1. PPA Case #1
Water Capture
City of Milwaukee
Steve Baisden
Laura Catherman
John Gardner
Heather Goetsch
October 24, 2011

2. 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
1

3. 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.
2

4. 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
3

5. 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. Me2 2) and existing stormwater programs in other cities (i.e.
Portland’s Clean River Rewards 3), 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
4

6. 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
5

7. 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 $7.25 8 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
6

8. 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 $7.25 11 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 measures 12. 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/
7

9. 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
8

10. 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).
9

11. 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.
10

12. 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.
11

13. 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).
Figure A-4: Income Based Fee
12

14. 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.
13

15. 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).
Figure B-4: Volume Reduction Chart for Water Saving Measures in CSS Area 14

16. Figure B-5: Water Saving Measures and Potential Volume Reductions
15

17. 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 20,000,000 2,000,000
lots
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
16