|
|
|
Signed up for downspout disconnection
- Thread starter Admiral Beez
- Start date
Prometheus The Supremo
►Member №41+⅜◄
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2007
- Messages
- 4,107
- Reaction score
- 5
- Location
- a strange reality, bizarro toronto
Down the tubes -- hear that one a lot. People say, "Ah, the country is going down the tubes."
What tubes? Have you seen any tubes? Where are these tubes? And where do they go? And how come there's more than one tube?
It would seem to me, one country, one tube. But is every state all of a sudden have to have its own tube now? One tube is all you need. But a tube that big? Somebody would have seen it by now.
-carlin
What tubes? Have you seen any tubes? Where are these tubes? And where do they go? And how come there's more than one tube?
It would seem to me, one country, one tube. But is every state all of a sudden have to have its own tube now? One tube is all you need. But a tube that big? Somebody would have seen it by now.
-carlin
billonlogan
Active Member
City caps off list for downspout diversion
But not before 50,000 more seek free service
November 21, 2007
Jim Byers
City Hall Bureau
Tens of thousands of Toronto households may be eligible to have the city pay for disconnecting downspouts. But city taxpayers could end up paying substantially higher water rates to pay for the work.
Toronto City Council last night voted to kill a program that was allowing homeowners to register to have the city pay for disconnecting the downspouts. But recent publicity over the proposed ending of the program resulted in another 50,000 people joining the waiting list prior to council ending the program.
"We received more than 20,000 letters, cards and emails in the last two days alone," sighed Toronto Water general manager Lou Di Gironimo.
Although some people on the list may not need the service, Di Gironimo said that at an average cost of $1,300 per home, the larger waiting list could cost the city $65 million. The city only has a $3.5 million budget for downspout disconnections for next year, he said.
Council will decide later how to pay for the disconnections. But Di Gironimo said water rates would have to jump another 10 per cent a year if the basic water rate was to pay the entire cost of the disconnection program.
City officials say they want to get rid of downspouts that send rain water directly into sewers because it can flood water treatment plants and force the city to flush untreated sewage into the lake.
Toronto 10 years ago brought in a program to disconnect downspouts for free in older parts of the city. The program received some promotion, but only a few people were registering for the service.
City staff last month recommended cutting off applications for the free service on Oct. 31.
But council's works committee voted to extend registration until last night.
Councillor John Parker said he didn't think it would be fair to homeowners to leave the deadline at last night.
But council voted 29-7 to end the program immediately.
Officials said anyone who registered before the end of the council meeting last night will be eligible for the free disconnection.
----------------------------
wtf... $1300 bucks per home? I did both mine last summer for under $100.
This program is in need of an audit or review and determine why it cost so much for a simple disconnect.
But not before 50,000 more seek free service
November 21, 2007
Jim Byers
City Hall Bureau
Tens of thousands of Toronto households may be eligible to have the city pay for disconnecting downspouts. But city taxpayers could end up paying substantially higher water rates to pay for the work.
Toronto City Council last night voted to kill a program that was allowing homeowners to register to have the city pay for disconnecting the downspouts. But recent publicity over the proposed ending of the program resulted in another 50,000 people joining the waiting list prior to council ending the program.
"We received more than 20,000 letters, cards and emails in the last two days alone," sighed Toronto Water general manager Lou Di Gironimo.
Although some people on the list may not need the service, Di Gironimo said that at an average cost of $1,300 per home, the larger waiting list could cost the city $65 million. The city only has a $3.5 million budget for downspout disconnections for next year, he said.
Council will decide later how to pay for the disconnections. But Di Gironimo said water rates would have to jump another 10 per cent a year if the basic water rate was to pay the entire cost of the disconnection program.
City officials say they want to get rid of downspouts that send rain water directly into sewers because it can flood water treatment plants and force the city to flush untreated sewage into the lake.
Toronto 10 years ago brought in a program to disconnect downspouts for free in older parts of the city. The program received some promotion, but only a few people were registering for the service.
City staff last month recommended cutting off applications for the free service on Oct. 31.
But council's works committee voted to extend registration until last night.
Councillor John Parker said he didn't think it would be fair to homeowners to leave the deadline at last night.
But council voted 29-7 to end the program immediately.
Officials said anyone who registered before the end of the council meeting last night will be eligible for the free disconnection.
----------------------------
wtf... $1300 bucks per home? I did both mine last summer for under $100.
This program is in need of an audit or review and determine why it cost so much for a simple disconnect.
Roy G Biv
Senior Member
Hilarious.
Northern Light
Superstar
The Deal with Downspouts
Hi All,
Been a bit since my last post, couldn't have more opportune invite though than this one.
I'm a professional environmentalist, and a supporter of the new rules.
First let me say there has been much really good advice in this thread.
So part of what I'm saying is just summary of other's comments. Hopefully, I can add something new.
First
Program/By-Law Rationale:
Currently in the City of Toronto, after a rainfall of any significance, our sewers overflow raw, un-treated sewage into the various creeks, rivers and the lake directly.
This occurs, because the in the older parts of the City (roughly, Old Toronto, York, East York and Scarborough south of Kingston Rd (west of Birchmount), the sewers are 'combined'.
Yes, the storm drain on every home is separated from the sanitary drain.
However, in older parts of the City, these both flow into the same sewer.
Hence why one pipe smells, and another does not.
But the problem remains.
Separated sewers were not required by law until the 1960's.
Some older areas have been retrofitted, most have not.
All sewers, combined and separate (storm) are designed, on purpose, to overflow in the even of a large rain fall.
This is because the volume of water that flows into catch-basins on the road, and off of downspouts from roofs is simply too large for the pipes to handle.
Pipes will never be installed so large as to deal with a significant rain as it would completely cost-prohibitive.
By disconnecting downspouts, and insuring that said flow is absorbed by the ground, either immediately, or overtime via a rain barrel, the City hopes to reduce the frequency and scale of sewage overflows.
This in turn will help wildlife, reduce water-treatment costs, and lead to the Beaches being open more often.
HOW ITS MEANT TO WORK:
There is absolutely no point in disconnecting a downpout and letting pour onto a paved/concrete driveway.
Assuming your driveway is properly graded, the excess water will simply flow to the road, then into the catch basin, and nothing will have been achieved.
The object, ideally, is for you to direct the flow of the spout into a naturalized rain garden.
That is to take a small area in your front/back yard, plants a few water-loving trees and shrubs (pussy willow/ red osier dogwood/ cedar etc.) and those plants will just soak up most of water, so there is no surface water.
Whatever the plants don't need will just end up being absorbed the ground, and naturally filtered by the limestone and clay underneath before seeping out in the nearest creek/valley area etc.
Alternatively, for those with an allergy to natural gardens or some good reason that they don't have enough room for the water to be aborbed all at once, a rain barrel is an alternative. Storing the water, till you want to water the lawn/your flower bed etc.
If you have no greenspace at all, then you can request an excemption to the by-law, to be granted at the discretion of the GM of Toronto Water.
(Its likely several hundred properties in the core will get such an exemption)
COST
The current City program pays for downspout disconnection, but is capped at $600.00 per home.
While most properties have very simple ways to disconnect a downspout, with a small redirector putting water into there rose bushes or whatever......
This is not always the case.
Average is average.
This is accounted for by dealing with the hard to fix cases. Complete new downspout (this is done if the flow needs to be relocated more than about 5M)
Also, it may involved pavement removal and/or lot-grading issues.
For instance, some homes for reasons not clear, have lawns graded so that the home is at the bottom of the lawn by a few degrees.
If the grade runs towards the house, it probably already has flooding issues. and a downspout disconnect would just make them worse.
Therefore the cost includes lots re-grading in extreme cases.
**********
Hopefully that was clear, and helpful.
Hi All,
Been a bit since my last post, couldn't have more opportune invite though than this one.
I'm a professional environmentalist, and a supporter of the new rules.
First let me say there has been much really good advice in this thread.
So part of what I'm saying is just summary of other's comments. Hopefully, I can add something new.
First
Program/By-Law Rationale:
Currently in the City of Toronto, after a rainfall of any significance, our sewers overflow raw, un-treated sewage into the various creeks, rivers and the lake directly.
This occurs, because the in the older parts of the City (roughly, Old Toronto, York, East York and Scarborough south of Kingston Rd (west of Birchmount), the sewers are 'combined'.
Yes, the storm drain on every home is separated from the sanitary drain.
However, in older parts of the City, these both flow into the same sewer.
Hence why one pipe smells, and another does not.
But the problem remains.
Separated sewers were not required by law until the 1960's.
Some older areas have been retrofitted, most have not.
All sewers, combined and separate (storm) are designed, on purpose, to overflow in the even of a large rain fall.
This is because the volume of water that flows into catch-basins on the road, and off of downspouts from roofs is simply too large for the pipes to handle.
Pipes will never be installed so large as to deal with a significant rain as it would completely cost-prohibitive.
By disconnecting downspouts, and insuring that said flow is absorbed by the ground, either immediately, or overtime via a rain barrel, the City hopes to reduce the frequency and scale of sewage overflows.
This in turn will help wildlife, reduce water-treatment costs, and lead to the Beaches being open more often.
HOW ITS MEANT TO WORK:
There is absolutely no point in disconnecting a downpout and letting pour onto a paved/concrete driveway.
Assuming your driveway is properly graded, the excess water will simply flow to the road, then into the catch basin, and nothing will have been achieved.
The object, ideally, is for you to direct the flow of the spout into a naturalized rain garden.
That is to take a small area in your front/back yard, plants a few water-loving trees and shrubs (pussy willow/ red osier dogwood/ cedar etc.) and those plants will just soak up most of water, so there is no surface water.
Whatever the plants don't need will just end up being absorbed the ground, and naturally filtered by the limestone and clay underneath before seeping out in the nearest creek/valley area etc.
Alternatively, for those with an allergy to natural gardens or some good reason that they don't have enough room for the water to be aborbed all at once, a rain barrel is an alternative. Storing the water, till you want to water the lawn/your flower bed etc.
If you have no greenspace at all, then you can request an excemption to the by-law, to be granted at the discretion of the GM of Toronto Water.
(Its likely several hundred properties in the core will get such an exemption)
COST
The current City program pays for downspout disconnection, but is capped at $600.00 per home.
While most properties have very simple ways to disconnect a downspout, with a small redirector putting water into there rose bushes or whatever......
This is not always the case.
Average is average.
This is accounted for by dealing with the hard to fix cases. Complete new downspout (this is done if the flow needs to be relocated more than about 5M)
Also, it may involved pavement removal and/or lot-grading issues.
For instance, some homes for reasons not clear, have lawns graded so that the home is at the bottom of the lawn by a few degrees.
If the grade runs towards the house, it probably already has flooding issues. and a downspout disconnect would just make them worse.
Therefore the cost includes lots re-grading in extreme cases.
**********
Hopefully that was clear, and helpful.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
In typical government fashion, the politicos and bureaucrats made no plans for a last minute burst in applications, notwithstanding the fact that they publicly announced that fines would be levied against those not in compliance, and that the deadline had been extended. Now the city needs over $60 million to retrofit an additional 50,000 applications received, but they only have $5 million or so earmarked for the project each year.
I imagine a lot of the folks who applied have no interest in having their downspouts disconnected, but instead understood that the work likely won't take place for 5-10 years, and that in the meantime the city can't levy non-compliance fines against those houses on the waiting list. Thus, by sending a e-mail homeowners are immune to by-law enforcement, meanwhile their less fortunate neighbours will begin facing (likely) immediate fines as the city races to find sources of revenue.
I imagine a lot of the folks who applied have no interest in having their downspouts disconnected, but instead understood that the work likely won't take place for 5-10 years, and that in the meantime the city can't levy non-compliance fines against those houses on the waiting list. Thus, by sending a e-mail homeowners are immune to by-law enforcement, meanwhile their less fortunate neighbours will begin facing (likely) immediate fines as the city races to find sources of revenue.
Northern Light
Superstar
3 years
They won't start enforcement before 2010 at the earliest.
They'll issue warnings etc. starting in 2009.
Also, the work will get accelerated, as it drastically reduces the burden on the City's infrastructure.
They should have anticipated some last minute surge.....
Though, the first time the Mandatory proposal went public was last year.
There was no rush then.
I think they expected a small run on applications.....
But nothing like 50,000 +
Keep in mind its been a free program for 9 years....
And they never had more 3,000 takers in any given year.
I certainly would have assumed people would have moved on this issue, and budgets for some extra demand.....
But 50,000? In fairness I think that's a surprise.
Keep in mind when this goes mandatory, its expected to affect 150,000 households.
So 1/3 roughly have suddenly found the free program in 10 days.
They won't start enforcement before 2010 at the earliest.
They'll issue warnings etc. starting in 2009.
Also, the work will get accelerated, as it drastically reduces the burden on the City's infrastructure.
They should have anticipated some last minute surge.....
Though, the first time the Mandatory proposal went public was last year.
There was no rush then.
I think they expected a small run on applications.....
But nothing like 50,000 +
Keep in mind its been a free program for 9 years....
And they never had more 3,000 takers in any given year.
I certainly would have assumed people would have moved on this issue, and budgets for some extra demand.....
But 50,000? In fairness I think that's a surprise.
Keep in mind when this goes mandatory, its expected to affect 150,000 households.
So 1/3 roughly have suddenly found the free program in 10 days.
Chuck
Senior Member
The simple answer is this. Each sewage treatment plant in both a combined and a separate system has a certain capacity - the total number of litres per hour of sewage that can enter the plant and be treated. A safety factor is applied, so that even under exceptional conditions, the treatment plant will always have enough capacity to treat all sewage that is generated in dry weather. Therefore, under normal circumstances, each sewage filtration plant is likely only operating at 50% capacity or less.
First let's look at a separate system in which storm water uses one set of pipes, and waste water uses a different set of pipes. In a separate system, the philosophy is that because raw sewage will never mix with storm water, storm water is always relatively clean. Therefore, 100% of the rain water that enters a sewer in a separate system is discharged directly into the nearest river without being treated. But storm water really isn't clean because it contains salt, spilled gas, fertilizer, oil, and whatever else is washed off the ground during a rainfall.
Now let's look at a combined system in which storm water and waste water use the same pipes. Recall that the volume of human generated sewage is never enough to use up the full capacity of treatment plants. This means that during light rainfall events, storm water will also be treated in a combined system. An overflow will only occur when a high enough volume of rainfall (per hour!) is generated that the capacity of treatment plants is exceeded, causing the sewage/storm water mix to flow untreated into the lake.
Combined systems are nowhere near as bad as they are made out to be because a substantial amount of storm water is also treated in a combined system, whereas it's not in a separate system. So the question is this: is enough storm water treated in a combined system to counter balance the negative effect of overflows, which may only occur during a few heavy rainfall events per year.
Today's rainfall lasted all day, but it never actually rained very heavily at any one time. Therefore, it's entirely possible that in the "combined" parts of Toronto, not one drop of untreated storm water entered Lake Ontario. However, in "separate" parts of the city, hundreds of millions of litres of untreated storm water were washed into the Don River and the like.
If enough people disconnect their downspouts, enough trees and green roofs are planted to trap and absorb rainwater, and enough storage capacity is provided (such as those massive underground storm water tanks at Sunnyside beach) enough storm water might be trapped that nearly 100% of all sewage AND storm water can be treated in Toronto's combined areas. The best you can ever hope for in separate areas is 100% treatment of raw sewage, and 0% treatment of storm water.
Prometheus The Supremo
►Member №41+⅜◄
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2007
- Messages
- 4,107
- Reaction score
- 5
- Location
- a strange reality, bizarro toronto
so even all the water from the storm sewers on streets from old toronto gets treated? these storm sewers must be on a different line or else there would be a foul stench coming from the grate. are storm sewers combined with sewage sewers? if you look through the grate of a sewer on the side of the street in old toronto, you can see poo floating by?
Chuck
Senior Member
To answer your first question about combined systems, storm water is only treated up to the point until the volume of storm water overwhelms the system. Any further volume leads to an overflow into outlet pipes that pour directly into a river or lake. However, the critical rainfall may be higher than you might think. Depending on what part of the city you are in, rainfalls of 5, 10, or even 25mm might be within the capacity of the nearest treatment plant. Intensity is key as well - 25mm of rain falling within one hour may cause an overflow, but 25mm of rain over a 10 hour period like today, may be fine.
To answer your second question, I believe that a combined system actually consists of smaller networks of "separate" systems, but what is key is that at some point, they all connect to one main trunk line. In other words, there is probably some degree of separation between storm and sanitary sewers which explains why catch basins don't stink, but eventually it all merges into one pipe. I also wanted to add that because I'm not a Municipal Engineer, I can't comment on the actual pipe network.
The point is that combined systems are certainly not all that bad, so long as we strive to retain as much storm water as possible. Forget the urban heat island effect, the real purpose of green roofs is to collect storm water! And you can certainly do you part to help by minimizing water use during rainfalls. Run the dishwasher or do laundry on dry days. Disconnect your downspout. Everything helps.
On a final note, take all of this with a grain of salt. While combined systems aren't terrible as your typical uninformed city councilor would lead you to believe, don't forget that large overflows can be absolutely catastrophic, and they only occur with combined systems.
Prometheus The Supremo
►Member №41+⅜◄
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2007
- Messages
- 4,107
- Reaction score
- 5
- Location
- a strange reality, bizarro toronto
thanks for the info chuck. there seems to be pros and cons for both systems.
it's too bad that storm water from post 60's areas goes directly into the rivers. when you think of all the particles of rubber from tires, drops of fuel, oil, road salt...
p.s, do our treatment plants do anything about road salt dissolved in runoff?
it's too bad that storm water from post 60's areas goes directly into the rivers. when you think of all the particles of rubber from tires, drops of fuel, oil, road salt...
p.s, do our treatment plants do anything about road salt dissolved in runoff?
Chuck
Senior Member
thanks for the info chuck. there seems to be pros and cons for both systems.
it's too bad that storm water from post 60's areas goes directly into the rivers. when you think of all the particles of rubber from tires, drops of fuel, oil, road salt...
p.s, do our treatment plants do anything about road salt dissolved in runoff?
You have stumbled upon another important advantage of a combined system. Salt is only removed from runoff in a combined system - unless of course the volume of runoff is so great that it exceeds the capacity of the treatment plant. Spring overflows fed entirely by melting snow are not uncommon, and are unfortunately mixed with raw sewage as well. But don't forget that in separate systems, dissolved road salt always heads straight for the nearest river, untreated!
Prometheus The Supremo
►Member №41+⅜◄
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2007
- Messages
- 4,107
- Reaction score
- 5
- Location
- a strange reality, bizarro toronto
are there any plans to treat storm water in the post 1960's areas?
any plans for new treatment plants or expansions?
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
10-year wait for downspout disconnect
Toronto Water is inundated with residents trying to get city's free service ahead of cut-off date
Nov 22, 2007 04:30 AM
John Spears
City Hall Bureau
It could take close to a decade for Toronto Water to disconnect all the eavestrough downspouts that qualified for the free service in a last-minute flood of applications.
More than 55,000 applications had poured in prior to Tuesday night's deadline for the free service, said Lou Di Gironimo, general manager of Toronto Water.
He said he'll report in January on a plan to carry out the work.
City council ended the free service this week after 10 years, prompting the last-minute deluge of applications.
Normally, about 2,500 homeowners applied each year for the free service, at a cost of about $3 million.
Disconnection will be compulsory within three years in the city's central neighbourhoods, where sanitary sewers – which carry dirty water from toilets – are interconnected with storm sewers – which carry surface runoff water.
About 120,000 homes are affected by the compulsory disconnection. They're in the old City of Toronto, East York and York, and a few neighbourhoods in Etobicoke and Scarborough.
Disconnecting downspouts from sewers decreases the flow of water through sewage treatment plants. The plants can get overwhelmed during a rainstorm, forcing plant operators to flush untreated sewage into the lake.
Currently, only two firms handle all the downspout disconnection work for the city.
Di Gironimo said city purchasing rules require Toronto Water to use larger firms that can provide certain financial assurances.
"There's only a few companies in this type of business that do that, and there's a cost for acquiring that," he said.
"That's why sometimes their bids are higher than with a smaller company that's not capable of getting bonding, but can do the work."
The two firms now under contract can handle a maximum of 4,500 disconnections a year, he said, but he's looking for ways to attract more qualified bidders and clear up the backlog in under a decade.
"If we can increase the number of homes we can complete in a year by putting out more contracts, we might be able to drive the number down to a seven-, eight-, nine-year range," he said.
Homeowners can still do the job themselves or hire their own contractor, and may well be able to do it for much less than it costs the city, he said.
Toronto Water will start enforcing downspout disconnections in three years in the central neighbourhoods. Di Gironimo said enforcement will focus on asking people to comply, with fines used as a last resort.
As it struggles with the downspout disconnections, Toronto Water says it has also hit a hiccup in efforts to install new water meters in all homes.
Old, inaccurate meters are costing the city about $28 million in lost revenue each year, according to a staff report.
Water officials want to install new meters that are more accurate, and will transmit regular readings by radio signal to the water-billing area.
But when Toronto Water invited companies to bid to supply the new meters, only one firm satisfied all the requirements. And its bid was more expensive than the $175 million cost that staff had estimated.
Staff are now considering how to revise the bidding conditions to attract more qualified bids, Di Gironimo said. The potential revenue increase, plus lower costs of meter reading, still make the project attractive.
Toronto Water is inundated with residents trying to get city's free service ahead of cut-off date
Nov 22, 2007 04:30 AM
John Spears
City Hall Bureau
It could take close to a decade for Toronto Water to disconnect all the eavestrough downspouts that qualified for the free service in a last-minute flood of applications.
More than 55,000 applications had poured in prior to Tuesday night's deadline for the free service, said Lou Di Gironimo, general manager of Toronto Water.
He said he'll report in January on a plan to carry out the work.
City council ended the free service this week after 10 years, prompting the last-minute deluge of applications.
Normally, about 2,500 homeowners applied each year for the free service, at a cost of about $3 million.
Disconnection will be compulsory within three years in the city's central neighbourhoods, where sanitary sewers – which carry dirty water from toilets – are interconnected with storm sewers – which carry surface runoff water.
About 120,000 homes are affected by the compulsory disconnection. They're in the old City of Toronto, East York and York, and a few neighbourhoods in Etobicoke and Scarborough.
Disconnecting downspouts from sewers decreases the flow of water through sewage treatment plants. The plants can get overwhelmed during a rainstorm, forcing plant operators to flush untreated sewage into the lake.
Currently, only two firms handle all the downspout disconnection work for the city.
Di Gironimo said city purchasing rules require Toronto Water to use larger firms that can provide certain financial assurances.
"There's only a few companies in this type of business that do that, and there's a cost for acquiring that," he said.
"That's why sometimes their bids are higher than with a smaller company that's not capable of getting bonding, but can do the work."
The two firms now under contract can handle a maximum of 4,500 disconnections a year, he said, but he's looking for ways to attract more qualified bidders and clear up the backlog in under a decade.
"If we can increase the number of homes we can complete in a year by putting out more contracts, we might be able to drive the number down to a seven-, eight-, nine-year range," he said.
Homeowners can still do the job themselves or hire their own contractor, and may well be able to do it for much less than it costs the city, he said.
Toronto Water will start enforcing downspout disconnections in three years in the central neighbourhoods. Di Gironimo said enforcement will focus on asking people to comply, with fines used as a last resort.
As it struggles with the downspout disconnections, Toronto Water says it has also hit a hiccup in efforts to install new water meters in all homes.
Old, inaccurate meters are costing the city about $28 million in lost revenue each year, according to a staff report.
Water officials want to install new meters that are more accurate, and will transmit regular readings by radio signal to the water-billing area.
But when Toronto Water invited companies to bid to supply the new meters, only one firm satisfied all the requirements. And its bid was more expensive than the $175 million cost that staff had estimated.
Staff are now considering how to revise the bidding conditions to attract more qualified bids, Di Gironimo said. The potential revenue increase, plus lower costs of meter reading, still make the project attractive.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
I don't think there are any cheap ways to remove salts from wastewater - one can try reverse osmosis or flash evaporation, but both are ridiculously expensive. Therefore, it's pretty paramount to reduce the initial salt load - I think the city has converted to applying liquid salt the last few years, which is much more effective per unit of salt used. The salt issue is also problematic when it comes to grey water reclaimation - there are limits as to how much one can use it for landscaping purposes, esp. in arid environments, given the salt can eventually build up and kills the soil.
AoD
AoD