PPA Case #1

Water Capture City of Milwaukee

Steve Baisden

Laura Catherman John Gardner

Heather Goetsch

October 24, 2011

1

October 24, 2011

Matt Howard

City of Milwaukee

Office of Environmental Sustainability

809 N. Broadway

Milwaukee, WI 53202

Dear Mr. Howard:

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to examine the problems facing Milwaukee’s sewerage

system and to provide the city with our recommendation. Enclosed is a report that defines the

problems facing the city and focuses on low- and no-cost options that reduce the volume of water

entering the sewerage system. Based on our evaluation, we have recommended Alternative E, a

combination of city-wide downspout disconnections and sewer lateral and foundation drain

repairs. Questions that are likely to be asked by residents and city officials include:

Which properties will get their downspouts disconnected first?

What problems might the solution create?

How much will this cost?

Why do some property owners get to participate while others do not?

Downspout disconnections will take place city-wide for eligible properties and sewer lateral and

foundation drain repair and replacement will take place in targeted areas. The city cannot fund

improvements of all homes across the city due to budget constraints. The public purpose of the

proposal is to reduce basement backups, minimize necessary costs, and improve the health and

safety for all residents. Fewer basement backups will cost the city, and therefore its residents,

less money. In addition, the proposal will likely provide other public benefits such as an

increased value of housing stock for property owners.

Some residents may ask why everyone must pay for repairs when only some residents will

benefit. This may be a sore subject for residents who could have taken advantage of pilot

programs at no cost and who now have to pay for these repairs. Residents need to understand that

this program will aide in preventing future basement back-ups, lateral ruptures, and sewerage

overflows which would be much more costly than participation in this preventative program.

Sincerely,

Steve Baisden

Laura Catherman

John Gardner

Heather Goetsch

2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Stormwater management has become increasingly challenging, especially in today’s tough

economic climate. The aging sewer system is expensive to replace and cannot be infinitely

expanded to capture the large volumes of precipitation caused by the changing climate. The City

of Milwaukee is considering inexpensive and creative ways to reduce the total volume entering

the stormwater system. After careful examination of five alternatives, the most effective and

efficient solution for the city is to mandate the disconnection of downspouts through city

ordinance and facilitate inspections and repairs of foundation drains and laterals for all properties

within the city limits. This solution meets and in some cases exceeds the cost and volume

criteria defined in this report.

Property owners will pay no cost for downspout disconnection if their annual household income

is at or below the Federal Poverty Level. However, those who have an annual household income

over the Federal Poverty Level will be responsible for disconnection at their own expense

(estimated at $10 per downspout). Property owners could also pay up to $1,500 for overall repair

costs either upfront or over 20 years ($75 per year) for lateral and foundation drain repairs. The

lateral replacement and foundation drain disconnection costs will be covered under the city’s

2012 planned budget and the downspout disconnection costs will be supported by an annual

stormwater management fee. Stormwater fees range from $1.50 to $6 per year. Therefore, both

initiatives can be carried out under the planned budget. A 15.1% volume reduction will be

reached if 35% of properties in the city disconnect their downspouts and 1,300 residences repair

their laterals in the non-compliant metershed.

Not only does this solution address issues of social equity through income based fees and free

disconnections for households at or below the Federal Poverty Level, but it will help save costs

for property owners and the city by reducing the rate of basement back-ups. Allowing property

owners to pay for these costs in small amounts over a 20 year period will ease the burden for

households in today’s tough economic times. Furthermore, it is flexible for the city. For

example, a modest increase in income based fees will allow more than 35% of downspouts to be

disconnected which will increase the reduction of stormwater runoff. Additionally, a modest

increase in fees could also be used to help cover any additional costs from lateral and foundation

drain repairs or sewer infrastructure.

3

PROBLEM SUMMARY

As Milwaukee urbanized and the surface became more impervious, stormwater management

became increasingly challenging. Milwaukee began to address these issues in 1925 with the

opening of the Jones Island sewerage plant and followed later by the South Shore treatment

plant. The city was further able to collect and transport stormwater as well as sewage by

constructing a combined sewer system that captures both stormwater and sewage, which is

treated before returning to Lake Michigan. Today, many areas have separated sewer systems

(separate pipes for stormwater and sewage), yet 25% of the city’s 2,450 miles of sewers remain

combined.

More than half of the sewers are more than 50 years old, not including laterals on private

property. The combined system is centrally located in the city and is below some of the poorest

neighborhoods. Over time, pipes can crack, bend, and tree roots can grow through them causing

issues that contribute to increased inflow and infiltration. The city has a maintenance plan to

replace or line damaged sewer pipes, but the plan does not include pipes on private property.

Milwaukee’s housing stock was constructed largely before 1955. These homes have foundation

drains and downspouts directly connected to the sewer system. Along with leaky lateral pipes,

these features are contributing factors to the 60% infiltration rate into the stormwater system.

The cost for a homeowner to have his/her lateral inspected and replaced can range from $2,500

to $7,000. The cost of disconnecting one downspout can be as minimal as $15.00, and installing

a sump pump in place of the foundation drain can cost anywhere from $500 to $5,000.

The existing sewer system is a fixed system and was built to handle precipitation patterns that

existed 50 years ago. Major rain events have resulted in considerable flooding in the city as well

as sewerage backups in residents’ basements. Due to flooding damage from a large storm in

2008, many homes were beyond repair and 20 homes were demolished. In June 2009, the city

received 763 calls from residents whose basements were flooded, 400 calls on July 15, 2010, and

nearly 11,000 calls on July 22, 2010. As the trend of increased precipitation persists, Milwaukee

will need to adapt to handle the increased volumes.

As climate changes, Wisconsin’s weather is becoming wetter and warmer. Precipitation has

increased by 15% and annual precipitation is greater than 17 inches. Additionally, major storm

events have increased in both spring and fall. In fact, four of the top five river crests for the

Kinnickinnic River over the past 35 years occurred within the past three years.

Another outcome of the increased precipitation has been sewerage overflows into Lake

Michigan. In the 1980s, the state of Illinois took Milwaukee to court charging the city with

polluting Lake Michigan. Milwaukee was found guilty. At that time the city was dumping raw

sewage into the lake 50 to 60 times per year. As a result, the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage

District (MMSD) created an Overflow Reduction Plan consisting of reclamation facility

upgrades, deep tunnels, and sewer rehabilitation. The plan reduced the overflows to 2 to 3 times

per year. While MMSD maintains their system, the city has to maintain its own sewers. This year

the city will spend around $38 million on sewer repairs and replacements.

In 2005, Mayor Barrett commissioned a Green Team to compose a sustainability report for the

city including nine recommendations for stormwater management. In response to the increased

number of flooding events since 2008, the Mayor created a Flooding Study Task Force. The

4

main message the task force conveyed is that no single action can correct the stormwater

flooding issue.

Considering the sewer system is fixed and expensive to repair or replace, the city and MMSD

have concluded that stormwater management needs to occur more comprehensively above

ground. In 2001, 2002, and 2006, the city and MMSD partnered to facilitate voluntary

downspout disconnections on private property. The city has additionally dedicated $10 million

to conducting pilot studies for stormwater mitigation, including bioswales in street medians,

pervious pavement in alleys, green roofs on municipal buildings, detention ponds in parks, and a

massive targeted sewer and lateral maintenance program. As recently as July 2011, the city’s

Common Council approved the National League of Cities Service Line Warranty Program in

order to give private residents a more affordable lateral replacement option.

PROBLEM STATEMENT

Milwaukee’s tight budget and overall bad economy are impeding the city’s ability to handle

increasing volumes and costly combined sewer overflows and basement backups caused by the

city’s impervious urban environment, aging sewer infrastructure, and changing climate.

CRITERIA

Cost to Property Owners The preferred alternative must not require residential and non-residential property owners to pay

more than an additional $100 and $1,000 respectively per property per year for the duration of

the program and/or project.

Rationale: Milwaukee’s residential and commercial property owners are negatively affected by

the bad economy. Median income for city households has decreased by 22% since 2000.1

However, the city is also negatively affected by the bad economy, aging infrastructure and

housing stock, and large rain events. The preferred alternative must address the city’s issues

while keeping costs for property owners within reasonable limits. Examining fees for existing

programs in Milwaukee (i.e. Me22) and existing stormwater programs in other cities (i.e.

Portland’s Clean River Rewards3), residential property owners should not be expected to pay

more than $100 annually and commercial property owners should not be expected to pay more

than $1,000 annually.

Cost to the City

The preferred alternative must not exceed the city’s planned fiscal year budget of $8 million.

Rationale: Due to tough economic conditions and the city’s tight fiscal budget, the total cost of

preferred alternative must fit within the city’s planned fiscal year budget. The city has budgeted

$38 million for sewer costs. City officials expect to spend $30 million on upcoming

maintenance and repairs to infrastructure which leaves $8 million remaining for the fiscal year.

The city cannot afford to allocate more money to the Sewer Maintenance Fund. Additionally,

raising taxes to cover the cost of stormwater management would be politically unfeasibly given

the current economic climate. However, if the estimated costs of an alternative exceed the city’s

1 Journal Sentinel. http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/130325653.html 2 Me2. http://www.smartenergypays.com 3 City of Portland Clean River Rewards. http://www.portlandonline.com/bes/index.cfm?c=41976

5

planned budget, the alternative must have outside funding or generate enough revenue to cover

the cost of the alternative.

Reduction in Stormwater Volume The preferred alternative must reduce the total volume of stormwater runoff and/or volume of

water entering the sewerage system by 15% during a 1” rain event within 5 years after

implementation.

Rationale: Modeled after Mayor Barrett’s directive for city departments to reduce stormwater

runoff by 15% on city owned properties4, the preferred alternative must reduce the volume of

stormwater runoff or water entering the sewerage system by 15% for residential and non-

residential properties in Milwaukee. The 5 year planning horizon provides sufficient time for

funding to be secured and revenue to be generated, if needed. Additionally, a 5 year

implementation period will allow for the alternative to be implemented at all residential and non-

residential properties in Milwaukee. For example, if the preferred alternative includes plant

material, a 5 year planning horizon will allow plants to mature before measuring the alternative’s

effectiveness.

ALTERNATIVES

Alternative A: Downspout disconnection within city limits and stormwater management income

based fees

Alternative A mandates by ordinance the disconnection of all downspouts within city limits.

This includes the disconnection of all eligible properties in the 27 square mile combined storm

and sanitary sewer system (CSS), in addition to all properties outside the CSS area but still

within city limits. The disconnection must be completed within four years of enactment of the

ordinance. Property owners may be eligible to complete the disconnection for free if they meet

the criteria set forth in Chapter 225, Section 4.2 in the Milwaukee Code of Ordinances (MCO)5

and their annual household income is at or below the Federal Poverty Level.6 This free service

will be performed by the Milwaukee Community Service Corps (MCSC).7 MCSC will help

determine the number of downspouts that can be disconnected and the best method for

disconnection in each case. Supplies needed for disconnection work (i.e. hack saws, rubber caps,

downspout elbows), instructions, and any necessary technical assistance will be supplied to the

MCSC by the city. After the disconnection is complete, a follow-up inspection by the City of

Milwaukee Department of Public Works (DPW) will ensure that the system works properly.

Property owners will be notified by mail two weeks prior to the evaluation of any possible work

being done on their property. MCSC members will be required to keep extensive notes on each

property for use in the city’s property database. In addition to the mandated disconnection, the

ordinance will prohibit any future development or redevelopment in the city limits from

connecting downspouts. In cases where it may not be technically feasible to disconnect the

downspout or where disconnection would create a hazardous condition, exceptions to this

regulation will be granted for properties unable to meet the city’s criteria set forth in the MCO.

4 City of Milwaukee Office of Environmental Sustainability. http://city.milwaukee.gov/ManagingYourStormwater 5 Milwaukee Code of Ordinances. Chapter 225, Section 4. http://cctv25.milwaukee.gov/netit-

code81/volume2_/ch225/CH225.pdf 6 2011 Health and Human Services Poverty Guidelines. http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/11poverty.shtml (e.g. Annual

income for a family of four would be less than or equal to $22,350). 7 Milwaukee Community Service Corps. http://www.milwaukeecommunityservicecorps.org/home.htm

6

Access into residential properties is not necessary to complete the disconnection. If residents do

not choose to allow the MCSC to perform the work, the owners must disconnect the downspout

themselves or hire a licensed plumber to disconnect the downspout at the owner's expense.

Those property owners who have an annual household income over the Federal Poverty Level do

not qualify for the free downspout disconnection. These property owners are required to perform

and pay for their own downspout disconnection. In addition to downspout disconnections, all

properties in the city limits will be assigned an annual stormwater management fee. This fee will

depend on the cost to maintain the downspout disconnection program over the four year time

allotment and will be predicated on income (Figure A-4). For example, to help offset the

monetary burden placed on the city to implement the downspout disconnection initiative, all

property owners in the city would pay a monthly fee at a variable rate based on household

income.

Evaluation of Alternative A: (See figures in Appendix A for tables and calculations)

Cost to Property Owners: Regarding downspout disconnection, property owners will pay no

cost if their annual household income is at or below the Federal Poverty Level (i.e., $22,350

for a family of four). MCSC will perform the disconnection work with materials supplied

from the city. Property owners who have an annual household income over the Federal

Poverty Level will be responsible for the disconnection of the downspouts at their own

expense, which may range from $10 to $80 over a four year period. In addition, property

owners would pay between $1.50 and $6 annually to help implement Alternative A (Figure

A-4). This increasing step fee is variable depending on household income. This fee will help

offset the cost of stormwater management programs/projects undertaken by the city.

Cost to the City: The city will be required to pay up to $2,766,974 for supplies and MCSC

fees over the four year implementation period to achieve a 15% in volume reduction

($691,743 per year) (Figure A-2). Downspout supply fees were calculated at a rate of $10

each. MCSC fees were calculated using Wisconsin's minimum wage rate of $7.258 and

assuming an average disconnection time of 20 minutes per downspout. The annual cost to

perform downspout disconnection will be supported by the annual stormwater management

fee.

Reduction in Stormwater Volume: A 15% in volume reduction will be reached if 35% of

property owners within the city disconnect their downspouts (Figure A-3).

Alternative B: Downspout disconnections in the CSS area and water allotment surcharge fee

Alternative B requires by ordinance that all eligible properties in the CSS sewerage system

disconnect downspouts. The timeline for completing disconnections is two years from the

enactment of the city’s ordinance. To assist property owners in the CSS area, property

evaluations and disconnection work will be performed by the MCSC under direction from the

DPW. MCSC members will evaluate each home in the CSS area to determine eligibility.

Properties eligible for disconnection must meet the criteria set forth in Chapter 225, Section 4.2

in the MCO.9 Supplies and instructions needed for disconnection work (i.e. hack saws, rubber

caps, downspout elbows) will be supplied to the MCSC by the city. Property owners will be

8 Wisconsin Minimum Wage. http://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/america.htm#Wisconsin 9 Milwaukee Code of Ordinances. http://cctv25.milwaukee.gov/netit-code81/volume2_/ch225/CH225.pdf

7

notified by mail two weeks prior to the evaluation and any possible work being done on their

property. MCSC members will be required to keep extensive notes on each property for use in

the city’s property database. After the disconnection is complete, a follow-up inspection by the

DPW will ensure that the system works properly. In addition to the mandated disconnection, the

ordinance will prohibit any future development or redevelopment in the CSS area from

connecting downspouts. Exceptions to this regulation will be granted for properties unable to

meet the city’s criteria set forth in the MCO.

In addition to downspout disconnections, residential properties in the CSS area will be assigned a

water usage allotment. Determining allotments for non-residential properties would be difficult

due to the varying nature of business activities and non-residential properties in the CSS area.

Every non-residential property would need to be examined on a case-by-case basis which would

be time consuming and costly for the city. The allotment for residential properties, 70 gallons

per person per day10

, will be based on the number of persons living in each household. Each

gallon used in excess of the allotted amount will receive a surcharge fee added to the existing per

gallon rate. Households consuming less than the allotted amount will receive credits for each

gallon not used in a given month. Credits can be used to cover or offset future surcharge fees

when applicable. Unused credits will expire one year from the date earned. Credits for each

household will appear on the monthly water utility bill. Collected surcharge fees can be used to

defray costs for implementing the downspout disconnection mandate and aid in reducing the

volume of water entering the CSS sewerage system. Surcharge fee rates will be evaluated

annually and based on the city’s CSS sewerage system needs (i.e. infrastructure upgrades).

Evaluation of Alternative B: (See figures in Appendix B for tables and calculations)

Cost to Property Owners: Property owners could pay as little as $0 to implement Alternative

B. Since MCSC will be performing disconnection work and the city will be supplying the

materials, downspout disconnections will have no direct out-of-pocket costs for property

owners. However, depending on each individual property owner’s water usage, surcharges

may be accrued for excessive water use.

Cost to the City: Depending on the number of properties eligible for downspout

disconnection, the city may be required to pay up to $3,153,495.89 for supplies ($10 per

downspout) and MCSC fees over the two year implementation period (Figure B-2). MCSC

fees were calculated using Wisconsin’s minimum wage rate of $7.2511

and assuming an

average disconnection time of 20 minutes per downspout. Implementation of the water usage

surcharge fee will require minimal additional staff time and should cost less than $100,000

per year to administer. The water usage surcharge fees will likely generate revenue for the

city from excessive water users, especially in summer months.

Reduction in Stormwater Volume: A 15% reduction in volume can be achieved through a

combination of downspout disconnections and water saving measures12

. For example, if

30% of all property owners disconnect downspouts and 10% of all property owners pursue

water saving measures (i.e. low-flow shower heads), a 15.1% reduction in volume will occur.

10 Water Usage. http://www.thegoodhuman.com/2008/08/25/just-how-much-rainwater-can-you-collect-off-your-

roof/ 11 Wisconsin Minimum Wage. http://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/america.htm#Wisconsin 12 Water Saving Measures. http://www.swfwmd.state.fl.us/conservation/thepowerof10/

8

Several combinations of downspout disconnections and water saving measures exist that will

achieve a minimum volume reduction of 15% (Figures A-3, A-4, and A-5).

Alternative C: Lateral repairs

Alternative C requires the City of Milwaukee to work with private property owners to replace

sewer laterals in targeted poorly performing sewer-shed areas as denoted by MMSD’s non-

compliant metershed reports. In July 2011, the city agreed to partner with the National League of

Cities Sewer Line Warranty Program to provide lateral insurance in case of rupture. However,

less than 0.1% of the city’s laterals break each year13

. The city must provide a policy to quicken

the pace of lateral repair in the city’s neediest areas. The city’s 2012 planned budget includes a

goal of repairing laterals in roughly 350 homes. MMSD granted $2.64 million to the city in 2012

for private property I/I work14

and the city has set aside money within the Sewer Maintenance

Fund, so funding for the program should not be an issue.15

The city will conduct sewer lateral repairs and foundation drain disconnections to homes within

the MMSD non-compliant metersheds (containing a rough average of 400 homes each). The cost

of both sewer lateral repair and foundation drain disconnection is roughly $7,500 per property.

This alternative will follow the city’s 2011 Pilot Program model16

, but will include a modified

payment structure in which the city will reimburse private property owners at an 80/20 split on

costs up to $7,500 (the city’s share will be a maximum of $6,000). The city will reimburse the

private property owner for the full cost of foundation drain repairs (usually $2000) and an 80/20

split on costs for lateral replacement or repair (including new lining). Property owners have the

option to pay upfront or through a 15-year payment plan (approximately $100 a year). In

addition, residents may choose what items to repair. The city will use contractors to perform the

work. The city will conduct lateral inspections first and notices will be sent to property owners

with a list of identified problems and cost estimates. Given such a cost/share model, with an $8

million budget the city could serve approximately 1,300 homes (or treat over 3 non-compliant

metersheds out of 15) in one year.

Evaluation of Alternative C:

Cost to Property Owners: Property owners could pay up to $1500 for repairs, which could be

paid upfront or over the course of 15 years ($100 per year).

Cost to the City: This alternative is within the city’s current budget proposal for 2012 and

requires no additional funding sources due to the limited nature of the proposal.

Reduction in Stormwater Volume: Alternative C reduces flow by 42,000 gallons per minute

(GPM) for 1300 homes. If we assume 75% of the homes in a non-compliant metershed (300

homes) have leaky laterals that contribute 50 GPM during a rain event, we end up with a

flow rate of 15,000 GPM for each non-compliant metershed. If laterals are repaired and only

leak 10 GPM, we have a combined flow rate of 3,000 GPM. If applied to 1,300 homes, this

results in a reduction in flow of 52,000 GPM. A 40% reduction in I/I for 1,300 homes is

13 Mayor’s Veto. http://milwaukee.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=824556&GUID=1640B292-F671-4457-

9282-56F25591830E&Options=ID%7cText%7c&Search=national+league 14 MMSD Budget. http://v3.mmsd.com/AssetsClient/Documents/Budgets/2012%20Proposed%20Budget.pdf 15 City Budget. http://city.milwaukee.gov/ImageLibrary/User/crystali/2012budget/2012proposedbook.pdf 16 Pilot Program. http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/114022314.html

9

equivalent to the reduction of 780,000 gallons per 1” rain event.17

If Milwaukee sees an

average of 34 inches of rain per year, Alternative C would reduce I/I in the city by

26,520,000 gallons a year. The city will need 9 similar projects to achieve the goal of

reducing volume by 243 million gallons a year (15%).

Alternative D: Stormwater management through zoning

Alternative D requires by zoning regulation that all development or redevelopment proposals

submitted to the Department of City Development must include: (1) a stormwater management

plan regardless of acreage of land disruption, (2) all parking lots must contain at least one

stormwater mitigation feature, and (3) all street repairs must include bioswales and/or rain

gardens in the median or grassway between the curb and sidewalk. All regulations are to take

into effect no later than January 1, 2012. To cover any additional costs, the city will dedicate at

least $5 million from its annual sewer repair budget. Additionally, property owners will

supplement the bioswales and/or rain gardens in grassways by increasing their stormwater

management charge by $10 per year for five years, not to exceed $1000.00 per year for

commercial properties.

Evaluation of Alternative D: (See figure in Appendix C for table and calculations)

Cost to Property Owners: The added stormwater management charge will total $76.88 for

residential buildings and will not exceed $150.00 for commercial properties regardless of the

average impervious surface area of 1,610 square feet, or Equivalent Residential Units

(ERUs). This alternative is within the parameters of the cost criteria for property owners.

Cost to the City: The cost to the city is below its fiscal budget for 2012 and does not require

an increase in taxes to residents. This alternative is within parameters of the cost to the city

criteria.

Reduction in Stormwater Volume: In order to meet the 15% volume reduction around

243,127,526 gallons would need to be reduced at the end of five years for a 1” rain event.

Figure C-1 in appendix C shows one of many ways this criterion can be met.

Alternative E: Downspout disconnection ordinance within City limits and sewer

lateral/foundation drain disconnection

Alternative E is a combination of Alternative A and Alternative C. Alternative E mandates by

ordinance the disconnection of all downspouts within city limits and replacement of sewer

laterals/drain disconnections within selected areas. Furthermore, the City will replace sewer

laterals and perform foundation drain disconnections within poorly performing sewer-shed areas,

as designated by MMSD. Evaluations and lateral inspections will be conducted by licensed

contractors issued by the City. The property owners eligible for downspout disconnection and

those properties selected for lateral replacement will be notified by mail two weeks prior to their

evaluation. These notices will detail possible work that may be done on the property (including

repairs) and potential costs. Alternative E includes a lateral fee and an annual stormwater

management fee. The lateral fee covers the cost of both sewer lateral repair and foundation drain

disconnection is roughly $7,500 per property. A modified payment structure will reimburse

17 Calculation: 1300 homes put 1.3 million gallons into the system in a 1" storm, they would instead put in 520,000

gallons. (saving 780,000 gallons per storm).

10

private property owners at an 80/20 split on repairs up to $7,500 (the city pays $6,000) which

will cover cost for foundation drain repairs and lateral replacement (including new lining).

Residents may pay either upfront or by means of a payment plan over 20 years. The stormwater

management fee applies to all properties within city limits to support the downspout

disconnection program. This fee is based on the cost to maintain the downspout disconnection

program over the four year time allotment and will be predicated on income.

Evaluation of Alternative E:

Cost to Property Owners: Property owners will pay no cost for downspout disconnection if

their annual household income is at or below the Federal Poverty Level. However, those

who have an annual household income over the Federal Poverty Level will be responsible for

disconnection as their own expense ($10 per downspout). Property owners could pay up to

$1,500 for overall repair costs either upfront or over 20 years ($75 per year). Stormwater fees

range from $1.50 to $6 per year.

Cost to the City: The lateral replacement/foundation drain disconnection costs will be

covered under the city’s 2012 planned budget and the downspout disconnection costs will be

supported by the annual stormwater management fee; therefore, both initiatives can be

carried out under the planned budget.

Reduction in Stormwater Volume: A 15.1% in volume reduction will be reached if 35% of

properties within the city disconnect their downspouts and 1,300 residences repair their

laterals in the non-compliant metershed.

RECOMMENDATION

Upon evaluation of all five alternatives, Alternative E is the recommended solution. Alternative

E successfully meets, and in some cases exceeds, the cost and volume criteria. As noted by the

Flooding Study Task Force, no single solution will fix the problem. Therefore, downspout

disconnections, lateral inspections and repairs, and income-based fees are more effective when

implemented in conjunction with each other than independently.

Alternative E addresses issues of social equity through income based fees and free

disconnections for households at or below the Federal Poverty Level. Additionally, although the

lateral repairs alone will not result in substantial volume reductions, this proactive solution will

help save costs for property owners and the city by reducing the rate of basement back-ups.

Allowing property owners to pay for these costs in small amounts over a 20 year period will ease

the burden for households in today’s tough economic times. Furthermore, Alternative E is a

flexible solution for the city. For example, a modest increase in income based fees will allow

more than 35% of downspouts to be disconnected which will increase the reduction of

stormwater runoff. Additionally, a modest increase in fees could also be used to help cover any

additional costs from lateral inspections, maintenance, and repairs.

11

Appendix A

Figure A-1: Data for City of Milwaukee Roofs and Downspouts

Figure A-2: Downspout Disconnection Costs. Cost for materials is based on $10 per downspout and

cost for MCSC fees is based on 20 minutes per downspout and the Wisconsin minimum wage rate of

$7.25.

12

Figure A-4: Income Based Fee

Figure A-3: Volume Reduction Chart for Downspout Disconnections in CSS Area. Gallons of water

collected from a roof during a 1” rain event was calculated by multiplying the total square feet of roof

area x 1” of rain x 0.6 (gallons collected per square foot per inch of rain).

13

Appendix B

Figure B-1: Data for CSS Area Roofs and Downspouts

Figure B-2: Downspout Disconnection Costs. Cost for materials is based on $10 per downspout and

cost for MCSC fees is based on 20 minutes per downspout and the Wisconsin minimum wage rate of

$7.25.

14

Figure B-4: Volume Reduction Chart for Water Saving Measures in CSS Area

Figure B-3: Volume Reduction Chart for Downspout Disconnections in CSS Area. Gallons of water

collected from a roof during a 1” rain event was calculated by multiplying the total square feet of roof

area x 1” of rain x 0.6 (gallons collected per square foot per inch of rain).

15

Figure B-5: Water Saving Measures and Potential Volume Reductions

16

Appendix C

Scenario for 15% Volume Reduction for Alternative D

Stormwater Feature Est. Gallons Reduced Total Square Feet

Bioswales 2,500,000 500,000

Porous pavement 10,000,000 1,000,000

Stormwater trees 10,000 1,000

Native landscaping 1,050,000 700,000

Rain garden 1,000,000 500,000

Green roof 15,000,000 5,000,000

Green alleys, streets, and parking lots

20,000,000 2,000,000

Total 49,560,000 9,701,000

Total after 5 years 247,800,000 48,505,000

Source: http://www.h2ocapture.com/Calculate.aspx

Figure C-1: Scenario for 15% Volume Reduction for Alternative D