On a different thread about pot holes, questions was raised about the city’s handling of basic maintenance of the city’s infrastructure.
In response, Alderman Deb Crossley described the work that’s being done to put together a long term maintenance plan for the city’s crucial, but mostly invisible, storm drain/sewage system. I thought this probably deserves its own thread, so here’s Alderman Crossley’s overview.
Ald. Fuller and I have been working with the administration for three years now on restoring Newton’s very old and leaky underground plumbing systems – 300 miles each of water, sewer and coming up next – stormwater mains and infrastructure. We are now in the second year of implementing a strategic plan to restore the water and sewer systems, which plan was crafted in the first year. A power point on the city website is still a good primer on the challenges we face and the solutions proposed. http://www.newtonma.gov/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=40846
The goals are to continue to provide reliable clean water and wastewater systems, and to get to a point of “predictable maintenance” – so we are not managing in crisis response mode. For the sewer system we must prevent clean rain water from entering the system – called infiltration or inflow – now comprising well over half the flow we send to MWRA. We all pay for this. And because our city has about 75 miles of underdrains connected back up to the sewers – in rainy months this can cross contaminate storm water draining to the Charles. So the City is in the process of disconnecting city mains from underdrains, cleaning and relining the mains to keep groundwater from infiltrating the main. Relining is a cool process where – working manhole to manhole – a cementitious sock is pushed through the pipe, which quickly hardens creating a ‘new’ pipe – about an 80 year fix. We divided the city into ten project areas prioritized by worst to best condition. Construction in project area 1 is more than half complete – and have advanced the overall program schedule to be done within ten years.
Part of the clean water in our sewers is the result of”inflow” when clean rain water is deliberately drained into the sewer system – via sump pumps draining into sinks, roof leaders or driveway drains connections. State and local laws prohibit this – though many homeowners were unaware of the condition. Over the last year the city has notified all (about 700) cases identified, many have been corrected and engineering is working with folks to help craft solutions to others.
We have also just recently appropriated funds to complete a thorough assessment and strategic plan to repair and possibly upgrade the stormwater system, which work should be done by next winter. Turns out we have much less good data on this system – but we know we face capacity issues and can see the poor condition at the outflows.
Repairing our systems proactively has already paid dividends as MWRA has rewarded the city with lower rate increases that other MWRA communities, two years in a row. But the bigger incentive is as we continue to reduce the I&I in the system – the volume of sewer flow is significantly reduced AND emergency repairs will be significantly reduced.
Our rates are paid into three separate enterprise funds – and law prohibits using one fund to pay for maintenance or repairs in another. So the strategic plan is based on a financing scheme that gradually raises rates (about 3.9%/year) to pay for this much needed work – as well as aggressively capturing any and all MWRA or other grant opportunities that might come our way. We barely have enough in the stormwater fund to clean the catchbasins – not frequently enough – so a good part of rate restructuring will be to get more funds into that pot.
This is one of the most critical projects the city has undertaken in recent years – we have learned a great deal and are committed to the follow through.
@Deb Crossley – Thanks for the detailed overview.
One of the most interesting technical details in the PowerPoint presentation (follow the link above) is the cross links between the storm water and sewage system. Much of the storm water that ends up in the sewage system is a result of faults – leaks, etc. or illegal connections. A more interesting (at least to me) problem is the storm water that’s purposefully dumped into sewage system by the 19th century designers of the original system.
The engineers of the time came up with an ingenious system that purposefully dumped storm water into the sewer system so that the sewer system would periodically be flushed whenever there was heavy rain and also to provide slow steady drainage of swampy land. A hundred years later, that design is a real problem, now that the sewage no longer dumps directly into the harbor. Every time it rains, that flush of stormwater goes directly to the sewage treatment plants and overwhelms them. It’s definitely a complicated and expensive problem to undo that 19th century design detail.
This is an extremely valuable and well done endeavor. It’s just hilarious how much push-back the $11 million overrides got, but all the squawkers didn’t say a peep about this $90 million infrastructure spending. Just shows we can trust Newton to do the right thing
Infrastructure Historical Trivia – Did you know that some very old pipes that have been discovered were actually made of cored tree trunks? I’m guessing that we probably won’t be installing any more of those.
Jerry – not just here. Cored tree trunks were used in NY, too, among other places.
mgwa — and Gilligan’s Island
I wonder how many of our commentators had sewer water backing into their basements in the last bi-annual 100 year storm? I did and I’m mad as h… and I’m not going to take it any more !
How is it we can find $110,000,000 to tear down 3 perfectly functional school buildings ( Angier, Cabot and Zervas, due to the same sort of lax maintenance program(s)), in a 2/3 year time period, and we must wait 11 years to apply $49,000,000 to gain some assurance we wont have to be relieving ourselves in our backyards with the next downpour ?
By this very, deliberate , might I say ‘glossy’ study, there are two admissions that “… there are insufficient funds for infrastructure investment.” and ” … insufficient funds to repair and maintain the drainage system.”
So who can we hold to account ? Our Aldermen ? Our Mayor ?
To whom can I send the next cleanup bill ?
@blueprintbill – yes, I haven’t had sewer water backing up into my basement and if I did, I’d be mad as hell too.
In your original post on the “pothole” thread you asked why no one is doing “down and dirty budgeting for things like, sanitary sewer system repair”? You are correct that for many years no one was doing the necessary budgeting, planning and preventative maintenance on the sewer system. This plan (above) appears to be a plan to do exactly that for the first time in many years (ever?).
If I had sewage in my basement I probably also wouldn’t be satisfied with the schedule or budget but I’d be heartened that the city was attempting to come up with a financial and technical plan to address the issue in a methodical, sustainable way, rather than lurching from one broken pipe emergency to the next.
Rather than dismiss the plan out of hand, I’d urge you to support the general plan while working to get more funding and a more aggressive schedule – at least on the portions of the plan that will keep your basement dry and clean. Of course, that’s way easier for me to say since my basement is dry.
blueprintbill — I don’t see an opportunity to address what you’re saying. What question needs addressing? The proactive city approach has been answered w rolling 5 year plans as well as a 20 year plan. If insurance didn’t cover your sewer backflow, what does the city need to do about that?
It might be useful to note that, in a world of “pay me now, or pay me later,” had the city been doing what it should have been over time, we would have been making larger payments back then for sewer and water.
Past administrations apparently weren’t willing to take the heat, so kicked than can down the road. Setti’s has taken this on, with the great efforts also of the BOA, to put forth a reasonable plan that over time will address this problem. [For those that want it all solved NOW, please consider what that cost would look like in current rates.]
Dan,
And what might that cost be at current rates to get this job done ‘ NOW’? Is this administration kicking the can down the road as well by not getting the job done ‘NOW”? Might we have to put on hold the demolition of a school house or two ?
Is the Austin Street development project compromising the budget for getting the job done ‘NOW’? Is public housing a higher priority ? Where are the priorities of this administration ?
First, getting the entire job done NOW, isn’t feasible just from a resource standpoint, but if you eead the report you can come up with a rough estimate of what that cost would be now if you could roll up the next ten years, say, into a NOW cost. you won’t like it.
Secondly, there are two separate budgets at work here. The water/sewer budget is completely outside our normal annual operating budget. That’s the reason you get both a property tax and a warder/sewer bill. So, the water/sewer budget has little bearing on the cost of schools for instance. We can’t use the operating budget for water/sewer, and the reverse is also true.
Our water/sewer costs are already not cheap, in large part because we are part of the MWRA system, Fixing the problems that increase our expenditures to MWRA will help but there is a significant upfront cost to fixing those problems.
you should reach out to Aldermen Deb Crossley or Ruthanne Fuller for a more in-depth explanation should you want that.
Water and sewer infrastructure repairs can and should–and under this plan, are, coming from rates, not taxes. Those rate funds can only be used for water and sewer, so whatever goes on with the school buildings or with housing will not slow the pipe repairs. Some developments, like Riverside, actually put extra funds into the sewer repairs, but none can take them away.
Not to mention the school buildings being replaced are not functional for many reasons, one of which is the same problem you are having with your house – flooding.
@Jane: flooding at Angier and Carr? I have only heard of the roof leaking–which is water from a slightly different source.
$49,000,000 for a ten year project that is causing MWRA assessments of over 50% 0f $19,500,000 in 2012 alone, (for excess sewerage ) does not make sense. Fix it now in 3 years and save in assessments for the next 7.
A bracing argument, blueprintbill. When the aldermen next set rates, I’ll key you know so you can best be heard.
Andreae – Water damage is water damage. If you work or are a student in the school, the source of the water problem is really not the concern. It’s the outcome that affects the learning/teaching environment – the mold and other health issues, as well as the loss of learning time that people are concerned about. At Angier, piping travels through classrooms to deal with water issues and the gymnasium was flooded at significant expense to the city several years ago. I don’t recall seeing Carr on the list of concerns for water issues – either on this blog or elsewhere – but you may have other information.
@blueprintbill, the biggest challenge is the amount of roads torn up at one time. Just not doable in the time frame you suggest, without huge traffic disruptions.
And you can count on the fact that if water rates were to rise by 50% over those 3 years the citizens’ screams would be frightful.
Dan Fahey — Just for clarification, the cost of the water/sewer rebuilding project is already baked into our current rates. Over the 8 years ended FY2010 water/sewer rates increased a whopping 70%. The ongoing improvements should not result in additional cost increases above MWRA increases, so say the projections
@hoss, I don’t believe that us accurate. The review last year led to a forward schedule of increases, and if done over 3 years (instead of 10) would increase rate by almost 50%
I don’t get it. If you fix the system and deliver 50 % less sewerage how can the costs go up ? The assessment rate might go up with inflation , MWRA juggling etc. but by 50%. The City power point says that we paid $19,500,000 in 2012. More than half of that was for water introduced into the sewers by our own mismanagement. If we correct the breaks in the system and deliver zero extra water ( non sewerage ) our assessment should be reduced by more than 1/2. or + $9,750,000. Corrective action is estimated at $49,000,000. In 5 years we will have paid out more than the $49,000,000 construction contract(s) estimated to fully repair the system. Doesn’t it make sense to do it with uninflated dollars, in 2 /3 years, and save all those assessments for excess water charges.
Issue bonds, stop building new schools, fix roof leaks, address the problem and fix it. Stop making excuses about how roads will be disrupted, they will be disrupted sooner or later anyway, why wait. We do things in too piecemeal (false economic ) a fashion. We patch school house roofs and not replace them. There is no getting around water leaks. You can’t repair them half way.
And about this “Cementitious Sock” that is being enthused over above. What is the loss in capacity due to the making of a sewer pipe smaller with this pipe liner? Would this not lower the rate of sewerage discharge, slowing the flow, increasing the possibility of basement flooding?
And again is an 80 year fix a correct one ? Is this another money saving short term bandaid ? Might not hollowed out logs last longer?
blueprintbill — Lots of cities have the same problem — how do we know we can get access to enough contractors under a more aggressive timeframe? And what if the greater portion of the work is done by Newton’s DPW? A more aggressive timeframe is’nt necessarily involving the same spending. You can get specific answers by emailing your alderman. But school building cost and sewer costs are not part of the same fund.
@blueprintbill – About that “cementious sock”. I think I remember hearing that it puts down an 1/8 inch thick lining. So yes that would reduce the capacity a bit as compared to a new un-lined pipe. Looking at the rather nasty looking photo of an unlined pipe in the PowerPoint presentation, it looks like an 1/8 inch is a drop in the bucket compared to the loss in capacity due to the crud accumulated on the unlined pipes.
Sorting out the sewer and storm drain system is a very big and complicated job. I think you’ve got good questions, but the likelihood of getting satisfying answers from arm chair bloggers like us is not too good. Since this is an issue that you have a big personal stake in, like Dan Fahey (above) I’d urge you to discuss it with the aldermen that have been working on this issue (Fuller and Crossley), and like Andreae mentioned above, I’d be sure to attend the aldermen meetings when sewer rates and maintenance are discussed.
It’s also important to remember that other towns are repairing pipes, and the key to paying less is to repairs the big sources of water faster than our neighbors. Why? Because the amount the mwra need to operate and to pay off the debt for deer island (60+% of the sewer rate is debt), is fixed. If newton is faster at reducing flow than boston, we get a break. But not if we all repair at the same rate.
Another thing to remember about all our pipes–they need ongoing maintenance. Even if we fixed them all now, ground shifts, materials decay, and thus new leaks happen naturally. We need annual funding for recurring repair and replacement. Fortunately, as an mwra community, we qualify for grants and zero-interest loans for routine repairs– just not for emergencies
Two things to remember:
1. Other towns are also repairing pipes. the key to paying less is to repair the big sources of clean water faster than they do. Why? Because there’s a fixed amount of money the MWRA needs to operate the sewer system and to pay off the debt for Deer Island (over 60% of our sewer rate is for debt). If Newton is faster at reducing flow than Boston, then we get a break. But not if we both repair at the same rate.
2. Even if we spent the necessary funds to fix all our pipes NOW, we’d still need to repair them next year & in the future. Ground shifts, materials decay–there’s always some new leak that starts, grows worse, etc. Fortunately, for routine maintenance, there are MWRA grants and 0% loans that Newton can access–just not for emergency breaks. That’s why this plan to get ahead of the emergencies is so smart.
This is about water, not sewer, but might have implications for the second-meter debate and how we charge for water. At the Library tonight, 7pm: Julia Blatt, Director of the Massachusetts River Alliance, will give a program titled Water Wars in Massachusetts: Reforming Water Management in a Blue State. She will discuss changes that are afoot in the way the state doles out the right to use water and the challenges in getting to “yes” on this contentious issue. The program is cosponsored by Green Decade/Newton as part of the Greening Our Community Series.
Not sure why it matters that we’re a Blue State??