormwater Discharges Associated With Construction Activitiesand the MS4 permit also affect the stormwater policies in Jefferson County.New development in Jefferson County is required to detain proposed stormwater discharge ratesto predeveloped conditions for the 2, 10, and 100 year storm events through the MSD DesignManual. The NRCS Type II, 24 hour rainfall distribution is required to be used for the modeling.In areas where adequate downstream facilities exist, especially in the lower portion of awatershed where peak flows from the new development will occur substantially prior to theoverall peak of the stream, on a case-by-case basis, MSD allows increased runoff to becompensated using a regional facility fee. This regional facility fee is used to construct regionalbasins.New development in the combined sewer area is restricted to a 6-inch stormwater connection tothe combined sewer system to help alleviate the flows in the system during rain events.Engineers must design the new development’s onsite stormwater system to work with the 6-inchoutlet. Examples of this include building detention basins, oversizing onsite stormwater pipes,and using green solutions such as pervious pavement and rain gardens to reduce peak flows.Floodplain compensation is required throughout Jefferson County for any fill placed in the fullydeveloped local regulatory floodplain as required in the Louisville Metro FloodplainManagement Ordinance. Due to severe flooding problems in the Pond Creek Watershed, theChenoweth Run Watershed of Floyds Fork, and the Big Run Watershed of Mill Creek, the ratiohas been increased to 1.5:1 for any fill in the Local Regulatory Floodplain of those watersheds.The ratio may also be increased on a site-specific basis as determined by MSD.As stated in the Louisville Metro Floodplain Management Ordinance, a natural 25 foot buffer oneach side of the stream bank must be preserved on all solid blueline streams as defined by theUSGS 7.5 minute topographic maps. In addition, solid blueline streams may not be relocated,channelized, or stripped, with the exception of public projects such as road crossings, utilities,and detention basins that have no other viable alternative.A minimum buffer is also required by the KPDES General Permit For Stormwater DischargesAssociated With Construction Activities (KYR10). A minimum 25 foot buffer is required fordischarges to waters categorized as High Quality or Impaired Water (Non-construction relatedimpairment). A minimum 50 foot buffer is required for discharges to waters categorized asImpaired Waters (Sediment impaired, but no TMDL).In order to promote enhanced water quality and aquatic habitat, natural channel designtechniques are the preferred method for the design of streams. Channel improvement projects inblueline streams are required to use natural or “soft” approaches. MSD’s Design Manualoutlines natural channel design requirements in Section 10.3.6.August 2010 Planning Methodology Page 15

Stormwater Management Master PlanGreen infrastructure and post-construction requirements for new development are currentlyunder development and are anticipated to be required as part of the MS4 Permit in late2011/2012. One aspect of these anticipated requirements that will benefit the stormwatermanagement program is the application of a water quality volume requirement. It is anticipatedthat the first 0.75 inches of the 80% stormwater runoff event will be required to be infiltrated,treated, or otherwise managed for new development projects.The Louisville/Jefferson County Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Ordinance requiresdevelopments with 2000 square feet of disturbance and developments within 50 feet of asensitive feature as defined by the ordinance to obtain a Site Disturbance Permit. The SiteDisturbance Permit requires an EPSC plan to be developed which achieves 80% design removalof total suspended solids that are generated by the site. The design storm to be used is the 10-year 24 hour SCS Type II storm event.1.4.2 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4)MSD, along with five co-permittees, has an MS4 permit (aka stormwater quality permit) throughthe Kentucky Division of Water (KDOW). The purpose of the MS4 program is to maintain andenhance water quality in Jefferson County. The purpose is also to protect and promote the publichealth, safety and welfare by preventing the introduction of harmful materials into the separatestorm sewer system. The co-permittees in the permit proposed by KDOW in July 2010 are:City of AnchorageCity of JeffersontownCity of ShivelyCity of St. MatthewsCity of LouisvilleMSDThe MS4 permit program is the result of the 1987 amendments to the Clean Water Act (CWA),commonly referred to as the Water Quality Act of 1987. In these amendments, Congressmandated that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) address non-point source pollution instormwater runoff. In essence, EPA defined urban stormwater (previously considered a nonpointsource) as a point source because there was a physical location (or point) of discharge.Congressional action required EPA to develop a program to permit the discharge of thestormwater from the MS4.The Louisville MS4 Permit includes over 100 activities and is organized into several programelements including:Illicit Discharge Detection and EliminationConstruction Site Runoff Controls (Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control)Post Construction Site Runoff Controls (Long-term Water Quality Control)Public Involvement and Outreach ProgramsMonitoringAugust 2010 Planning Methodology Page 16

Stormwater Management Master PlanReporting and AssessmentThe MS4 program elements are accomplished by both the co-permittees and MSD. MSD has thesole responsibility for the following duties:Construction oversight including plan review and site inspection; administration of theErosion Prevention and Sediment Control Ordinance and the Floodplain ManagementOrdinance;Hazardous material plans and inspections for qualifying industrial and commercialproperties; administration of the Hazardous Materials Ordinance;Monitoring program and related laboratory analysis;Investigation and enforcement upon potential illicit discharges through administration ofapplicable sections of the Wastewater & Stormwater Discharge Regulations;Annual compliance demonstration report preparation for MSD activities and collection ofco-permittee portion; andEducation and outreach to the general Louisville Metro area. MSD will lead selectedspecific elements including green infrastructure outreach and education efforts. MSDwill provide opportunity for input from co-permittees.Co-permittees of the proposed MS4 permit have the sole responsibility for the following dutieswithin their jurisdictional boundaries:Construction oversight in addition to that provided through Lousiville MSD;Drainage system and outfall mapping;Implement education and outreach at the applicable levels of neighborhood and localcommunity that compliment the education and outreach provided by MSD tailored tolocal water bodies’ pollutants of concern;Drainage system operation and maintenance;Inspection, operation, maintenance and/or applicable certification that permanent (alsoknown as post-construction) water quality devices, controls, and management practicesare operating effectively;Road maintenance including snow and ice removal related stormwater managementactivities;Fleet and facility stormwater pollution prevention plans and their implementation;Report and refer potential illicit discharge observations by municipal employees or otherreports from residents to MSD for investigation and potential enforcement;Preparation and timely submittal of annual compliance demonstration report to MSDaccording to agreed upon formats and standards; andLousiville Metropolitan Government has sole responsibility for administration of othercodes and ordinances including, but not limited to, solid waste management, animalcontrol and land development.August 2010 Planning Methodology Page 17

Stormwater Management Master PlanThe term for the current permit has elapsed, but has been administratively extended by KDOW.MSD submitted a proposed Stormwater Quality Management Plan (SWQMP) in 2008 to KDOWfor the permit and is awaiting final approval.The SWQMP, which is planned to be updated once the MS4 permit is finalized, is a detailedbusiness plan MSD and its co-permittees intend to use as a tool to implement the MS4 permit.The intended purposed of the SWQMP is to improve water quality in local streams, creeks, andwaterways within Jefferson County. The expected water quality benefits include reductions inpollutants of concern and more closely meeting the Clean Water Act goals for water quality.1.4.3 Integrated Overflow Abatement Plan (IOAP)/Green InfrastructureThe IOAP is a long-term plan to improve water quality, control combined sewer overflows(CSOs), and eliminate sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) throughout the county. The IOAP wasprepared in response to a consent decree with the EPA and the Kentucky Environmental andPublic Protection Cabinet. The IOAP is intended to improve water quality in both the localstreams in Jefferson County and the Ohio River. The expected water quality benefits includereductions in the peak levels of bacteria and a reduction in the amount of time that averagebacteria levels exceed water quality standards. For further information, copies of the IOAP canbe found on MSD’s website.As part of the IOAP, 115 potential green infrastructure projects have been identified throughoutthe county as of July 2010. Many types of green projects are being considered, such as bioswales,permeable alleys, pervious parking, and rain gardens. Currently, 20 projects have beenselected for construction and 95 other projects are being considered. A map showing thelocations of these projects is included as Figure 1.4.1.5 Watershed Master Plans1.5.1 GeneralThe management of stormwater drainage is recommended to be on a watershed-by-watershedbasis. Accomplishment of this approach shall be through the development of StormwaterManagement Master Plans. These plans document the hydrologic, physiographic, drainagecharacteristics, and planning tools pertinent to managing stormwater drainage in the watershed.Utilizing this information within the context of various policies, goals and objectives establishedfor the SMMP, specific “Action Plans” set forth recommended regional projects, specialregulations for development, and requirements for further updating and upgrading the planningdata and models.Further information specifically regarding the floodplain of each watershed, including number offloodprone buildings, development trends, critical facilities located in the floodplain, natural andbeneficial functions of the floodplain, and general flooding information can be found in theLouisville Metro Multi-Hazards Mitigation Plan.August 2010 Planning Methodology Page 18

J:\msd\SharedMaps\GreenProjects-StatusMap\Green Infrastructure Locations.mxdPotential GreenInfrastructurePartnerships£¤ 31E22252423popors£¤ 31Wpo13rspors 841 po1416rs 841 Figure 1.4Revision Date: 19-MAY-2010po poLegend£¤ 17§¨¦ §¨¦ rs 71 popopopo Selectedpo popo5popo Under Consideration£¤popopopopopo po popo po7po§¨¦ po popo po po po po po popo popo popo popo£¤ 71 Major Streams£¤ 60 £¤ popo popo po49 £¤popoInterstatepopo popopo £¤ £¤ 150 po 19Major Arterialpo po popors 612618po po 6po£¤ 60Minor Arterialpo £¤ po po po po 8popopoCSS areapopopopopopo§¨¦ 641po3§¨¦§¨¦ poGreen Focus Areas264 po §¨¦ po10po po popo11Metro Councilpo2115 popo §¨¦ 26512 po po2§¨¦ 265popopopo20.£¤ 31WGreen Infrastructure LocationsJefferson County Boundary0 10,000 20,000FeetCopyright (c) 2010, LOUISVILLE AND JEFFERSONCOUNTY METROPOLITAN SEWER DISTRICT (MSD),LOUISVILLE WATER COMPANY (LWC),LOUISVILLE METRO GOVERNMENT, andJEFFERSON COUNTY PROPERTY VALUATIONADMINISTRATOR (PVA).All Rights Reserved.Louisville/Jefferson County InformationConsortium (LOJIC), a Jefferson County,Kentucky, based cooperative project of:Louisville/Jefferson Metro GovernmentLouisville Water CompanyMetropolitan Sewer DistrictProperty Valuation AdministratorNo part of this map may be reproduced or transmittedin any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical,including photocopying and recording, or by anyinformation storage or retrieval system, except asexpressly permitted in writing by MSD.Map Created: 19-MAY-2010

Stormwater Management Master Plan1.5.2 Plan ContentsThe intent of the SMMP is to develop the means and methods to address management ofstormwater drainage on a regionally consistent basis. The various planning tools and data in theStormwater Management Master Plans will be used by both MSD and the technical community.Therefore, the organization of this data was standardized to provide consistent means ofcataloguing and referencing the data. The following is the standardized outline for a StormwaterManagement Master Plan.Watershed Study Area – this section provides a general description of thewatershed location, communities, and notable features. Topography, geology,soils, land use, and any regional basins or major channel improvement projectsare also described in this section. This section also includes a description of anynatural stormwater features located in the watershed that will be protected, suchas parks, greenways, and conservation easements.Modeling – this section describes modeling that has been done for the watershed.Assumptions and calibrations for the models are described.Action Plan – this section provides recommended drainage improvement projectsand regulatory control strategy for the watershed.August 2010 Planning Methodology Page 20

2.0 MIDDLE FORK BEARGRASS CREEK

Stormwater Management Master Plan2.0 MIDDLE FORK – BEARGRASS CREEK2.1 Watershed Study Area2.1.1 GeneralThe 25 square mile Middle Fork Beargrass CreekWatershed is located in the north central portionof Jefferson County. Its headwaters originate inMiddletown and flow in a westerly directionthrough St. Matthews. The stream continues intothe Highlands via Seneca and Cherokee Parks, tofinally outlet into the South Fork Beargrass Creekjust south of Main Street. The major streams inthe Middle Fork Beargrass Creek Watershed are Middle Fork Beargrass Creek at Cherokee ParkMiddle Fork and Weicher Creek. An aerial mapshowing the Middle Fork Beargrass Creek Watershed is included as Map MLF-1. A drainagemap showing the 17 subbasins for Middle Fork Beargrass Creek is included as Map MLF-2.Communities lying in this watershed include the Highlands, Seneca Gardens, St. Regis Park, St.Matthews, Lyndon, Wildwood, Hurstbourne, Douglass Hills, and Middletown.Notable landmarks include Cherokee Park, Seneca Park, Cave Hill Cemetery, the SouthernBaptist Seminary, Bowman Field, Big Spring Country Club, Oxmoor Mall, and HurstbourneCountry Club.Wetlands located along Middle Fork Beargrass Creekat Arthur K. Draut ParkSeveral parks are located along the Middle Forkof Beargrass Creek. These parks provide openspace where flooding can occur without propertydamages and allow recreational use during drierperiods. Cherokee Park, which is owned by theCity of Louisville, is located along Middle ForkBeargrass Creek in the Highlands area. The Cityof St. Matthews also has two parks, Brown Parkand Arthur K. Draut Park, located in thefloodplain along Middle Fork of Beargrass Creeknear Bowling Boulevard. Arthur K. Draut Parkalso includes wetlands, which help improve waterquality for the creek. In addition, conservationeasements have been created by the Peterson-Dumesnil House located in Crescent Hill.August 2010 Middle Fork Beargrass Creek Page 1

Stormwater Management Master Plan2.1.2 TopographyThe entire Middle Fork Beargrass Creek Watershed is situated in the Eastern UplandsTopographic Region. Broad steep-sided valleys and flat to gently rolling plateaus dominate theterrain. Middle Fork Beargrass Creek has cut deeply into this terrain and flows through a wellentrenched channel; where near vertical cliffs are common.Elevations range from about 425 feet, at the confluence with South Fork Beargrass Creek, toabout 750 feet, in the Middletown area.2.1.3 GeologyThe major portion of this watershed isunderlain by limestones of the lowerDevonian and middle Silurian ages. Anotable exception is the Lyndon/St. Matthewsarea, which is underlain by middle Devonianage shale. Middle Fork Beargrass Creek haseroded deep into these rocks, and in someinstances, shales of middle Silurian age areexposed. The general dip of these rock beds,or strata, is toward the west at a little less thanone foot in one-hundred feet. A northeastMiddle Fork at Breckenridge Lanetrending synclinal axis is observed, however, inthe Lyndon/St. Matthews area. A northeast trending anticlinal axis is also observed in theSeneca Gardens/Seneca Park area. Limited karst activity is represented by some small sinkholesand springs, particularly in the Lyndon/ Oxmoor area and in the area of the Sinking Fork.2.1.4 SoilsSection 2.2.2 of the SMMP explains in detail the five soil groups used to classify soils in thisstudy. The soil composition in the Middle Fork Beargrass Creek Watershed is mainly Group Band unclassified. The soil groups in the Middle Fork Watershed can be found on Map MLF-3.2.1.5 Land UseThe land use in the Middle Fork Watershed is mostly residential and commercial, with many ofthe commercial properties located along Shelbyville Road and Hurstbourne Lane. Someagricultural land is also located in this watershed behind the Oxmoor Mall. A map of theexisting land use is included as Map MLF-4.2.1.6 Regional Basins/Channel ImprovementsThe Whipps Mill Basin is a regional flood storage basin that is situated in the upper portion ofthe Middle Fork Watershed. The basin, which was built in 2000, covers a 40-acre site andAugust 2010 Middle Fork Beargrass Creek Page 2

Stormwater Management Master Planprovides flood protection for hundreds of residents. The Woodlawn Park Basin is anotherregional basin located in the Middle Fork Watershed. Both the Woodlawn Park Basin and theWhipps Mill Basin are shown on Map MLF-2.2.1.7 Local BasinsThere are currently 60 local basins located in the Middle Fork Beargrass Creek watershed.These basins are shown on Map MLF-2.2.2 ModelingThe hydrologic analysis for Middle Fork Beargrass Creek was calculated using HEC-1. Curvenumbers, drainage area, and time of concentration were used to determine flows from eachsubbasin. Storage routings were added as needed and numerous trials were required in order todetermine final discharge values. Using the discharge values from HEC-l, HEC -2 was used tocreate stream profiles. Cross sections and bridge elevations and geometry were field surveyed.The model was verified using two methods. High water marks were available for five floods:March 1964, April 1970, July 1973, May 1983, and February 1990. Also, discharge-frequencycurves were used for the two USGS gauges located on Middle Fork Beargrass Creek.Large portions of the Middle Fork Watershed are served by the combined sewer system. Thecombined sewer system conveys sewage and stormwater through sewer lines to a wastewatertreatment plant. When the capacity of the sewer system is exceeded, a portion of the water isdiverted to combined sewer overflows (CSOs). A SWMM model for this area was used to createoutflow hydrographs for a 10 year, 1 hour SCS Type II rainfall event to estimate these combinedsewer overflows. A comparison was done between the SWMM model and a HEC-1 modelcreated using overland flows. The flows were approximately the same and it was determinedthat the HEC-1 model would providereasonably accurate results and that aSWMM model would not be required.Weicher Creek was restudied for the 2006Flood Insurance Study (FIS) using HEC-HMS. Models were run for the 10, 2, 1, and0.2 percent chance events using a standardSCS Type II 24 hour design stormdistribution. Hydrologic parameters, such ascurve number, time of concentration, and soilgroups, were developed using informationfrom LOJIC. Several moderately sized pondslocated near the Oxmoor Golf and CountryMiddle Fork at Brown ParkClub were included in the model. Watersurface elevations were determined usingHEC-RAS. Cross sections were obtained from field surveys. All bridges, dams, and culvertswere field surveyed to obtain elevation data and structural geometry. Roughness coefficientsAugust 2010 Middle Fork Beargrass Creek Page 3

Stormwater Management Master Planwere determined based on field inspections and aerial photography. No stream gauges exist inWeicher Creek. Model calibration was done by comparing discharges based on regressionequations for rural and urban streams in Jefferson County presented in “Estimation of Peak-Discharge Frequency of Urban Streams in Jefferson County, Kentucky, U.S. Geological Survey,Water-Resources Investigations Report 97-4219.”The uppermost portions of Middle Fork Beargrass Creek and the tributaries were not part of adetailed study. These areas were studied using approximate methods. The floodplains werecalculated using Manning’s Formula. Cross sections were determined from maps and fieldreconnaissance, but were not field surveyed. Bridge and culvert data were only gathered if it wasexpected to cause significant backwater. Bridge and culvert data were hand measured and nosurvey was completed. Slopes used for Manning’sFormula were based on topographic mapping.Floodplain limits for the 1 percent annual chanceflood were calculated for existing conditions andfuture, fully developed conditions. Existingconditions are labeled as the FEMA floodplain andfuture conditions are labeled as the LocalRegulatory Floodplain. Map MLF-5 shows thelimits of each of these floodplains.2.3 Action Plan2.3.1 Watershed RequirementsNew development in the Middle Fork BeargrassCreek Watershed is required to detain proposedstormwater discharge rates to predevelopedconditions for the 2, 10, and 100 year storm eventsthrough the MSD Design Manual. The NRCS TypeII, 24 hour rainfall distribution is required to beMiddle Fork at Cherokee Parkused for the modeling. In areas where adequatedownstream facilities exist, especially in the lower portion of a watershed where peak flows fromthe new development will occur substantially prior to the overall peak of the stream, on a caseby-casebasis, MSD allows increased runoff to be compensated using a regional facility fee.This regional facility fee is used to construct regional basins.New development in the combined sewer area is restricted to a 6-inch stormwater connection tothe combined sewer system to help alleviate the flows in the system during rain events.Engineers must design the new development’s onsite stormwater system to work with the 6-inchoutlet. Examples of this include building detention basins, oversizing onsite stormwater pipes,and using green solutions such as pervious pavement and rain gardens to reduce peak flows andoverall runoff volumes.August 2010 Middle Fork Beargrass Creek Page 4

Stormwater Management Master PlanFloodplain compensation is required in the Middle Fork Beargrass Creek Watershed at a ratio of1:1 for any fill placed in the fully developed local regulatory floodplain as required in theLouisville Metro Floodplain Management Ordinance. The ratio may be increased on a sitespecificbasis as determined by MSD.As stated in the Louisville Metro Floodplain Management Ordinance, a natural 25 foot buffer oneach side of the stream bank must be preserved on all solid blueline streams as defined by theUSGS 7.5 minute topographic maps. In addition, solid blueline streams may not be relocated,channelized, or stripped, with the exception of public projects such as road crossings, utilities,and detention basins that have no other viable alternative.A minimum buffer is also required by the KDOW through its Kentucky Pollutant DischargeElimination System (KPDES) General Permit For Stormwater Discharges Associated WithConstruction Activities (KYR10). A minimum 25 foot buffer is required for discharges towaters categorized as High Quality or Impaired Water (Non-construction related impairment). Aminimum 50 foot buffer is required for discharges to waters categorized as Impaired Waters(Sediment impaired, but no TMDL).In order to promote enhanced water quality and aquatic habitat, natural channel designtechniques are the preferred method for the design of streams. Channel improvement projects inblueline streams are required to use natural or “soft” approaches. MSD’s Design Manualoutlines natural channel design requirements in Section 10.3.6.Green infrastructure and post-construction requirements for new development are currentlyunder development and are anticipated to be required as part of the MS4 Permit in late2011/2012. One aspect of these anticipated requirements that will benefit the stormwatermanagement program is the application of a water quality volume requirement. It is anticipatedthat the first 0.75 inches of the 80% stormwater runoff event will be required to be infiltrated,treated, or otherwise managed for new development projects.The Louisville/Jefferson County Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Ordinance requiresdevelopments with 2000 square feet of disturbance and developments within 50 feet of asensitive feature as defined by the ordinance to obtain a Site Disturbance Permit. The SiteDisturbance Permit requires an EPSC plan to be developed which achieves 80% design removalof total suspended solids that are generated by the site. The design storm to be used is the 10-year 24 hour SCS Type II storm event.2.3.2 Proposed ProjectsSeveral combined sewer projects, which are part of the IOAP, are proposed in the Middle ForkBeargrass Creek Watershed. These projects include a downspout disconnection project, twosewer separation projects, and a proposed storage basin located at I-64 and Grinstead Drive.More information regarding these projects can be found in Appendix A of this report and also inthe final CSO Long-Term Control Plan document, which is part of MSD’s IOAP.August 2010 Middle Fork Beargrass Creek Page 5

Stormwater Management Master PlanOne green infrastructure project has been planned in this watershed and nine others are currentlybeing considered. The planned project is a dry well near an I-264 Off-Ramp. This project isscheduled to be completed in 2011. For more information regarding green infrastructureprojects, see Appendix B of this report and also the Final CSO Long-Term Control Plandocument, which is part of MSD’s IOAP.Small scale drainage projects are taken care of through the program Project DRI. Beginning in2003, MSD initiated an aggressive program to address a wide variety of drainage issues that arebrought to us by our customers. This program, dubbed Project DRI (Drainage ResponseInitiative), assigned experienced project managers, contractors, and inspectors to addressdrainage problems on a "grade-to-drain" basis. Efforts under this program address problemsranging from structural flooding to alleviating minor standing water problems. Available fundsare distributed across the service area based on relative levels of customer concerns andestimated costs of repairs within geographic areas. Since 2003, MSD has spent over $125 millionin capital drainage improvements in our service area under the three phases of Project DRI.Phase 4 of Project DRI is scheduled to begin in July 2010. Projects lists for Phases 1-3 can befound in the Appendix C of this report. A final project list for Phase 4 is currently underdevelopment.August 2010 Middle Fork Beargrass Creek Page 6

3.0 MUDDY FORK BEARGRASS CREEK

Stormwater Management Master Plan3.0 MUDDY FORK – BEARGRASS CREEK3.1 Watershed Study Area3.1.1 GeneralThe eight square mile Muddy Fork Beargrass Creek Watershed is located in the north centralportion of Jefferson County. Its headwaters originate in the Graymoor/Devondale area. Thestream then flows northwesterly to I-71, turns to the southwest, and parallels I-71 to finally outletinto South Fork Creek Beargrass Creek just downstream of the Beargrass Creek pumping station.The only major creek running through this watershed is Muddy Fork Beargrass Creek. An aerialmap showing the Muddy Fork Beargrass Creek Watershed is included as Map MF-1. A drainagemap showing the seven subbasins for Muddy Fork Beargrass Creek is included as Map MF-2.Communities lying in this watershed include Graymoor, Devondale, Crescent Hill, RollingFields, Mockingbird Valley, Indian Hills, and Windy Hills.Notable landmarks include the VA Hospital, CrescentHill Park, and the Louisville County Club.3.1.2 TopographyThe major portion of the Muddy Fork Watershed issituated in the Eastern Uplands Topographic Region.The remaining portion, which includes I-71 and landadjacent to the Ohio River, is in the Flood Plain.Broad steep-sided valleys and gently rolling plateausdominate the terrain in the Eastern Uplands Region.Muddy Fork has cut deeply into this terrain and flowsthough a well entrenched channel where near verticalcliffs are common.Muddy Fork at Mockingbird Valley RoadA flat, low-lying terrain predominates in the floodplain.Stream channels of low gradient slopes tend to parallelthe Ohio River.Elevations range from about 420 feet, the pool stage of the Ohio River above the McAlpine Lockand Dam, to about 585 feet, in the Devondale area.3.1.3 GeologyThe portion of this watershed lying in the Eastern Uplands Topographic Region is predominatelyunderlain by limestone of lower Devonian age. The major creeks, however, have erodedchannels deeply into, and in many cases, through these rocks, exposing limestones, shales, andAugust 2010 Muddy Fork Beargrass Creek Page 1

Stormwater Management Master Plandolomites of middle Silurian age. The general dip of these rock beds, or strata, is toward thewest at a little more than one-half foot in one-hundred feet. However, a northeast trendinganticlinal axis is observed in the Brownsboro Village/Windy Hills area. Limited karst activity isrepresented by small sinkholes and springs.The portion of this watershed lying in theFlood Plain Topographic Region is underlainby various alluvial deposits of Quaternary age.These deposits range in thickness from severalfeet to well over one hundred feet, and arecomprised of complex layers of silts, sands,clays, and gravels. This region is a welldocumented aquifer and groundwater isreadily available.3.1.4 SoilsSection 2.2.2 of the SMMP explains in detailthe five soil groups used to classify soils in Muddy Fork at Elmwood Avenuethis study. The soil composition in the MuddyFork Beargrass Creek Watershed is mainly B and C soils, with some soils in the unclassified soilgroup. The soil groups in the Muddy Fork Watershed can be found on Map MF-3.3.1.5 Land UseThe majority of the land use in the Muddy Fork Watershed is residential. The existing land usein the Muddy Fork Watershed can be found on Map MF-4.3.1.6 Regional Basins/Channel ImprovementsNo regional basins or major channel improvement projects are located in the Muddy ForkWatershed.3.1.7 Local BasinsThere are currently 9 local basins located in the Muddy Fork Beargrass Creek watershed. Thesebasins are shown on Map MF-2.3.2 ModelingHydraulic analyses for the Muddy Fork Watershed were developed using HEC-1. Curvenumbers, drainage area, and time of concentration were used to determine flows from eachsubbasin. Storage routings were added as needed and numerous trials were required in order todetermine final discharge values. Using the discharge values from HEC-l, HEC -2 was used tocreate stream profiles. Cross sections and bridge elevations and geometry were field surveyed.August 2010 Muddy Fork Beargrass Creek Page 2

Stormwater Management Master PlanNo discharge gauges were available for model calibration along Muddy Creek at the time themodel was created.Portions of Muddy Fork Beargrass Creek that were not studied using HEC-1 software werestudied using approximate methods. The floodplains were calculated using Manning’s Formula.Cross sections were determined from maps and field reconnaissance, but were not fieldsurveyed. Bridge and culvert data were only gathered if it was expected to cause significantbackwater. Bridge and culvert data were hand measured and no survey was completed. Slopesused for Manning’s Formula were based on topographic mapping.Floodplain limits for the 1 percent annual chance flood were calculated for existing conditionsand future, fully developed conditions. Existing conditions are labeled as the FEMA floodplainand future conditions are labeled as the Local Regulatory Floodplain. Map MF-5 shows thelimits of each of these floodplains.3.3 Action Plan3.3.1 Watershed RequirementsNew development in the Muddy Fork Beargrass Creek Watershed is required to detain proposedstormwater discharge rates to predeveloped conditions for the 2, 10, and 100 year storm eventsthrough the MSD Design Manual. The NRCS Type II, 24 hour rainfall distribution is required tobe used for the modeling. In areas where adequate downstream facilities exist, especially in thelower portion of a watershed where peak flows from the new development will occursubstantially prior to the overall peak of the stream, on a case-by-case basis, MSD allowsincreased runoff to be compensated using a regional facility fee. This regional facility fee isused to construct regional basins.New development in the combined sewer area is restricted to a 6-inch stormwater connection tothe combined sewer system to help alleviate the flows in the system during rain events.Engineers must design the new development’s onsite stormwater system to work with the 6-inchoutlet. Examples of this include building detention basins, oversizing onsite stormwater pipes,and using green solutions such as pervious pavement and rain gardens to reduce peak flows andoverall runoff volumes.Floodplain compensation is required in the Muddy Fork Beargrass Creek Watershed at a ratio of1:1 for any fill placed in the fully developed local regulatory floodplain as required in theLouisville Metro Floodplain Management Ordinance. This ratio may be increased on a sitespecificbasis as determined by MSD.As stated in the Louisville Metro Floodplain Management Ordinance, a natural 25 foot buffer oneach side of the stream bank must be preserved on all solid blueline streams as defined by theUSGS 7.5 minute topographic maps. In addition, solid blueline streams may not be relocated,channelized, or stripped, with the exception of public projects such as road crossings, utilities,and detention basins that have no other viable alternative.August 2010 Muddy Fork Beargrass Creek Page 3

Stormwater Management Master PlanA minimum buffer is also required by the KDOW through its Kentucky Pollutant DischargeElimination System (KPDES) General Permit For Stormwater Discharges Associated WithConstruction Activities (KYR10). A minimum 25 foot buffer is required for discharges towaters categorized as High Quality or Impaired Water (Non-construction related impairment). Aminimum 50 foot buffer is required for discharges to waters categorized as Impaired Waters(Sediment impaired, but no TMDL).In order to promote enhanced water quality and aquatic habitat, natural channel designtechniques are the preferred method for the design of streams. Channel improvement projects inblueline streams are required to use natural or “soft” approaches. MSD’s Design Manualoutlines natural channel design requirements in Section 10.3.6.Green infrastructure and post-construction requirements for new development are currentlyunder development and are anticipated to be required as part of the MS4 Permit in late2011/2012. One aspect of these anticipated requirements that will benefit the stormwatermanagement program is the application of a water quality volume requirement. It is anticipatedthat the first 0.75 inches of the 80% stormwater runoff event will be required to be infiltrated,treated, or otherwise managed for new development projects.The Louisville/Jefferson County Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Ordinance requiresdevelopments with 2000 square feet of disturbance and developments within 50 feet of asensitive feature as defined by the ordinance to obtain a Site Disturbance Permit. The SiteDisturbance Permit requires an EPSC plan to be developed which achieves 80% design removalof total suspended solids that are generated by the site. The design storm to be used is the 10-year 24 hour SCS Type II storm event.3.3.2 Proposed ProjectsOne combined sewer project, which is part of the IOAP, is proposed in the Muddy ForkBeargrass Creek Watershed. This project is the Clifton Heights Storage Basin. Moreinformation regarding this project can be found in Appendix A of this report and also in the FinalCSO Long-Term Control Plan document, which is part of MSD’s IOAP.Four green infrastructure projects are being considered in the Muddy Fork Beargrass CreekWatershed. For more information regarding green infrastructure projects, see Appendix B of thisreport and also the Final CSO Long-Term Control Plan document, which is part of MSD’sIOAP.Small scale drainage projects are taken care of through the program Project DRI. Beginning in2003, MSD initiated an aggressive program to address a wide variety of drainage issues that arebrought to us by our customers. This program, dubbed Project DRI (Drainage ResponseInitiative), assigned experienced project managers, contractors, and inspectors to addressdrainage problems on a "grade-to-drain" basis. Efforts under this program address problemsranging from structural flooding to alleviating minor standing water problems. Available fundsAugust 2010 Muddy Fork Beargrass Creek Page 4

Stormwater Management Master Planare distributed across the service area based on relative levels of customer concerns andestimated costs of repairs within geographic areas. Since 2003, MSD has spent over $125 millionin capital drainage improvements in our service area under the three phases of Project DRI.Phase 4 of Project DRI is scheduled to begin in July 2010. Projects lists for Phases 1-3 can befound in the Appendix C of this report. A final project list for Phase 4 is currently underdevelopment.August 2010 Muddy Fork Beargrass Creek Page 5

4.0 SOUTH FORK BEARGRASS CREEK

Stormwater Management Master Plan4.0 SOUTH FORK – BEARGRASS CREEK4.1 Watershed Study Area4.1.1 GeneralThe 27 square mile South Fork Beargrass Creek Watershed is located in the north central portionof Jefferson County. Its headwaters originate in Jeffersontown, flow in a westerly direction toBuechel, turn northwest into the Highlands, and finally, turn slightly northeast at the Louisvilleand Nashville Railroad and eventually outlet intothe Ohio River near Towhead Island. At aboutmile 0.75 of South Fork, the Louisville LocalFlood Protection Project (Floodwall) crosses thestream. A large pumping station is located at thispoint. In addition, from approximately mile 1.4 tomile 4.1, the stream is a large concrete channelwith high vertical sidewalls. Major streams in thiswatershed include South Fork Beargrass Creek andBuechel Branch. An aerial map showing theSouth Fork Beargrass Creek Watershed is includedas Map SF-1. A drainage map showing the 24South Fork Beargrass Creek at Broadwaysubbasins for South Fork Beargrass Creek isincluded as Map SF-2.Communities lying in the watershed include Jeffersontown, Phoenix Hill, Germantown,Audubon Park, Strathmoor, Wellington, Buechel, Highgate Springs, Houston Acres, Forest Hills,Schnitzelburg, Smoketown, Shelby Park, Tyler Park and the Highlands.Notable landmarks include the Beargrass CreekPumping Station, Calvary Cemetery, the LouisvilleZoo, Tyler Park, and Rest Haven MemorialCemetery. Several parks are located within thefloodplain of South Fork Beargrass Creek, includingJoe Creason Park and the Beargrass Creek StateNature Preserve. Buechel Park is located alongBuechel Branch, a tributary of South Fork BeargrassCreek. These parks provide open space whereflooding can occur without property damage, as wellas recreational uses during drier periods.Conservation easements have also been grantedalong South Fork Beargrass Creek near Poplar LevelRoad and Illinois Avenue by Audubon Hospital,Calvary Cemetery, Day Spring, and the St. JosephHome for the Aged.Beargrass Creek Flood Pumping StationAugust 2010 South Fork Beargrass Creek Page 1

Stormwater Management Master Plan4.1.2 TopographyThe major portion of the South Fork Beargrass Creek Watershed is situated in the EasternUplands Topographic Region. The remaining portion, which lies west of the Louisville andNashville Railroad and adjacent to the Ohio River, is in the Flood Plain.Broad steep-sided valleys and flat to gently rolling plateaus dominate the terrain in the UplandsRegion. South Fork Beargrass Creek has cut deeply into this terrain and flows through a wellentrenched channel.A very flat, low-lying terrain predominates in the Flood Plain. South Fork Beargrass Creekflows through an improved concrete channel in this region.Elevations range from about 420 feet, the pool stage of the Ohio River above McAlpine Lockand Dam, to about 690 feet, in the area north of Jeffersontown.4.1.3 GeologyThe portion of this watershed lying in the Eastern Uplands Topographic Region is predominatelyunderlain by limestones of lower Devonian and middle Silurian age. The South Fork BeargrassCreek, which flows through a well developed alluvialchannel, cuts deeply into those rocks but does not exposethe older, middle Silurian shales and dolomites. Thegeneral dip of these rock beds, or strata, is toward the westat a little less than one foot in one hundred feet. A northtrending synclinal axis is observed in theBuechel/Highgate Springs area. A northeast trendinganticlinal axis is observed in the Camp Taylor/Strathmoorarea. Limited karst activity is represented by some smallsinkholes and springs.The portion of this watershed lying in the Flood PlainTopographic Region is predominately underlain by glacialoutwash deposits of Quaternary age. These deposits varyin thickness from several feet to well over one hundredfeet, and are comprised of complex layers of silts, sands,clays, and gravels. This region is a well documentedaquifer, and groundwater is readily available.4.1.4 SoilsOutlet of South Fork Beargrass Creekinto the Ohio RiverSection 2.2.2 of the SMMP explains in detail the five soil groups used to classify soils in thisstudy. The soil composition in the South Fork Beargrass Creek Watershed is mainly Group BAugust 2010 South Fork Beargrass Creek Page 2

Stormwater Management Master Planand unclassified. The soils in the South Fork Beargrass Creek Watershed can be found on MapSF-3.4.1.5 Land UseThe majority of the land use in the South Fork Watershed is residential, however manycommercial properties are located in the downtown area and along major roads such asBardstown Road, Poplar Level, and Hurstbourne Parkway. Some industrial properties also existin the South Fork Watershed and are mostly located near the downtown area and the NewburgRoad area south of the Watterson Expressway. Map SF-4 shows the land use in this watershed.4.1.6 Regional Basins/Channel ImprovementsThe South Fork Beargrass Creek FloodProtection project was initiated in 2001 and iscurrently in the final stages of completion.The project was a joint project between theUSACE and MSD and included theconstruction of eight regional basins, rangingin size from 9 acre-feet to 160 acre-feet ofstorage, throughout the South ForkWatershed. The project also included 2000feet of channel improvement, 1900 feet offloodwall around an apartment complex, andenvironmental features, such as constructionof pools and riffles in the channels andplanting 9 acres of bottomland hardwoods. Bashford Manor Regional BasinThe purpose of the project was to help relieveflooding in the South Fork Watershed. The basins are located near Bashford Manor,Breckenridge Lane, Downing Way, Fountain Square, Hikes Lane, Gerald Court, Richland Ave,and Old Shepherdsville Road. Another regional basin, the Dry Bed Reservoir, is also located inthe South Fork Beargrass Creek Watershed. This basin was constructed in the 1980’s to relieveflooding along South Fork.4.1.7 Local BasinsThere are currently 58 local basins located in the South Fork Beargrass Creek watershed. Thesebasins are shown on Map SF-2.4.2 ModelingA new hydrologic analysis for South Fork Beargrass Creek was completed for the 2006 FIS.HEC-HMS was used to model the stream. LOJIC data was used to estimate model inputs, suchas curve number, time of concentration, and soil groups. Water surface elevations weredetermined using HEC-RAS and cross sections were obtained from field surveys. All bridges,August 2010 South Fork Beargrass Creek Page 3

Stormwater Management Master Plandams, and culverts were field surveyed to obtain elevation data and structural geometry.Ineffective flow areas were included in areas with significantly reduced flow conveyance, suchas inundated commercial/industrial areas, neighborhoods, and areas of floodplain storage.Roughness coefficients were determined based on field inspections and aerial photography. Thetwo existing USGS stream gauges, located at Trevilian Way and Winter Avenue, were used tocalibrate the model. Two storm events were used in the calibration, February/March 1997 andJanuary 2000.Large portions of the South Fork Watershed are served by the combined sewer system. Thecombined sewer system conveys sewage and stormwater through sewer lines to a wastewatertreatment plant. When the capacity of the sewer system is exceeded, a portion of the water isdiverted to combined sewer overflows (CSOs). A SWMM model for this area was used to createoutflow hydrographs for a 10 year, 1 hour SCS Type II rainfall event to estimate these combinedsewer overflows. A comparison was done between the SWMM model and a HEC-1 modelcreated using overland flows. The flows were approximately the same and it was determinedthat the HEC-1 model would provide reasonably accurate results and that a SWMM modelwould not be required. This assumption was made again when the existing HEC-1 models wereupdated using HEC-HMS for the 2006 FIS.Hydrologic analyses for Brooklawn Tributary and Buechel Branch, tributaries of South ForkBeargrass Creek, were completed using HEC-1. Curve numbers, drainage area, and time ofconcentration were used to determine flows from each subbasin. Storage routings were added asneeded and numerous trials were required in order to determine final discharge values. Using thedischarge values from the HEC-1 models, HEC -2 was used to create stream profiles for eachstream. Cross sections and bridge elevations and geometry were field surveyed. Models werecalibrated using high water marks from five floods: March 1964, April 1970, July 1973, May1983, and February 1990.The uppermost portions of South Fork Beargrass Creek and the tributaries were not part of adetailed study. Instead, these areas were studied using approximate methods. The floodplainswere calculated using Manning’s Formula. Cross sections were determined from maps and fieldreconnaissance, but were not field surveyed. Bridge and culvert data were only gathered if it wasexpected to cause significant backwater. Bridge and culvert data were hand measured and nosurvey was completed. Slopes used for Manning’s Formula were based on topographicmapping.Floodplain limits for the 1 percent annual chance flood were calculated for existing conditionsand future, fully developed conditions. Existing conditions are labeled as the FEMA floodplainand future conditions are labeled as the Local Regulatory Floodplain. Map SF-5 shows the limitsof each of these floodplains.August 2010 South Fork Beargrass Creek Page 4

Stormwater Management Master Plan4.3 Action Plan4.3.1 Watershed RequirementsNew development in the South Fork Beargrass Creek Watershed is required to detain proposedstormwater discharge rates to predeveloped conditions for the 2, 10, and 100 year storm eventsthrough the MSD Design Manual. The NRCS Type II, 24 hour rainfall distribution is required tobe used for the modeling. In areas where adequate downstream facilities exist, especially in thelower portion of a watershed where peak flows from the new development will occursubstantially prior to the overall peak of the stream, on a case-by-case basis, MSD allowsincreased runoff to be compensated using a regional facility fee. This regional facility fee isused to construct regional basins.New development in the combined sewer area is restricted to a 6-inch stormwater connection tothe combined sewer system to help alleviate the flows in the system during rain events.Engineers must design the new development’s onsite stormwater system to work with the 6-inchoutlet. Examples of this include building detention basins, oversizing onsite stormwater pipes,and using green solutions such as pervious pavement and rain gardens to reduce peak flows andoverall runoff volumes.Floodplain compensation is required in the South Fork Beargrass Creek Watershed at a ratio of1:1 for any fill placed in the fully developed local regulatory floodplain as required in theLouisville Metro Floodplain Management Ordinance. This ratio may be increased on a sitespecificbasis as determined by MSD.As stated in the Louisville Metro Floodplain Management Ordinance, a natural 25 foot buffer oneach side of the stream bank must be preserved on all solid blueline streams as defined by theUSGS 7.5 minute topographic maps. In addition, solid blueline streams may not be relocated,channelized, or stripped, with the exception of public projects such as road crossings, utilities,and detention basins that have no other viable alternative.A minimum buffer is also required by the KDOW through its Kentucky Pollutant DischargeElimination System (KPDES) General Permit For Stormwater Discharges Associated WithConstruction Activities (KYR10). A minimum 25 foot buffer is required for discharges towaters categorized as High Quality or Impaired Water (Non-construction related impairment). Aminimum 50 foot buffer is required for discharges to waters categorized as Impaired Waters(Sediment impaired, but no TMDL).In order to promote enhanced water quality and aquatic habitat, natural channel designtechniques are the preferred method for the design of streams. Channel improvement projects inblueline streams are required to use natural or “soft” approaches. MSD’s Design Manualoutlines natural channel design requirements in Section 10.3.6.Green infrastructure and post-construction requirements for new development are currentlyunder development and are anticipated to be required as part of the MS4 Permit in lateAugust 2010 South Fork Beargrass Creek Page 5

Stormwater Management Master Plan2011/2012. One aspect of these anticipated requirements that will benefit the stormwatermanagement program is the application of a water quality volume requirement. It is anticipatedthat the first 0.75 inches of the 80% stormwater runoff event will be required to be infiltrated,treated, or otherwise managed for new development projects.The Louisville/Jefferson County Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Ordinance requiresdevelopments with 2000 square feet of disturbance and developments within 50 feet of asensitive feature as defined by the ordinance to obtain a Site Disturbance Permit. The SiteDisturbance Permit requires an EPSC plan to be developed which achieves 80% design removalof total suspended solids that are generated by the site. The design storm to be used is the 10-year 24 hour SCS Type II storm event.4.3.2 Proposed ProjectsSeveral combined sewer projects, which are part of the IOAP, are proposed in the South ForkBeargrass Creek Watershed. These projects include a CSO dam modification, a sewer separationproject, a pump station replacement, four storage basins, and an interceptor project. Moreinformation regarding these projects can be found in Appendix A of this report and also in thefinal CSO Long-Term Control Plan document, which is part of MSD’s IOAP.One green infrastructure project has been planned in this watershed and 17 others are currentlybeing considered. The planned project is a permeable alley at Campbell and Main. This projectis scheduled to be completed in 2010. For more information regarding green infrastructureprojects, see Appendix B of this report and also the Final CSO Long-Term Control Plandocument, which is part of MSD’s IOAP.Small scale drainage projects are taken care of through the program Project DRI. Beginning in2003, MSD initiated an aggressive program to address a wide variety of drainage issues that arebrought to us by our customers. This program, dubbed Project DRI (Drainage ResponseInitiative), assigned experienced project managers, contractors, and inspectors to addressdrainage problems on a "grade-to-drain" basis. Efforts under this program address problemsranging from structural flooding to alleviating minor standing water problems. Available fundsare distributed across the service area based on relative levels of customer concerns andestimated costs of repairs within geographic areas. Since 2003, MSD has spent over $125 millionin capital drainage improvements in our service area under the three phases of Project DRI.Phase 4 of Project DRI is scheduled to begin in July 2010. Projects lists for Phases 1-3 can befound in the Appendix C of this report. A final project list for Phase 4 is currently underdevelopment.August 2010 South Fork Beargrass Creek Page 6

5.0 CEDAR CREEK

Stormwater Management Master Plan5.0 CEDAR CREEK5.1 Watershed Study Area5.1.1 GeneralThe 11 square mile Cedar Creek Watershed is located in south central Jefferson County and isbisected by the Gene Snyder Freeway. Its headwaters originate in the Fern Creek area. Thestream flows in a southerly direction, passing into Bullitt County, and eventually discharges intoFloyds Fork. For the purposes of this study, the Jefferson/Bullitt County line serves as theapproximate southerly watershed boundary. Cedar Creek is the only major stream in thiswatershed. An aerial map showing the Cedar Creek Watershed is included as Map CC-1. Adrainage map showing the six subbasins for Cedar Creek is included as Map CC-2.Communities lying in this watershedinclude Fern Creek and Highview.Notable landmarks include Beulah Churchand Fern Creek High School.5.1.2 TopographyCedar Creek near Gene Snyder FreewayThe entire Cedar Creek Watershed issituated in the Eastern UplandsTopographic Region. Broad, fairly steepsidedvalleys and narrow ridge crestsdominate the terrain. Streams have cutdeeply into this terrain and flow through thewell-entrenched channels.Elevations range from about 550 feet, at the Jefferson County/Bullitt County line, to about 740feet, in the area north of Fern Creek.5.1.3 GeologyThe entire watershed is underlain by rocks of middle Silurian age. On higher ground, limestoneis predominant. In the deeply cut stream channels, shales and dolomites are commonly exposed.The general dip of these rock beds, or strata, is toward the west at a little less than one foot inone hundred feet. Surficial features do not indicate karst activity, but springs are common on topof the Silurian shales.August 2010 Cedar Creek Page 1

Stormwater Management Master Plan5.1.4 SoilsSection 2.2.2 of the SMMP explains in detail the five soil groups used to classify soils in thisstudy. The soil composition in the Cedar Creek Watershed is mainly from soil group C and theunclassified soil group. The soils in the Cedar Creek Watershed can be found on Map CC-3.5.1.5 Land UseThe Cedar Creek Watershed is mainly residential, with large tracts of agricultural land use,especially in the eastern portion of the watershed. A map showing existing land use in the CedarCreek Watershed is included as Map CC-4.5.1.6 Regional Basins/ChannelImprovementsThe Cedar Creek Watershed has no regionalbasins or major channel improvement projects.5.1.7 Local BasinsThere are currently 50 local basins located inthe Cedar Creek watershed. These basins areshown on Map CC-2.5.2 ModelingCedar Creek at Thixton LaneModeling for Cedar Creek was completed using HEC-HMS. LOJIC data was used to estimatemodel inputs, such as curve number, time of concentration, and soil groups. Water surfaceelevations were determined using HEC-RAS. Cross sections were obtained from field surveys.All bridges, dams, and culverts were field surveyed to obtain elevation data and structuralgeometry. Roughness coefficients were determined based on field inspections and aerialphotography. No stream gauges existed in the Cedar Creek Watershed at the time of the study;therefore, the model was calibrated using the regression equations for Jefferson Countypresented in “Estimation of Peak-Discharge Frequency of Urban Streams in Jefferson County,Kentucky, U.S. Geological Survey, Water-Resources Investigations Report 97-4219.”Floodplain limits for the 1 percent annual chance flood were calculated for existing conditionsand future, fully developed conditions. Existing conditions are labeled as the FEMA floodplainand future conditions are labeled as the Local Regulatory Floodplain. Map CC-5 shows thelimits of each of these floodplains.August 2010 Cedar Creek Page 2

Stormwater Management Master Plan5.3 Action Plan5.3.1 Watershed RequirementsNew development in the Cedar Creek Watershed is required to detain proposed stormwaterdischarge rates to predeveloped conditions for the 2, 10, and 100 year storm events through theMSD Design Manual. The NRCS Type II, 24 hour rainfall distribution is required to be used forthe modeling. In areas where adequate downstream facilities exist, especially in the lowerportion of a watershed where peak flows from the new development will occur substantiallyprior to the overall peak of the stream, on a case-by-case basis, MSD allows increased runoff tobe compensated using a regional facility fee. This regional facility fee is used to constructregional basins.Floodplain compensation is required in the Cedar Creek Watershed at a ratio of 1:1 for any fillplaced in the fully developed local regulatory floodplain as required in the Louisville MetroFloodplain Management Ordinance. This ratio may be increased on a site-specific basis asdetermined by MSD.As stated in the Louisville Metro Floodplain Management Ordinance, a natural 25 foot buffer oneach side of the stream bank must be preserved on all solid blueline streams as defined by theUSGS 7.5 minute topographic maps. In addition, solid blueline streams may not be relocated,channelized, or stripped, with the exception of public projects such as road crossings, utilities,and detention basins that have no other viable alternative.A minimum buffer is also required by the KDOW through its Kentucky Pollutant DischargeElimination System (KPDES) General Permit For Stormwater Discharges Associated WithConstruction Activities (KYR10). A minimum 25 foot buffer is required for discharges towaters categorized as High Quality or Impaired Water (Non-construction related impairment). Aminimum 50 foot buffer is required for discharges to waters categorized as Impaired Waters(Sediment impaired, but no TMDL).In order to promote enhanced water quality and aquatic habitat, natural channel designtechniques are the preferred method for the design of streams. Channel improvement projects inblueline streams are required to use natural or “soft” approaches. MSD’s Design Manualoutlines natural channel design requirements in Section 10.3.6.Green infrastructure and post-construction requirements for new development are currentlyunder development and are anticipated to be required as part of the MS4 Permit in late2011/2012. One aspect of these anticipated requirements that will benefit the stormwatermanagement program is the application of a water quality volume requirement. It is anticipatedthat the first 0.75 inches of the 80% stormwater runoff event will be required to be infiltrated,treated, or otherwise managed for new development projects.The Louisville/Jefferson County Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Ordinance requiresdevelopments with 2000 square feet of disturbance and developments within 50 feet of aAugust 2010 Cedar Creek Page 3

Stormwater Management Master Plansensitive feature as defined by the ordinance to obtain a Site Disturbance Permit. The SiteDisturbance Permit requires an EPSC plan to be developed which achieves 80% design removalof total suspended solids that are generated by the site. The design storm to be used is the 10-year 24 hour SCS Type II storm event.5.3.2 Proposed ProjectsTwo green infrastructure projects are currently being considered in the Cedar Creek watershed.For more information regarding green infrastructure projects, see Appendix B of this report andalso the Final CSO Long-Term Control Plan document, which is part of MSD’s IOAP.Small scale drainage projects are taken care of through the program Project DRI. Beginning in2003, MSD initiated an aggressive program to address a wide variety of drainage issues that arebrought to us by our customers. This program, dubbed Project DRI (Drainage ResponseInitiative), assigned experienced project managers, contractors, and inspectors to addressdrainage problems on a "grade-to-drain" basis. Efforts under this program address problemsranging from structural flooding to alleviating minor standing water problems. Available fundsare distributed across the service area based on relative levels of customer concerns andestimated costs of repairs within geographic areas. Since 2003, MSD has spent over $125 millionin capital drainage improvements in our service area under the three phases of Project DRI.Phase 4 of Project DRI is scheduled to begin in July 2010. Projects lists for Phases 1-3 can befound in the Appendix C of this report. A final project list for Phase 4 is currently underdevelopment.August 2010 Cedar Creek Page 4

6.0 FLOYDS FORK

Stormwater Management Master Plan6.0 FLOYDS FORK6.1 Watershed Study Area6.1.1 GeneralThe 460 square mile Floyds Fork Watershed is located in eastern Jefferson County, Henry,Oldham, Shelby, Spencer, and Bullitt Counties. Its headwaters originate in southwest HenryCounty, approximately 13 miles beyond the Jefferson County boundary line. Flow is generallysouthwest through Oldham, Shelby, and Jefferson Counties, and then into Bullitt county, whereit outlets into the Salt River. The majorstreams in this watershed are Floyds Fork,Pope Lick, and Chenoweth Run. Aerial mapsshowing the Floyds Fork Watershed areincluded as Maps FFN-1 and FFS-1.Drainage maps showing the 16 subbasins forFloyds Fork are included as Maps FFN-2 andFFS-2.The watershed covers a six county area:Jefferson, Bullitt, Spencer, Oldham, Henryand Shelby. For the purpose of this report,only the 104 square mile portion of thiswatershed which lies in Jefferson County anddrains parts of Jeffersontown, Middletown, andAnchorage is given detailed study.Floyds Fork at Floyds Fork ParkCommunities in the study area include parts of Jeffersontown, Middletown, Anchorage,Berrytown, Woodland Hills, Tucker Station, and Hopewell.Notable landmarks include Fishermens Park, Chenoweth Park, parts of Bluegrass Industrial Park,Eastern High School, and Jeffersontown High School. Existing parks along Floyds Fork includeFloyds Fork Park and William F. Miles Park. Both of these parks provide open space that willbe preserved along Floyds Fork. Conservation easements have also been provided in the FloydsFork watershed near Deer Run Road and Pope Lick Road. Woodland Protection Areas in thiswatershed have been created for the Oakland Hills Subdivision and the Hills of Beckley Station.6.1.2 TopographyThe entire 33 square mile study area is situated in the Eastern Uplands Topographic Region.Broad, steep-sided valleys and narrow ridge crests dominate the terrain. Major streams have cutdeeply into this terrain and flow through well-entrenched channels, where near-vertical cliffs arecommon.August 2010 Floyds Fork Page 1

Stormwater Management Master PlanElevations range from about 490, in the area of the Seatonville Springs Country Club, to about760 feet, in the area north of Anchorage.6.1.3 GeologyThe major portion of this study area is underlain by limestones, shales, and dolomites of middleSilurian age. Major creeks, however, have eroded channels deeply into, and in many cases,through these rocks. In these deep cuts, limestones, shales, and dolomites of upper Ordovicianage are commonly exposed. The general dip of theserock beds, or strata, is toward the west at a little lessthan one foot in one hundred feet. Surficial featuresdo not indicate karst activity, but springs are commonon top of the Silurian and Ordovician shales.6.1.4 SoilsSection 2.2.2 of the SMMP explains in detail the fivesoil groups used to classify soils in this study. Thesoil composition in the Floyds Fork Watershed is fromgroups B, C, D, and the unclassified group. The soilsin the Floyd Forks Watershed can be found on MapsFFN-3 and FFS-3.6.1.5 Land UseFairmount Falls, a tributary to Floyds ForkThe majority of the land use in the Floyds ForkWatershed is residential and agricultural. The existingland use in the Floyds Fork Watershed can be foundon Maps FFN-4 and FFS-4.6.1.6 Regional Basins/Channel ImprovementsThere are no regional basins or major channel improvement projects located in the Floyds ForkWatershed.6.1.7 Local BasinsThere are currently 237 local basins located in the Floyds Fork watershed. These basins areshown on Map FF-2.6.2 ModelingIn the Floyds Fork Watershed, new hydrologic analyses were done for Brush Run Upper, FloydsFork, and Long Run Creek in the 2006 FIS. HEC-HMS software was used to calculate 10, 2, 1,August 2010 Floyds Fork Page 2

Stormwater Management Master Planand 0.2 percent chance flood events using the SCS Type II, 24 hour design storm distribution.Model inputs such as curve number, time of concentration, and soil groups were determinedusing information from LOJIC. Water surface elevations were determined using HEC-RAS.Cross sections were obtained from field surveys and all bridges, dams, and culverts were fieldsurveyed to obtain elevation data and structural geometry for Brush Run Upper and Floyds Fork.Cross sections for Long Run Creek were obtained using topographic mapping from LOJIC witha contour interval of 2 feet. Bridges along Long Run Creek were hand measured, but not fieldsurveyed. Roughness coefficients were determined based on field inspections and aerialphotography.Brush Run Upper lacks any stream gauges. The model was calibrated using the regressionequations for Jefferson County that can be found in “Estimation of Peak-Discharge Frequency ofUrban Streams in Jefferson County, Kentucky, U.S. Geological Survey, Water-ResourcesInvestigations Report 97-4219.” The Floyds Fork model was calibrated using data from theMarch 1997 flood. Long Run Creek’s model was calibrated using the regression equations forJefferson County and also using gauge data and USGS’s PEAKQ software.Floyds Fork, the lower section of Brush Run Upper, and Long Run Creek each had detailedstudies completed to develop the floodplains. Other tributaries to Floyds Fork, including BackRun, Big Run East, the upper portion of Brush Run Upper, Brush Run Middle, Brush RunLower, Broad Run, Cane Run, Chenoweth Run Upper, Chenoweth Run Lower, CommerceCreek, Kuriger Creek, Old Mans Run, Pope Lick, Shakes Run, Shinks Branch, South Long Run,and Spotswood Creek, were studied using approximate methods. The floodplains werecalculated using Manning’s Formula. Cross sections were determined from maps and fieldreconnaissance, but were not field surveyed. Bridge and culvert data were only gathered if it wasexpected to cause significant backwater.Bridge and culvert data were hand measuredand no survey was completed. Slopes usedfor Manning’s Formula were based ontopographic mapping.Floodplain limits for the 1 percent annualchance flood were calculated for existingconditions and future, fully developedconditions. Existing conditions are labeledas the FEMA floodplain and futureconditions are labeled as the LocalRegulatory Floodplain. Maps FFN-5 andFFS-5 show the limits of each of thesefloodplains.Long Run Creek at Eastwood-Fisherville RoadAugust 2010 Floyds Fork Page 3

Stormwater Management Master Plan6.3 Action Plan6.3.1 Watershed RequirementsNew development in the Floyds Fork Watershed is required to detain proposed stormwaterdischarge rates to predeveloped conditions for the 2, 10, and 100 year storm events through theMSD Design Manual. The NRCS Type II, 24 hour rainfall distribution is required to be used forthe modeling. In areas where adequate downstream facilities exist, especially in the lowerportion of a watershed where peak flows from the new development will occur substantiallyprior to the overall peak of the stream, on a case-by-case basis, MSD allows increased runoff tobe compensated using a regional facility fee. This regional facility fee is used to constructregional basins.Floodplain compensation is required at a ratio of 1.5:1 in the Chenoweth Run Watershed and 1:1in the remaining area of the Floyds Fork Watershed for any fill placed in the fully developedlocal regulatory floodplain as required in the Louisville Metro Floodplain ManagementOrdinance. This ratio may be increased on a site-specific basis as determined by MSD.As stated in the Louisville Metro Floodplain Management Ordinance, a natural 25 foot buffer oneach side of the stream bank must be preserved on all solid blueline streams as defined by theUSGS 7.5 minute topographic maps. In addition, solid blueline streams may not be relocated,channelized, or stripped, with the exception of public projects such as road crossings, utilities,and detention basins that have no other viable alternative.A minimum buffer is also required by the KDOW through its Kentucky Pollutant DischargeElimination System (KPDES) General Permit For Stormwater Discharges Associated WithConstruction Activities (KYR10). A minimum 25 foot buffer is required for discharges towaters categorized as High Quality orImpaired Water (Non-construction relatedimpairment). A minimum 50 foot buffer isrequired for discharges to waters categorizedas Impaired Waters (Sediment impaired, butno TMDL).Floyds Fork at Miles ParkIn order to promote enhanced water qualityand aquatic habitat, natural channel designtechniques are the preferred method for thedesign of streams. Channel improvementprojects in blueline streams are required touse natural or “soft” approaches. MSD’sDesign Manual outlines natural channeldesign requirements in Section 10.3.6.Green infrastructure and post-construction requirements for new development are currentlyunder development and are anticipated to be required as part of the MS4 Permit in lateAugust 2010 Floyds Fork Page 4

Stormwater Management Master Plan2011/2012. One aspect of these anticipated requirements that will benefit the stormwatermanagement program is the application of a water quality volume requirement. It is anticipatedthat the first 0.75 inches of the 80% stormwater runoff event will be required to be infiltrated,treated, or otherwise managed for new development projects.The Louisville/Jefferson County Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Ordinance requiresdevelopments with 2000 square feet of disturbance and developments within 50 feet of asensitive feature as defined by the ordinance to obtain a Site Disturbance Permit. The SiteDisturbance Permit requires an EPSC plan to be developed which achieves 80% design removalof total suspended solids that are generated by the site. The design storm to be used is the 10-year 24 hour SCS Type II storm event.6.3.2 Proposed Projects21 st Century Parks, along with the City of Louisville and Future Fund, have acquired over 3,200acres of land for the future Floyds Fork Greenway. The project will extend from ShelbyvilleRoad to Bardstown Road along Floyds Fork and will incorporate the existing Miles Park andFloyds Fork Park. It will restore and maintain the streamside tree buffer, add up to 44 acres ofnew wetlands, add 500 acres of new forest, add 273 acres of restored meadow, and preserve over80% of the parkland as natural habitat. The greenway will help improve water quality in FloydsFork and help sustain the flora and fauna found in this watershed. The greenway alsoencompasses large portions of the floodplain along Floyds Fork and will keep the area as openspace. In addition, recreational uses are planned for the greenway, including areas for picnicsand sports, a multiuse recreational trail, and a canoe trail. Phase 1 of the park is currently beingdesigned, with groundbreaking planned for 2010 and the grand opening planned for 2015.Five green infrastructure projects are currently being considered in the Floyds Fork watershed.For more information regarding green infrastructure projects, see Appendix B of this report andalso the Final CSO Long-Term Control Plan document, which is part of MSD’s IOAP.In addition to the Floyds Fork Greenway, beginning in 2003, MSD initiated an aggressiveprogram to address a wide variety of drainage issues that are brought to us by our customers.This program, dubbed Project DRI (Drainage Response Initiative), assigned experienced projectmanagers, contractors, and inspectors to address drainage problems on a "grade-to-drain" basis.Efforts under this program address problems ranging from structural flooding to alleviatingminor standing water problems. Available funds are distributed across the service area based onrelative levels of customer concerns and estimated costs of repairs within geographic areas. Since2003, MSD has spent over $125 million in capital drainage improvements in our service areaunder the three phases of Project DRI. Phase 4 of Project DRI is scheduled to begin in July2010. Projects lists for Phases 1-3 can be found in the Appendix C of this report. A final projectlist for Phase 4 is currently under development.August 2010 Floyds Fork Page 5

7.0 GOOSE CREEK

Stormwater Management Master Plan7.0 GOOSE CREEK7.1 Watershed Study Area7.1.1 GeneralThe 18 square mile Goose Creek Watershed is located in northeastern Jefferson County and isdrained primarily by Goose Creek and Little Goose Creek. Goose Creek’s headwaters originatein Anchorage, flow in a westerly direction to the area of Westport Middle School, then turngenerally northwest, and finally outlet into theOhio River at Six Mile Island. Little GooseCreek’s headwaters originate in the Freys Hillarea, flow northwesterly, and eventuallydischarge into Goose Creek about one-halfmile from its outlet on the Ohio River. Themajor streams are Goose Creek and LittleGoose Creek. An aerial map showing theGoose Creek Watershed is included as MapGC-1. A drainage map showing the eightsubbasins for Goose Creek is included as MapGC-2.Outlet of Goose Creek into the Ohio RiverCommunities situated in this watershed includeAnchorage, Rolling Hills, Plantation, OldBrownsboro Place, Hills and Dales, Glenview Heights, Brownsboro Farm, and Green Spring.Notable landmarks include Kentucky Country Day School, E.P. Tom Sawyer State Park, OwlCreek Country Club, Central State Hospital, Standard Country Club, and Ballard High School.Hounz Lane Park is located along Goose Creek and provides open space and wetland areas thatwill be preserved. E.P. “Tom” Sawyer State Park is another park located along Goose Creek thatprovides open space that will be preserved. Woodland Protection Areas have also been createdfor the Woodstone Subdivision along Goose Creek.7.1.2 TopographyThe major portion of the Goose Creek Watershed is situated in the Eastern Uplands TopographicRegion. The remaining portion, which lies adjacent to the Ohio River, is in the Flood Plain.Broad, fairly steep-sided valleys and gently rolling plateaus dominate the terrain in the UplandsRegion. Both Goose and Little Goose Creek have cut deeply into this terrain and they flowthrough well entrenched, channels, where near vertical cliffs are common.A flat, low-lying terrain predominates in the Flood Plain Region. Excluding Goose Creek,stream channels of low gradient slopes tend to parallel the Ohio River.August 2010 Goose Creek Page 1

Stormwater Management Master PlanElevations range from about 420 feet, the pool stage of the Ohio River at the McAlpine Lock andDam, to about 760 feet, in the area north of Anchorage.7.1.3 GeologyThe portion of this watershed lying in the Eastern Uplands Topographic Region is predominantlyunderlain by limestones of lower Devonian and middle Silurian age. This major creek, however,has eroded channels deep into these rocks, exposing middle Silurian shales and dolomites. Thegeneral dip of these rock beds, or strata, is toward the west at a little more than one-half foot inone hundred feet. A northeast trending anticlinal axis is observed about 0.6 miles north of andparallel to County Road 1447. An east trending synclinal axis is observed in the area north ofAnchorage. Limited karst activity is represented by some small sinkholes and springs.The portion of this watershed lying in the Flood Plain Topographic Region is underlain byvarious alluvial deposits of Quaternary age. These deposits range in thickness from several feetto well over one hundred feet, and are comprised of complex layers of silts, sands, clays, andgravels. This region is a well-documented aquifer and groundwater is readily available.7.1.4 SoilsSection 2.2.2 of the SMMP explains in detail the five soil groups used to classify soils in thisstudy. The soil composition in the Goose Creek Watershed is mainly from soil group B and theunclassified group. The soils in the Goose CreekWatershed are shown on Map GC-3.7.1.5 Land UseThe majority of the land use in the Goose CreekWatershed is residential. The existing land use in theGoose Creek Watershed can be found on Map GC-4.7.1.6 Regional Basins/Channel ImprovementsThere are no regional basins or major channelimprovement projects located in the Goose CreekWatershed.7.1.7 Local BasinsThere are currently 59 local basins located in the GooseCreek watershed. These basins are shown on Map GC-2. Goose Creek at Hounz Lane ParkAugust 2010 Goose Creek Page 2

Stormwater Management Master Plan7.2 ModelingNew hydraulic analyses were completed for the uppermost portion of Goose Creek, Little GooseCreek, LeFores Branch, Brownsboro Ditch, Lilac Run, Rolling Hills Branch, and SpringhurstCreek for the 2006 FIS. The modeling was performed with HEC-HMS using the SCS Type II,24-hour rainfall distribution. Hydraulic parameters such as curve number, time of concentration,and soil groups were determined using information from LOJIC. Water surface elevations weredetermined using HEC-RAS. Cross sections were obtained from field surveys. All bridges,dams, and culverts were field surveyed to obtain elevation data and structural geometry.Roughness coefficients were determined based on field inspections and aerial photography.The portions of Goose Creek and Little Goose Creek that were not restudied in the 2006 FISwere studied using approximate methods. The floodplains were calculated using Manning’sFormula. Cross sections were determined from maps and field reconnaissance, but were notfield surveyed. Bridge and culvert data were only gathered if it was expected to cause significantbackwater. Bridge and culvert data were hand measured and no survey was completed. Slopesused for Manning’s Formula were based on topographic mapping.Floodplain limits for the 1 percent annual chance flood were calculated for existing conditionsand future, fully developed conditions. Existing conditions are labeled as the FEMA floodplainand future conditions are labeled as the Local Regulatory Floodplain. Map GC-5 shows thelimits of each of these floodplains.7.3 Action Plan7.3.1 Watershed RequirementsNew development in the Goose Creek Watershed is required to detain proposed stormwaterdischarge rates to predeveloped conditions for the 2, 10, and 100 year storm events through theMSD Design Manual. The NRCS Type II, 24 hour rainfall distribution is required to be used forthe modeling. In areas where adequate downstream facilities exist, especially in the lowerportion of a watershed where peak flows from the new development will occur substantiallyprior to the overall peak of the stream, on a case-by-case basis, MSD allows increased runoff tobe compensated using a regional facility fee. This regional facility fee is used to constructregional basins.Floodplain compensation is required in the Goose Creek Watershed at a ratio of 1:1 for any fillplaced in the fully developed local regulatory floodplain as required in the Louisville MetroFloodplain Management Ordinance. The ratio may be increased on a site-specific basis asdetermined by MSD.As stated in the Louisville Metro Floodplain Management Ordinance, a natural 25 foot buffer oneach side of the stream bank must be preserved on all solid blueline streams as defined by theUSGS 7.5 minute topographic maps. In addition, solid blueline streams may not be relocated,August 2010 Goose Creek Page 3

Stormwater Management Master Planchannelized, or stripped, with the exception of public projects such as road crossings, utilities,and detention basins that have no other viable alternative.A minimum buffer is also required by the KDOW through its Kentucky Pollutant DischargeElimination System (KPDES) General Permit For Stormwater Discharges Associated WithConstruction Activities (KYR10). A minimum 25 foot buffer is required for discharges towaters categorized as High Quality or Impaired Water (Non-construction related impairment). Aminimum 50 foot buffer is required for discharges to waters categorized as Impaired Waters(Sediment impaired, but no TMDL).In order to promote enhanced water quality and aquatic habitat, natural channel designtechniques are the preferred method for the design of streams. Channel improvement projects inblueline streams are required to use natural or “soft” approaches. MSD’s Design Manualoutlines natural channel design requirements in Section 10.3.6.Green infrastructure and post-construction requirements for new development are currentlyunder development and are anticipated to be required as part of the MS4 Permit in late2011/2012. One aspect of these anticipated requirements that will benefit the stormwatermanagement program is the application of a water quality volume requirement. It is anticipatedthat the first 0.75 inches of the 80% stormwater runoff event will be required to be infiltrated,treated, or otherwise managed for new development projects.The Louisville/Jefferson County Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Ordinance requiresdevelopments with 2000 square feet of disturbance and developments within 50 feet of asensitive feature as defined by the ordinance to obtain a Site Disturbance Permit. The SiteDisturbance Permit requires an EPSC plan to be developed which achieves 80% design removalof total suspended solids that are generated by the site. The design storm to be used is the 10-year 24 hour SCS Type II storm event.7.3.2 Proposed ProjectsThree green infrastructure projects are currently being considered in the Goose Creek watershed.For more information regarding green infrastructure projects, see Appendix B of this report andalso the Final CSO Long-Term Control Plan document, which is part of MSD’s IOAP.Small scale drainage projects are taken care of through the program Project DRI. Beginning in2003, MSD initiated an aggressive program to address a wide variety of drainage issues that arebrought to us by our customers. This program, dubbed Project DRI (Drainage ResponseInitiative), assigned experienced project managers, contractors, and inspectors to addressdrainage problems on a "grade-to-drain" basis. Efforts under this program address problemsranging from structural flooding to alleviating minor standing water problems. Available fundsare distributed across the service area based on relative levels of customer concerns andestimated costs of repairs within geographic areas. Since 2003, MSD has spent over $125 millionin capital drainage improvements in our service area under the three phases of Project DRI.Phase 4 of Project DRI is scheduled to begin in July 2010. Projects lists for Phases 1-3 can beAugust 2010 Goose Creek Page 4

Stormwater Management Master Planfound in the Appendix C of this report. A final project list for Phase 4 is currently underdevelopment.August 2010 Goose Creek Page 5

8.0 HARRODS CREEK

Stormwater Management Master Plan8.0 HARRODS CREEK8.1 Watershed Study Area8.1.1 GeneralThe 180 square mile Harrods Creek Watershed is located in northeastern Jefferson County,Oldham and Henry Counties. Its headwaters originate in the area east of LaGrange, Kentucky,approximately 17 miles beyond the Jefferson Countyborder. The creek flows generally to the southwest,converging with South Fork Harrods Creek about onehalfmile outside the Jefferson County line. From thispoint, the flow continues southwest through JeffersonCounty to an outlet on the Ohio River at Guthrie Beach.Major streams in this watershed include Harrods Creek,Wolf Pen Branch, South Fork Harrods Creek, and SouthFork Hite Creek. An aerial map showing the HarrodsCreek Watershed is included as Map HC-1. A drainagemap showing the nine subbasins for Harrods Creek isincluded as Map HC-2.For the purpose of this report, only the 15.3 square mileportion of this watershed in and adjacent to JeffersonCounty is given detailed study.Communities in the study area include Fincastle,Ballardsville, Pewee Valley, Lake Louisvilla,Worthington, and Prospect.Outlet of Harrods Creek into the Ohio RiverNotable landmarks include the Ford Motor Company Kentucky Truck Plant and Hunting CreekCountry Club.8.1.2 TopographyThe major portion of the 15.3 square mile study area is situated in the Eastern UplandsTopographic Region. The remaining portion, which lies adjacent to the Ohio River, is in theFlood Plain.Broad steep-sided valleys and gently rolling plateaus dominate the terrain in the Uplands Region.Harrods Creek has cut deeply into this terrain and it flows through a well entrenched channel,where near-vertical cliffs are common.A very flat, low-lying terrain predominates in the Flood Plain, excluding Harrods Creek, streamchannels of low gradient slopes tend to parallel the Ohio River.August 2010 Harrods Creek Page 1

Stormwater Management Master PlanElevations range from about 420 feet, the pool stage of the Ohio River above the McAlpine Lockand Dam, to about 780 feet, in an area southwest of Pewee Valley.8.1.3 GeologyThe portion of this study area lying in the Eastern Uplands Topographic Region is predominantlyunderlain by limestones of the lower Devonian and middle Silurian ages. The major creeks,however, have eroded channels deeply into, and in some cases, though these rocks. In thesedeeper cuts, shales, dolomites, and limestones of middle and lower Silurian and upperOrdovician age are commonly exposed. The general dip of these rock beds, or strata, is towardthe west at a little more than one-half foot in one hundred feet. Some limited karst activity isrepresented by small sinkholes and springs.In the Harrods Creek channel, and in the study area portion which lies in the Flood PlainTopographic Region, various alluvial deposits of the Quaternary age are encountered. Thesedeposits range in thickness from several feet to well over one hundred feet. They are comprisedof complex layers of silts, sands, clays, and gravels. This region is a well documented aquiferand groundwater is readily available.8.1.4 SoilsSection 2.2.2 of the SMMP explains in detail the five soil groups used to classify soils in thisstudy. The soil composition in the Harrods Creek Watershed is mainly from soil group B and theunclassified group. The soil groups in the Harrods Creek Watershed can be found on Map HC-3.8.1.5 Land UseThe majority of the land use in the Harrods Creek Watershed is residential and agricultural. Theexisting land use in the Harrods Creek Watershed can be found on Map HC-4.8.1.6 Regional Basins/Channel ImprovementsNo regional basins or major channel improvement projects are located in the Harrods CreekWatershed.8.1.7 Local BasinsThere are currently 76 local basins located in the Harrods Creek watershed. These basins areshown on Map HC-2.8.2.1 ModelingNew models were completed for Harrods Creek and Hite Creek using HEC-HMS for the 2006FIS. The standard SCS Type II, 24-hour design storm distribution was used to determine the 10,2, 1, and 0.2 percent annual chance events. Hydraulic parameters such as curve number, time ofAugust 2010 Harrods Creek Page 2

Stormwater Management Master Planconcentration, and soil groups were determined using information from LOJIC. Water surfaceelevations were determined using HEC-RAS. Cross sections were obtained from field surveys.All bridges, dams, and culverts were field surveyed to obtain elevation data and structuralgeometry. Roughness coefficients were determined based on field inspections and aerialphotography. Based on the modeling, Harrods Creek is controlled by backwater from the OhioRiver for the entire length located in Jefferson County. Model calibration was done using theregression equations for Jefferson County which can be found in “Estimation of Peak-DischargeFrequency of Urban Streams in Jefferson County, Kentucky, U.S. Geological Survey, Water-Resources Investigations Report 97-4219.”Wolf Pen Branch and Hunting Creek, which are tributaries to Harrods Creek, were studied usingapproximate methods. The floodplains were calculated using Manning’s Formula. Crosssections were determined from maps and field reconnaissance, but were not field surveyed.Bridge and culvert data were only gathered if it was expected to cause significant backwater.Bridge and culvert data were hand measured and no survey was completed. Slopes used forManning’s Formula were based on topographic mapping.Floodplain limits for the 1 percent annual chance flood were calculated for existing conditionsand future, fully developed conditions. Existing conditions are labeled as the FEMA floodplainand future conditions are labeled as the Local Regulatory Floodplain. Map HC-5 shows thelimits of each of these floodplains.8.2.2 Action Plan8.2.3 Watershed RequirementsNew development in the Harrods CreekWatershed is required to detain proposedstormwater discharge rates to predevelopedconditions for the 2, 10, and 100 year stormevents through the MSD Design Manual.The NRCS Type II, 24 hour rainfalldistribution is required to be used for themodeling. In areas where adequateHarrods Creek upstream of US Hwy 42downstream facilities exist, especially in thelower portion of a watershed where peakflows from the new development will occur substantially prior to the overall peak of the stream,on a case-by-case basis, MSD allows increased runoff to be compensated using a regionalfacility fee. This regional facility fee is used to construct regional basins.Floodplain compensation is required in the Harrods Creek Watershed at a ratio of 1:1 for any fillplaced in the fully developed local regulatory floodplain as required in the Louisville MetroFloodplain Management Ordinance. This ratio may be increased on a site-specific basis asdetermined by MSD.August 2010 Harrods Creek Page 3

Stormwater Management Master PlanAs stated in the Louisville Metro Floodplain Management Ordinance, a natural 25 foot buffer oneach side of the stream bank must be preserved on all solid blueline streams as defined by theUSGS 7.5 minute topographic maps. In addition, solid blueline streams may not be relocated,channelized, or stripped, with the exception of public projects such as road crossings, utilities,and detention basins that have no other viable alternative.A minimum buffer is also required by the KDOW through its Kentucky Pollutant DischargeElimination System (KPDES) General Permit For Stormwater Discharges Associated WithConstruction Activities (KYR10). A minimum 25 foot buffer is required for discharges towaters categorized as High Quality or Impaired Water (Non-construction related impairment). Aminimum 50 foot buffer is required for discharges to waters categorized as Impaired Waters(Sediment impaired, but no TMDL).In order to promote enhanced water quality and aquatic habitat, natural channel designtechniques are the preferred method for the design of streams. Channel improvement projects inblueline streams are required to use natural or “soft” approaches. MSD’s Design Manualoutlines this requirement in Section 10.3.6.Green infrastructure and post-construction requirements for new development are currentlyunder development and are anticipated to be required as part of the MS4 Permit in late2011/2012. One aspect of these anticipated requirements that will benefit the stormwatermanagement program is the application of a water quality volume requirement. It is anticipatedthat the first 0.75 inches of the 80% stormwater runoff event will be required to be infiltrated,treated, or otherwise managed for new development projects.The Louisville/Jefferson County Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Ordinance requiresdevelopments with 2000 square feet of disturbance and developments within 50 feet of asensitive feature as defined by the ordinance to obtain a Site Disturbance Permit. The SiteDisturbance Permit requires an EPSC plan to be developed which achieves 80% design removalof total suspended solids that are generated by the site. The design storm to be used is the 10-year 24 hour SCS Type II storm event.8.3.2 Proposed ProjectsOne green infrastructure project is currently being considered in the Harrods Creek watershed.For more information regarding green infrastructure projects, see Appendix B of this report andalso the Final CSO Long-Term Control Plan document, which is part of MSD’s IOAP.Small scale drainage projects are taken care of through the program Project DRI. Beginning in2003, MSD initiated an aggressive program to address a wide variety of drainage issues that arebrought to us by our customers. This program, dubbed Project DRI (Drainage ResponseInitiative), assigned experienced project managers, contractors, and inspectors to addressdrainage problems on a "grade-to-drain" basis. Efforts under this program address problemsranging from structural flooding to alleviating minor standing water problems. Available fundsare distributed across the service area based on relative levels of customer concerns andAugust 2010 Harrods Creek Page 4

Stormwater Management Master Planestimated costs of repairs within geographic areas. Since 2003, MSD has spent over $125 millionin capital drainage improvements in our service area under the three phases of Project DRI.Phase 4 of Project DRI is scheduled to begin in July 2010. Projects lists for Phases 1-3 can befound in the Appendix C of this report. A final project list for Phase 4 is currently underdevelopment.August 2010 Harrods Creek Page 5

9.0 MILL CREEK

Stormwater Management Master Plan9.0 MILL CREEK9.1 Watershed Study Area9.1.1 GeneralThe 34 square mile Mill Creek Watershed is located in the western portion of Jefferson County.Due to the diversion of the upstream reaches of Mill Creek into a “cut-off” channel, thiswatershed is divided into two entirely separate sections. These are referred to as Upper MillCreek and Lower Mill Creek. Major streamsincluded in Upper Mill Creek include BigRun, Cane Run, and Mill Creek Cutoff. Majorstreams included in Lower Mill Creek includeMill Creek and Black Pond Creek. An aerialmap showing the Mill Creek Watershed isincluded as Map MC-1. A drainage mapshowing the 16 subbasins for Mill Creek isincluded as Map MC-2.The 19 square mile Upper Mill Creek’sheadwaters originate in the area of ManslickRoad and I-264. From here, they flow in awesterly direction to the western side ofLower Mill Creek at Outlet to Ohio RiverShively, where several tributaries including CaneRun, Boxwood Ditch, Lynnview Ditch, and Big Run join the flow. From this point, the flowdirection is to the northwest, via the cutoff channel. The stream outlets into the Ohio River justsouth of Riverside Gardens. A flood pumping station is located in the Riverside Gardens areanear the stream outlet. This flood pumping station is part of the flood levee system that protectsJefferson County from Ohio River flooding.Communities lying in the Upper Mill Creek section include Shively, Heatherfield, HuntersTrace, Parkwood, St. Denis, and Riverside Gardens.Notable landmarks include Louisville Gas & Electric’s Mill Creek Power Station, Western HighSchool, Doss High School, Shively Park, Dixie Manor, and a part of Iroquois Park. Sun ValleyPark is located on Mill Creek near Lower River Road. This park provides preserved open spacealong Mill Creek.The 15 square mile Lower Mill Creek’s headwaters originate in the area of Lower Hunters Traceand Terry Road. From here, the flow is generally to the south, paralleling the Ohio River.Several tributaries, including Black Pond Creek and Valley Creek, join this flow in the ValleyDowns area. The stream eventually outlets into the Ohio River west of Valley Village. A floodpumping station is located 0.75 miles upstream of the mouth of Lower Mill Creek. This floodAugust 2010 Mill Creek Page 1

Stormwater Management Master Planpumping station is part of the flood levee system that protects Jefferson County from Ohio Riverflooding.Communities lying in the Lower Mill Creek section include Valley Village, Meadow Lawn,Valley Downs, parts of Valley Station and Pleasure Ridge Park, Sylvania, Greenwood, andWaverly Hills.Notable landmarks include Sun Valley Community Park, Valley High School, Waverly Park,and the Louisville and Jefferson County Riverport Authority.9.1.2 TopographyThe major portion of the Mill Creek Watershed issituated in the Flood Plain Topographic Region. Theremaining portion, which lies east of the Illinois CentralRailroad, lies in the Knobs.A very flat, low-lying terrain predominates in the FloodPlain. Stream channels with low gradient slopes tendto parallel the Ohio River. Terraces of ten to twentyfeet in height are common.Steep-sided, round-topped hills dominate the terrain inthe Knobs. Stream channels are deeply cut into thesehills and commonly have high gradient slopes.Lower Mill Creek at Bethany LaneElevations range from about 382 feet, the pool stage ofthe Ohio River below the McAlpine Lock and Dam, toabout 760 feet, at the top of the Iroquois Park hill.9.1.3 GeologyThe portion of this watershed lying in the Flood Plain Topographic Region is predominantlyunderlain by glacial outwash deposits of the Quaternary age. These deposits vary in thicknessfrom several feet to well over one hundred feet, and are comprised of complex layers of silts,sands, clays, and gravels. This region is a well documented aquifer and groundwater is readilyavailable.The portion of this watershed lying in the Knobs topographic region is predominantly underlainby a hilly complex of Mississippian age siltstones and shales, whose lower flanks are covered byzero to thirty feet of an alluvial deposit of Quaternary age loess and eloian sand. The general dipof the rock beds, or strata, in this hilly area is toward the west at a little less than one foot in onehundred feet. Karst activity is not associated with this region. It should be noted, however, thatMississippian shales become plastic when wetted and even moderate slopes are prone to slumpand/or slide.August 2010 Mill Creek Page 2

Stormwater Management Master Plan9.1.4 SoilsSection 2.2.2 of the SMMP explains in detail the five soil groups used to classify soils in thisstudy. The soil composition in the Mill Creek Watershed is principally from soil groups B, C,and the unclassified group. The soil groups in the Mill Creek Watershed can be found on MapMC-3.9.1.5 Land UseThe majority of the land use in the Mill Creek Watershed is residential, with commercial areaslocated along Dixie Highway and a combination of commercial and industrial uses near the river.The existing land use in Mill Creek can be found on Map MC-4.9.1.6 Regional Basins/Channel ImprovementsThe Wheeler Basin is a regional basin located in the Mill Creek Watershed. The basin wasconstructed to relieve flooding from the combined sewer system.9.1.7 Local BasinsThere are currently 46 local basins located in the Mill Creek watershed. These basins are shownon Map MC-2.9.2 ModelingHydraulic analyses for Lower Mill Creek werecompleted using HEC-1. Curve numbers, drainagearea, and time of concentration were used todetermine flows from each subbasin. Storageroutings were added as needed and numerous trialswere required in order to determine final dischargevalues. Using the discharge values from the HEC-1models, HEC -2 was used to create stream profilesfor each stream. Cross sections and bridgeelevations and geometry were field surveyed.Calibrations were done by comparing dischargedata from the Southwest Jefferson County LocalFlood Protection Project (SJCLPP) design analysisand data from the original FIS for Jefferson County.Backwater from the pumping station on Mill Creekaffects Mill Creek up to Moorman Road and alsothe lower portions of Valley Creek and Black PondCreek.Mill Creek Cutoff near outlet to Ohio RiverAugust 2010 Mill Creek Page 3

Stormwater Management Master PlanUpper Mill Creek was also modeled used HEC-1 and the results were verified using thedischarge data from the SJCLPP design analysis and the original FIS for Jefferson County.Curve numbers, drainage area, and time of concentration were used to determine flows fromeach subbasin. Storage routings were added as needed and numerous trials were required inorder to determine final discharge values. Using the discharge values from the HEC-1 models,HEC -2 was used to create stream profiles for each stream. Cross sections and bridge elevationsand geometry were field surveyed. At the time of the study, no USGS stream gauges existed inthe watershed. Backwater from the pumping station affects the Mill Creek Cutoff, Upper MillCreek, Huff Lane Tributary, Gardens Tributary, and Lower Garrison Ditch.Some tributaries to Mill Creek, including the uppermost section of Upper Mill Creek, smallportions of Big Run Creek, and a small portion of Ponder Creek were studied using approximatemethods. The floodplains were calculated using Manning’s Formula. Cross sections weredetermined from maps and field reconnaissance, but were not field surveyed. Bridge and culvertdata were only gathered if it was expected to cause significant backwater. Bridge and culvertdata were hand measured and no survey was completed. Slopes used for Manning’s Formulawere based on topographic mapping.Along the floodwall, areas that are inundated bybackwater during pumping operations were purchasedby the County and/or put into flowage easements toprotect the areas from future development.Floodplain limits for the 1 percent annual chance floodwere calculated for existing conditions and future,fully developed conditions. Existing conditions arelabeled as the FEMA floodplain and future conditionsare labeled as the Local Regulatory Floodplain. MapMC-5 shows the limits of each of these floodplains.9.3 Action Plan9.3.1 Watershed RequirementsNew development in the Mill Creek Watershed isrequired to detain proposed stormwater discharge ratesLouisville Loop Bridge over Mill Creek Cutoff to predeveloped conditions for the 2, 10, and 100 yearstorm events through the MSD Design Manual. TheNRCS Type II, 24 hour rainfall distribution is required to be used for the modeling. In areaswhere adequate downstream facilities exist, especially in the lower portion of a watershed wherepeak flows from the new development will occur substantially prior to the overall peak of thestream, on a case-by-case basis, MSD allows increased runoff to be compensated using aregional facility fee. This regional facility fee is used to construct regional basins.August 2010 Mill Creek Page 4

Stormwater Management Master PlanFloodplain compensation is required in the Big Run Watershed of Mill Creek at a ratio of 1.5:1and 1:1 for the remaining areas in the Mill Creek Watershed for any fill placed in the fullydeveloped local regulatory floodplain as required in the Louisville Metro FloodplainManagement Ordinance. The ratio may be increased on a site-specific basis as determined byMSD.As stated in the Louisville Metro Floodplain Management Ordinance, a natural 25 foot buffer oneach side of the stream bank must be preserved on all solid blueline streams as defined by theUSGS 7.5 minute topographic maps. In addition, solid blueline streams may not be relocated,channelized, or stripped, with the exception of public projects such as road crossings, utilities,and detention basins that have no other viable alternative.A minimum buffer is also required by the KDOW through its Kentucky Pollutant DischargeElimination System (KPDES) General Permit For Stormwater Discharges Associated WithConstruction Activities (KYR10). A minimum 25 foot buffer is required for discharges towaters categorized as High Quality or Impaired Water (Non-construction related impairment). Aminimum 50 foot buffer is required for discharges to waters categorized as Impaired Waters(Sediment impaired, but no TMDL).In order to promote enhanced water quality and aquatic habitat, natural channel designtechniques are the preferred method for the design of streams. Channel improvement projects inblueline streams are required to use natural or “soft” approaches. MSD’s Design Manualoutlines this requirement in Section 10.3.6.Green infrastructure and post-construction requirements for new development are currentlyunder development and are anticipated to be required as part of the MS4 Permit in late2011/2012. One aspect of these anticipated requirements that will benefit the stormwatermanagement program is the application of a water quality volume requirement. It is anticipatedthat the first 0.75 inches of the 80% stormwater runoff event will be required to be infiltrated,treated, or otherwise managed for new development projects.The Louisville/Jefferson County Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Ordinance requiresdevelopments with 2000 square feet of disturbance and developments within 50 feet of asensitive feature as defined by the ordinance to obtain a Site Disturbance Permit. The SiteDisturbance Permit requires an EPSC plan to be developed which achieves 80% design removalof total suspended solids that are generated by the site. The design storm to be used is the 10-year 24 hour SCS Type II storm event.9.3.2 Proposed ProjectsRecently, MSD and the USACE launched a study of the Upper Mill Creek Basin similar to theSouth Fork Beargrass Creek study. The study will identify projects eligible for federalparticipation. The study has already identified eight projects, most of which will be stormwaterdetention basins. Other projects, such as stream restorations, may also be considered.August 2010 Mill Creek Page 5

Stormwater Management Master PlanFive green infrastructure projects are currently being considered in the Mill Creek watershed.For more information regarding green infrastructure projects, see Appendix B of this report andalso the Final CSO Long-Term Control Plan document, which is part of MSD’s IOAP.In addition, small scale drainage projects are taken care of through the program Project DRI.Beginning in 2003, MSD initiated an aggressive program to address a wide variety of drainageissues that are brought to us by our customers. This program, dubbed Project DRI (DrainageResponse Initiative), assigned experienced project managers, contractors, and inspectors toaddress drainage problems on a "grade-to-drain" basis. Efforts under this program addressproblems ranging from structural flooding to alleviating minor standing water problems.Available funds are distributed across the service area based on relative levels of customerconcerns and estimated costs of repairs within geographic areas. Since 2003, MSD has spentover $125 million in capital drainage improvements in our service area under the three phases ofProject DRI. Phase 4 of Project DRI is scheduled to begin in July 2010. Projects lists for Phases1-3 can be found in the Appendix C of this report. A final project list for Phase 4 is currentlyunder development.August 2010 Mill Creek Page 6

10.0 OHIO RIVER/CITY

Stormwater Management Master Plan10.0 OHIO RIVER/CITY10.1 Watershed Study Area10.1.1 GeneralThe Ohio River/City Watershed was not studied in detail in the SMMP. This watershed isdrained by a complex system of combined sewers. No open channels of any magnitude exist.An aerial map showing the Ohio River/City drainage area is shown on Maps CORE-1 andCORW-1 on the following page. A drainage map showing the six subbasins for the OhioRiver/City Watershed is included as Maps CORE-2 and CORW-2.Communities situated in this watershed includedowntown Louisville, Kenwood, SouthernHeights, Beechmont, Highland Park, Oakdale,Wilder Park, Parkland, South Parkland,Shawnee, and Portland.Notable landmarks include portions of IroquoisPark, the Kentucky Fair and Exposition Center,the University of Louisville, Churchill Downs,Kentucky International Convention Center, CityHall, Shawnee Park, and Chickasaw Park. Manyparks are located along the Ohio River andprovide preserved open space along the OhioRiver floodplain. These parks include EvaBandman Park, Capertown Swamp, ChickasawPark, Carrie Gaulbert Cox Park, Hays KennedyPark, Kulmer Reserve, Lannan Park, PortlandWharf Park, Riverside Farnsley-MoormanLanding, Riverview Park, Thurman HutchinsPark, Twin Park, and Waterfront Park.Combined Sewer System at the Southwestern Outfall10.1.2 TopographyThe major portion of the Ohio River/City Watershed is located in the Flood Plain TopographicRegion. The remaining portion lies in the Central Basin. A very flat, low-lying terrainpredominates both the Flood Plain and Central Basin Regions.Elevations range from about 382 feet, the pool stage of the Ohio River below the McAlpine Lockand Dam, to about 586 feet in Glenview.August 2010 Ohio River/City Page 1

Stormwater Management Master Plan10.1.3 GeologyThe portion lying in the Flood Plain Topographic Region is predominately underlain by glacialoutwash deposits of Quaternary age. These deposits vary in thickness from several feet to wellover one hundred feet, and are comprised of complex layers of silts, sands, clays, and gravels.This region is a well documented aquifer and groundwater is readily available.The portion of this watershed lying in the Central Basin Topographic Region is predominatelyunderlain by alluvial lacustrine deposits ofQuaternary age. These deposits vary in thicknessfrom zero to fifty feet, and are comprised of layersof silts, sands, clays, and gravels.10.1.4 SoilsSection 2.2.2 of the SMMP explains in detail thefive soil groups used to classify soils in this study.The soil composition in the Ohio River/CityWatershed is mainly unclassified. The soils in theOhio River/City Watershed are shown on MapsCORE-3 and CORW-3.10.1.5 Land UseOhio River near Mill Creek outletThe land use in the Ohio River/City Watershed ismainly a mix of residential, commercial, andindustrial land use. The existing land use in theOhio River/City Watershed is shown on MapsCORE-4 and CORW-4.10.1.6 Regional Basins/Channel ImprovementsNo open channels of any magnitude exist in this watershed, however, in order to help reducecombined sewer overflows, there are two regional basins located in the Ohio River/CityWatershed. These basins are Executive Inn Basin and Brady Lake.10.1.7 Local BasinsThere are currently 28 local basins located in the Ohio River/City watershed. These basins areshown on Maps CORE-2 and CORW-2.10.2 ModelingThe only mapped floodplain in the Ohio River/City Watershed is located along the Ohio River.Modeling of the Ohio River was completed by the Ohio River Division of the USACE inAugust 2010 Ohio River/City Page 2

Stormwater Management Master PlanCincinnati, Ohio. The USACE used the methods presented in the USACE hydrology report andhistoric gage records along the Ohio dating from 1832 to the present.No mapped floodplains exist in the Ohio River/City Watershed behind the floodwall because noopen channels of any magnitude exist within this watershed. The area behind the floodwall isdrained through the combined sewer system. Modeling has been done for this combined sewersystem to predict the response of the system to various rain events. This model was createdusing the EPA’s XP-SWMM program and was calibrated based on observed data during variousstorm conditions. The pipe network used was based on the best available data, which includedas-built drawings, construction drawings, and CSO inventory records.Floodplain limits for the Ohio River for the 1 percent annual chance flood were calculated forexisting conditions and future, fully developed conditions. Existing conditions are labeled as theFEMA floodplain and future conditions are labeled as the Local Regulatory Floodplain. MapsCORE-5 and CORW-5 show the limits of each of these floodplains.10.2 Action Plan10.2.1 Watershed RequirementsNew development in the Ohio River/City Watershed is restricted to a 6-inch stormwaterconnection to the combined sewer system to help alleviate the flows in the system during rainevents. Engineers must design the new development’s onsite stormwater system to work withthe 6-inch outlet. Examples of this include building detention basins, oversizing onsitestormwater pipes, and using green solutions such as pervious pavement and rain gardens toreduce peak flows and overall runoff volumes.Floodplain compensation is required in the Ohio River/City Watershed at a ratio of 1:1 for anyfill placed in the fully developed local regulatory floodplain as required in the Louisville MetroFloodplain Management Ordinance. This ratio may be increased on a site-specific basis asdetermined by MSD.As stated in the Louisville Metro Floodplain Management Ordinance, a natural 25 foot buffer oneach side of the stream bank must be preserved on all solid blueline streams as defined by theUSGS 7.5 minute topographic maps. In addition, solid blueline streams may not be relocated,channelized, or stripped, with the exception of public projects such as road crossings, utilities,and detention basins that have no other viable alternative.A minimum buffer is also required by the KDOW through its Kentucky Pollutant DischargeElimination System (KPDES) General Permit For Stormwater Discharges Associated WithConstruction Activities (KYR10). A minimum 25 foot buffer is required for discharges towaters categorized as High Quality or Impaired Water (Non-construction related impairment). Aminimum 50 foot buffer is required for discharges to waters categorized as Impaired Waters(Sediment impaired, but no TMDL).August 2010 Ohio River/City Page 3

Stormwater Management Master PlanIn order to promote enhanced water quality and aquatic habitat, natural channel designtechniques are the preferred method for the design of streams. Channel improvement projects inblueline streams are required to use natural or “soft” approaches. MSD’s Design Manualoutlines this requirement in Section 10.3.6.Green infrastructure and post-construction requirements for new development are currentlyunder development and are anticipated to be required as part of the MS4 Permit in late2011/2012. One aspect of these anticipated requirements that will benefit the stormwatermanagement program is the application of a water quality volume requirement. It is anticipatedthat the first 0.75 inches of the 80% stormwater runoff event will be required to be infiltrated,treated, or otherwise managed for new development projects.The Louisville/Jefferson County Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Ordinance requiresdevelopments with 2000 square feet of disturbance and developments within 50 feet of asensitive feature as defined by the ordinance to obtain a Site Disturbance Permit. The SiteDisturbance Permit requires an EPSC plan to be developed which achieves 80% design removalof total suspended solids that are generated by the site. The design storm to be used is the 10-year 24 hour SCS Type II storm event.10.2.2 Proposed ProjectsMSD is currently under a consent decree by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and theKentucky Environmental and Public Protection Cabinet to reduce sanitary and combined seweroverflows. An Integrated Overflow Abatement Plan (IOAP) has been prepared by MSD toaddress the consent decree. The IOAP is a long term plan to control combined and separatesewer overflows in the community so that MSD can meet all federal and state clean waterregulations. These regulations must be met by 2024 in order to avoid severe financial penalties.The goal of the program is to improve water quality and protect the health of the citizens ofLouisville Metro.Several combined sewer projects, which are part of the IOAP, are proposed in the OhioRiver/City Watershed. These projects include seven storage basins, two sewer separationprojects, and a wet weather treatment facility. More information regarding these projects can befound in Appendix A of this report and also in the final CSO Long-Term Control Plan document,which is part of MSD’s IOAP.Thirteen green infrastructure projects are planned in the Ohio River/City Watershed. Theseprojects include two bioswale projects, three green parking lot projects, one rain garden, twopermeable alleys, one green street project, and four dry wells. These projects are scheduled to becompleted in 2010 and 2011. Currently there are also 53 other projects being considered in thiswatershed. For more information regarding green infrastructure projects, see Appendix B of thisreport and also the Final CSO Long-Term Control Plan document, which is part of MSD’sIOAP.August 2010 Ohio River/City Page 4

Stormwater Management Master PlanSmall scale drainage projects are taken care of through the program Project DRI. Beginning in2003, MSD initiated an aggressive program to address a wide variety of drainage issues that arebrought to us by our customers. This program, dubbed Project DRI (Drainage ResponseInitiative), assigned experienced project managers, contractors, and inspectors to addressdrainage problems on a "grade-to-drain" basis. Efforts under this program address problemsranging from structural flooding to alleviating minor standing water problems. Available fundsare distributed across the service area based on relative levels of customer concerns andestimated costs of repairs within geographic areas. Since 2003, MSD has spent over $125 millionin capital drainage improvements in our service area under the three phases of Project DRI.Phase 4 of Project DRI is scheduled to begin in July 2010. Projects lists for Phases 1-3 can befound in the Appendix C of this report. A final project list for Phase 4 is currently underdevelopment.August 2010 Ohio River/City Page 5

11.0 PENNSYLVANIA RUN

Stormwater Management Master Plan11.0 Pennsylvania Run11.1 Watershed Study Area11.1.1 GeneralThe 7 square mile Pennsylvania Run Watershed is located in south central Jefferson County. Itsheadwaters originate in the Highview area, and the stream flows in a southerly direction, passinginto Bullitt County, and eventually discharging into Cedar Creek. For the purpose of this study,the Jefferson County/Bullitt County border serves as the approximate southerly watershedboundary. Pennsylvania Run is theonly major stream in this watershed.An aerial map showing thePennsylvania Run Watershed isincluded as Map PR-1. A drainage mapshowing the 3 subbasins forPennsylvania Run is included as MapPR-2.Highview is the only community in thePennsylvania Run Watershed.McNeely LakeNotable landmarks include McNeelyLake and McNeely Lake Park.McNeely Lake Park is located alongPennsylvania Run and providespreserved open space.11.1.2 TopographyThe entire Pennsylvania Run Watershed is situated in the Eastern Uplands Topographic Region.Broad, fairly steep-sided valleys and narrow ridge crests dominate the terrain. Streams have cutdeeply into this terrain and flow through well-entrenched channels.Elevations vary from about 515 feet at the Jefferson County/Bullitt County line, to about 685 feetin the Highview area.11.1.3 GeologyThe major portion of this watershed in underlain by limestone of middle Silurian age.Pennsylvania Run has eroded deeply into, and in some cases through this limestone. MiddleSilurian age shales and dolomites are commonly exposed in the valley walls. The general dip ofthese rocks is toward the west at a little less than one foot in one hundred feet. Surficial featuresdo not indicate karst activity, but springs are common on top of the exposed shale.August 2010 Pennsylvania Run Page 1

Stormwater Management Master Plan11.1.4 SoilsSection 2.2.2 of the SMMP explains in detail the five soil groups used to classify soils in thisstudy. The soil composition in the Pennsylvania Run Watershed is mainly from soil groups Band C and the unclassified soil group. The soil groups in the Pennsylvania Run Watershed canbe found on Map PR-3.11.1.5 Land UseThe majority of the land use in the Pennsylvania Run Watershed is residential. The existing landuse map in the Pennsylvania Run Watershed can be found on Map PR-4.11.1.6 Regional Basins/Channel ImprovementsNo regional basins or major channel improvement projects are located in the Pennsylvania RunWatershed; however the largest lake in Jefferson County, McNeely Lake is located within thiswatershed.11.1.7 Local BasinsThere are currently 28 local control basins located in the Pennsylvania Run watershed. Thesebasins are shown on Map PR-2.11.2 ModelingNew hydrologic modeling was completed for Pennsylvania Run for the 2006 FIS. HEC-HMSwas used for the modeling. Hydraulic parameters such as curve number, time of concentration,and soil groups were developed using datafrom LOJIC. Several storage routings wereincluded in the model, including McNeelyLake. Water surface elevations weredetermined using HEC-RAS. Crosssections were obtained from field surveys.All bridges, dams, and culverts were fieldsurveyed to obtain elevation data andstructural geometry. Roughness coefficientswere determined based on field inspectionsand aerial photography.The portion of Pennsylvania Runapproximately 800’ south of MountPennsylvania Run at Mount Washington RoadWashington Road was studied usingapproximate methods. The floodplain wascalculated using Manning’s Formula. Cross sections were determined from maps and fieldreconnaissance, but were not field surveyed. Bridge and culvert data were only gathered if it wasAugust 2010 Pennsylvania Run Page 2

Stormwater Management Master Planexpected to cause significant backwater. Bridge and culvert data were hand measured and nosurvey was completed. Slopes used for Manning’s Formula were based on topographicmapping.Floodplain limits for the 1 percent annual chance flood were calculated for existing conditionsand future, fully developed conditions. Existing conditions are labeled as the FEMA floodplainand future conditions are labeled as the Local Regulatory Floodplain. Map PR-5 shows thelimits of each of these floodplains.11.3 Action Plan11.3.1 Watershed RequirementsNew development in the Pennsylvania Run Watershed is required to detain proposed stormwaterdischarge rates to predeveloped conditions for the 2, 10, and 100 year storm events through theMSD Design Manual. The NRCS Type II, 24 hour rainfall distribution is required to be used forthe modeling. In areas where adequate downstream facilities exist, especially in the lowerportion of a watershed where peak flows from the new development will occur substantiallyprior to the overall peak of the stream, on a case-by-case basis, MSD allows increased runoff tobe compensated using a regional facility fee. This regional facility fee is used to constructregional basins.Floodplain compensation is required in thePennsylvania Run Watershed at a ratio of 1:1 for anyfill placed in the fully developed local regulatoryfloodplain as required in the Louisville MetroFloodplain Management Ordinance. The ratio may beincreased on a site-specific basis as determined byMSD.As stated in the Louisville Metro FloodplainManagement Ordinance, a natural 25 foot buffer oneach side of the stream bank must be preserved on allsolid blueline streams as defined by the USGS 7.5minute topographic maps. In addition, solid bluelinestreams may not be relocated, channelized, or stripped,with the exception of public projects such as roadcrossings, utilities, and detention basins that have noother viable alternative.McNeely Lake DamA minimum buffer is also required by the KDOW through its Kentucky Pollutant DischargeElimination System (KPDES) General Permit For Stormwater Discharges Associated WithConstruction Activities (KYR10). A minimum 25 foot buffer is required for discharges towaters categorized as High Quality or Impaired Water (Non-construction related impairment). AAugust 2010 Pennsylvania Run Page 3

Stormwater Management Master Planminimum 50 foot buffer is required for discharges to waters categorized as Impaired Waters(Sediment impaired, but no TMDL).In order to promote enhanced water quality and aquatic habitat, natural channel designtechniques are the preferred method for the design of streams. Channel improvement projects inblueline streams are required to use natural or “soft” approaches. MSD’s Design Manualoutlines this requirement in Section 10.3.6.Green infrastructure and post-construction requirements for new development are currentlyunder development and are anticipated to be required as part of the MS4 Permit in late2011/2012. One aspect of these anticipated requirements that will benefit the stormwatermanagement program is the application of a water quality volume requirement. It is anticipatedthat the first 0.75 inches of the 80% stormwater runoff event will be required to be infiltrated,treated, or otherwise managed for new development projects.The Louisville/Jefferson County Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Ordinance requiresdevelopments with 2000 square feet of disturbance and developments within 50 feet of asensitive feature as defined by the ordinance to obtain a Site Disturbance Permit. The SiteDisturbance Permit requires an EPSC plan to be developed which achieves 80% design removalof total suspended solids that are generated by the site. The design storm to be used is the 10-year 24 hour SCS Type II storm event.11.3.2 Proposed ProjectsSmall scale drainage projects are taken care of through the program Project DRI. Beginning in2003, MSD initiated an aggressive program to address a wide variety of drainage issues that arebrought to us by our customers. This program, dubbed Project DRI (Drainage ResponseInitiative), assigned experienced project managers, contractors, and inspectors to addressdrainage problems on a "grade-to-drain" basis. Efforts under this program address problemsranging from structural flooding to alleviating minor standing water problems. Available fundsare distributed across the service area based on relative levels of customer concerns andestimated costs of repairs within geographic areas. Since 2003, MSD has spent over $125 millionin capital drainage improvements in our service area under the three phases of Project DRI.Phase 4 of Project DRI is scheduled to begin in July 2010. Projects lists for Phases 1-3 can befound in the Appendix C of this report. A final project list for Phase 4 is currently underdevelopment.August 2010 Pennsylvania Run Page 4

12.0 POND CREEK

Stormwater Management Master Plan12.0 POND CREEK12.1 Watershed Study Area12.1.1 GeneralThe 94 square mile Pond Creek Watershed is located in south central and southwest JeffersonCounty. It is primarily drained by a series of natural and improved channels called Fern Creek,Northern Ditch, Southern Ditch, and Pond Creek. The headwaters of Fern Creek originate in thewest side of Jeffersontown and flow southwest to Shepherdsville Road. At this point, the flowturns to the west and the improved channel is calledNorthern Ditch. This westerly flow continues intothe vicinity of the Louisville and NashvilleRailroad’s Osborn Yard, where it turns southwestand finally outlets into Southern Ditch at the OuterLoop. The flow in Southern Ditch, an improvedchannel, originates in the Smyrna area and moveswest, generally paralleling the Outer Loop. Fromthis point, Southern Ditch flows to the west aboutthree-quarters of a mile, then turns to the southwestand flows about one mile to Manslick Road.Downstream from Manslick Road, the naturalchannel is called Pond Creek. It flows in a generallysouthwesterly direction to its eventual outlet into theSalt River. Numerous tributaries enter these fourmain channels, including Fishpool Creek, MudCreek, Wilson Creek, Bee Lick Creek, GreasyDitch, Duck Spring Branch, Salt Block Creek, SlateRun, Bearcamp Run, Crane Run, Brier Run, andWeaver Run. Aerial maps showing the Pond CreekWatershed are included as Maps PCW-1, PCC-1, andPond Creek Flood Pumping StationPCE-1. Drainage maps showing the 38 subbasins for Pond Creek are included as Maps PCW-2,PCC-2, and PCE-2.Communities situated in this watershed include parts of Jeffersontown, Fern Creek, Highview,Newburg, Smyrna, Okolona, Lynnview, Auburndale, Fairdale, Prairie Village, Medora, Orell,and part of Valley Station.Notable landmarks include the Louisville International Airport, General Electric’s AppliancePark, Jefferson Mall, part of Iroquois Park, Komosdale Cement Plant, and much of the JeffersonCounty Memorial Forest. Three USGS gauges are located in the Pond Creek Watershed,including two on Pond Creek and one on Northern Ditch. Roberson Run Park is located alongRoberson Run, a tributary of Pond Creek, and provides preserved open space along thattributary. A conservation easement has been created near the Outer Loop by the Trinity HighSchool Foundation to protect existing wetlands in the Pond Creek watershed. Three floodplainAugust 2010 Pond Creek Page 1

Stormwater Management Master Plancompensation/wetlands mitigation banks are also located in this watershed. In addition, aWoodland Protection Area has been established in the Brookhurst Subdivision.12.1.2 TopographyThe Pond Creek Watershed is unique, in that it encompasses parts of all four of JeffersonCounty’s Topographic Regions. Fern Creek is in the Eastern Uplands. Northern and SouthernDitch are in the Central Basin. Pond Creek has eroded a trench through the knobs and drains aportion of the Flood Plain.In the Eastern Uplands Topographic Region, broad steep-sided valleys and gently rollingplateaus dominate the terrain. Major streams have cut deeply into this terrain and they flowthrough well-entrenched channels.In the Central Basin Topographic Region, an extremely flat, low-lying terrain predominates.This was formerly a swampy area. The major streams have been greatly improved and flow inwell entrenched, though very low gradient slope, channels.In the Knobs Topographic Region, steep-sided, round-topped hills dominate the terrain. Streamchannels are deeply cut into these hills and commonly have high gradient slopes.In the Flood Plain Topographic Region, a very flat, lowlyingterrain predominates. Stream channels of lowgradient slopes tend to parallel the Ohio River, andterraces of ten to twenty feet in height are common.Elevations range from about 382, the pool stage of theOhio River below the McAlpine Lock and Dam, to inexcess of 900 feet, along the county’s southernboundary.12.1.3 GeologyThe portion of this watershed lying in the EasternUplands Topographic Region is predominately underlainby limestones of lower Devonian and middle Silurianage. At the boundary with the Central Basin, anoccasional exposure of middle Devonian age shale isPond Creekobserved. Only in a few stream beds are middle Silurianage shales exposed. The general dip of theses rock beds,or strata, is toward the west at about one and one half feet in one hundred feet. Near theboundary of the Central Basin, the general dip approached two and one half feet in one hundredfeet.August 2010 Pond Creek Page 2

Stormwater Management Master PlanThe portion of this watershed lying in the Central Basin Topographic Region is predominatelyunderlain by alluvial lacustrine deposits of Quaternary age. These deposits vary in thicknessfrom zero to fifty feet, and are comprised of complex layers of silts, sands, clays, and gravels.The portion of this watershed lying in the Knobs Topographic Region is predominately underlainby a hilly complex of Mississippian age siltstones and shales, whose lower flanks are covered byzero to thirty feet of alluvial deposits of Quaternary age loess, eolian sand, and terrace materials.The general dip of the rock beds, or strata, in this hilly area is toward the west at a little less thanone foot in one hundred feet. Karst activityis not associated with this region. It shouldbe noted, however, that Mississippian shalesbecome plastic when wetted and evenmoderate slopes are prone to slump and/orslide.The portion of this watershed lying in theFlood Plain Topographic Region ispredominately underlain by glacial outwashdeposits of Quaternary age. These depositsvary in thickness from several feet to wellover one hundred feet, and are comprised ofcomplex layers of silts, sands, clays, andgravels. This region is a well documentedaquifer and groundwater is readily available.Vulcan Regional Basin12.1.4 SoilsSection 2.2.2 of the SMMP explains in detail the five soils groups used to classify soils in thisstudy. The soil composition in the Pond Creek Watershed is mainly soil groups B and C and theunclassified soil group. The soils in the Pond Creek Watershed are shown on Maps PCW-3,PCC-3, and PCE-3.12.1.5 Land UseThe majority of the land use in the Pond Creek Watershed is residential. The existing land use inthe Pond Creek Watershed is shown on Maps PCW-4, PCC-4, and PCE-4.12.1.6 Regional Basins/Channel ImprovementsThe first regional basin built by MSD was the Roberson Run Basin. It was built in the early1990s and is relatively small. Although the impacts on flooding are minimal by today’sstandards, the basin is a multiuse facility with the incorporation of walking paths around thebasin that link adjoining residential areas.August 2010 Pond Creek Page 3

Stormwater Management Master PlanIn 1998, MSD, Jefferson County Government, and the USACE began the construction phase ofthe Pond Creek Flood Prevention Project. The final phase of this project is currently underway.The project will utilize large basins for flood storage and channel improvements to remove anestimated 2,000 buildings from the danger of most floods. In addition, the project willincorporate Greenways principles that will provide pedestrian access to Pond Creek. Walkingand biking paths will help connect neighborhoods and introduce area residents to ever improvingwater quality along Pond Creek. A description of each phase of the project is listed below.Phase I: The Okolona Wetlands RestorationSite is an environmental restoration of 15 acresof wetlands located in a sludge lagoon near theOkolona Wastewater Treatment Plant. Therestoration process included draining the area ofsludge and replanting native vegetation. Theplans for this restoration phase have beencompleted.Phase II: The Vulcan Detention Basin includedconstructing a dam on Fishpool Creek, installinga low-flow pipe, and constructing an overflowstructure into the basin. The basin was designedMelco Basin Pump Stationto fill during a 24-hour storm event and drainover a period of approximately eight days. Thisbasin became operational in September 1999. The capacity of the detention basin is 450 acrefeet.A diversion dam was constructed across the creek and an 18’’ pipe was placed through thedam to maintain base flows.Phase III: The Melco Detention Basin behind the Ford Motor Plant was completed in 2001. Itexpanded an existing 15-acre borrow pit to 80 acres, which increased the storage capacity to1,500 acre-feet.Phase IV: This phase included channelmodifications to Northern Ditch betweenPreston Highway and the Melco Basin inlet.It also included widening one bank ofNorthern Ditch for a distance of almost 1.5miles, replacing culverts and installing rifflestructures and pools in the stream toimprove aquatic habitat.Phase V: Channel modifications to PondCreek and the placement of a multipurposerecreation trail alongside the creek arecurrently under construction. This phaseNorthern Ditch widening west of Preston HwyAugust 2010 Pond Creek Page 4

Stormwater Management Master Planincludes widening one bank of Pond Creek for a distance of 2.4 miles, replacing culverts andinstalling riffle structures and pools in the stream to improve aquatic habitat.In addition to the USACE project, MSD has also worked with a private company to create afloodplain and runoff compensation bank located in the Pond Creek Watershed. Thiscompensation bank is funded though private development. It consists of three basins. Ponds 1and 2 have been constructed. Pond 1 is located near I-65 and the Outer Loop and is 80 ac-ft.Pond 2 is located near Wilson Creek and the Gene Snyder Freeway and is 26.5 ac-ft. Pond 3 iscurrently under construction. This pond is located at National Turnpike and Southern Ditch andwill be 234 ac-ft. These ponds also function as wetland mitigation banks.12.1.7 Local BasinsThere are currently 154 local basins located in the Pond Creek watershed. These basins areshown on Maps PCW-2, PCC-2, and PCE-2.12.2 ModelingNew hydrologic analyses was completed for the Pond Creek Watershed in the 2006 FIS,including Blue Spring Ditch, Fishpool Creek, Northern Ditch, Pond Creek, Southern Ditch,Wilson Creek, and Wet Woods Creek. HEC-HMS software was used to develop the models anddetermine the 10, 2, 1, and 0.2 percent annual chance events using the standard SCS Type II 24hour design storm distribution. Hydrologic parameters, such as curve number, time ofconcentration, and soil groups, were developed using information from LOJIC. An unsteadystate HEC-RAS model was created to determine water surface elevations. Cross sections wereobtained from field surveys. All bridges, dams, and culverts were field surveyed to obtainelevation data and structural geometry.Roughness coefficients were determined basedon field inspections and aerial photography.Ineffective flow areas were included in areaswhere restrictive fence lines and large or densedevelopment exists. Storage areas consideredin the unsteady state hydraulic model includeMelco, Vulcan, the upper portion of WetWoods Creek (left overbank area of NorthernDitch upstream of I-65), the lower portion ofWet Woods Creek (right overbank areadownstream of I-65), Blue Spring Ditch (leftoverbank area near Jefferson Boulevard), BeeLick Creek (upstream of I-265), Salt BlockCreek (south of I-265 and west of West ManslickRoad) and a mobile home park on DriftwoodDrive. Calibration of the models was done using flow and rainfall gauges located within theRenaissance Basin, a side saddle basin along SouthernDitch that was constructed by private developmentwatershed and the regression equations for Jefferson County. High water marks were also usedto help calibrate the models.August 2010 Pond Creek Page 5

Stormwater Management Master PlanHydrologic analyses for Bee Lick Creek, Cooper Chapel Branch, the lower portion of FernCreek, Filson Fork, Greasy Ditch, the lower portion of Little Bee Lick Creek, Manslick Branch,Mud Creek, the lower portion of Roberson Run, Slate Run, and Wet Woods Creek werecompleted using HEC-1. Hydrologic parameters such as curve number, drainage area, and timeof concentration were used to determine flows for each subbasin. Using the discharge valuesfrom the HEC-1 models, HEC -2 was used to create stream profiles for each stream. Storageroutings were added as needed and numerous trials were required in order to determine finaldischarge values. Cross sections and bridge elevations and geometry were field surveyed.Models were calibrated using high water marks from the 1964 flood and the log-Pearson TypeIII methodology.Bearcamp Run, Brier Creek, Crane Run, Downs Branch, the upper portion of Fern Creek, theupper portion of Little Bee Lick Creek, Picadilly Run, Porter Branch, Rangeland Run, ReardonHollow Ditch, the upper portion of Roberson Run, Roney Ditch, Schuff Branch, Walnut HillBranch, and Watterson Trail Creek were studied using approximate methods. The floodplainswere calculated using Manning’s Formula. Cross sections were determined from maps and fieldreconnaissance, but were not field surveyed. Bridge and culvert data were only gathered if it wasexpected to cause significant backwater. Bridge and culvert data were hand measured and nosurvey was completed. Slopes used for Manning’s Formula were based on topographicmapping.Along the floodwall, areas that are inundated by backwater during pumping operations werepurchased by the County and/or put into flowage easements to protect the areas from futuredevelopment.Wetlands along Wet Woods Creek constructed by WasteManagementFloodplain limits for the 1 percent annualchance flood were calculated for existingconditions and future, fully developedconditions. Existing conditions are labeledas the FEMA floodplain and futureconditions are labeled as the LocalRegulatory Floodplain. Maps PCW-5,PCC-5, and PCE-5 show the limits of eachof these floodplains.12.3 Action Plan12.3.1 Watershed RequirementsThe Pond Creek Watershed has significantflooding and drainage problems. A largeportion of the watershed is very flat and not well drained. Due to this fact, the increased runoffvolumes are generally more critical than the rate of discharge. Increases in runoff volume due todevelopment in the Pond Creek Watershed must be mitigated at a ratio of 1.5:1 as required in theAugust 2010 Pond Creek Page 6

Stormwater Management Master PlanMSD Design Manual. The ratio may be increased on a site-specific basis as determined byMSD. Per the MSD Design Manual, all detention basins are required to limit the post-developed2, 10, and 100 year flows to the pre-developed peak discharge rates through the MSD DesignManual. The NRCS Type II, 24 hour rainfall distribution is required to be used for the modeling.In areas where adequate downstream facilities exist, especially in the lower portion of awatershed where peak flows from the new development will occur substantially prior to theoverall peak of the stream, on a case-by-case basis, MSD allows increased runoff to becompensated using a regional facility fee. This regional facility fee is used to construct regionalbasins.Floodplain compensation is also required in the Pond Creek watershed at a ratio 1.5:1 for any fillplaced in the fully developed local regulatory floodplain as required in the Design Manual. Theratio may be increased on a site-specific basis as determined by MSD.As stated in the Louisville Metro Floodplain Management Ordinance, a natural 25 foot buffer oneach side of the stream bank must be preserved on all solid blueline streams as defined by theUSGS 7.5 minute topographic maps. In addition, solid blueline streams may not be relocated,channelized, or stripped, with the exception of public projects such as road crossings, utilities,and detention basins that have no other viable alternative.A minimum buffer is also required by the KDOW through its Kentucky Pollutant DischargeElimination System (KPDES) General Permit For Stormwater Discharges Associated WithConstruction Activities (KYR10). A minimum 25 foot buffer is required for discharges towaters categorized as High Quality or Impaired Water (Non-construction related impairment). Aminimum 50 foot buffer is required for discharges to waters categorized as Impaired Waters(Sediment impaired, but no TMDL).In order to promote enhanced water quality and aquatic habitat, natural channel designtechniques are the preferred method for the design of streams. Channel improvement projects inblueline streams are required to use natural or “soft” approaches. MSD’s Design Manualoutlines this requirement in Section 10.3.6.Green infrastructure and post-construction requirements for new development are currentlyunder development and are anticipated to be required as part of the MS4 Permit in late2011/2012. One aspect of these anticipated requirements that will benefit the stormwatermanagement program is the application of a water quality volume requirement. It is anticipatedthat the first 0.75 inches of the 80% stormwater runoff event will be required to be infiltrated,treated, or otherwise managed for new development projects.The Louisville/Jefferson County Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Ordinance requiresdevelopments with 2000 square feet of disturbance and developments within 50 feet of asensitive feature as defined by the ordinance to obtain a Site Disturbance Permit. The SiteDisturbance Permit requires an EPSC plan to be developed which achieves 80% design removalof total suspended solids that are generated by the site. The design storm to be used is the 10-year 24 hour SCS Type II storm event.August 2010 Pond Creek Page 7

Stormwater Management Master Plan12.3.2 Proposed ProjectsIn addition to completing the joint project with the ACOE described in Section 12.1.6, MSD is inthe design stage for a flood control basin on Northern Ditch near its confluence with SouthernDitch. This basin, called the Aluma Basin, will be constructed on approximately 50 acres ofproperty recently purchased by MSD which lies between Northern Ditch and the Scottsdale andConfederate Acres subdivisions. This basin could provide an additional 300 acre/feet offloodplain storage in this low-lying area.Three green infrastructure projects are currently being considered in the Pond Creek watershed.For more information regarding green infrastructure projects, see Appendix B of this report andalso the Final CSO Long-Term Control Plan document, which is part of MSD’s IOAP.In addition to the proposed Aluma Basin and the green infrastructure projects, beginning in 2003,MSD initiated an aggressive program to address a wide variety of drainage issues that arebrought to us by our customers. This program, dubbed Project DRI (Drainage ResponseInitiative), assigned experienced project managers, contractors, and inspectors to addressdrainage problems on a "grade-to-drain" basis. Efforts under this program address problemsranging from structural flooding to alleviating minor standing water problems. Available fundsare distributed across the service area based on relative levels of customer concerns andestimated costs of repairs within geographic areas. Since 2003, MSD has spent over $125 millionin capital drainage improvements in our service area under the three phases of Project DRI.Phase 4 of Project DRI is scheduled to begin in July 2010. Projects lists for Phases 1-3 can befound in the Appendix C of this report. A final project list for Phase 4 is currently underdevelopment.August 2010 Pond Creek Page 8

Appendix AFinal Recommended CSO GrayInfrastructure Project List

Appendix BFinal Recommended GreenDemonstrations Project List

Appendix CProject DRI Phases I-IIIProject List

Project DRI Phase 1Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION1 LYNNVIEW/CHARLOTTE ANN DITCH PH. 2 $01 LAKE DREAMLAND DIP $35,0001 SOUTHWESTERN PKWY (Gibson) DIP $40,0001 WINNROSE WAY DIP $75,0001 S. 34TH (800) DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $75,0001 S. OVERBROOK (5100) DRAINAGE IMP $75,0001 EDGIN AVENUE DRAINAGE IMP $90,0001 DULLWORTH DRIVE DIP $100,0001 MELODY ACRES LANE DRAINAGE IMP $100,0001 ROSEWEDGE WAY DRAINAGE IMP $100,0001 SHAGBARK (3400) DRAINAGE IMP $100,0001 BUBBLING OVER DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $150,0001 SETON HILL DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP. $160,0001 OLD CANE RUN DIP $175,0001 KRAMERS LANE DIP $187,5001 RIVERSIDE GARDENS DIP $187,5001 LENOIR AVENUE DRAINAGE IMP $200,0001 OBOE DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $200,0001 LIKENS/GUDGEL DIP $343,7501 LYNNVIEW/CHARLOTTE ANN DIP $375,0001 CLARINET DRIVE DIP $375,0001 SOUTH CRUMS DIP $500,0001 KAUFMAN LANE DIP $875,0002 DAHL RD/FAIRY BELL CT DIP $02 ORANGE BLOSSOM (6809) DIP $10,0002 ROBINHOOD LANE DRAINAGE IMP $35,0002 REDONDO REAR YARD DIP $35,0002 SPICEWOOD LANE DRAINAGE IMP $45,6792 KREMER AVENUE DRAINAGE IMP $47,0002 PAPAYA COURT DIP $52,0002 TWIN OAKS DRAINAGE IMP $60,0002 NAOMI DRIVE DIP $60,0002 KERN COURT DIP $60,0002 HILTON COURT DIP $65,0002 BUECHEL BANK ROAD DIP $65,000Page 1

Project DRI Phase 1Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION2 RED FERN DIP $65,0002 GUEST AVENUE DRAINAGE IMP $71,5002 HILLWOOD DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $71,5002 WOODED WAY DIP $75,0002 MELDA LANE DIP $75,0002 BRUCE AVE DIP $75,0002 GREEN COVE DIP $75,0002 LIVELY/POITIER COURT DIP $75,0002 CAWOOD DRIVE DIP $75,0002 TERRACE GREEN CIRCLE DIP $75,0002 YAUPON/YEW REAR/ROAD DIP $85,0002 JEANINE DRIVE ROADSIDE DIP $90,0002 RITA/REDONDO REAR DIP $90,0002 EAST HELCK AVENUE DRAINAGE IMP $100,0002 INDUSTRIAL BLVD OUTLET $100,0002 INDUSTRIAL DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $110,0002 REGENTS WAY DRAINAGE IMP $110,0002 PLANE TREE/SAMARA DRAINAGE IMP $121,0002 GREEN MANOR/SANDSTONE BLVD DIP $145,0002 OAKDALE DIP $150,0002 ALBA WAY DIP $150,0002 CASPIAN/ARAL/BALATON REAR YARD DIP $150,0002 SPICEWOOD DRIVE WEST DIP $160,0002 RANGELAND RD PHASE 2 DIP $326,5003 FITZGERALD ROAD DR. IMP. $100,0003 DIXDALE AVENUE DIP $125,0003 NARRAGANSETT DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $125,0004 914 DIXIE HIGHWAY DIP $04 812 S. 2ND ST EMERGENCY DRAINAGE $04 S. JACKSON (1228) DIP $30,0004 JACOB ST (JACKSON TO CLAY) DR. IMP. $50,0005 CURRY CT (653) DRAINAGE IMP $60,0005 NORTHWESTERN PKWY PHASE II $100,0006 807 ALGONQUIN PARKWAY DIP $2,5006 HOMEVIEW DR DIP $100,000Page 2

Project DRI Phase 1Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION6 1400 BLOCK EARL AVENUE DIP $110,0007 FAIRMEADE RD AREA PHASE 2 DIP $07 BEECHWOOD VILLAGE DIP PHASE 2 $07 BEECHWOOD VILLAGE PH 3 $07 446 SWING LANE DRAINAGE IMP. $16,0007 4049 ORMOND DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP. $27,0007 GREENWAY DRIVE DIP $122,0007 GREENMEADOW CIRCLE DIP $222,0007 BEECHWOOD VILLAGE DIP $250,0007 FAIRMEADE ROAD DIP $252,0008 VALLEY VISTA (2357) DRAINAGE IMP $2,0008 SARATOGA (2535) DRAINAGE IMP $25,0008 STRATHMOOR BLVD (1900 BLK) DIP $40,0008 DOUGLASS BLVD DIP ALDERMAN $80,0008 SUMNER (3300 BLK) DRAINAGE IMP $140,0008 FLEMING ROAD DR. IMP. $150,0009 HEATHER HILLS DIP $09 ALTA CIRCLE (1012) DRAINAGE IMP $6,4009 LINDSAY AVENUE (2760) DRAINAGE IMP. $16,5009 ELINE AVE ALDERMAN DIP $30,0009 INDIANOLA AREA 2 DRAINAGE IMP $50,0009 KENNEDY AVE PH 2 ALDERMAN $117,0009 SYCAMORE AVE ALDERMAN PROJECT $140,4009 INDIANOLA SUBDIV DIP PROJECT AREA 8 $200,0009 WARNER/GRANDVIEW ALDERMAN DIP $237,00010 MARVIN AVENUE DR. IMP. $010 CURTIS AVENUE DIP $40,00010 BELMAR DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $52,00010 COUNCIL DISTRICT 10 FY04 DIP $110,00010 FARMDALE ROAD DRAINAGE IMP $115,00010 HESS LANE DIP $120,00010 COUNCIL DISTRICT 10 FY05 DIP $120,00010 PINEWOOD ROAD DRAINAGE IMP $135,00010 THRUSH ROAD DRAINAGE IMP $150,00010 GLENWORTH AVENUE DRAINAGE IMP $160,000Page 3

Project DRI Phase 1Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION10 TILE FACTORY LANE DRAINAGE IMP $180,00010 LEITH LANE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $250,00010 SCHUFF LANE DRAINAGE IMP $420,00011 NACHAND LANE DRAINAGE IMP $42,00011 SUNBURY LANE DRAINAGE IMP $70,00011 COUNCIL DISTRICT 11 FY05 DIP $75,00011 SOUTHERN AVENUE DIP $80,00011 COUNCIL DISTRICT 11 FY04 DIP $90,00011 FAIRLAND AVENUE DIP $90,00011 KLONDIKE LANE DIP $125,00011 GLENMEADE ROAD DRAINAGE IMP $125,00012 UNDINE DRIVE DR. IMP. $012 7506 EDENROC LANE DIP $14,70012 MT. EVEREST DRIVE DIP $15,00012 6706 ASTRAL DRIVE DIP $20,70012 7117 URANUS DRIVE DIP $22,30012 MELODY LANE DIP $25,00012 MOUNT CALVARY DIP $25,00012 MARYVIEW DRIVE DIP $26,00012 5310 VISTA JOHN DRIVE DIP $26,00012 5209 & 5214 GALAXIE DRIVE DIP $26,10012 NOTTOWAY CIRCLE DIP $50,00012 ALBANY AVE DIP $50,00012 SWAPS LANE DIP $50,00012 BEAHL BLVD DIP $60,00012 RAILROAD AVENUE DIP $60,00012 DOWNS COURT DIP $65,00012 MARIAN DRIVE DIP $65,00012 PADDOCK LANE DIP $70,00012 ALPS ROAD DIP $70,00012 MANSLICK PALATKA DIP $75,00012 LEMMAH DRIVE DIP $75,00012 LA VEL LANE DIP $75,00012 SONETTE WAY DIP $80,00012 DAISY/MELINDA DIP $80,000Page 4

Project DRI Phase 1Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION12 STRIVE DIP $80,00012 EUGENE WAY DIP $80,00012 CHADRON DRIVE DIP $100,00012 DERRICK DRIVE DIP $100,00012 WELBY ROAD DIP $120,00012 ARVIS/DELROSE DIP $150,00012 MEYERS LANE DIP $175,00012 BOSSER/MARIMONT DIP $725,00012 SYLVANIA DIP $750,00012 BRIDWELL DIP $875,00012 THOMAS/GRASTON DIP $1,501,00013 ROSEBANK CT DR. IMP. $013 BRANDYWYNE RESTORATION PROJECT $013 DEERING ROAD SIDEWALK PROJECT $013 YORKTOWN TERRACE DR. IMP. $013 OLD TOWNE ROAD DRAINAGE IMP $30,00013 10727 CHARLENE DRIVE DIP $40,00013 PIROUETTE AVENUE DIP $45,00013 NO.DITCH SLIDE REPAIR(7407 IND. COVE) $50,00013 MARYTENA COURT DIP $55,00013 LARLYN DRIVE DIP $55,00013 Lamborne Boulevard DIP $60,00013 CALLIE DRIVE DIP $65,00013 MITCHELL HILL/MT. HOLLY RD DIP $65,00013 STARLET DRIVE DIP $85,00013 FARMERS LANE OUTLET DIP $85,00013 WILTONWOOD COURT DIP $90,00013 STAR REST CIRCLE DIP $95,00013 HARPERS FERRY DRIVE DIP $110,00013 FOX AVENUE DIP $110,00013 TAVISTOCK/SCARBOROUGH DIP $110,00013 WINDSOR PLACE DRAINAGE IMP $115,00013 AFTERGLOW DIP $120,00013 10512 W. MANSLICK DIP $125,00013 BRIDGET/DORIS DRAINAGE IMP $150,000Page 5

Project DRI Phase 1Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION13 NOLA DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $150,00013 WILTON/CARLTON DRAINAGE IMP $150,00013 BROWN AUSTIN NORTH DIP $175,00013 SUNGOLD ESTATES DI $250,00013 OLD KENTUCKY HOME SUBDIVISION DIP $590,00014 BURGOO KING ROAD DIP $014 DONERAIL DR. IMP. $014 PENSIVE/CORNFLOWER DR. IMP. $014 DALTON/PONDER $014 DALTON/APOLLO DRAINAGE IMP $014 HEARTHSTONE DRAINAGE IMP. $014 GLENDALE ROAD DR. IMP. $014 JANNA DRIVE DR. IMP. $014 NOCTURNE/MIDDLEROSE DR. IMP. $014 6503 JOHNSONTOWN RD DR. IMP. $014 8601 THOMPSON LANE DIP $23,00014 7917 CARNATION DRIVE DIP $37,00014 WEST ORELL DIP $63,00014 BETHANY LANE DIP $63,00014 CARNATION DRIVE NORTH DIP $75,00014 JONQUIL DRIVE DIP $75,00014 GLOXINA/SEAFORTH DIP $80,00014 CARNATION DRIVE SOUTH DIP $80,00014 FENMORE AVE DIP $80,00014 DELTON ROAD DIP $100,00014 GREYSTONE DIP $100,00014 OAK PARK DIP $120,00014 NANCY LANE DIP $125,00014 ALEXANDER DIP $150,00014 PARADISE/PLAYER DIP $175,00014 NATHAN HALE WAY DIP $175,00014 LaPLAZA DIP $194,00014 WEST PAGES/MORNING GLORY DIP $200,00014 HINCHBROOK DIP $200,00014 WEST PAGES/DECKER RD DIP $250,000Page 6

Project DRI Phase 1Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION14 TIEDMAN SUBDIVISION PH. 1 DRAINAGE IMP. $274,00014 NORTH DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP. $312,00014 SOUTH DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP. $375,00014 YUMA DIP $625,00014 SUNNY VALE DIP $664,00014 DIXIE GARDENS DIP $723,00014 DALTON DIP $750,00014 ORELL ROAD DRAINAGE IMP $775,00014 BETHANY OAKS DIP $782,00014 CASTLE ROAD DIP $1,094,00014 COUNT FLEET DIP $1,157,00015 1406 ANNA LANE DIP $015 NANEEN DRIVE ROADSIDE DIP $015 CAROLYN ROAD DIP $015 MARRET PLACE DIP $10,00015 MALCOLM DIP $25,00015 CORNETTE WAY DIP $35,00015 4500 BLK SANDERS LANE DIP $45,00015 4523 ESTATE DRIVE DIP $46,10015 NORWAY NORTH DIP $65,00015 TURQUOIS/AMBER DIP $95,00016 VALE CIRCLE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $40,00016 AVENUE OF THE WOODS DIP $41,00016 5517 HEMPSTEAD RD DIP $46,00016 BALLARD HIGH SCHOOL BASIN $47,00016 RIVERWAY DRIVE DITCH DIP $61,30017 WASHINGTON/PERSHING DIP $017 FARNHAM DR (9000 BLK) DIP $017 BOXHILL LANE DR. IMP. $017 510 & 610 TUCKER STATION RD DIP $017 GLENHILL RD DR. IMP. $017 SOMERFORD ROAD DIP $46,00017 LAKELAND RD/WILLOW LAKE DIP $69,00017 COLONIAL TERRACE/LYNDON DIP $363,00018 CHARING CROSS RD DIP $25,000Page 7

Project DRI Phase 1Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION18 112 DORSEY WAY DRAINAGE IMP. $37,99018 LEYTON AVENUE DIP $38,69318 BEDFORDSHIRE DIP $40,00018 VANNAH EXMOOR DIP $40,00018 SKYLARK DIP $50,00018 WOOD ROAD/LYNDON LANE DIP $65,00018 2300 JANLYN ROAD DIP $70,00018 ORMSBY LANE DIP $100,00018 NOTTINGHAM DIP $123,69319 HERRICK LN/TUCKER STATION DIP $26,00019 WOODLAND HILLS DIP PHASE 1 $30,00019 BLUE RIDGE MANOR PH. 2 DIP $30,00019 TUCKER STATION ROAD DRAINAGE IMP. $40,00019 ECHO BRIDGE DIP $40,00019 BLUE RIDGE MANOR DRAINAGE IMP. $46,00019 RUNNING CREEK DIP PH. 1 $50,00019 DOUGLASS HILLS DIP PH. 1 $55,00019 DOUGLASS HILLS DIP PH. 2 $60,00019 WOODLAND HILLS DIP PH. 2 $80,00019 WOODLAND HILLS DIP PH. 3 $100,00019 RUNNING CREEK DIP PH. 2 $100,00020 10201 STATIA LYNN COURT $020 8800 WHIPPS MILL RD DIP $020 WALBRIDGE COURT DRAINAGE IMP. $39,00020 SARATOGA WOODS SUBD DIP PH. 1 $64,00020 GLENMARY SUBD DIP PH. 1 $64,00021 4408 SOUTH FIRST ST DIP $14,00021 7200 IVAN CT DIP $15,60021 ALPINE WAY DIP $46,70021 LONE OAK PHASE 2 DIP $83,20121 DEVERS/LONE OAK PHASE 2 DIP $107,00021 AUBURNDALE/DALE DR. IMP. $113,62021 CONCORD DRIVE DIP $145,00021 GIRARD DRIVE DIP $150,00021 ELAM DIP $150,000Page 8

Project DRI Phase 1Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION21 DOWNES DIP $175,00022 ORCHARD PLACE DR IMP $022 GORHAM/RUNNING FOX DIP $15,00022 LA FON/ZELMA FIELDS DIP $15,00022 SPRING GARDEN DIP $20,00022 DEA DEA COURT DIP $25,00022 MARY DELL/PENTEL LANE DR. IMP $30,00022 BRUSH LANE DIP $30,00022 10000 FERN CREEK DIP $40,00022 HUDSON LANE PH. 1 DIP $40,00022 SPRUCEWOOD DRIVE DIP $40,00022 BRANDYWYNE/HOLLY OAK PH. 2 DIP $45,00022 HUDSON/FAIRGROUND DIP $45,00022 MARKET CART WAY DIP $45,00022 BRANDYWYNE/HOLLY OAK PH.1 DIP $60,00022 TRENTA/VEVEY DIP $60,00022 BLUE BOY/CARMIL DIP $75,00022 DANBY/STOCKTON COURTS DR IMP $80,00022 HUDSON LANE/STOUT PH.2 DIP $100,00022 ROSEBOROUGH DRAINAGE SYSTEM IMPROVEMEN $100,00022 WATERFERN/WOODFERN DIP $125,00022 GAINSBOROUGH/WATERING PLACE DIP $150,00022 ROBERSON RUN STREAM RESTORATION $200,00023 ROCHELLE ROAD SINKHOLE REPAIR $023 7503 MICHAEL DRIVE DIP $15,00023 DENISE DRIVE DIP $30,00023 SENATOR DIP $30,00023 NEWTON REAR YARD DIP $30,00023 McNEELY LAKE DIP $35,00023 PRICE LANE DIP $45,00023 APPLE VALLEY DIP $46,00023 5807 FERN VALLEY RD CAVE IN $50,00023 MONTEGO BAY DIP $50,00023 CEDAR HILL DIP $56,00023 GINGER DIP $60,000Page 9

Project DRI Phase 1Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION23 ST. BERNARD DIP $60,00023 MONTPELIER COURT DI $60,00023 EAST MANSLICK (5409) DR IMP $65,00023 DREAMERS DIP $65,00023 BOCAGRANDE DIP $70,00023 CROSSBEAK COURT DIP $75,00023 HACKBERRY DIP $75,00023 JOHN PAUL DIP $75,00023 ROSSMOOR ROADSIDE DIP $75,00023 ADKINS ROAD DIP $85,00023 PAUL REVERE DRAINAGE IMP $100,00023 PAGODA DIP $150,00023 NATIONAL TURNPIKE/NASH RD. DRAINAGE IMP $220,54023 ROSEBOROUGH DIP PHASE II $257,43823 SEATONVILLE ROAD DRAINAGE SYSTEM IMP $300,00024 BRONZERIDGE PLACE DIP $20,00024 EDGETREE COURT DIP $25,00024 GALVIN COURT DIP $25,00024 BURNT CEDAR LANE DIP $30,00024 QUEENS CASTLE ROAD DIP $30,00024 OAKRIDGE PLACE DIP $36,00024 ARMORIDGE DIP $38,00024 JIM HAWKINS DRIVE DIP $38,00024 BLUE BELL DRIVE DIP $40,00024 CHAMBERS WAY DIP $40,00024 TRIO AVENUE DIP $40,00024 MOONRIDGE DIP $46,00024 CARNES COURT DRAINAGE IMP $50,00024 MILES LANE DIP $50,00024 CARBINE/HISPANYOLA DR. IMP $60,00024 SLAYTON COURT DIP $60,00024 STILLRIDGE/LITTLERIDGE DIP $60,00024 OLD OUTER LOOP DIP $66,00024 MARKWELL LANE DRAINAGE IMP $70,00024 CHARLESWOOD ROAD DIP $75,000Page 10

Project DRI Phase 1Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION24 TOEBBE LANE R/S DIP $75,00024 BILLY BONES/DAWKINS DIP $85,00024 ANNELLA WAY DIP $90,00024 FOREST VIEW DRIVE DIP $90,00024 PINELAND DRIVE DIP $91,00024 OKOLONA TERRACE DRAINAGE IMP $100,00024 FINAL DRIVE EROSION CONTROL $105,00024 LIPPS LANE DRAINAGE IMP $118,60024 LINDA LN. DIP $128,00024 JAN WAY DRAINAGE IMP $150,00024 MOODY COURT DRAINAGE IMP $150,00024 TUESDAY WAY DRAINAGE IMP $150,00024 PINECROFT DRIVE DIP $150,00024 MAPLECREEK/WILLOWCREEK DR. IMP $160,00024 CHESLEY DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $175,00024 LAMBERT ROAD DIP $195,00024 MEDTREE/CARMELWOOD DRAINAGE IMP $200,00024 MUD LANE ROADSIDE DR IMP $200,00024 MOODY ROAD ROADSIDE DR. IMP $215,00024 MINORS LANE DIP $250,00024 FAIRDALE RD. DIP $463,03225 NANKA ROAD DR. IMP. $025 RAMONA/ANA DR. IMP. $025 SEVILLE DRIVE DR. IMP. $025 ANITA BLVD PHASE 2 DR. IMP. $025 ANITA/EL PRADO DR. IMP. $025 FOREST HILLS DETENTION BASIN $025 7538 PIMLICO DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $025 5508 BRUCE AVENUE DR IMP $025 EL PRADO STREET DR IMP $025 10249 DODGE LANE DR. IMP. $025 9211 HI VIEW LANE DIP $10,00025 SOUTHWOOD TERRACE DIP $10,00025 7406 GRANNEL ROAD DIP $11,00025 3600 DORSET ROAD DIP $11,000Page 11

Project DRI Phase 1Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION25 3611 LOCKLEE ROAD DIP $12,00025 8204 ARNOLDTOWN ROAD DIP $12,00025 9001 DORJEAN DRIVE DIP $15,00025 10302 SUNLIGHT WAY DIP $18,00025 10211 STARLIGHT WAY DIP $30,00025 SUNNYBROOK DRIVE DIP $35,00025 QUILLMAN DIP $50,00025 2800 FORDHAVEN ROAD DIP $50,00025 PARALEE DIP $60,00025 HILLTOP TERRACE DIP $63,00025 HIVIEW DRIVE DIP $88,00025 WISERTOWN ROAD DIP $90,00025 SHOREWOOD/MAE DIP $125,00025 MID DRIVE DIP $150,00025 VESPER DIP $159,00025 PAGES LANE DIP $215,00025 FORREST HILLS DIP $470,00025 GRANADA DIP $563,00026 MERIDIAN AVENUE DR. IMP. $026 CHEVY CHASE DIP $30,00026 TERRIER LANE DRAINAGE IMP $35,00026 STRAFFORD AVE DRAINAGE IMP $45,00026 LYNNBROOK DIP $50,00026 STANTON BLVD DIP $50,00026 DOWNING WAY (3800) DRAINAGE IMP $50,00026 HILLSBORO ROAD DR. IMP. $50,00026 CURRAN ROAD (3000 BLK) DR. IMP. $50,00026 HILLBROOK DR DRAINAGE IMP $50,00026 ABIGAIL LN DIP ALDERMAN PROJECT $56,07526 SILVERBROOK DIP $60,00026 ALLISON WAY DIP $65,00026 DISTRICT 26 DIP $70,00026 RIDGEVIEW DIP $75,00026 SHANNON DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP. $75,00026 BOWMAN RD DIP ALDERMAN PROJECT $81,809Page 12

Project DRI Phase 1Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION26 CANNONS LN ALDERMAN PROJECT $90,00026 DISTRICT 26 FY05 DR. IMP. $100,00026 WENDELL AVE DIP ALDERMAN PROJECT $117,00026 NORBOURNE AVE DRAINAGE IMP. $120,00026 STERLING ROAD PH. 1 DR. IMP. $121,00026 DISTRICT 26 FY04 DR. IMP. $150,00026 STERLING ROAD PH. 2 DRAINAGE IMP. $159,00026 MASEMURE CT STREAM BANK $300,000TOTAL $47,306,920Page 13

Project DRI Phase 2Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS1 CLARENE DRIVE DR. IMP. $80,000 4/16/2007 7/2/20071 COVA DRIVE DR. IMP. $110,000 6/5/2006 7/28/20061 DIAMOND WAY DR. IMP. $100,000 7/31/2006 8/24/20061 DIENES WAY (4100 BLK) DIP $0 12/12/2005 1/27/20061 DONALD DRIVE (3200 BLK) DR. IMP. $75,000 12/29/2006 3/17/20071 DOVER AVENUE DR. IMP. $100,000 3/26/2007 5/1/20071 DOVER RD (4300 BLK) DIP $100,000 4/17/2006 6/23/20061 DOVER ROAD (4500 BLK) DIP $210,000 8/7/2006 11/14/20061 FARNSLEY ROAD DR. IMP. $50,000 7/18/2006 10/6/20061 FY06 CD-01 DRAINAGE IMP. $90,000 3/22/2006 3/24/20061 FY07 CD-01 DRAINAGE IMP. $40,000 Merged w/Richmont1 GERALD DRIVE DR. IMP. $80,000 2/14/2007 6/28/20071 GREENDALE DRIVE DR. IMP. $150,000 3/6/2006 7/1/20061 LAKE DREAMLAND (4200 BLK) DIP $120,000 12/7/2005 3/15/20061 RICHMONT ROAD DR. IMP. $200,000 9/25/2006 4/30/20071 STEGNER AVENUE DR. IMP. $120,000 8/8/2006 11/28/20061 TEAKWOOD CIRCLE DR. IMP. $200,000 12/7/2005 8/21/20061 VANETO DRIVE DR. IMP. $85,000 8/22/2005 10/3/20052 3819 MELDA DR. IMP. $110,000 8/22/2005 1/2/20062 4832 CANE RUN ROAD $02 AILANTHUS TRAIL REAR YARD $175,000 10/10/2005 6/21/20062 DAHL ROAD ROADSIDE DIP $200,000 1/5/2006 7/15/20062 EMERALD DRIVE REAR YARD DIP $95,000 10/9/2006 2/14/20072 EMMALEE DRIVE ROADSIDE DR IMP $145,000 2/27/2006 5/25/20062 EMMALEE REAR YARD DR IMP $0 8/8/2007 10/31/20072 FAIRINGTON DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $0 10/22/2008 3/5/20092 GARDEN GREEN/MANSFIELD ROADSIDE DIP $145,000 6/1/2006 10/15/20062 GORDON/CORINTH ROADSIDE DIP $95,000 2/20/2007 6/15/20072 GREEN COVE REAR DIP $100,000 10/26/2005 6/1/20062 HANDLEY AVENUE ROADSIDE DIP $135,000 2/19/2007 6/18/20072 INDUSTRIAL BLVD ROADSIDE DIP $225,000 6/4/2007 9/30/20072 NOREENE ROADSIDE DR IMP $140,000 3/31/2006 7/24/20062 OLD KENTUCKY HOME ROADSIDE DIP $110,000 5/12/2007 7/15/20072 ORVILLE DRIVE ROADSIDE DIP $125,000 3/1/2007 5/31/20072 PIXLEY REAR YARD DIP $110,000 7/17/2006 5/31/2007Page 1

Project DRI Phase 2Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS2 RANGELAND RD OUTLET $370,000 6/1/2006 10/20/20062 RANGELAND RD PHASE 3 DR. IMP. $0 11/1/2006 4/1/20072 RED FERN ROADSIDE DIP $120,000 1/6/2006 4/20/20062 REDFERN/RED OAK REAR YARD DIP $185,000 9/5/2006 12/31/20062 REGENT ROAD ROADSIDE DIP $240,000 7/1/2006 10/26/20062 REGENT/GENERAL LANE DIP $110,000 8/12/2005 12/5/20052 RIATA/REVERE REAR YARD DIP $160,000 5/15/2007 7/31/20082 ROBINHOOD ROADSIDE DIP $125,000 11/5/2006 8/15/20072 ROOKWOOD ROADSIDE DIP $250,000 10/27/2006 12/21/20062 RURAL/RED OAK REAR YARD DIP $165,000 11/21/2008 4/19/20092 SHADY VILLA ROADSIDE DIP $165,000 6/1/2006 8/1/20062 SPICE WOOD REAR YARD DIP $125,000 7/17/2006 1/15/20072 SUNSHINE ACRES ROADSIDE DIP $125,000 5/3/2006 11/30/20062 WESTSIDE DRIVE ROADSIDE DIP $180,000 5/29/2007 7/31/20072 YAUPON/ALBA WAY REAR YARD DR. IMP. $165,000 1/10/2008 5/31/20083 FY07 CD-03 DRAINAGE IMP. $45,000 1/2/2007 3/25/20073 S. 28TH STREET (200 BLK REAR) DIP $40,000 10/3/2005 11/7/20054 FY06 CD-04 DR. IMP. $9,000 3/1/2006 6/1/20075 4532 WESTCHESTER AVE DIP $31,000 12/2/2006 1/14/20075 SHAWNEE TERRACE DR. IMP. $30,000 9/15/2005 10/15/20056 1146 ALGONQUIN PKWY DIP $32,000 6/1/2006 7/30/20066 1159 ALGONQUIN PKWY DIP $17,000 9/6/2005 10/17/20056 1200 ALGONQUIN PKWY DIP $13,000 Merged w/1146 Algonq6 735 ALGONQUIN PKWY DIP $50,000 9/7/2008 2/3/20097 500 BLK FENLEY AVE DIP $290,000 11/13/2007 3/10/20087 600 BLK FENLEY AVE DIP $70,000 Deleted7 GIRARD/WOOLRICH DIP $175,000 11/4/2008 5/2/20097 GREEN MEADOW CT DIP $75,000 10/15/2007 1/15/20087 GREENLAWN/CARLIMAR RD DIP $90,000 11/30/2007 2/12/20087 REGENCY LANE DIP $90,000 11/13/2007 1/15/20087 STIVERS RD DIP $25,000 11/1/2007 1/2/20087 TYNE RD DIP-BEECHWOOD VILLAGE PH4 $60,000 7/28/2006 10/31/20068 1222 ROYAL AVE DIP $35,000 12/1/2005 2/1/20068 1701 GARDNER LN/CARRIAGE CT DIP $75,000 5/8/2006 9/22/20068 1917 LOWELL AVE DIP $30,000 5/7/2007 6/30/2007Page 2

Project DRI Phase 2Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS8 1919 EASTVIEW AVE DIP $15,000 10/16/2006 11/15/20068 1936 EMERSON AVE DIP $95,000 1/1/2007 4/25/20078 2121 STRATHMOOR BLVD DIP $151,000 5/8/2006 7/27/20068 2402 ASHWOOD DRIVE DIP $55,000 3/10/2006 6/30/20068 3008 FALMOUTH DRIVE DIP $40,000 4/23/2006 5/5/20068 BELMONT ROAD DIP $165,000 2/1/2007 3/16/20079 1216 PARKHILL RD DIP $15,000 11/3/2005 11/21/20059 3514 NANZ AVENUE DIP $50,000 3/6/2006 4/20/20069 630 COUNTRY CLUB RD DIP $60,000 4/24/2006 10/15/20069 FRANKFORT AVE @ BLUE DOG CAFE DIP $30,000 2/21/2007 5/21/20079 UNIVERSITY RD DIP $110,000 6/11/2007 7/28/200710 4531 RIVERVIEW AVENUE DR IMP $0 9/10/2007 1/15/200810 BISHOP LANE DR. IMP. $86,000 1/15/2006 3/31/200610 CD-10 FY07 DIP $150,000 8/4/2006 12/31/200710 DYER AVENUE DR. IMP. $139,000 4/24/2006 8/1/200610 ETHEL AVE DIP $180,000 Deleted10 FY06 CD-10 DR. IMP. $125,000 9/15/2006 7/31/200810 GREENUP ROAD DIP $122,000 2/7/2007 4/24/200710 ST. FRANCIS AVENUE DR. IMP. $205,000 4/17/2006 3/21/200710 WOLFE AVENUE DR. IMP. $98,000 1/1/2007 2/1/200711 CD-11 FY06 DIP $65,00011 CD-11 FY07 DIP $90,000 10/31/2006 12/31/200711 DOGWOOD DR (EAST SIDE) DIP $55,000 10/9/2006 12/18/200611 GINGERWOOD DR PH2 DIP $46,000 10/3/2005 11/9/200511 GLENMEADE PH. 2 DR. IMP. $0 5/25/2006 7/20/200611 JAVA COURT DR MAINT PROJECT $0 5/8/2006 5/23/200611 KLONDIKE LN PH 2 $125,000 1/9/2006 4/30/200611 MAMARONECK RD (REAR) DIP $41,000 1/8/2007 3/15/200711 ROSEMONT BLVD DIP $120,000 11/7/2005 3/30/200611 SIX MILE LANE DIP $170,000 3/1/2007 5/25/200712 2206 PARKWOOD RD DIP $60,000 4/16/2007 6/15/200712 2502 LORENE AVE DIP $40,000 11/6/2006 12/22/200612 4930 WELLSWORTH AVE DIP $25,000 5/15/2006 6/8/200612 5203 PLUTO DR DIP $28,000 10/19/2006 12/20/200612 5509 BRINSON LN DIP $15,000 8/2/2005 10/21/2005Page 3

Project DRI Phase 2Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS12 7001 LOWER HUNTERS TRACE DIP $100,000 4/4/2006 12/4/200612 ALAMO CT DIP $105,000 4/1/2006 6/21/200612 ARID LN DIP $100,000 6/20/2006 8/28/200612 ARVIS DR DIP $46,000 3/19/2007 5/18/200712 BLACK OAK LN DIP $72,000 1/5/2007 4/20/200712 CADY DR DIP $41,000 8/8/2005 8/30/200512 CORONET WAY DIP $60,000 4/4/2006 4/12/200612 CROCKET DR DIP $60,000 4/1/2006 6/6/200712 DOYLE DR DIP $71,000 6/4/2007 8/30/200712 DURST DR DIP $100,000 1/8/2007 4/6/200712 FEYHURST DR PH2 DIP $60,000 3/19/2007 4/20/200712 FISTER CT CIP $60,000 12/13/2005 1/13/200612 GREENVIEW DR DIP $50,000 3/12/2007 5/11/200712 HARDWOOD CT DIP $60,000 5/30/2006 8/8/200612 HESS DIP $65,000 10/4/2006 12/1/200612 HUBERTA DR DIP $26,000 8/2/2005 9/26/200512 IMPERIAL TER/ ADRIENNE WAY DIP $100,000 1/8/2007 3/30/200712 IROQUOIS PARK RD DIP $84,000 9/8/2007 4/25/200812 JOY DR DIP $150,000 6/4/2007 3/20/200812 JULIE KAYS WAY DIP $90,000 7/16/2007 8/30/200812 KRAUSE DIP $100,000 1/5/2007 4/24/200712 MEMORY LN DIP $105,000 10/20/2008 1/17/200912 MILLS DR DIP $50,000 10/28/2006 1/26/200712 OAK LEA REAR DITCH DIP $56,000 7/23/2007 9/21/200712 TEMPEST WAY REAR DITCH DIP $75,000 1/8/2007 4/13/200712 TWIN DR DIP $75,000 Deleted12 WALNUT GROVE AVE DIP $55,000 6/7/2007 7/20/200712 WEBER LN DIP $46,000 3/19/2007 4/26/200712 WHITE OAK/ ACORN DIP $70,000 11/24/2007 8/30/200812 WOOD RD DIP $137,000 4/15/2007 5/18/200713 3614 CAMP GROUND RD $013 408 OLDE TOWNE RD DRAINAGE IMP $0 9/28/2007 10/31/200713 454 ROBERTS AVE DIP $75,000 2/21/2006 3/15/200713 714 TIN DOR WAY DRAINAGE IMP $0 11/2/2007 11/30/200713 8221 CANDLEGLOW LN SIDE YARD DIP $0 11/2/2006 12/18/2006Page 4

Project DRI Phase 2Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS13 AUBURN OAKS REAR YARD DIP $60,000 9/28/2005 12/15/200513 CANDLEGLOW LN REAR YARD DIP $110,000 Deleted13 CANDLELIGHT DITCH REPAIR DIP $80,000 10/24/2005 4/15/200613 CHERI WAY DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $0 9/18/2007 11/1/200713 DEERING RD SIDEWALK EXT PH2 $0 9/17/2007 10/12/200713 ELMER DRIVE DIP $110,000 2/22/2006 1/2/200713 FERGUSON FIVE AVE REAR YARD DIP $40,000 9/5/2006 11/30/200613 FIR COURT REAR YARD DR. IMP. $80,000 5/10/2007 6/8/200713 FLICKER RD REAR YARD DIP $95,000 5/4/2007 8/31/200713 HERBERT LANE DIP $55,000 5/1/2006 8/15/200613 LESANE COURT DR. IMP. $75,000 7/12/2007 9/30/200713 LILLIAN/LORA DR DIP $65,000 1/9/2006 5/15/200613 LORA DR REAR YARD DIP $65,000 7/2/2007 9/15/200713 MARY ELLEN DIP $110,000 12/13/2006 5/31/200713 MCBROOM DIP $75,000 2/13/2007 6/15/200713 PARLIAMENT/KINGS CROSS DIP $75,000 12/15/2006 4/30/200713 SCARBOROUGH REAR YARD DR. IMP. $110,000 8/15/2008 11/1/200813 TALLOW/AFTERGLOW DIP $110,000 7/12/2007 9/30/200713 TIN DOR/KIRSH WAY ROADSIDE DIP $110,000 9/15/2006 5/31/200714 BEESTON BLVD DIP $100,000 6/21/2007 8/10/200714 BETSY ROSS DR DIP $56,000 9/1/2006 3/30/200714 BLAKELY LN DIP $295,000 Deleted14 BRAMBLE LN DIP $110,000 12/19/2006 5/25/200714 CANNA DR DIP $115,000 9/7/2005 10/17/200514 COLUMBINE DR (7900-8000 BLK) DIP $144,000 6/5/2007 12/3/200714 CRESTON DR DIP $82,000 5/7/2007 6/25/200714 DAFFODIL DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $0 10/22/2008 3/20/200914 DAVID LN DIP $125,000 6/5/2007 8/3/200714 DEVONSHIRE DR DIP $119,000 7/21/2006 10/20/200614 DUNKIRK LN DIP $72,000 9/25/2006 1/20/200714 JERRY LN DIP $50,000 6/5/2007 8/3/200714 JONQUIL DR PH2 DIP $144,000 6/11/2007 12/3/200714 LATANIA DR DIP $145,000 3/12/2007 5/31/200714 LOCHWICK WAY DIP $100,000 4/24/2006 7/21/200614 LOWER RIVER RD DIP $250,000 3/15/2008 8/30/2008Page 5

Project DRI Phase 2Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS14 LYONS AVE DIP $205,000 3/31/2006 7/7/200614 MARK DR DIP $99,000 3/12/2007 4/20/200714 MATT CT DIP $140,000 12/5/2005 3/15/200614 MEADOWLAWN DRIVE DR. IMP. $0 9/1/2006 3/15/200714 MILAN CT DIP $47,000 10/20/2008 3/18/200914 MOORMAN RD DIP $120,000 8/14/2006 9/15/200614 PANDOREA DR DIP $145,000 4/2/2007 6/1/200714 RAINBOW DR DIP $40,000 5/28/2007 6/30/200714 RODGERS RD DIP $95,000 2/9/2006 5/15/200614 SHIREWICK WAY DIP $82,000 12/11/2006 1/26/200714 TEAKWOOD LN DIP $60,000 5/25/2007 6/15/200714 THOMPSON LN/MOCK CT DIP $150,000 10/20/2008 3/18/200914 TRILLIUM DR (7900-8000 BLK) DIP $145,000 1/25/2006 5/10/200614 TUMERIC LN DIP $85,000 1/17/2006 2/15/200614 W ORELL RD PH2 DIP $108,000 11/20/2007 8/1/200814 WALKER RD DIP $120,000 5/15/2006 7/21/200615 9TH STREET @ CHURCHILL DOWNS DIP $0 8/18/2005 9/22/200515 FRIDEN WAY (4900 BLK) DIP $25,000 10/7/2005 11/11/200515 FY06 CD-15 DR. IMP. $60,375 5/1/2008 7/31/200815 FY07 CD-15 DR. IMP. $125,000 8/7/2008 1/3/200915 HAZELWOOD AVE (4500 BLK) DIP $75,000 3/14/2007 12/31/200715 McGILL DRIVE (4400 BLK) DIP $51,875 9/20/2005 10/17/200515 RONDEAN DRIVE (4300 BLK) DIP $78,750 Cancelled -customer15 SOUTHGATE AVE (1500 BLK) DIP $87,500 4/1/2006 6/30/200615 WHEELER AVENUE (4100 BLK) DIP $62,500 1/21/2009 6/19/200916 1501 NORTHWIND DRIVE DIP $0 8/24/2006 11/6/200616 2107 BAINBRIDGE RD DIP $0 8/17/2006 8/24/200616 7610 RIVER ROAD DR. IMP. $0 8/17/2006 8/24/200616 ASHRIDGE DRIVE DIP $125,000 5/22/2007 2/21/200816 BEECH AVENUE DIP $31,250 Mergedw/Bass/Shirley16 BROWNSBORO VISTA DRIVE DIP $1,616 10/11/2007 12/30/200716 BURNING BUSH DRIVE DR. IMP. $112,500 5/22/2007 1/30/200816 CHADFORD WAY DIP $0 10/14/2005 11/1/200516 DEER MEADOW DRIVE DIP $65,250 Completed by Maint17 BLOSSOM LN/COLONEL DR DIP $95,498 12/15/2006 6/19/2007Page 6

Project DRI Phase 2Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS17 DEVON COURT DIP $48,313 7/24/2006 9/22/200617 KEISLER WAY DIP $21,875 6/5/2006 9/8/200617 MURPHY LN (4300 BLK) DIP $21,875 11/19/2007 4/23/200817 NORTHUMBERLAND DR/ALAMANCE DR DIP $53,000 12/15/2006 4/14/200717 PARA COURT DIP $22,000 9/29/2006 11/24/200617 PULASKI CT DIP $20,750 9/26/2007 12/10/200717 RIVEROAKS CIRCLE DIP $29,938 9/26/2007 12/12/200717 ROCK SPRING DR DIP $25,313 10/2/2006 11/3/200617 SAVANNAH RD DIP $70,188 12/15/2006 6/6/200717 SHEFFORD LANE DIP $32,250 10/23/2007 3/21/200818 BLOWING TREE DR. IMP. $53,125 10/13/2006 4/1/200718 CADOGAN COURT DR. IMP. $95,188 11/27/2007 3/25/200818 ELSMERE CIRCLE DR. IMP. $23,187 9/15/2005 10/10/200518 LARKHALL COURT DR. IMP. $22,500 4/27/2007 7/31/200718 MAHAN DRIVE DR. IMP. $93,750 11/7/2006 4/1/200718 NARWOOD DRIVE DIP $83,750 8/14/2006 4/13/200718 WISTERIA DRIVE DR. IMP. $40,000 6/6/2007 10/31/200718 WOODCLEFT ROAD DR. IMP. $57,500 9/6/2007 11/28/200719 10214 RADFORD ROAD DIP $37,500 7/14/2006 8/16/200619 14312 MICAWBER WAY DR. IMP. $10,000 9/23/2005 4/1/200619 206 BLUE RIDGE DRIVE DR. IMP. $31,250 4/30/2007 6/1/200719 BROOKMOOR DRIVE DIP $47,000 3/2/2006 4/18/200619 CHERRY POINT DRIVE DIP $68,750 12/1/2006 5/11/200719 DORSHIRE COURT DR. IMP. $0 6/26/2006 12/15/200619 GRAND VISTA PLACE DIP $56,250 9/11/2006 6/8/200719 HARRODS CREEK COURT DIP $0 1/9/2006 3/31/200619 LAWRENCEKIRK COURT DR. IMP. $31,250 8/13/2007 9/24/200719 LINNEY AVENUE DIP $81,25019 MARENGO DRIVE DIP $50,000 12/1/2006 5/31/200719 PENNY CIRCLE DR. IMP. $56,250 Merged w/Grand Vista19 PRESTWICK PLACE DR. IMP. $43,750 Deleted19 RIDGE CREST DRIVE DIP $25,000 5/6/2006 8/7/200619 SPRING ARBOR DIP $81,250 3/13/2006 4/20/200619 WILLOUGHBY COURT DIP $22,500 7/20/2005 9/2/200519 WOODSTOCK ROAD DIP $50,000 11/1/2005 12/1/2005Page 7

Project DRI Phase 2Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS20 3603 SHANNON RUN TRAIL DR. IMP. $8,125 10/23/2006 11/19/200620 BARDS COURT DR. IMP. $81,250 6/5/2006 8/18/200620 CRP PH. 21 GLENMARY (31E BERM) DIP $0 6/20/2005 9/30/200520 DISTRICT 20 DR. IMP. $32,875 7/1/2005 12/11/200620 KIRBY LANE/STONYBROOK DIP $43,750 4/17/2006 6/15/200620 SPALAGO COURT DIP $50,000 10/11/2006 1/1/200721 AURORA DRIVE DIP $95,391 12/1/2005 9/30/200621 BARKBROOK LANE (2800 BLK) DIP $58,344 9/12/2005 10/31/200521 CELINA DRIVE (2800 BLK) DIP $143,711 9/13/2005 10/5/200521 DESHLER DRIVE (2800 BLK) DIP $159,844 10/3/2005 1/31/200621 ERVAY AVENUE (600 BLK) DIP $42,500 4/2/2006 7/31/200621 FORUM & WEST KINGDOM DIP $178,169 4/27/2009 7/25/200921 FY06 CD-21 DR. IMP. $207,190 9/8/2007 1/25/200821 FY07 CD-21 DR. IMP. $207,190 9/8/2007 5/31/200821 HALSTEAD AVE (5500 BLK) DIP $108,875 4/18/2006 10/19/200621 HALSTEAD AVE (5500 BLK,REAR) DIP $140,500 4/18/2006 5/31/200721 HANNAH AVE (4300 BLK) DIP $101,641 9/8/2007 10/28/200721 HOWARD STREET (1200 BLK) DIP $101,641 6/8/2007 7/16/200721 MAYLAWN AVENUE (600 BLK) DIP $68,000 Deleted21 SCHOLAR STREET (1300 BLK) DIP $117,286 10/8/2005 7/31/200621 SCHOOL WAY AND FORUM DR. IMP. $117,104 9/12/2008 12/10/200821 SOUTH 1ST STREET (4300 BLK) DIP $94,296 6/14/2007 7/15/200721 SOUTHLAND TERRACE (5800 BLK) DIP $187,618 12/1/2005 8/31/200621 TYSON PLACE (REAR) DRAINAGE IMP $0 9/30/2008 11/28/200821 WEST KINGDOM AND CHRISTOPHER DIP $99,700 9/12/2008 12/10/200822 5210 COOL BROOK CULVERT REPAIR $0 4/5/2007 7/31/200722 5611 PAVILION WAY DR. IMP. $0 5/15/2006 7/31/200622 5900 BUCKS LANE DR. IMP. $0 5/15/2006 12/30/200622 6301 S. WATTERSON TRAIL DIP $0 7/16/2007 7/25/200722 6807 S WATTERSON TRAIL DIP $50,000 7/20/2005 9/30/200522 6909 GLENDALE RD DRAINAGE IMP $0 8/16/2007 9/30/200722 8010 WATERFERN WAY DIP $0 6/23/2006 9/1/200622 8805 HUDSON LANE ROADSIDE DIP $0 3/13/2007 3/16/200722 9018 FERN CREEK RD DR IMP $0 7/6/2007 9/1/200722 ARDENIA/CELMATIS DIP $80,000 12/15/2006 4/30/2007Page 8

Project DRI Phase 2Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS22 AVANTI WAY DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $0 8/16/2007 9/30/200722 BROADHALE ROAD DIP $75,000 11/2/2007 6/30/200822 BRYNWOOD/TROUTWOOD DIP $80,000 5/15/2007 12/3/200722 COOL BROOK DIP $80,000 1/9/2006 4/15/200622 CUB COURT DIP $40,000 11/7/2005 9/30/200622 DELIGHTFUL CT REAR YARD DIP $50,000 Deleted22 FIELD RIDGE/FIELD VIEW REAR YD DIP $80,000 3/25/2006 1/31/200722 FIELD TRAILS CT DIP $70,000 2/22/2006 8/1/200622 FONTENDLEAU WAY SIDE YARD DIP $0 11/2/2006 2/15/200722 GLENDALE RD REAR YARD DIP $70,000 Merged w/Field Ridge22 GLENDALE TRACE REAR YARD DIP $99,000 10/9/2006 1/15/200722 HALLWOOD COURT DIP $0 5/29/2006 6/23/200622 JEFFERSON/FERN CREEK DIP $85,000 11/9/2006 4/30/200722 JOHNSON SCHOOL RD DR. IMP. $0 4/5/2007 6/1/200722 MCKENNA WAY DIP $55,000 2/13/2007 6/21/200722 MT EASTES LN DIP $120,000 10/3/2006 3/4/200722 RUNNING FOX CIRCLE DIP $150,000 3/24/2006 11/15/200622 ST. GABRIEL DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $0 11/6/2007 1/4/200822 WELLBURN DR/MARIAN DR DIP $65,000 11/3/2006 4/29/200722 WILDWOOD DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $0 7/16/2007 8/15/200723 APPLE VALLEY (REAR YARD) DIP $150,000 11/29/2006 4/30/200723 APPLEGATE LANE @ VAUGHN MILL DIP $50,000 1/23/2006 4/15/200623 BOLO COURT (REAR) DR. IMP. $60,000 8/7/2006 12/1/200623 GREEN MANOR DRIVE ROADSIDE DIP $150,000 4/3/2006 8/15/200623 JOYCE DRIVE (8404 REAR) DIP $50,000 4/30/2007 6/15/200723 LANTANA/FIRETHORN WAY ROADSIDE DIP $200,000 1/30/2006 4/4/200723 LARKGROVE DRIVE DIP $160,000 5/22/2006 10/15/200623 LEISURE LANE DR. IMP. $65,000 5/14/2007 7/15/200723 MAPLE HILL ROADSIDE DIP $40,000 7/17/2006 12/4/200623 PRICE LANE ROAD ROADSIDE DIP $80,000 3/1/2006 4/14/200623 SUNGOLD ESTATES (ROADSIDE) DIP $230,000 5/1/2006 10/31/200623 WAYCROSS (ROADSIDE & OUTLET) DIP $125,000 4/24/2006 8/31/200623 WHISPERING HILLS DR. IMP. $50,000 11/10/2005 8/31/200623 WOODHILL LANE ROADSIDE DIP $74,000 2/2/2007 4/27/200724 ARNOLD AVENUE DR. IMP. $70,000 5/14/2007 10/31/2007Page 9

Project DRI Phase 2Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS24 ARROYO/SKYLINE DR. IMP. $110,000 7/8/2006 8/21/200624 BONAVANT/JAN WAY DR. IMP. $180,000 12/5/2005 5/31/200624 BRIARCLIFF DRIVE ROADSIDE DIP $170,000 11/20/2006 1/16/200724 CATHAY COURT DIP $100,000 8/7/2006 10/16/200624 CLOSTERWOOD ROADSIDE DR. IMP. $220,000 4/30/2007 7/15/200724 COOLRIDGE/TAILRIDGE DR. IMP. $180,000 2/20/2006 3/30/200624 FOREMAN LANE ROADSIDE DIP $171,000 6/12/2006 12/4/200624 GRADE LANE NORTH DR. IMP. $260,000 11/7/2005 5/1/200624 IRELAND/MINORS DR. IMP. $140,000 10/14/2008 3/12/200924 LOCUST LANE DR. IMP. $90,000 Merged w/Maple Way24 MAPLE ROAD DR. IMP. $100,000 4/17/2006 10/17/200624 MAPLE WAY ROADSIDE DR. IMP. $230,000 3/17/2006 4/21/200624 NORMIE/CAVEN ROADSDIE DIP $220,000 9/18/2006 12/1/200624 OAKLEAF LANE ROADSIDE DIP $170,000 11/20/2006 2/12/200724 OLDSHIRE DR. IMP. $230,000 4/30/2007 7/24/200724 PINELAND DRIVE SLIDE REPAIR $50,000 7/11/2005 10/15/200524 ROBERSON RUN PHASE II DIP $170,000 10/23/2006 12/15/200624 TITAN/SATURN ROADSIDE DR. IMP. $220,000 11/13/2006 7/24/200724 UPS SOUTHERN DITCH SLIDE REPAIR $50,000 7/11/2005 9/15/200525 11007 DEERING ROAD DR. IMP. $40,000 8/1/2005 8/30/200525 BENTFORD/FIRESIDE DR. IMP. $175,000 6/13/2006 9/8/200625 BUNNING DRIVE DR. IMP. $60,000 3/28/2006 8/1/200625 CAROL WAY DR. IMP. $150,000 12/5/2007 8/30/200825 CONSTANCE DRIVE DR. IMP. $125,000 4/17/2006 8/1/200625 CRISTLAND ROAD DR. IMP. $85,000 9/19/2005 1/17/200625 FLUSHING WAY DR. IMP. $90,000 3/6/2007 7/13/200725 FRANELM ROAD DR. IMP. $0 8/19/2006 8/31/200625 GRAFTON HALL ROAD PHASE 2 DIP $175,000 3/25/2007 7/27/200725 INNWOOD DRIVE DR. IMP. $130,000 9/11/2006 2/4/200725 LEWIS WAY DR. IMP. $175,000 2/20/2006 4/3/200625 MARCEY/TARRYTOWNE DR. IMP. $125,000 3/1/2006 6/2/200625 MILLERS LANE DR. IMP. $90,000 1/10/2007 6/30/200725 MOONLIGHT WAY DR. IMP. $175,000 9/6/2005 5/12/200625 MOONLIGHT WAY PHASE 2 DIP $58,000 Deleted - lack of support25 PIERCE/DEARING WOODS DIP $100,000 6/26/2006 3/1/2007Page 10

Project DRI Phase 2Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS25 SEDALIA TRAIL DR. IMP. $65,000 12/21/2006 3/12/200725 ST. ANTHONY GARDENS DR. IMP. $55,000 10/10/2006 6/8/200725 STANDING OAK DRIVE DIP $65,000 9/28/2006 2/1/200725 STARLIGHT WAY PH. 2 DR. IMP. $70,000 3/1/2006 6/30/200625 TORRINGTON ROAD DR. IMP. $55,000 3/6/2006 4/3/200625 WINSLOW DRIVE DR. IMP. $120,000 8/28/2006 11/3/200626 ADA LANE (3300 BLK) DIP $120,000 4/3/2006 8/15/200626 ASHBROOKE/BROOKHAVEN DIP $0 8/10/2007 3/21/200826 BROOKDALE AVE (2800 BLK) DIP $80,000 5/1/2006 8/14/200626 DEAN DRIVE (3300 BLK) DIP $150,000 2/21/2007 3/13/200726 DOWNING WAY (2100 BLK) DIP $113,346 10/21/2005 7/31/200626 EMERSON AVE (2200 BLK) DIP $120,000 8/21/2007 10/4/200726 FY06 CD-26 DR. IMP. $187,500 8/16/2006 9/29/200626 FY07 CD-26 DR. IMP. $194,083 8/17/2006 10/5/200626 JOAN AVE DRIVE (3000 BLK) DIP $125,000 2/12/2007 3/13/200726 LOWELL AVE (2200 BLK) DIP $48,778 10/21/2005 7/31/200626 NADINA AVE (3000 BLK) DIP $123,954 11/13/2006 12/31/200626 TENNYSON AVE (2500 BLK) DIP $93,183 10/21/2005 7/31/200626 VINEDALE AVE (2400 BLK) DIP $80,000 4/1/2007 4/26/200726 WADSWORTH AVE (2200 BLK) DIP $120,156 10/23/2006 3/14/200726 WENDELL AVE (2200 BLK) DIP $100,000 5/15/2006 8/21/200626 WINSTON AVE (2300 BLK) DIP $175,000 3/1/2006 7/10/2006TOTAL $32,501,616Page 11

Project DRI Phase 3Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS1 4200 BLK LAKE DREAMLAND (REAR) DIP $100,000 4/17/2010 7/15/20101 ACCASIA DR (2600 BLK) DIP $50,000 8/1/2009 10/29/20091 BALAMOR DR DIP $150,000 11/29/2009 3/28/20101 BELLS LANE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $0 6/19/2008 7/15/20081 DONNA RD (REAR) DIP $90,000 6/1/2009 9/28/20091 ELANE DR DIP $110,000 3/10/2008 5/9/20081 FY08/09 CD-1 DIP $248,405 5/1/2008 12/15/20081 GREENWELL (4200 BLK) $120,000 4/22/2008 7/14/20081 LAKE DREAMLAND (4500/4600 BLK) $60,000 4/15/2010 7/13/20101 LYNNVIEW/CHARLOTTE ANN (4300 BLK REAR) $80,000 4/2/2010 6/30/20101 NEW LYNNVIEW DR $120,000 3/10/2008 6/19/20081 POPLAR VIEW DR DIP $250,000 7/31/2008 10/6/20081 POPPY AVENUE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $0 11/17/2008 3/31/20091 RIVER FRONT DR $120,000 6/1/2009 10/28/20091 ROSEWEDGE REAR DIP $70,000 6/30/2008 8/6/20081 SUNFLOWER AVE (4000 BLK REAR) DIP $40,000 9/14/2009 12/12/20091 SUNSET DR (REAR) DIP $50,000 9/3/2009 12/1/20092 5901-5919 OAKDALE DR IMP $90,000 3/5/2010 7/30/20102 ALBA/CEDRUS DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $91,449 2/15/2010 6/29/20102 ALETHA DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $110,000 4/7/2008 6/15/20082 ATHENS DRIVE ROADSIDE DR IMP $176,800 2/18/2008 5/31/20082 CAROLYN WAY DRAINAGE IMP $90,000 8/26/2009 11/29/20092 DAHL/SUSANA DRAINAGE IMP $125,000 3/15/2010 7/30/20102 FERN VALLEY RD (4007 BLK) DIP $0 12/22/2009 5/20/20102 GARDEN GREEN/RANGOON DR IMP $155,000 6/30/2008 11/15/20082 INDUSTRIAL BLVD FINAL DR IMP $153,100 2/15/2009 4/5/20092 LAGOONA ROADSIDE DRAINAGE IMP $135,000 3/10/2008 5/31/20082 MILE OF SUNSHINE DRAINAGE IMP $225,000 4/1/2009 7/12/20092 PINE TREE/TWIN OAKS ROADSIDE DIP $117,000 7/29/2009 11/29/20092 PLANTUS PLACE DR IMP $95,000 5/15/2010 8/29/20102 REFLECTION/RIDGE CREST DR IMP $135,000 7/15/2009 11/29/20092 RETREAT WAY DRAINAGE IMP $215,000 6/23/2008 10/24/20082 RIPPLE/ROSETTE REAR DR IMP $170,000 6/15/2009 11/14/20092 ROOKWOOD/REDFERN REAR DR IMP $189,700 8/15/2009 12/30/20092 RUNIC/RUSTIC REAR DRAINAGE IMP $156,000 8/1/2008 10/21/20082 SANFORD AVE ROADSIDE DR IMP $125,000 4/2/2008 6/16/2008Page 1

Project DRI Phase 3Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS2 STEPHEN FOSTER/NELLY BLY R/S DIP $125,000 1/15/2010 5/15/20102 TAMARIND/CAPE REAR YARD DR IMP $88,000 6/8/2008 9/18/20082 VALLA DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $99,300 2/15/2009 4/5/20092 VIM DRIVE REAR DRAINAGE IMP $125,000 5/22/2009 9/9/20093 BEECH ST DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $0 8/21/2010 1/17/20113 FY09 CD-03 DIP $38,3273 KNIGHT ROAD DRAINAGE IMP $0 10/9/2010 7/25/20114 CEDAR ST/QUINNE DIP $9,985 7/15/2008 8/28/20085 3113 BANK ST DIP $56,304 5/20/2008 8/28/20086 1100 ALGONQUIN PKWY DIP $61,935 7/1/2008 8/28/20086 CALIFORNIA NBHD DRAINAGE IMP $0 8/21/2010 1/17/20116 FY09 CD-06 DIP $40,000 7/21/2008 11/25/20086 RICHMONT TER SUBD @ BOXELDER DIP $0 9/19/2010 7/5/20117 1414 NORTHWIND RD DR IMP $0 6/9/2008 7/28/20087 202 COUNCIL DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $0 6/19/2008 9/1/20087 253 ST MATTHEWS AVE DIP $25,379 Merged w/Brookfield7 3700 BLK NAPANEE ROAD DIP $25,428 10/29/2008 12/5/20087 3900 BROOKFIELD AVE DRAINAGE IMP $153,398 12/2/2008 4/30/20097 400 BLKS REAR COUNTRY LN & CLUB LN DIP $263,148 3/28/2010 9/23/20107 400 SPRITE ROAD DRAINAGE IMP $9,886 10/29/2008 11/14/20087 401 SPRINGWOOD LANE DRAINAGE IMP $20,931 12/30/2008 4/30/20097 4306 RIVER ROAD DRAINAGE IMPR $07 500 BLOCK N HUBBARDS LN DIP $44,755 7/14/2008 10/13/20087 506 N HUBBARDS LANE DRAINAGE IMP $50,060 10/29/2008 12/15/20087 BEECH AVENUE AREA DRAINAGE IMP $194,499 8/8/2009 5/24/20107 INDIAN HILLS DRAINAGE IMP 2008 $20,9317 REGENCY LANE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $20,931 1/5/2009 3/1/20098 2200 BELMONT AVE DIP $152,107 Deleted8 2400 TREVILIAN WAY DIP $110,000 6/29/2009 10/26/20098 FY09 CD-08 DIP $100,000 8/28/2008 6/30/20098 FY10 CD-08 DIP $100,000 8/21/2009 6/16/20108 LAMONT RD DIP $100,000 5/9/2008 8/31/20089 216 N HITE AVE DRAINAGE IMP $15,0009 2900 SENECA PARK RD DRAINAGE IMP $15,000 8/20/2008 8/31/20089 440 LIGHTFOOT RD DRAINAGE IMP $15,000 Deleted9 GLADSTONE AVENUE DRAINAGE IMP $26,000 8/21/2008 8/31/2008Page 2

Project DRI Phase 3Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS9 LANDOR AVENUE DRAINAGE IMP $50,000 Deleted9 LINDSAY AVE DRAINAGE IMP $30,375 10/8/2008 11/19/20089 MEADOW DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $50,000 1/5/2009 5/30/200910 1500 BELMAR DRAINAGE IMP $70,000 10/16/2008 3/31/200910 BASHFORD AVENUE DRAINAGE IMP $0 8/21/2010 1/17/201110 COLONIAL HILL ROAD DRAINAGE IMP $0 8/21/2010 1/17/201110 CROSS BILL RD DRAINAGE IMP $253,119 3/7/2010 9/2/201010 FORREST STREET DRAINAGE IMP $0 8/21/2010 1/17/201110 FY09 CD-10 DRAINAGE IMP $150,000 6/2/2008 12/15/200810 FY10 CD-10 DRAINAGE IMP $150,00010 GREENLEAF ROAD DRAINAGE IMP $70,000 3/1/2008 8/28/200810 LEE AVENUE CONCRETE DITCH ENCLOSURE $0 10/6/2009 2/2/201010 LEE AVENUE DRAINAGE IMP $100,000 Deleted10 LUCAS AVENUE DRAINAGE IMP $160,000 5/20/2008 8/31/200810 RICHMONT TER SUBD @ SUMAC DIP $0 9/19/2010 7/5/201110 WEST BUECHEL DRAINAGE IMP $0 1/21/2011 6/19/201111 CRAWFORD AVENUE DRAINAGE IMP $0 1/5/2009 4/30/200911 GRANVIL DR DIP $90,000 7/1/2009 10/8/200911 KAYE LAWN DR (3100 BLK) DIP $80,000 9/22/2008 11/14/200811 KLONDIKE LN (2700/2800 BLK) DR IMP $0 7/8/2009 9/5/200911 MANNER DALE DR (4400 BLK) DIP $83,000 1/5/2010 6/3/201011 MELBOURNE AVENUE DR IMP $0 3/19/2009 6/12/200911 MICHAEL DRIVE (3800 BLK) DRAINAGE IMP $0 10/14/2008 11/7/200811 PERMA DR DIP $155,934 7/14/2008 10/24/200811 SIX MILE LN (6300/6400 BLK) DIP $50,000 2/11/2008 4/18/200811 TYSON PLACE (REAR) DRAINAGE IMP $0 Deleted12 1701 TRENT AVE DIP $75,000 7/5/2009 11/1/200912 2410 RODDY RD DIP $34,000 11/26/2008 1/30/200912 2413 OMAHA DIP $35,000 10/7/2008 12/1/200812 2511 MAVIS AVE DIP $53,000 11/14/2008 3/31/200912 2513 WILKERSON AVE DIP $35,000 8/21/2009 12/18/200912 2605 THOMAS AVE DIP $40,000 10/17/2008 11/15/200812 3034 BRIDWELL DIP $15,000 4/18/2008 4/25/200812 5015 LASABRE DR DIP $54,000 9/21/2009 1/18/201012 5212 SKYLIGHT DIP $48,000 3/24/2010 7/21/201012 5607 McDEANE DRIVE DR IMP $0 10/30/2008 1/15/2009Page 3

Project DRI Phase 3Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS12 6312 TRIPLETT DR DIP $50,000 7/22/2009 11/18/200912 6615 ASTRAL DR DIP $67,000 10/6/2008 12/31/200812 6816 MANSLICK DIP $23,735 4/1/2008 5/23/200812 7003 URANUS (REAR) DIP $25,000 3/30/2009 5/30/200912 7112 KENTUCKY AVE DIP $44,000 1/16/2008 3/18/200812 7209 FEYHURST DIP $65,000 4/7/2008 6/20/200812 BRICK KILN LN DIP $100,000 2/22/2010 6/21/201012 BROOKLAWN DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $0 1/21/2009 6/19/200912 COLUMBIA AVE DIP $130,000 3/17/2009 6/15/200912 CORONET DR DIP $30,000 5/22/2010 9/18/201012 DAISY AVE DIP $45,000 10/22/2009 2/18/201012 DATURA DIP $15,000 5/5/2010 9/1/201012 FLAIR KNOLL DRAINAGE IMP $0 12/17/2008 3/31/200912 KRAUSE DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $0 4/21/2009 10/17/200912 MARGUERITE DR REAR DITCH $35,000 9/3/2008 11/30/200812 MATTERHORN DR DIP $53,000 6/8/2008 6/20/200812 MILNER DR DIP $33,000 4/21/2010 8/18/201012 MT. EVEREST DRAINAGE IMP $0 3/30/2009 5/30/200912 MT. HOWARD DIP $54,000 3/1/2008 3/14/200812 OAK VALLEY DR DIP $71,000 4/7/2010 8/4/201012 OSWEGO DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $0 11/26/2008 3/1/200912 ROMANIA DR DIP $30,000 9/2/2008 9/30/200812 SANTA FE TRAIL DIP $70,000 5/6/2009 7/1/200912 SARANAC CT DIP $20,000 9/3/2008 12/15/200812 SKY BLUE DIP $82,000 12/22/2009 4/20/201012 STEPHAN DIP $60,000 11/14/2008 3/31/200912 VISTA JOHN DRAINAGE IMP $0 4/21/2009 10/17/200913 9301 BEULAH CHURCH RD DR IMP $0 8/22/2008 8/29/200813 9614 BRITTANIA CT DR IMP $0 5/19/2009 5/15/200913 BALANCE LANE DRAINAGE IMP $0 9/11/2008 3/31/200913 BROWN AUSTIN PHASE 2 DR IMP $150,000 11/20/2009 5/18/201013 ELK RIVER DRAINAGE IMP $70,000 9/30/2008 1/1/200913 ELMER LANE REAR YARD DRAINAGE IMP $200,000 2/9/2009 6/1/200913 GLIMMER WAY DRAINAGE IMP $70,000 6/11/2008 8/15/200813 KEYS FERRY RD DRAINAGE IMP $0 4/10/2009 6/30/200913 LARLYN/KEYS FERRY DRAINAGE IMP $94,149 10/20/2009 4/17/2010Page 4

Project DRI Phase 3Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS13 MACKIE LAND DRAINAGE IMP $60,000 3/7/2010 9/2/201013 OLDE GLOUCHESTER COVE DR IMP $50,000 9/4/2009 3/2/201013 ROBERTS AVENUE DRAINAGE IMP $100,000 2/15/2008 7/15/200813 SISSONE DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $55,000 9/11/2008 1/1/200913 TIN DOR WAY DRAINAGE IMP $100,000 3/3/2009 6/1/200913 TOLLS LANE DRAINAGE IMPR $70,000 12/1/2008 4/28/200913 TONYA COURT DRAINAGE IMP $50,000 5/20/2008 6/30/200813 YORKTOWN NORTH BASIN IMP $50,000 6/11/2008 8/30/200814 12405 LOWER RIVER RD DR IMP $32,000 8/19/2008 11/30/200814 8318 SILVER FOX DRAINAGE IMP $75,000 1/29/2008 2/15/200814 ARON ROAD DRAINAGE IMP $40,000 10/21/2008 4/1/200914 AXTELL AVENUE DRAINAGE IMP $135,000 12/23/2008 3/31/200914 BLUEBONNET ROAD DRAINAGE IMP $45,000 1/5/2010 7/3/201014 BROKERS TIP LANE DRAINAGE IMP $140,000 5/5/2010 10/31/201014 DELTON ROAD REAR DRAINAGE IMP $80,000 9/4/2009 3/2/201014 DORINDA DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $82,000 7/5/2009 12/31/200914 FENMORE AVENUE (REAR) DR IMP $55,000 7/28/2008 10/6/200814 FLORADORA DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $125,000 1/14/2008 4/13/200814 IREWICK WAY DRAINAGE IMP $92,500 3/3/2009 6/1/200914 MARIE ANNA DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $125,000 3/7/2010 9/2/201014 PATRICIA DRIVE/APRIL WAY DR IMP $145,000 4/24/2008 6/30/200814 PLAUDIT WAY DRAINAGE IMP $90,003 4/17/2009 7/1/200914 SEAFORTH DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $125,000 1/20/2009 5/1/200914 SUNKIST WAY DRAINAGE IMP $200,000 7/16/2008 10/7/200814 W PAGES RESTORATION PROJECT $0 4/13/2009 5/15/200914 WHIPPLE RD DRAINAGE IMP $0 4/23/2009 5/30/200915 1600 CRUMS LANE DRAINAGE IMP $166,723 6/30/2009 8/30/200915 FY09 CD-15 DRAINAGE IMP $100,000 5/1/2008 11/25/200815 FY10 CD-15 DRAINAGE IMP $100,00015 TAYLOR BLVD DRAINAGE IMP $0 1/21/2011 6/19/201116 BEECH AVENUE DRI $55,00016 BRITTANY VALLEY ROAD DRI $50,000 7/21/2008 9/30/200816 GLENVIEW AVENUE DRAINAGE IMP $0 1/19/2009 4/24/200916 HARRODS LANDINGS DRI $65,000 12/1/2008 3/1/200916 REST WAY DRI $56,865 5/13/2009 9/30/200916 WOLF TRACE DRAINAGE IMP $30,000 3/19/2008 3/24/2008Page 5

Project DRI Phase 3Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS16 WOODSIDE DRIVE DRI $40,000 3/19/2008 4/15/200817 5211 SILVERTON LANE DIP $0 6/21/2009 9/18/200917 BINGHAM DRIVE (9000 BLK) DIP $40,125 1/12/2009 2/28/200917 MALVERN HILL RD (8800 BLK) DIP $26,750 7/30/2008 8/22/200817 RHETT COURT (2500 BLK) DRAINAGE IMP $26,750 5/27/2008 7/8/200817 ROCK SPRING CULVERT STUDY $12,500 3/6/2008 6/24/200817 TIVERTON WAY (9700 BLK) DRAINAGE IMP $26,750 5/27/2008 8/14/200817 VINING PLACE & CHAMBERLAIN LN DIP $79,648 3/7/2009 5/1/200917 WESTPORT RD (8700 BLK) DIP $105,250 8/20/2009 11/17/200917 WICKHAM WAY (1900 BLK) DR IMP $26,750 6/26/2008 9/30/200817 WILSON AVENUE (9200 BLK) DR IMP $133,750 1/12/2009 2/13/200918 CARRIAGE HOUSE COURT DRI $100,000 6/17/2008 9/18/200818 CHARING CROSS DRI PROJECT $140,000 12/30/2008 2/6/200918 DISTRICT 18 DRI 3 $49,621 11/21/2009 6/30/201018 GRANT AVE DRI PROJECT $37,500 Deleted18 LYNDON LANE DRI $49,618 CANCELLED18 WAXWING DRI PROJECT $70,000 6/21/2009 1/28/201018 WINGED FOOT DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $0 8/21/2008 10/2/200819 11514 SHELBYVILLE RD DIP $0 11/26/2008 1/8/200919 16625 LEDGES DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $30,000 Deleted19 203 MARENGO DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $29,000 9/8/2008 10/15/200819 308 WESTWOOD DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $40,000 Deleted19 BRENTFORD PLACE DRAINAGE IMP $30,000 5/19/2009 7/31/200919 CAROLDALE LANE DRAINAGE IMP $18,750 5/19/2009 8/14/200919 COATBRIDGE PLACE DRAINAGE IMP $52,25019 CROSSBRANCH COURT DR IMP $82,750 9/22/2008 10/17/200819 DISTRICT 19 DRAINAGE IMPR $35,721 2/21/2010 8/19/201019 DONOHUE DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $44,125 9/21/2009 12/4/200919 HAWICK PLACE DRAINAGE IMP $56,625 4/1/2009 6/15/200919 HURLINGHAM COURT DRAINAGE IMP $80,000 4/28/2008 8/4/200819 JUNEAU DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $40,000 Deleted19 MEADOW LANE DRAINAGE IMP $36,500 6/6/2008 8/31/200819 MIDDLETOWN INDUSTRIAL BLVD DIP $35,000 7/21/2008 8/22/200819 MIDLAND MEADOWS DRAINAGE IMP $21,875 7/21/2008 9/30/200819 NASSAU LANE CULVERT IMPROVEMENT $45,000 12/1/2008 3/1/200919 URTON LANE DRAINAGE IMP $75,625 4/28/2008 9/7/2008Page 6

Project DRI Phase 3Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS19 WAKEFIELD PLACE DRAINAGE IMP $25,750 7/21/2008 10/15/200819 WILLIAMS RIDGE ROAD DIP $0 4/6/2009 6/30/200920 12008 HUDSON VIEW CT DIP $41,875 5/20/2008 7/30/200820 12407 KIRKHAM RD CULVERT DIP $30,000 Deleted20 ALDERBROOK PLACE DRAINAGE IMP $23,275 3/28/2008 5/1/200820 DISTRICT 20 DRAINAGE IMPR $40,269 7/1/2008 6/30/201020 HISTORIC DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $57,250 5/22/2008 7/15/200820 ROCK MOSS COURT DRAINAGE IMP $40,000 8/28/2008 10/15/200821 230 KENWOOD HILL ROAD DIP $120,000 6/21/2009 11/17/200921 BELLEVUE AVE (4700 BLK) REAR DIP $33,500 8/22/2008 1/28/200921 DALE AVENUE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $118,100 4/22/2009 7/17/200921 FY08 CD-21 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $600,000 6/1/2008 1/17/201021 IROQUOIS AVE (700 & 800 BLK) DIP $153,220 10/30/2008 1/15/200921 LAWNSIDE & LENOAK DRAINAGE IMP $89,900 4/1/2009 5/30/200921 MORRISON AVENUE DRAINAGE IMP $78,500 5/22/2009 9/5/200921 OAKWOOD AVENUE DRAINAGE IMP $153,600 5/1/2009 8/30/200921 SOUTHERN PARKWAY DRAINAGE IMP $160,000 4/1/2009 6/30/200921 W SOUTHLAND BLVD DRAINAGE IMP $52,300 4/1/2009 6/29/200921 WOODLAWN AVENUE DRAINGE IMP $96,000 5/1/2009 8/15/200922 10206 SEATONVILLE ROAD DIP $0 4/14/2009 5/15/200922 2200 OUTER LOOP BANK REPAIR $0 12/15/2008 4/15/200922 5505 SPRIGWOOD DRAINAGE IMP $0 1/29/2008 2/15/200822 7808 BUELAH CHURCH DIP $0 4/14/2009 6/15/200922 815 FLICKER ROAD DRAINAGE IMP $0 7/11/2008 7/22/200822 8602 HUDSON LN DRAINAGE IMP $0 8/22/2008 9/30/200822 9611 SEATON PLACE DRAINAGE IMP $0 4/14/2009 6/15/200922 BIRCHLINE DRAINAGE IMP $125,000 5/2/2008 7/23/200822 CROSS COUNTRY DRAINAGE IMP $70,187 5/5/2010 10/31/201022 CYNTHIA DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $100,000 11/5/2009 5/3/201022 DEA DEA COURT DRAINAGE IMP $0 4/14/2009 7/12/200922 FERN CREEK/FERNDALE RD DR IMP $75,000 3/17/2009 7/15/200922 FIRWOOD REAR YARD DRAINAGE IMP $75,000 12/5/2009 6/2/201022 GRANVIL DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $75,000 9/4/2009 3/2/201022 MICHAEL EDWARD DRAINAGE IMP $150,000 10/2/2008 12/31/200822 POINSETTIA DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $0 7/5/2010 12/31/201022 REDCOAT DRAINAGE IMP $75,000 3/25/2009 6/15/2009Page 7

Project DRI Phase 3Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS22 SANTOM LANE DRAINAGE IMP $75,000 9/17/2008 12/31/200822 ST. GABRIEL CULVERT REPLACEMENT $0 5/28/2008 6/30/200822 WALTLEE DRAINAGE IMP $100,000 8/12/2008 10/9/200822 WINDGATE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $0 5/1/2008 5/30/200822 WINTER PARK DRAINAGE IMP $100,000 9/11/2008 11/30/200823 BRISCOE RIDGE DRAINAGE IMP $55,000 Deleted23 BURLWOOD DRAINAGE IMP $225,000 7/14/2008 1/1/200923 DAVERMAN COURT DRAINAGE IMP $50,000 12/22/2009 6/19/201023 HIGHVIEW SUBD DRAINAGE IMP $240,000 6/30/2008 10/16/200823 ROCHELLE ROAD DRAINAGE IMP $240,000 4/1/2008 10/15/200823 SCIENCE HILL DRAINAGE IMP $0 4/14/2009 6/15/200923 STONEMILL COURT DRAINAGE IMP $68,357 7/22/2009 1/17/201023 YELLOW PINE DRAINAGE IMP $150,000 8/11/2008 10/30/200824 ALLENTREE COURT DRAINAGE IMP $129,877 3/7/2010 9/2/201024 JUDGE BLVD DRAINAGE IMP $75,000 9/21/2009 3/19/201024 KIKI/MONTRIE DRAINAGE IMP $200,000 7/5/2009 12/31/200924 KNOPP AVENUE DRAINAGE IMP $250,000 3/17/2009 7/1/200924 MELTON AVENUE DRAINAGE IMP $250,000 11/5/2009 5/3/201024 MOONRIDGE DRAINAGE IMP $150,000 11/5/2008 2/15/200924 OLIVE ROAD DRAINAGE IMP $175,000 4/7/2010 10/3/201024 RUST OAK DRAINAGE IMP $250,000 6/23/2008 9/1/200824 SIRATE LANE DRAINAGE IMP $200,000 1/21/2010 7/19/201024 SLACK/HARNED DRAINAGE IMP $200,000 8/21/2009 2/16/201024 SPYGLASS/NORMIE DRAINAGE IMP $200,000 9/1/2008 11/15/200824 TURNPIKE VIEW DRAINAGE IMP $0 5/19/2009 7/15/200924 WOODBURY DRAINAGE IMP $175,000 11/14/2008 3/1/200925 10320 DEERING RD DRAINAGE IMP $60,000 8/20/2009 2/15/201025 10600 TORRINGTON RD DRAINAGE IMP $45,972 7/21/2009 1/16/201025 11609 DEERING ROAD DRAINGAE IMP $65,000 9/19/2009 3/17/201025 9112 HI VIEW DRAINAGE IMP $0 11/26/2008 2/28/200925 9811 3RD STREET ROAD DR IMP $85,000 5/22/2009 11/17/200925 ANDALUSIA LANE DRAINAGE IMP $65,000 10/21/2009 4/18/201025 CANDY LANE DRAINAGE IMP $130,000 5/12/2008 10/31/200825 CRESTRIDGE DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $120,00025 EL PRADO ST PHASE 2 DRAINAGE IMP $100,000 5/5/2009 7/15/200925 GAYMONT DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $150,000 3/17/2008 6/23/2008Page 8

Project DRI Phase 3Project List by Council DistrictCD PROJECT NAME ALLOCATION START FINISH COMMENTS25 HI VIEW LANE DRAINAGE IMP $60,000 3/20/2010 9/15/201025 JAMES HILL ROAD DRAINAGE IMP $85,000 11/20/2009 5/18/201025 LANSFORD DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $120,000 4/10/2008 9/1/200825 MID DRIVE PHASE 2 DRAINAGE IMP $85,000 12/18/2008 4/15/200925 MILLERS LANE PHASE 2 DRAINAGE IMP $95,000 12/1/2008 2/17/200925 NEPTUNE PLACE DRAINAGE IMP $100,000 4/17/2009 7/1/200925 RIDAN WAY DRAINAGE IMP $160,000 2/6/2008 8/15/200825 S. DODGE LANE DRAINAGE IMP $110,000 7/21/2009 1/16/201025 SUPREMUS/COLT DRAINAGE IMP $130,000 12/21/2009 6/18/201025 SW YMCA DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT $0 9/29/2008 11/15/200825 TAMM COURT DRAINAGE IMP $100,000 6/20/2009 12/16/200925 TEMPLETON DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $190,000 8/1/2008 10/14/200825 WILDWOOD LANE DRAINAGE IMP $70,000 6/5/2009 12/1/200925 WINDEMERE DRIVE DRAINAGE IMP $100,00026 3510 BROCKTON LANE DIP $0 10/29/2008 12/30/200826 BLOSSOMWOOD DR (4000 BLK) DIP $40,000 4/21/2008 6/19/200826 BRECKENRIDGE LN (500 BLK) DIP $0 9/12/2008 10/24/200826 BRYAN WAY (3400 BLK) DIP $150,000 6/16/2008 8/4/200826 FY08/09 CD-26 DIP $96,295 5/14/2008 6/30/200826 GLADSTONE AVE (2300 BLK) DIP $90,000 1/4/2010 5/3/201026 HALLSDALE DR DIP $170,000 9/22/2008 11/14/200826 HENDON/TALISMAN REAR DIP $150,000 2/12/2010 7/11/201026 LYNNBROOK DR (4200 BLK) DIP $40,000 7/15/2008 9/9/200826 PARKDALE AVE DIP $60,000 8/1/2009 10/14/200926 TYLER LN (2200/2300 BLKS) DIP $120,000 1/4/2010 6/2/201026 WELLINGMOOR AVE DIP $150,000 10/16/2009 4/13/201026 WESTWOOD AVE DIP $140,000 8/1/2009 11/28/2009TOTAL $24,049,621Page 9