← Back to the list of projects

City of Ann Arbor SSWWEP - Citizens Advisory Committee Coordination — City of Ann Arbor

← Back to messages

Summary of Tech Briefings

Posted by Robert Czachorski on 18 Feb, 2014
Category: No category

Folks,

During the last 2 weeks we conducted 4 tech briefings and 1 brainstorming session organized by Michelle (thank you Michelle).  We had participation in these meetings by almost every CAC member and several good topics and ideas were discussed.  I want to thank each of you for volunteering your time, and for your efforts and contributions. 

I thought it would be good to provide a high-level summary of some of the items that were discussed. My notes may not be perfect, so if I missed something, please feel free to add it. These are just the notes from what was discussed - we've not evaluated these, and I am not endorsing any particular idea or discussion.  These will require further investigation by the team and deliberation by the CAC, and we will be getting into more of these discussion in the next several months as the project proceeds.

As I look over these comments, many are focused on FDD, because that it the bulk of information that has been available so far. Very soon as we turn our sights to other options such as storage and relief sewers, I would expect that the brainstorming and discussions would start to generate similar lists of ideas to consider for those types of options. 

 In no particular order, here were some of the ideas discussed:

  1. When comparing alternatives like storage and FDD, compute the costs of FDD to include the full "life cycle" costs of the FDD, including items like a suitable backup system, operations and maintenance, and any other enhancements to the program that might be needed. This will provide a realistic comparison of the true costs. 
  2. Consider locating a floor drain near sump pump as a "fail safe" backup system - note a significant disadvantage of this: because the floor will be under hydrostatic pressure, there is potential for seepage at other points in a basement.  Discussed the idea of lowering the floor by an inch or two near the sump and floor drain area to help with this. Discussed venting requirements for the floor drain idea. The building official (Ralph) seemed ok with this idea, and is looking into the proximity of the floor drain and the sump, and the 1-2 inch depression idea. A similar concept is being implemented in Livonia. 
  3. Discussion on the location of the sump at the "clean out location" where the sanitary pipe and footing drain come together, and how it might get relocated to other parts of the basement when convenient for putting sump in a utility area.  Methods to do this were discussed, and the pros and cons were reviewed. A concern was raised with the waiver the City requires when this occurs, and the risks of seepage or wetness when tapping the footing drains away from the low point at the clean out was discussed. Other construction techniques like trenching across the floor were discussed. 
  4. Consider water conservation measures. 
  5. Objectives of the CAC were discussed and a proposal was put fourth: To address: a) SSOs to the Huron River, b) basement backups resulting from the sanitary sewer system, and c) stormwater / water issues in the house after FDD.
  6. Consider a warranty period after FDD where the homeowner will have assurances that the installation and operation will work right.
  7. Consider using a pump with a 5-year warranty instead of a 1-year warranty.
  8. Consider a change in the contracting structure where the plumbers contract with the City rather than the homeowners. This arose out of some stories surrounding some issues with some of the contractors and their responsiveness. 
  9. Consider coordinating sewer upgrades or storage with road projects and stormwater upgrades.  The project proposed at Scio and 7th was specifically mentioned.
  10. Consider improving the grading adjacent to houses and downspout extensions to direct more stormwater away from the foundations and footing drains.  
  11. Consider check valves for isolated houses with sanitary backup issues.
  12. Consider "grade protection stations" for small groups of houses with sanitary back-up issues. A grade protection station is a new sewer line and small pump station that collects sewage from a few houses and pumps it into the sanitary sewer, effectively disconnecting those houses from any backups in the sanitary sewer.
  13. Consider a gravity FDD system with City operated stormwater pump stations in the right-of-way to disconnect footing drains.  Advantages include the footing flow is removed from the sanitary, the disconnection provides a gravity system for the homeowners, no sump pumps in the houses.  Disadvantages include cost (back of the envelope calculations put it at 2-3x more expensive than FDD), there would be 2 service leads from each home (one for sanitary and one for footing drains), and there would be numerous pump stations to construct, operate and maintain. The number of pump stations might be reduced by grouping several streets together. 
  14. Consider revising the FDD program to make it voluntary, incentivized, and robust.
  15. Consider FDD at the time of house sale.

Take care,
Robert

Comments

Frank Burdick on 19 Feb, 2014:

robert-joe-michelle-or-peter,
can someone please post the list of questions that Ralph Welton promised to get with us, on?

I have them but I would like someone else to add this a separate boot-camp question.

These items should be tracked separately from all of the items list above.

Frank Burdick on 19 Feb, 2014:

Regarding item 15 above:
  1. Consider FDD at the time of house sale.

I have severe and serious objections to this idea.  This was threatened and possibly implemented in Auburn Hills... another OHM project.  I will not support this in any shape or form.  

Robert Czachorski on 19 Feb, 2014:

The ones I wrote down were:

1.  Check on any proximity setbacks between a sump pump and a floor drain

2.  Check on venting distance requirements for a floor drain

3.  Check on any issues with depressing the floor by an inch or two between the sump and a floor drain

4.  Provide a look-up table for service lead size requirements

5.  Ask his inspectors about their experience with the reliability of a check valves.

That is what I wrote in my notes.   Please add if I missed something.

Thanks,
Robert

Judy Hanway on 20 Feb, 2014:

On the meeting I attended on Feb. 17, these items were also mentioned:

1. Investigate diverting flow to another WW plant (mentioned were Dexter and Ypsi).

2. Investigate adding more storage near the WWTP.

3. Finding out more about the WWTP--ie, are there problems with capacity, etc.

Joe Conen on 21 Feb, 2014:

There are a couple items I noted from the tech briefings that I will add:
  • Sanitary piping is clay piping with expected service life of greater that 50 years. It is repaired as needed, usually by in situ lining.  This lining improves flow and may reduce I&I (hard to quantify ahead of time, though). The pipe is not generally replaced when it needs repair.
  • H2S (hydrogen sulfide) is generated in the sanitary system during bacterial processes in the waste. It is corrosive to the piping and it is desirable to allow this gas to vent to minimize its buildup. This may be an undesired outcome of plugging manhole covers.
  • A sanitary system evaluation study (SSES) (not what is currently being completed) can be  performed if it is desirable to determine the proportions of the various I&I into that part of the system. Robert briefly described this, and I believe he used the Glen Leven area as an example where this might help understand why FDD in that area has a mixed result (I think that is what I heard.)
  • There was a discussion of public sources of I&I, and people present were not sure whether or how this had been dealt with in the 2001 time frame. I will try to ask this as a new question.

Joe

Robert Czachorski on 21 Feb, 2014:

Great notes, Joe. Thanks for posting.

Peter Houk on 23 Feb, 2014:

FDD at time of sale is a compromise that the team should explore, perhaps in conjunction with other modifications to the FDD program.

It's not a perfect compromise, but it has the potential to be less intrusive than changing a resident's house while they are living in it.  

Frank Burdick on 23 Feb, 2014:

regarding the statement, "FDD at time of sale is a compromise that the team should explore"

i can not say loudly enough how totally opposed i am to this draconian suggestion. i would use all caps here in all seriousness to make my point.  this would be the only time or posting where i really would be shouting.  i would never support this and i would likely organize a petition amongst citizens and real estate professionals to stop this.  i won't take the time to elaborate on my opposition to this.  I could come up with many analogies. Hopefully we will never have to debate this suggestion.

Robert Czachorski on 23 Feb, 2014:

So you have an opinion, but you are not willing to provide the basis of it?  You expect other CAC members to accept your opinion because of your threat to yell about if you were allowed to? 

--------------

I can provide an example of another community who is considering a time of sale ordinance, why it might work for them, and why their basis might not be suitable to Ann Arbor:  The City of Owosso.  Owosso is an older community and many of their home sales are estate sales where the proceeds of the sale are going to next of kin in an inheritance.  The City is evaluating a time of sale ordinance, because it will not impact the current, often elderly residents, and those inheriting the house are probably expecting to have some work and investment to do some upgrades in the house anyway in order to prepare it for sale.  For Owosso, this creates an environment where a time of sale ordinance might be effective and prudent to consider.

I don't think the conditions in Ann Arbor are like Owosso.  Ann Arbor likely has a higher transient population than Owosso, with many more homes turning over that are not associated with an estate sale or inheritance. 

Take care,
Robert

Michelle Lovasz on 24 Feb, 2014:

Frank, I can hear your thoughts and ideas better when you don't "shout" with caps.

Frank Burdick on 24 Feb, 2014:

I don’t understand this comment from Michelle

Fb

Frank Burdick on 25 Feb, 2014:


Re: Point of Sale ardent opposition.

Regarding the above inappropriate comment, "So you have an opinion, but you are not willing to provide the basis of it?  You expect other CAC members to accept your opinion because of your threat to yell about if you were allowed to? "
............allow me to "provide the basis of my opinion. 
I had to think about this to come up with an analogy that bests represents the draconian and egregious nature of the fdd program. It is not easy to come up with a modern day example because the program is so egregious and harmful to a property owner or potential propety owner.
The long and the short of it is, you can't have a program that devalues a home;  be mandatory,  to someone who is trying to sell that home for the highest market value.  You can not force a program on a seller when the program has failed time and again in many homes.
Travel with me back in time to, gee, lets see, 1950 sounds about right.  You want to sell your house.  You recently installed steam pipe indoor heating.  Just about the time you list your house for sale,  the City comes along and decides to make it mandatory that you need to insulate all the exposed steam pipes. They have some health and safety rules or codes that they are worried about.  
They tell you that the only insulation that you can use is a product called asbestos.  Apparently that is the only product that they will approve.  In addition the product is starting to be recognized as causing heath and safety concerns in other industries. This concern spreads to the residential real estate market and appraisers and real estate agents red flag this issue.  The city continues to force the use of the asbestos and the home's  is devalued in the local free market.
Ok... so this may seem like a stretch but consider these questions:
1. Do sump pumps fail and cause basement flooding?
2. Is basement flooding asked about on a Real Estate Disclosure forms?
3. Does a formally "finished" basement have less value if it has been flooded by a failed sump pump?
4. Is it fair to sell an intact home with a dry basement with usable finished basement space that is calculated into the square footage of home, to a new buyer who is then forced, by some ordinance to install a sump pump that is likely to fail?  If a readers answer to this question is "yes," well,  I know a few Used Car Dealers that are looking for sales staff.