The Contractor Report

Wingra springs threatened by heavy pumping

2011-12-06T17:03:00.000-06:00

.
Over the years, a number of springs on the shores of Lake Wingra have gone dry. Vigorous springflow is important, because it helps to keep Lake Wingra clean. Improved spring flow is part of the restoration plan for the lake.

The Odana Infiltration Project, costing over $2 million, was supposed to restore groundwater in the area by pumping stormwater into the ground. But now that project is in limbo, since it was found that the groundwater was being contaminated--over legal limits--from the salty runoff they were pumping.

Still, a number of springs in the area continue to flow--to the delight of residents in the area.

Western Council Ring Spring--a window into a healthy underground.

Now, heavy pumping of groundwater is occurring at two construction sites in the area:

Parman Place at Monroe & Glenway St

The contractor is Landgraf Construction.

The blue hose to the left is carrying the pumped groundwater.

Steve Glass sent me the following report:

You may have heard the recent report that excavation at the Parman's Place project has opened up a large underground water vein or spring (estimated flow rate of >50 gallons per minute, but no one will really know until it is measured with a pygmy flow meter).

According to reports, "the contractor is de-watering the site (under their de-watering permit related to petroleum contamination of the site) and diverting the flow into the sanitary storm sewer."

Also, according to reports, "the contractor expects that continuous pumping will be required to keep the sub-grade de-watered."
These reports and the possibility of continuous pumping raise numerous ecological and hydrological issues for the watershed, the lake itself, and the wetlands bordering it.

There are many unknowns. For example, scientists don't know with certainty the groundwater flow path, so the major question is how will this new spring opening impact existing ground water discharge rates and flow patterns? Increase them? Decrease them? No impact?

Ken Bradbury of the Geological and Natural History Survey has suggested (according to one source) that Parman's construction might disrupt flow to existing springs and pointed to the nearby Council Spring complex just off Arbor Drive in the Arboretum as a possible candidate for disrupted flow.

We have a record of recent flow rates (gallons per minute) for the past few years for the Council Springs complex and will be able to make some comparison of before and after flow rates.

"Continuous pumping" over many years--sounds like a big waste of energy. Could the groundwater be used for heating and cooling.... or for a beautiful fountain?

Next to Wingra Park behind Jac's restaurant

The contractor is Fisher Construction

At this second construction site, there is a lot of groundwater flowing into this excavation, requiring a lot of pumping. As required by law, the flow is being filtered through a large bladder resting next to Arbor Dr.

Water from the bladder is seeping into the storm sewer--hence it's lost from the ground and from the springs.

Another problem is that a lot of sediment is escaping from the bladder, and getting into the gutter. It's only a short distance to the lake. Sediment is the main way that phosphorus gets into lakes, to stimulate noxious weed growth.

Both problems--loss of groundwater and sediment--could be solved if the bladder can be moved to a depression in Wingra Park just across Arbor Dr. In that location (right), the water would return to the water table, and the sediment would be harmless.

This construction site is violating regulations by leaving the streets very dusty and unswept after each working day.

The pumping at both sites is within a 1200 foot distance from the spring--and may therefore be subject to regulation.

Teach-in at the springs

David Liebl led a group to the Council Ring Springs to talk about the issues, according to a post on alder Sue Ellingson's facebook site.

Below: East and west branches of the Council Ring Spring.

More photos of Parman Place construction.

More photos of Wingra Park construction.
If you love the springs, make a donation to Friends of Lake Wingra.

"The environment" is one product of the construction industry

2011-10-12T12:08:00.000-05:00

The construction industry is Madison's largest heavy industry.

When you put up a building, you are creating a nice place to live or work. You are also affecting the quality of where we live and work. Nineteen percent of the phosphorus in our lakes comes from Dane County's constructon industry.

This is what Steve Jobs said about a product... your product:

"We've never worried about numbers. In the market place, Apple is trying to focus the spotlight on products, because products really make a difference. [...] Ad campaigns are necessary for competition; IBM's ads are everywhere. But good PR educates people; that's all it is. You can't con people in this business. The products speak for themselves."

-- Playboy interview, 1985

How you treat the environment speaks volumes about the ethics of your business.

Nelson and Nelson Cement--illegal discharge of concrete waste

2011-10-08T02:45:00.004-05:00

Left: Slurry escaping down gutter. Right: The "person responsible."

With two releases on two days, Nelson & Nelson is liable for...
fines of up to $4,000.

The contractor was politely notified that discharge was illegal after the first gutter spill. When I appeared with camera during the second spill, they rushed to place dams, while denying it was illegal.

More photos.

Discharge of concrete slurry--from washing chutes or cutting concrete--happens all over Madison. But...

It's illegal The details...

City Engineer Greg Fries said: "For both City and private projects the Health Department considers the discharge of concrete wash water to the curb to be an illicit discharge and they regulate it under MGO 7.46 which is available on our web site."*

"It shall be unlawful for any person to release, discharge, or permit the escape of any potential polluting substance... into any lake or stream in or under the jurisdiction of the City of Madison, or into any street, sewer, ditch or drainageway leading into any lake or stream, or to permit the same to be so discharged to the ground surface."

Any person causing a spill must immediately clean it up.

If it cannot be immediately cleaned up, the person responsible must report it to 911.

The person responsible may be held liable for costs of cleanup. This includes both the contractor and the homeowner who hired the contractor.

Fines range up to $2000. Each day of violation is a separate offense.

Is concrete waste a "polluting substance"?

Portland cement is considered a hazardous substance" by many agencies and laws. Hazards include:

alkaline chemicals such as lime--corrosive to tissue
trace amounts of crystalline silica--abrasive to skin and can damage lungs

trace amounts of chromium--can cause allergic reactions.

Both silica and chromium can cause cancer. Probably the main danger to neighbors is from the dust. When the slurry dries in the gutter, the wind can blow it about. It can cause eye and lung irritation, and some people are quite allergic to chromium.

# # #

* Quoted from an email dated Nov. 11, 2010, when Contractor Report requested clarification.
Fact sheet on concrete washout.
Fact sheet on dangers of hexavalent chromium, found in concrete dust.
Fact sheet for how concrete slurry should be handled.

Pickford St Reconstruction

2011-08-20T18:13:00.013-05:00

.
The Pickford St project involves installing a new stormsewer, plus water mains and resurfacing. The street in in an environmentally sensitive area, on a slope close to Lake Wingra.

On Aug. 8, there was a brief but heavy downpour, providing an opportunity to see how erosion control measures were working.

View uphill from Monroe St. At first it seemed there was no escape of muddy water, at least on the surface.

But then, I noticed a cave-in, under the gravel pad. This may have allowed muddy runoff to escape unfiltered into the storm sewer.

Numerous gravel check dams on either side of the street trapped some of the runoff. But additional runoff was directed to the center of the street, where it formed a concentrated flow. This kind of arrangement caused massive erosion in a big storm last year on Edgewood Ave.

This is the outfall of runoff from the Pickford St area, into Lake Wingra. Much muddy runoff was going into the Lake.

Overall quality of the erosion control

I give this job a grade of "B" (good but not excellent).

What I liked

Good gravel pads at either end.
Large check dams, slanted upstream to capture & store runoff
Good deployment of inlet filters

What could have been improved

The dirt surface of the work area did not appear to have been treated with polymer or compacted with a roller, as Parisi Construction did during similar work on Gilmore Street.
There was no defense against formation of a gulley in the middle of the street.
Could the cave-in have been foreseen or prevented?
Muddy runoff did escape into Lake Wingra.

Overall, Parisi Construction did a better job of erosion control during their job on Gilmore Street.

Update 8/23/11: After a very intense morning downpour, I saw that runoff had escaped from the bottom of the Pickford St. site. No additional stormsewer inlets have filters on them, so these need to be added. The pavement below the entrance to Pickford is very dirty.

Debris on the terrace indicates runoff from a storm on 8/23 escaped the site to stormwater inlets that were unfiltered.

Not sustainable--the construction industry in Madison

2011-06-14T00:42:00.034-05:00

Recently, the American Lung Association named Madison as one of the most polluted cities in the nation from particle pollution--dust and smoke.

There's construction all over downtown Madison. Dust is being tracked onto streets every day, and is being blown out of construction sites on windy days.

Covering sources of dust

Findorff site before covering, & after. Click to enlarge.

I thank Findorff for covering their piles of bare soil, about a week after my first complaint. To my knowledge, this is a first in Madison*, and very welcome.

Despite the plastic cover, most of the site is still exposed to wind and tires.

However, most of the Findorff site (next to the Kohl Center) is still bare, the gravel pad is still inadequate, and much dust is still being tracked out. The clouds of dust I saw blowing from this site originated from the gravel pad area on the west side of the site, not from the soil now covered with plastic.

Sweeping

Madison could do much more to control dust on the streets. Usually streets aren't swept periodically during the day, or even at the end of the work day (as required by City contracts).

Even when bobcat sweepers are used at the end of the day, they are quite ineffective.

What's needed is for city street sweepers to clean busy streets near construction sites several times a day, during construction. These machines are designed for the task and more effective than bobcats.

Washing tires

Another essential to control the dust is to make tire washing a requirement at construction entrances. Tire washing is already an approved BMP, but never used in Madison (to my knowledge).

Contractors argue there isn't room on most construction sites. They say there would be a problem with the water and mud produced. It's true that some construction sites are very tight.

But at the Findorff site next to the Kohl Center, we have a construction site producing huge quantities of dust in the air--and mud on the streets... but this entrance is IDEAL for tire washing.

There's plenty of room on pavement, outside the entrance and away from traffic, to wash tires.

Stormwater drains or grassy areas nearby could accept filtered effluent.

Most of the muddy water from washing tires could be recycled, to be used again.

This "dumpster filter" was set up by Miron Construction at a very crowded site to filer muddy water.

A similar filter could be used by Findorff to recycle tire-washing water. When the dumpster fills with mud, it could be dewatered using the bag filter (foreground), then carted off for disposal.

Findorff has a perfect location to wash tires. There really isn't any excuse not be a responsible member of the community at this site.

Construction--still out of control, after 40 years of effort

The construction industry is the last large industry without sufficient control of pollution.

There are good regulations, and progress has been made--but not enough to control the problems of pollution from construction.

Nineteen percent of the phosphorus pollution in Madison's lakes still comes from construction erosion, and you can easily see how construction downtown contributes to our severe air pollution.

The reasons for failure are complex--but in a nutshell:

It IS difficult to control construction pollution, due to cramped and disorganized sites, changing weather, and a multitude of subcontractors.
Byzantine regulations and fuzzy responsibilities.
Lack of political will. The City or State agencies are policing themselves.
Unlike permanent factories, construction sites are dispersed and temporary.

Beyond construction sites

Ray Cattell's illegal dumping**

Construction sites are just one part of a larger industry. To understand the full impact of construction, you have to also consider production of concrete (and other pavements), mud on roads, dumps, quarries, and the recycling or disposal of concrete and other construction rubble.

Careless disposal of concrete slurry and wash water is polluting our lakes via storm sewers (right), polluting the soil around trees (stunting their growth), and adding toxic dust to the air. The chromium in concrete may be getting into our groundwater and drinking water.

I have followed trucks leaking mud for over six miles. The mud tracked from tires onto streets is so widely dispersed as to be almost invisible, yet it sifts onto large areas, and eventually becomes toxic dust or water pollution. The mud tracked from construction sites, collectively, adds up to huge quantities.

Additional construction operations are also tracking mud and blowing dust:

Quarries

Landfills

Concrete production and recycling operations

The home bases of construction firms

The bottom line--health

There are tens of thousands of people in Dane County whose health is threatened by our dusty air. These are the sensitive population--people with heart disease, diabetes, emphysema, chronic obstructive lung disease, asthma, the elderly, and children. These sensitive people are concentrated in the downtown in schools, hospitals, and housing for the elderly. Officials--and responsible contractors--cannot continue to ignore these vulnerable members of our community.

The City (or State) wants to keep costs down for construction projects. For this reason, they are lax in planning and enforcing to reduce erosion and dust from construction.

Contractors feel competitive pressures to bid low on dust and erosion control measures.

So ultimately, it's the responsibility of government to raise the bar and enforce higher standards.

Everyone complains about escalating healthcare costs. Yet construction in Madison is adding to medical costs. When a child is rushed to the emergency room with a severe asthma attack, there's no smoking gun saying a contractor was responsible. But scientifically and statistically, the connection is there--the link has been proven with 50 years of public health data.

How are we going to balance the costs of construction... with the cost in lives and health care dollars? It's time to start the debate.

And what about the image of Madison as one of the most polluted (and unhealthy) cities in the nation? An image like that won't attract the growth that fuels construction.

Our lakes are too dirty to swim, our groundwater is becoming too contaminated to drink (at some wells), and now our air is on the "most polluted" list. Once upon a time, Madison was rated the "most livable" city.

This is not what SUSTAINABILITY looks like.

# # #

* I have seen using fabric to protect steep slopes from water erosion at three sites in Madison, in order of occurrence: Target store at Hilldale, Terra Construction at Library Mall, and Findorff on Dayton St. The Findorff site next to the Kohl Center is the first I am aware of to protect soil from wind erosion. Some progress.

** Raymond P. Cattell, Inc., probably dumped this concrete slurry into the storm sewer on Johnson St. just west of State St. The work was on a block of concrete pavement in the street. There was no Cattell stamp on the concrete work, but since Cattell dumped slurry to the gutter further to the west, and is working to the east near the square, this is likely a Cattell deed. Not only was slurry allowed to run in the gutter to a storm sewer inlet, but waste (possibly leftover concrete) was dumped directly into the upstream inlet. Photo 6/13/11.

Contractors--one cause of bad air in Dane County

2011-06-10T01:44:00.000-05:00

Dust lofting from Findorff* site in downtown Madison.
Note concrete waste, right center.

The American Lung Association gave the Madison area** a failing grade for particle pollution in the air. That's right, an "F."

Originally reported on WISC-TV, I decided to delve a little deeper. It was hard to believe that little old Madison, the city of blue lakes, could be so polluted.

But it's true. Here's what I found.

Madison's report card

The American Lung Association based their assessment on three years of data from the EPA. They rated counties across the USA based on ozone, short term (8 hrs) particle pollution, and long-term particle pollution. Madison got a "C" for ozone, while most of the Wisconsin counties along the lake got an "F," due to the way lake breezes trap the ozone along the shore.

But the flunking grade Madison received was based on the 8-hour particle levels. The Lung Association created a score based both the severity of periods of particle pollution, and on the number of severe events.

Madison flunked because we had 16 "orange" days over a three year period. An "orange" alert day is unhealthy for sensitive populations, which include the very young, elderly, and people with chronic disease--for example asthma and bronchitis.

That's right, Madison was on the list of the most polluted cities in the US (for short-term particle pollution).

How we compare

The Lung Association's website has a nifty widget allowing comparison of cities:

For 24-hour particle pollution, Madison ranked as the 24th most polluted out of 277 metropolitan areas. We did better (but still poorly) on other measures.

Compared to the New York area, we both flunked on particle pollution. NYC was slightly worse.

Compared to the Los Angeles area, again both flunked on particle pollution--but LA was much worse.

Health effects

Particle pollution ranges from coarse dust and pollen down to extremely microscopic particles--the smallest usually from combustion.

"Lower levels of ozone and particle pollution pose bigger threat than previously thought. A Canadian study showed that levels well below those considered safe for these pollutants triggered asthma attacks and increased the risk of emergency room visits and hospital admissions for children with asthma.6 Another study found that low levels of these pollutants increased the risk of hospital treatment for pneumonia and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease." Source

There are large numbers of "sensitive people" in Dane County who could be harmed by particles in our air. For example, out of 491,000 people in our area, 39,000 have adult asthma, 16,000 have chronic bronchitis, and 7,000 have emphysema.

I'm nearly 70 years old. That puts me in a sensitive group--the elderly (Yikes!).

It's been windy in Madison the last few days--my voice has been so hoarse people have remarked about it.   I assumed it was the spring pollen--until I saw all the dust going airborne from construction sites downtown (see below). Then, I noticed the air was yellow, even though there were no clouds.   It's possible my voice problems were caused by dust that turned the sky yellow.

As I write, I'm sneezing, with eyes moist. The wind is 16 mph. Less than a mile upwind, is a Findorff* Construction site on Science Drive, surrounded by residential neighborhoods. I've followed this site over the last month or so. It's been very sloppy--a large parking lot caked with mud, and muddy tire tracks heading off-site on residential streets.

Don't assume your red eyes are caused by pollen--you may be allergic to negligent construction firms.

Sources of particles in air

Without much industry in Madison, how did we get so polluted?

Generally speaking, air in the US moves from west to east, so the further east you go, the more polluted.

The particles come from combustion (power plants and autos), pollen, and dust. I'm going to focus on the dust.

Surrounded by agricultural land, windy spring days can kick up lots of dust from bare fields. Wisconsin has a lot of fine soil left over from glacial times. Yet other Midwestern cities don't have as much particle pollution as Madison.

Construction sites are one of the last industries where pollution isn't well-controlled.  Enormous amounts of mud are washed or tracked out of construction sites. Mud on streets soon becomes dust--coated with all kinds of noxious chemicals picked up from the streets. Eventually, the dust rains out to become water pollution.

Madison has only weak enforcement for pollution from construction sites. Inspection staff are overworked, and almost never penalize the contractors they supervise. Some sites are inspected by Madison's Engineering Division. Others on campus are under the control of the State's Dept. of Administration, and inspected by the DNR.   The State is inspecting itself. More.

I"ll close with some photos of dust out of control at Findorff* Construction sites in downtown Madison, taken on 6/3 and 6/7 (click on a photo to enlarge it).

There are large areas of exposed fine soil at the Findorff site W of the Kohl Center, with no apparent controls for dust. "Polymer" is a kind of glue or moistener that is supposed to be applied to sites like this to control dust. I didn't see the telltale signs of polymer--and if it had been applied, it wasn't working.

Findorff* site just W. of the Kohl Center. There is fine dust about 6" deep on top of the gravel pad. This is where I saw large clouds of dust rising. Note grey concrete waste dumped to right--concrete dust is very hazardous. When it rains, the dust will stop, but the mud tracking will begin, starting a new cycle of mud-on-roads-to-dust.

Same location, just outside the gate. Note thick, fine dust. The gravel pad has become so buried in dust that it will be completely ineffective when it rains. To be effective, gravel pads must be maintained, cleaned, or renewed. I see few gravel pads at Findorff sites that are properly maintained.

Another Findorff entrance onto W. Dayton St., thick with dust. This is source of the dust cloud in the first photo. Concrete waste is also being dumped near this spot--perhaps that's why the dust is so grey.

On two corners along W. Johnson St., Findorff is mixing mortar. You can see the mix is getting onto the sidewalk on a windy day. The label on a bag says: "WARNING--INJURIOUS TO EYES, CAUSES SKIN IRRITATION.... In case of eye contact, immediately flush with water for at least 15 min...." Close to the sidewalk, I found an empty bag of the stuff, untied and uncovered, with dust sifting out, rocking in the wind. Workers are advised to wear face masks--what about all the students walking by?

Another dusty site nearby on Lake St. Note leaking fluid, mixing with dust. The white is likely concrete dust from cutting with a saw--very toxic to the lungs.

One of two hoppers on Lake St. containing mortar mix. In the foreground, a nearly empty bag of mix is leaking dust. This bag has the same hazard warning.

# # #

* Am I picking unfairly on Findorff? Findorff is one of many construction firms in the area that often ignore the spirit if not letter of erosion control regulations. I am focusing on Findorff because they are a large local firm, and claim to be a good citizen. But other problem firms are Tri-North, Speedway, Landgraff, and Rawson.

Yet I have observed and documented many Findorff sites with erosion control problems. In particular, Findorff often has inadequate gravel pads at their sites--and gravel pads are important in controlling dust on streets. Today, I observed three different Findorff sites downtown that were creating dust hazard through sloppy practice or omissions.

While I hope Findorff will improve, these dust problems are the final responsibility of DNR.

My grandmother used to say: "What people do when they think no one is watching--that's the true test of character."

** Madison area: The Lung Association broke down the data by several areas. One was Dane County. Another was "Madison-Baraboo." For this short article, I'll just refer to "Madison."

Go here for an area-wide prediction of air quality.

Cattell dumps concrete waste to storm sewer

2011-06-06T10:33:00.016-05:00

Concrete wastewater is extremely alkaline. It can cause fish kills upon reaching lakes or streams.

While concrete waste is tightly regulated in some countries, it receives little attention in Wisconsin. Nevertheless, discharging concrete wastewater into the storm sewers is illegal in Madison.

On June 3, white stains from concrete work by Raymond P. Cattell, Inc., were observed running down the gutter towards a sewer opening near Frances St.

Cattell was repaving a portion of W. Johnson St, and the white stains were probably a concrete slurry resulting from cutting concrete with a saw. This slurry is as caustic as concrete washwater.

The stormsewer receiving the concrete waste probably empties to Monona Bay, a popular fishing location.

Update 8/7/11, 6:00 am: I originally attributed the white stains in the gutter to Findorff Construction, a second firm working with masonry at the same corner (and closer to the white stains). Today I received an email from Steve Klaven of Findorff, saying that Cattell was responsible. So at 5:00 am, I visited the site and poured water where Cattell had been working. The water ran to where the white stains began in the gutter, indicating with high probability that Cattell was indeed the firm sending caustic waste to Lake Monona. I regret my initial error--jumping to a conclusion.

Concrete wastewater can cause skin burns. Splash marks indicated that autos had spread the wastewater onto the sidewalk.

Cattell was working on the white squares beyond the corner. White footprints indicated pedestrians had been walking through the concrete slurry.

Sharp blocks of waste concrete were left close to the crosswalk, posing a hazard to pedestrians.

The Findorff masonry construction site at the corner of Lake and Johnson streets. The slurry in the gutter did not come from here.

Masonry wastewater was dumped into the soil next to a tree--potentially lethal to roots, and also forming dust toxic to humans. This was next to where Findorff was working--the new concrete here bore a Findorff stamp.

At two Findorff sites nearby, dust was not being adequately controlled--creating another kind of health hazard.

All these problems were observed late Friday afternoon--left to fester all weekend.

See all the photos

Madison's air has high levels of particle pollution

2011-05-03T00:23:00.014-05:00

Findorff construction site next to Kohl Center, 6/3/11.

The American Lung Association said the Madison area is one of the worst places in the country for particle pollution in the air, according to a new study.

Construction sites are a major source of dust in the air. When vehicles leave construction sites, they lay a track of mud that lasts for miles. The mud turns to road dust--soon becoming air pollution.

Defense against dust--gravel pads

Many contractors do not have the required 50' pads of 3"washed gravel at construction entrances. The gravel keeps the tires out of the mud.

Another function of pads--due to the 3" chunks of gravel--is to shake the mud off the tires. But many contractors rely on existing pavement--for example a parking lot next to the construction site--as a substitute for a gravel pad. But the smooth pavement doesn't provide the necessary shaking of the required gravel pad.

Last year, Contractor Report visited many construction sites, and found that the majority had deficient pads. Many pads were too short or covered with mud--and many sites had no pads at all.

Some contractors like Speedway Sand and Gravel (at Edgewood Av in 2010) began work before the pads were installed. Another example was 2010 construction on the Hillcrest-Upland Greenway.

This spring, the percent of construction sites with adequate pads has increased, thanks to better inspection by the City. Nevertheless, I've found deficient pads at Findorff Construction sites in Monona and Madison.

At best, gravel pads only reduce tracking. This site (right) had a good pad, but still it didn't prevent muddy tracks.

If Madison wants clean lakes and clean air, we have to begin tire washing.

Water tight trucks

Another cause of dust from construction sites is loading wet soil into dump trucks that leave the site. Trucks carrying mud are supposed to be water tight.

Last summer, I tracked a truck dribbling mud for six miles from construction on University Avenue. This spring, I observed muddy dribbles leaving the Miron Construction site on the UW campus (Lakeshore Residence).

Contractors:

Work for a healthy community--

Follow rules to avoid tracking mud

Some contractors who ignore regulations on gravel pads

Rawson Contractors

Findorff Construction at sites in Madison Madison Monona

Speedway Sand and Gravel

Speedway releases concrete slurry to storm sewer

2011-04-30T00:49:00.007-05:00

. . .

On or before April 24, Speedway Sand and Gravel was using a saw to cut concrete pavement on Highland Avenue.

Water is required to cool the saw--and the water, plus concrete dust, creates an alkaline slurry. The slurry is so alkaline that it can cause a fish kill, upon reaching the lake.

Madison General Ordinances prohibit releasing concrete wastewater to the storm sewer.

The dried slurry is supposed to be cleaned up by the end of the day.

The work was probably done on Friday, and the photo is from Sunday, with rain in between.

Here, you can see white slurry getting onto the stormwater opening.

Speedway has a long history of abuse. The banner photo above was a massive sediment spill into Lake Wingra at Speedway's site on Edgewood Av, during the summer of 2010. Photo by Jamie Saul.

Except for the concrete slurry above, this Speedway site at the corner of Highland Av and Old University Av shows improvements over 2010.

More photos of the site.

Landgraf continues abuse from concrete mixing

2011-04-29T23:40:00.010-05:00

Mixing of mortar for bricklaying at Mendota Court

creates toxic dust and alkaline runoff.

On April 12, I photographed white stains from concrete wastewater running into Lake Mendota from the construction site on Mendota Court, run by Landgraf Construction. I sent a complaint with photos to the City.

By April 29, I saw the concrete mixer had been moved to the rear of the property--but the situation was not improved.

There were still no barriers to prevent muddy runoff during rain, or spilled concrete wastewater, from running down the alley, then down Mendota Ct to the lake.

I observed a cloud of toxic concrete dust drift over an area where students pass to and from nearby apartments. The operator of the mixer was not wearing a respirator. Concrete dust contains Chromium VI and is carcinogenic.

I noted one improvement since April 12: the stormwater inlet filters downstream on Lake Street had been cleaned. But filters won't stop a spill of concrete wastewater, which can cause a fish kill.

My grandma was a good inspector

2011-04-20T22:16:00.016-05:00

Grandma gets the dirt on Findorff and Tri-North
. . .

When Grandma visited, she'd wipe her finger across the mantle above the fireplace. If there was any dust, your reputation as a housekeeper was finished. Grandma believed there were signs--good indicators of how people behave.

So it goes with contractors and erosion control. During the last year of inspecting scores of construction sites, I've had a chance to test Grandma's method. It holds up pretty well.

If a construction site looks sloppy and disordered, then there's a good chance the erosion control has been neglected.

Here are a few recent examples. Neither site demonstrates horrific lapses--but that's partly because we haven't had any big storms this spring. But all three sloppy sites illustrate Grandma's rule.

Tri-North site in Monona

What Grandma sees here is litter everywhere. Some blew in from a nearby shopping center, but some came from the site.

Once you look at the erosion control, you see:

Dirty tracks leaving the site,

Sediment fences down in many places, and

Sediment fences waiting to fail. (photo below)--either because they were poorly placed, or constructed with damaged stakes.

This spot along the sediment fence, located in a swale, will get most of the runoff. It already has a hole (L), and the stake (R) is defective.

Findorff Construction in Monona, E. Broadway

At this site, both construction entrances had no gravel pads* (see 2 photos below).

Disorder. Silt socks non-functional. There is a creek just to the left that needs protecting. The whole site is bordered by environmentally sensitive wetlands.

Findorff Construction in Madison, Science Drive

Problems at this site:

Main construction entrance inadequate (there was gravel, but it's beaten into mud).

Pavement outside construction entrance extremely dirty over a broad area.

No barrier to sediment between construction site and pavement.

Stormwater inlets downstream not protected.

Small area being excavated near street has no sediment fence or silt socks. Drainage way is filling with sediment.

Conclusions

Erosion control is something hardly anyone pays attention too--certainly not the public. So when you take a close look at how a contractor does erosion control, you are seeing how they behave--when they think no one is looking.

My grandmother used to say: "What people do when no one is watching--that's the true test of character."

# # #

More photos from Findorff at Monona 4/9/11 here.
More photos f rom Findorff at Science Drive, Madison, 4/9/11 here and 4/19/11 here.
More photos from Tri-North, Monona, 4/9/11 here.

* Much of the Findorff Monona site was paved--an old parking lot. Perhaps, for that reason, the planners felt no entrance gravel pad was needed. But there is so much mud about that the pavement isn't keeping mud from being tracked out. Moreover, a gravel pad is supposed to work by jolting the tires, shaking the mud off. So pavement won't work as well as a clean gravel pad.

The silt fence--causes of failure

2011-04-20T14:35:00.011-05:00

. . .

The silt fence is one of the most effective BMPs at construction sites. It acts as a dam along the perimeter of a site. Water pools behind the dam, while sediment settle out.

However, in the year that I've been inspecting construction sites, I've seen a number of failures. These failures can be serious, because the silt fence is usually the last line of defense. Large amounts of impounded water and sediment can be suddenly released, causing a large sediment spill.

Inspectors should carefully inspect sediment fences, because they are so important, and because of ineffective installation, which is common.

When the fence fails, all that built-up water and sediment is released--causing a substantial "sediment spill."

The fence can fail because

Too much runoff is concentrated at one place along the fence,
The stakes holding it are too weak,
The runoff makes and end run around the fence, or
Gaps in the fence allow leaks.

Too much runoff in one place

Many construction sites have a shallow swale that concentrates the runoff and directs it towards one part of the perimeter. The fence at that point can receive a too large volume of runoff.

A shallow depression leads toward the center of this fence, causing potential overload. Note that the right stake is damaged. Click photo to enlarge.

The lowest point on the perimeter can be barely perceptible. Still, the fence all along the lower side of the property will channel the runoff towards the one lowest point, where water will build up, causing failure. To prevent such concentration of water, the fence should be "scalloped."

Shallow channels or check dams should be used to redirect the runoff within the construction area, so that it's directed to several places along the perimeter, rather than just one.

The stakes are too weak (or damaged)

Specifications for the sediment fence call for stakes of a certain size. This may be adequate for a fence that doesn't pool much water. But where a lot of water backs up, the stakes will break.

Stakes on both sides failed, when large volumes were dammed behind the fences.

The best defence is to use larger stakes to begin with, or to inspect the fence after a storm, and beef up the stakes where it's clear that water has pooled.

One of the best ways to ensure the fence doesn't fail, due to too much runoff or weak stakes, is to have TWO rows of fences.

The water makes an end run

This is an obvious flaw, easily found by inspection. One easy way to fix it is to use a silt sock to stop any water slipping around the end.

Gaps

One of the more common gaps is between a building (or wall) and the silt fence. These can be plugged with wadded fabric or a silt sock.

Additional photo examples

This fence served too large an area--and most runoff was concentrated on one low spot.

Same problem. When the runoff was concentrated on one spot, stakes failed, and the fence was overtopped.

This low corner of the lot is likely to receive much of the runoff. Just one stake at the corner will carry much of the load. The corner should be rounded, and additional stakes added.

# # #

Links to more info on these sites and photos:

Photos #1 and #4: Ellis Stone Construction Co. at Wildcat Mt. State Park

Photos # 2 and #6: Tri-North in Monona, WI.

Photos #3 and #5: Rawson Contractors on Old Middleton Rd.(Madison, WI), street reconstruction and sediment ponds. Rawson has had a lot of problems with erosion control To find them, put "Rawson" into the search box, upper left.

Landgraf Construction dumps concrete wastewater to lake

2011-04-13T03:51:00.004-05:00

Discharging concrete wastewater in the gutter is illegal. The water is highly alkaline, and can cause a fish kill.

Discharging such waste to the stormsewers is illegal in Madison. The Department of Health writes up violations and passes them to the City Attorney for prosecution.

Landgraf Construction is mixing concrete products on-site at Mendota Court, just a block from Lake Mendota.

White stains show concrete wastewater flowed down the gutter to stormsewer inlets, a stone's throw from the Lake.

In addition, the stormsewer inlet filters are clogged.

Filth from this construction site, and from other dirty streets in the area, is making a mess of the Lake.

Mid Towne Construction wastes salt, pollutes lakes and groundwater

2011-03-28T12:43:00.023-05:00

Levels of salt are rising in our lakes and groundwater. Salt use kills plants adjacent to roads and parking lots. Salt attacks concrete.

When companies like Mid Towne Construction store salt improperly, they not only harm the environment--they are also wasting your money.

West Towne Mall, rear parking lot.

"Road salt use is a sleeping giant," said Roger Bannerman, DNR water resources management specialist. "The potential for chloride to damage our water systems is more inevitable than climate change." More

The photos speak for themselves. All were taken March 24, 2011--long after salt use should have stopped.

What business owners can do

Make sure your people are properly trained to use the minimum
Use salt only on steps or slopes
Quick removal of snow on walkways (so sun can do the melting) is as effective as salt
Make sure salt is properly stored
Set a cutoff date in spring--around March 1.
Post signs "Watch your step--No salt area--This business cares about the environment"
Sweep up leftover salt in early Spring
You'll save on salt spreading costs, landscaping, and maintenance of concrete.
Help keep our lakes and drinking water healthy.

# # #

Photos of overuse of salt, Madison's west side:

March 14, 2011

March 24, 2011

University snow dump could threaten Madison's aquifer

2011-03-15T01:09:00.005-05:00

The University's snow dump is located close to an old fly-ash dump.

The huge pile of melting snow on University property, near Picnic Point, is a potential threat to Madison's aquifer and water supply.

A portion of the 500-750 tons of salt that the University spreads each winter on roads and parking lots ends up in this pile. This unrefined road salt is contaminated with trace heavy metals and ferrocyanide.

In addition, in the 1960s, the University Farms used to dump manure here from the nearby barn. And, the Ecology Students' Association caught the University Power Plant dumping many truckloads of fly ash here. Fly ash also contains toxic heavy metals. The students found the University didn't have a permit from the DNR, so the UW was forced to stop.
A pump and a dump

Nevertheless, as the current pile of snow melts and floods the ground with water, it may push that water through the previous deposits of manure and fly ash, pumping contaminants deeper into the aquifer.

The pile of snow is a dump for trash, salt, and heavy metals--but it's also a source for water leaching into the ground. Most dumps are supposed to be protected by a clay liner that prevents the leachate from reaching the aquifer.

But this dump isn't so protected. The DNR has required the University to build a berm and some puny stone spillways around it, but these minimal safeguards have been breached by today's pile. Reaching three stories hight, the pile exceeds the capacity of these protections many fold. Water that doesn't leach into the ground or flow to the Class of 1918 wetland is pumped right to Lake Mendota.

Incredible. Pumping the leachate from a dump into the lake!

Growing contamination of our aquifer

Madison has two aquifers, a shallow and a deep one, separated in most places by a layer of impervious shale. Madison gets most of it's drinking water from the deep aquifer. But the shale which protects the deep aquifer is absent in some places, especially around the lakes. So perhaps there is no shale to protect the deep aquifer under the pile of snow.

One of Madison's most active wells, #15 on the east side, is showing increasing levels of salt, proving that salt is a concern for our drinking supply. Since water moves very slowly through the ground, it takes many decades for groundwater problems to show up. But once contaminated, it takes even longer to clear.

Out at the Odana Golf Course, MG&E is pumping salty water into the ground. That project is part of a plan to compensate for the millions of gallons of cooling water that the West Campus Cogeneration Facility withdraws from Lake Mendota. Yet that project, also, is contaminating Madison's aquifer. The levels of salt in test wells near the Odana pumping site have already reached actionable levels. And, MG&E's 5-year permit to pump has expired.*

The University (and MG&E) is playing fast and loose with Madison's water supply. You can't have a healthy economy, without ample supplies of clean water. It costs millions to drill and equip new wells for the City.

# # #

Why doesn't the CoGen Facility collect water from the melting snow dump, clean it, and use it instead of water from Lake Mendota? Sure, it would be expensive to purify that filthy water from the snow pile, but shouldn't the University be cleaning up after itself, rather than using the lake or groundwater to flush away their wastes?

* I'll be writing more about the Odana CoGen pumping project soon.

More photos and details in this previous story.
Salt problems in Wisconsin.
Salt problems in Minneapolis.
Increasing salt in Madison well #15.

Future Barriques cafe on Park St caught in illegal pumping

2011-02-18T00:03:00.025-06:00

Barriques is known for their distinctive cafes that also serve wine--at five locations in the Madison area. A new store is being planned for 961 South Park St., where remodeling is underway. It's at the corner of S. Park and Parr streets, less than a block from Monona Bay. Environmentally, it's a sensitive location--Monona Bay is popular with fishermen.

On Wednesday morning a local resident noticed a crew pumping a large volume of cloudy water from inside the site being remodeled. The water was flushed onto Parr St., where it flowed down the gutter and into a storm sewer, bound for Monona Bay. The resident said he recognized the man supervising the pumping as one of the owners of Barriques.

Illegal pumping onto Parr St. from Barriques future location.

The resident notified DNR personnel, who then contacted Rick Wenta, Public Health and Environmental Protection, under the City's Health Department.

Update 2/21, based on email from R. Wenta:
"Generally, water from inside a structure is considered waste water, which has to be discharged to the sanitary sewer. (There are some exceptions; foundation water is one example.)

There are no provisions for filtering, then pumping the waste to the storm sewer. Under the state plumbing code, a floor drain collects domestic wastewater which must be directed to the sanitary sewer.

Public Health Madison and Dane County is responsible for enforcing Madison General Ordinance 7.46 which states: it is illegal to discharge potentially polluting substances to the storm sewer."

Next, a truck for pumping septic systems drove onto the site and began work. It wasn't clear weather their services had been previously planned by Barriques, or whether it was a response to the complaint.

That afternoon, Mr. Wenta inspected the scene of the illegal discharge. When notified that the resident had photos of the illegal pumping, Wenta said he would forward the information to the City Attorney, and that the Health Department would press for a fine.

Toxic possibilities

What was in the water being pumped towards Monona Bay?

When I inspected the photos in photoshop, the water appeared cloudy and grey. This is consistent with concrete slurry--which results from cutting concrete with a saw, or cleaning up where concrete is being removed. Concrete rubble was being carried out of the Barriques location by a Bobcat, and loaded onto a truck labeled "Ken Wagner, the Concrete Remover, Waunakee, WI, 831-6355."

Click on photo to enlarge

Concrete washwater and slurry is extremely alkaline--enough to burn the skin. Upon reaching Monona Bay less than a block away, it could cause a fish kill. In New Zealand, such dumping is ~~more closely regulated~~ ~~than in Madison, where mishandling of concrete waste is commonplace.~~ ~~More on concrete waste.~~

Update 2/21: Mr. Wenta, who inspected the property after pumping ended, said he did not believe the cloudy water in the photo represented concrete slurry.

Neighbors are concerned about other toxic chemicals. At least three shops were formerly located at the site...

A car radiator shop--heavy metals, antifreeze
An auto repair shop--oil, antifreeze, & other fluids
A furniture store with furniture repair--paint stripper (very toxic,) paint thinners, & lead

The resident who blew the whistle was worried about another possibility--that Barriques was pumping the sludge from the bottom of a drain trap--a concrete pit usually found in the floor of a building of this type. If so, that sludge could be contaminated with any of the toxins listed above.

Recently, Madison had a scare when toxic Chromium 6 (at very low levels) was found in the City's tapwater. Several years ago, a well on the near East Side had to be permanently shut down, because of industrial contamination. Concrete waste and wastewater contains significant amounts of Chromium 6.

Lessons from the incident at Barriques

There may still be deposits of toxic chemicals lurking in old buildings. Remodeling or demolitions must be done with care and with inspections.
Contractors and business owners--remember, citizens are watching. Madisonians care about their lakes.

The illegal hose was returned to this truck. Click photo to read plate.

Construction Co. Pays $60K Civil Penalty in Iowa

2011-01-07T17:35:00.001-06:00

Manatt's is a private construction company hired to work on a portion of interstate in Iowa.

"Manatt’s approached the owner of private land adjacent to the I-35 construction project to seek permission to use material from the construction site to fill in approximately 1,000 linear feet of an unnamed tributary of White Breast Creek. Although the landowner agreed to the proposed activity, neither the landowner nor Manatt’s obtained a permit from the Corps of Engineers to allow the work within the stream and wetlands, as required by the federal Clean Water Act."

Manatt's unauthorized fill was spotted during a routine inspection by the Army Corps in 2009.

Source

Speedway dumped hazardous waste in Lake Wingra

2011-01-04T01:21:00.015-06:00

Misdeeds are sometimes revealed when bodies float to the surface... as happened recently at Lake Wingra.

On January 2, 2011, I found this bucket frozen in Lake Wingra. Google research revealed the bucket had contained pipe joint mastic, a tarry compound used to seal box culverts--large pipes that carry stormwater.

Two days later, I found a second 5-gallon can nearby--

and this one was almost full.

Evidently, the two cans were left from construction of the Pickford Street stormwater project of 2009. You can see where the culvert empties into the lake in the photo above.

But why were the cans now revealed, over a year after the project was finished? Joints between the segments of the box culvert had been sealed inside the culvert. Probably the cans were left inside. Later, when there was enough flow in the culvert, the cans washed out. If true, this means the inside of the culvert wasn't carefully inspected by the City when the work was finished.

The joint sealer in the cans is listed by the Feds as an "acute health hazard" and a "chronic health hazard." California considers it to cause cancer. The EPA says this material is "subject to hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal requirements." Source

Who is responsible

Speedway Sand and Gravel was the contractor. In 2010, their sloppy work on Edgewood Ave resulted in numerous spills of sediment into Lake Wingra. Later, their work on Segoe Ave involved dumping of concrete wastewater, and stormwater inlet protection that failed during a heavy rain.
Stewart Mael was the City inspector for this project.
The City Council and the Mayor need to devote more resources to inspection. Ordinances and rules don't work without inspection.

More photos from this project.

How phosphorus escapes from construction sites

2010-11-13T15:07:00.029-06:00

When you see mud in the lakes, you know phosphorus is escaping.
Lake Mendota 7/7/10.

Studies show that 19% of the phosphorus in our lakes--an important nutrient that causes the growth of toxic algae--comes from construction site erosion.

Once in the lake, the phosphorus is taken in by plants, passed on to animals that eat them, and then recycled endlessly when their bodies decay. So once in the lake, most of the phosphorus stays forever.

In Wisconsin waters, phosphorus acts like a fertilizer.* A small amount goes a long way towards stimulating growth of weeds. An ounce of phosphorus results in many pounds of noxious weeds. More than that, it upsets the natural balance of waterways, leading to fish kills, undesirable aquatic plants, and more.

Since the Clean Water Acts of the 1970s, people have been trying to control phosphorus from construction sites--but progress remains elusive. Why is this nutrient so hard to control?

Phosphorus is found in rocks and soil--and especially in decaying organic matter like leaves. So when soil is disturbed by construction, the phosphorus is free to move when it rains.

It’s curious, but phosphorus is nearly insoluble. So how can it move with the stormwater? The answer is called “adsorption.” This is a weak bond the phosphorus makes with the surface of a particle of soil. So when sediment--muddy water--flows off-site, the phosphorus goes along as a hitchhiker.

No problem--we just filter the water, and the phosphorus stops… right?

No--it’s more complicated. A number of BMPs** are used to filter runoff. They all tend to trap the coarsest particles, Some are better than others, but they all fail to trap the finest particles of sediment.

Why most BMPs fail to stop phosphorus

The smallest particles are a big problem, because--all together--they have a huge surface area. If you take one pound of coarse particles that can be trapped, and compare the adsorbed phosphorus to a handful of dry mud of the same weight--mud that passed through the filter--the pound of mud has far more phosphorus attached. That’s because the fine particles of mud have a huge surface area, compared to the coarse particles.

This means that most of the phosphorus is not stopped by the various filters commonly used at construction sites. And the most commonly used BMPs--storm water inlet filters--are the least effective at stopping the small particles.

Even if they filtered all the water going past them, they wouldn’t stop the fine particles. But as anyone know who has looked at inlet filters in the field, they are poorly maintained, installed on too few inlets, and most water flows around them to the next unfiltered inlet.

So if you depend on inlet filters, you are just kidding yourself.

A good filter is a slow filter

Here’s the reason most filters can’t work. If you made the pores of the filter cloth small enough, the water passes through very slowly. The pores in the cloth get clogged. Too much water would back up.

There is only one kind of filter that really works--that really catches all the fine particles and the attached phosphorus. That’s a natural filter with vegetation. We’re talking about a grassy swale (a shallow channel), or a settling pond.

These two BMPs have numerous advantages over the BMPs above:

First and foremost--they catch ALL the tiny particles.
They have a very large capacity, so slow filtration isn’t a problem.
By slowing the water, they allow particles to drop out.
The accumulated sediment is more easily cleaned out, or if not cleaned, simply becomes part of the swale or pond.
You don’t have to clean as often or clean all the sediment--they still work.
The plants and animals filter the water and break down the pollutants.
Both swales and ponds recharge the groundwater.

There are a few BMPs that mimic swales and ponds, but they aren’t as good

Sediment trap on Midvale during heavy rain, 10/24.

A sediment trap is like a miniature pond. It works pretty well for a low flow. But if there’s a lot of flow into it, it overflows, and most of the mud is just passed through. The mud that it does collect probably settles only when the flow slows at the end of the storm.

If the trap is not carefully cleaned after each storm, then the next big flow will wash all the remaining dirt downstream.

Sediment traps could be somewhat more effective, if arranged in chains. Likewise, rain gardens with a small capacity can be arranged in chains, so they can handle larger storms.

A bladder of filter cloth can work fairly well. These are often used to filter muddy water pumped from a trench. But they have a limited capacity, and they have to be cleaned. And, under some conditions, I have seen them pass muddy water.

Disadvantages of swales and ponds

Both require substantial area--which may not be available on-site.
They need to be planned and built in advance, so they are vegetated when needed.

However, with creative design and planning, these can be overcome. Streets can be used to export muddy water during a storm to a basin or swale that has been planned nearby. For example, at the Hillcrest-Upland Greenway project, the ravine being worked on drained a basin half a mile long. The ravine was capable of producing very large flows in a storm.

But only a block downstream from the lower end of the ravine, a long, grassy swale was located in the median of Midvale Blvd. The swale had in fact been designed to handle heavy flows, and had storm water inlets along its length. Swale: upper L of photo below.

Directing heavy runoff from the ravine to this swale seemed to be an ideal solution--except that City officials were reluctant to create traffic problems or deal with issues beyond the site. But problems for traffic existed anyway, because when it rained hard, the ravine water overflowed into Midvale, and went right past the swale.

The lesson from Midvale is, that if procedures can be developed to deal with any adverse public reaction from runoff leaving the site, and if Engineers are willing to expand their bag of tricks to offsite locations, then possibilities for stopping phosphorus increase.

No free lunch (except for the algae)

Where swales like the Midvale median don’t exist, large rain gardens could be built in advance. After the project is finished, these gardens would remain to beautify the neighborhood and improve recharge of groundwater. They would remain as green infrastructure for future construction projects.

In many cases, terraces downstream from the construction could be used as settling basins, or turned into a chain of medium-sized rain gardens.

Or, gutters dammed at intervals by a series of silt socks, could become a series of settling basins. After a storm, the socks are moved to the terrace--then a street cleaner removes the trapped sediment from the street. Next, the socks are moved back to the gutter.

The area needed for swales and basins can be reduced through smart planning. On many street construction projects, clean water flowing into the construction area can be routed around the project. That way, less DIRTY runoff leaves the construction area, so a smaller swale or basin can do the job.

The bottom line

If you see muddy water leaving a construction site, running down the gutter, and into a storm water inlet (even if it has a filter), you are not stopping the phosphorus.

The problem will never be solved… until the muddy tracks and trickles stay where they belong.

Routing runoff down a street, or building a large rain garden, aren’t as convenient as plopping down a few hay bales or inlet filters. But those current solutions simply aren’t effective.

When we decide we care enough about clean lakes and streams--then swales, settling basins, and rain gardens are the only serious solution.

# # #

* A more colorful analogy is that phosphorus in waterways acts like a dose of heroin for an addict. The dose sends the lake into a frenzy of ecstatic growth, leading to unbalanced, destructive behavior. The algae suffer such extreme withdrawal pangs that they have a huge die-off, leading to rotting masses of vegetation. Next, the fish run out of oxygen and die also. All this rotting biomass releases the phosphorus, which then sends the ecosystem another high, kick of growth, and dieoff. The lake is hooked! Meanwhile, the dealers (Chemlawn and other merchants of fertilizer) go about the neighborhood, pushing their harmful products.

** Best Management Practices have been repalced by what are called "Terchnical Standards," basically the same thing. Each one is a recipe for a certain way of controlling erosion, backed by research. They are considered the best current practices.

Update on smallest particles:
In Lake Tahoe, CA, "the improvements [in water clarity] were in part due to the realization that fine particles are so important. “For the last eight or nine years, the science has shown that fine particles are the major cause of clarity decline. Today we have many projects in the basin that are being designed to better retain these fine particles and keep them out of the lake.” Source

Is dumping concrete waste illegal in Madison?

2010-11-12T15:56:00.010-06:00

Concrete wastewater, and the slurry from cutting concrete with a saw, are very toxic to aquatic life. In addition, the waste contains chromium, a known carcinogen that can contaminate groundwater.

So... is dumping this material at a construction site illegal in Madison?

In Madison

"For general city projects discharge of concrete to the stormwater system is prohibited by the Standard Specifications section 104.10," p. 18:

Concrete trucks or any other equipment shall not be flushed out onto public streets, walks, or gutters. This does not include streets being worked on within the project, unless they are completed pavements.
For City projects with lots of concrete, the City puts highly detailed, specific language about handling concrete waste into the contract. For an example, see Bid Item 90039.

However, there are many projects with only a little concrete involved, and these do not have the specific language. So these projects would be covered under the Standard Specs above. These projects with "just a little concrete" still produce a lot of waste.

"For both City and private projects, the Health Department considers the discharge of concrete wash water to the curb to be an illicit discharg--and they regulate it under Madison General Ordinances 7.46." These ordinances don't specifically mention concrete wastewater, but obviously it would be included among the pollutants regulated.

Provisions call for notification via 911, fines between $50 and $2,000 a day, and financial liability for cleanup.

At constructon sites, City Engineer Greg Fries says: "Generally washing of chutes to a pit on site is acceptable - if no pit is available generally the practice is to wash in to an artificial pit (normally stacked concrete forms lined with a geotextile membrane).

In Wisconsin (The DNR)

Ready mix plants are tightly regulated. See the permit webpage here and the information sheet here.

Greg Fries says: "There are no WDNR regs (that I am aware of) for washing of concrete chutes at construction sites. Although work with Jim Bertolacini on this issue in previous years allows me to say that Jim Bertolacini considered discharge of wash water to the curb to be an illicit discharge."

The EPA

...considers concrete wastewater important enough to issue a BMP fact sheet on how to handle it.

In the State of Maryland

"On September 13, 2010, the Office of the Attorney General... filed a civil Complaint for Civil Penalties in the Circuit Court for Allegany County seeking a civil penalty of $10,000 for alleged water pollution violations..., specifically wet concrete and concrete dust, resulting in a fish kill to Sand Spring Run at a stormwater construction project in Frostburg." The defendant was Lashley Construction Company, Inc. Source

In New Zealand, "the Polluter Pays" for mishandling concrete waste

"Polluters can face an infringement fee of up to $1000 or imprisonment for a maximum term of two years or a fine of up to $200,000, with a further $10,000 for each day the discharge continues."

Landowners: you are responsible for any work on your land. Make sure the contractor you hire knows how to do the job properly."

"Bosses: you are responsible for the actions of your staff. Make sure you train them well and give them the proper tools for the job."

"Workers: you must do the job properly. If you cause pollution, you could lose your job, get a fine or even go to jail." Source

# # #

Wisconsin Contractors who have dumped concrete wastewater

Rawson Contractors

Speedway Sand and Gravel

Tri-North Builders

Parisi Construction
S&L Underground and Trucking

Acknowledgements: Thanks to David Liebl, Greg Fries, and Roger Bannerman for quickly responding with much helpful information. The info in quotes about Madison and DNR is from an email from Fries.

Rawson cleans mud from box culvert

2010-11-12T02:27:00.007-06:00

Thanks to Rawson (and City inspectors) for cleaning the mud from the box culvert under Old Middleton Rd.

Now the mud won't move to the lake in the next big storm.

Nice and clean--so clean you could eat off of it.

And I'm sure some raccoons will. I saw their footprints in the mud.

The next step...

Rawson should pay a fine of $400 for gashing this tree.

The wound area exceeds the 1 square foot threshold for a fine.

Concrete wastewater pollution in Madison

2010-11-09T11:05:00.042-06:00

After I noticed concrete wastewater dumped at many construction sites around Madison, I decided to research the topic. Here's what I found... so far. Research in progress--your comments are welcome.

Concrete waste illegally dumped by Rawson Contractors close to Lake Monona at Lowell St. 11/7/10

Concrete wastewater is a white or grayish fluid. It comes from washing equipment used to mix or deliver concrete. It is often combined with a pile of leftover concrete. You can spot it as a white stain--on pavement, or on a prepared surface about to be paved.

"The wash water is alkaline and contains high levels of chromium, which can leach into the ground and contaminate groundwater.* It can also migrate to a storm drain, which can increase the pH of area waters and harm aquatic life. Solids that are improperly disposed of can clog storm drain pipes and cause flooding. Installing concrete washout facilities not only prevents pollution but also is a matter of good housekeeping at your construction site." Source

The "slurry" formed when a saw cuts concrete is just as bad as the wastewater--and must be treated with the same respect.

Concrete wastwater or slurry is supposed to be disposed of properly by placing it in a container called a concrete washout.

"Concrete washouts are used to contain concrete and liquids when the chutes of concrete mixers and hoppers of concrete pumps are rinsed out after delivery. The washout facilities consolidate solids for easier disposal and prevent runoff of liquids."

Cement wastewater = toxic waste

"Lime is a major component of cement and is found in all concrete products. It dissolves in water to produce an alkaline solution that will burn and kill fish, insects and plants. Water that comes into contact with unset concrete or concrete dust quickly increases in alkalinity and will be highly toxic to aquatic life.

Concrete wastewater has a pH of 12 -13 and is as toxic as oven cleaner or bleach. The pH of freshwater is 6-7. Concrete wastewater causes burns in a similar way to a strong acid. A single bucket of concrete wastewater will easily kill hundreds of fish. Never allow concrete slurry or wastewater to enter the stormwater system."

"Sacking, felt cloth, weed mat, enviro-filters and hay bales do not reduce the high pH of concrete wastewater. The filtered water will still be toxic even though it looks clear."

Dilution is not the solution

"Never try to dilute concrete wastewater or slurry spills. It takes 25,000 gallons of fresh water to dilute a bucket of concrete wastewater to a neutral pH."

Can wastewater be dumped on the ground?

According to one source, it's OK to dump small amounts of concrete wastewater into small pits in the soil. The one thing you should never do--they say--is dump it into the storm sewer.

However, I don't agree that it's OK to dump it on the ground. For one thing, most of Madison is close to our lakes. And in a heavily settled area, it doesn't make sense to dump toxic waste on top of your drinking water. Eventually, it will get down to the wells. Already Madison has lost several wells due to toxic waste, and it's VERY expensive to replace wells.

Even if the toxic waste never reaches the lakes or drinking water, it degrades and sterilizes the soil. Soil is a rich ecosystem--and when healthy, it can break down much of the pollution passing through. But concrete wastewater is so toxic that it can destroy this filtering effect of soil. It makes no sense to destroy these "free public services" provided by the environment.

If concrete is toxic, does this mean we should stop using it? No. Concrete structures serve a purpose--and when they fail, they will be replaced. But concrete dumped in the soil serves no purpose, and can never be economically removed.

Can concrete waste be dumped in the construction hole?

It's common for extra concrete to be dumped into the construction hole. When the hole is backfilled, it's invisible. At this construction site above by Parisi on Gilmore Street, 9/30, you can see excess concrete dumped on either side of the stormwater structure. But this is just as harmful as dumping it on the surface, for the reasons given above.

Concrete pollution is common in Madison--photos

One of several large dumps by Speedway Sand & Gravel along Seoge Rd, 9/7/10.

S&L Underground & Trucking dumps concrete slurry from a saw onto N. Owen Dr, 11/10/10.

Tri-North Builders on State Street, 7/27/10. Right next to a heavy pedestrian area. Concrete dust is harmful to eyes, and some people get an alergic reaction to it.

Several streaks of concrete wastewater dumped by Parisi Construction on Gilmore St, 10/24/10.

Pouring concrete in the rain??

You're kidding! But it happens. In the New Zealand manual, you're not supposed to pour concrete when rain if forecast...

Speedway Sand & Gravel smoothing fresh sidewalk on Edgewood Av. right next to L. Wingra. During rain 7/7/10.

Concrete pollution--not on Wisconsin's radar

Google can reveal a lot about what's on the public's mind. And concrete wastewater is not on the public's radar in the US. Nothing about concrete wastewater turned up on the City's website. Very little turned up within the United States, except that EPA has a fact sheet on it. A very dull fact sheet, not designed to educate the public.

The only really good document I found on the subject was from the agency responsible for environmental protection for the capital of New Zealand. Why New Zealand?

It turns out that both New Zealand and Australia (similar countries) are ahead of the US in environmental concern. Everyone has heard about how rabbits were introduced to Australia, then swept across the continent, eating everything. Now the toxic cane toads are repeating that sad story. Australia--already a desert continent--is now experiencing a severe drought.

In new Zealand, vegetation was devastated by too many sheep, and too many introduced deer. Many species of native animals found only in New Zealand are going extinct. So these two countries have learned--the hard way--to respect the environment.

New Zealand's cities consistently rank among the most livable in the world. So perhaps the "Kiwis" do have something we can learn from.

The bottom line

"If you or your business works with concrete, lime or other cement based products, then it is important that you ensure that no land or water pollution results from your activities."

"Remember: If you can't take the necessary steps to prevent pollution from your work..., you shouldn't be in the business."

Comments on this article (Update Nov. 11)

Check on the reference to chromium. Try and find a material safety data sheet (MSDS) for cement. My guess is that chromium concentration depends on the source of the cement, and may not apply to what is used around here.

Washout from concrete trucks is hydrated lime (same as in the concrete) and when it drys, is no different from the concrete (without the aggregate).

Excess concrete and washout usually is buried under the soil layer during landscaping, and can properly be considered "fill."

Madison prohibits washout to streets or drains.

I think concrete wastewater would only be an issue if:

1) Washed out into a storm system or surface waters.
2) Washed our over porous soils close to the water table.

I see #1 regularly, so I suggest concentrating on that problem.

Posted by David Liebl
Faculty Associate
Dept. of Engineering Professional Development, UW

............................................................................

I haven't studied the issue of concrete wastewater much, but elevated alkalinity is probably a serious issue that is probably even more neglected than soil erosion. Thanks for highlighting it.

Posted by Doug Soldat

Assistant Professor, Turfgrass and Urban Soils

Department of Soil Science, University of Wisconsin-Madison

# # #

* Concrete washwater contains Chromium VI, a known carcinogen and the same heavy metal which the Erin Brockovich movie focused on.

Material Safety Data Sheet for Portland Cement
EPA fact sheet about washout

Product for safely handling washout

Manual for handling washout, produced by the environmental agency for the capital of New Zealand. All quotes above are from this manual.

A responsible contractor: Worker from D&M Concrete cleaning the gutter with a broom.
Click to enlarge.

Rawson fails to clean mud from box culvert

2010-11-07T18:37:00.006-06:00

The Rawson construction site on Old Middleton Rd is a mess--completely unprepared for rain. In their defence, no rain was forecast for the weekend. But much work remains to prepare for the rain forecast for next Thursday.

There's a lot to fix before the next storm:

Terraces on hillsides are all bare, with no protection.
Many inlet filters are clogged.
Steep slopes on the east side of the road near the creek are unstabilized.
Banks of the stream, just above the box culvert, are unstabilized.
The gutters are filled with soil and gravel in many places.
A pile of soil next to pavement, corner of Old Middleton and Helm, is unprotected.
At least two silt frences are down.

Rawson fails to clean mud from box culvert

Before an earlier storm, Rawson neglected to close the opening of the box culvert they had just laid under Old Middleton Rd. As a result, muddy runoff from their site filled the culvert, and a thick layer of mud was deposited. We brought this to the attention of the City, and the City asked Rawson to clean out the culvert.

But when we inspected the culvert today, we found only about the first 10 feet downstream had been cleaned (what you can easily see from outside). The rest--the bulk of the culvert--hadn't been cleaned at all.

Cleaning the culvert is important...

In the next big storm, this mud will be washed half a mile to L. Mendota.

Rawson damages trees

One large tree had a gash in it's trunk at least two feet long.

A second tree also had a large gash, and a third had minor root damage.

See all the photos here.

Previous articles on Rawson problems

Dumps muddy water into Lake Monona
Multiple problems at Gillman St.
Cause of the mud in the box culvert.

"Average" isn't good enough any more...

2010-10-27T00:02:00.001-05:00

Madison--not an average city

The view--as Rawson Contractors pumped mud into Monona Bay.

"...Just doing your job in an average way — in this integrated and automated global economy — will lead to below-average wages. Sadly, average is over. We’re in the age of “extra,” and everyone has to figure out what extra they can add to their work to justify being paid more than a computer, a Chinese worker or a day laborer." Thomas Friedman

The "extra" that contractors can add to their work is care for the environment, skill in "green infrastructure," and a willingness to experiment and improve on erosion control practices.

Krupp--Please be a good neighbor!

2010-10-26T17:59:00.001-05:00

The Sequoia Commons project, Phase II, is nearing completion.

On the whole, I have been satisfied with erosion control for this project. Except at the entrances, the site never sheds muddy runoff, and gravel pads were improved (N end) when I made suggestions.

Nevertheless, problems at the two construction entrances have continued throughout...

Both entrances bleed sediment during rain storms.
Both entrances produce muddy tracks in the neighborhood. Cleaning with a bobcat has been ineffective, and never cleans as far as the tracks go.

Bleeding muddy runoff at the south construction entrance on Caromar.

Sediment moving down the gutter of Caromar. More photos.

And on the positive side...

The large rain garden along Caromar Street. is beautiful, and works quite well. Thanks to good Krupp design.

Inaccurate inspection reports by City Engineering

2010-10-26T15:17:00.001-05:00

Update 10/28, 10:00 am: Tim Troester has posted a new inspection for the Greenway project for 10/27. His accurate inspection adds important detail, including the time and photos. Therefore, I believe that Engineering is responding to my comments below, and that the situation is improving.

Accurate reporting is essential if our erosion control regulations are to work. They could provide the feedback that engineers and regulators need to see if their erosion control measures are working. And they are essential to holding contractors accountable to regulations.

Inspection reports are legal documents. They need to be accurate and detailed enough to stand up in court, under cross-examination. Inspections by the City of Madison, for the most part, are neither accurate* nor detailed.

For that reason, some citizens have lost faith that contractors are accountable. That's why a lawsuit was filed by residents outraged by Speedway's behavior. And accountability is the reason for this blog. Our thousands of photos stand as accurate inspections. Each photo has a time stamp--in contrast to City inspections, which so far lack this basic element.

Yet Contractor Report has found instances of inaccurate inspections.
The report below, from the Hillcrest-Upland Greenway, is one example. The online report is copied below in black text. I will highlight errors by adding what I believe is the correct answer in red, with more general commentary in blue.

Tim Troester is the Permit Authority

John Fahrney is the Permittee and Authorized Inspector

Inspector: Paul Lauby 261-9678

plauby@cityofmadison.com

Reason for Inspection: After rainfall inspection
Inspection Date: 10/24/2010
Weather Data Source: Media Report
Last Precip. End: 10/23/2010 It was raining heavily on the morning of 10/24.

Last Precip. Amount: .59 in.

Weather Trends: rain
------------------------------------------------------------

Construction Entrance: Rock Construction/Tracking Pads

Inspected: Status: Inactive Active

Required: Yes Condition: N/A Applicable

These pads are supposed to be 50' long and in place at the start of the project. The pads were thin and spotty, with patches of soil showing through. As for N/A (not applicable), about 4 pieces of large equipment were introduced prior to 10/24, and a power shovel was removed from the site on 10/23.

Moreover, the gravel pads are supposed to be underlain with geo fabric. These pads were not. It was only on 10/25 or 10/26 that the contractor got around to adding the fabric, then more gravel on top.

The gravel pad at Owen Dr on 10/24, 3:23 pm,** looking inward from sidewalk. At lower left, you can see it's so thin that grass is showing through.

You can see the pad is less than 50' long. Same location, 10/23

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction Entrance: Sweeping/Cleaning
Inspected: Yes Status: Active
Required: Yes Condition: Correct   Cannot determine.

Inspecting after a heavy rain, how could Paul Lauby know if the street had been swept? Inspecting a day later on 10/25, Stewart Mael reports: Status Inactive, Condition N/A. The two inspectors don't agree.***
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inlet Protection: Filter Fabric Insert
Inspected: Yes Status: Active
Required: Yes Condition: Correct   Incorrect

There was one filter on Owen, and two downstream on Midvale, in the far east gutter. However, the sediment trap overflowed, sending sediment down Midvale in all four gutters.   So numerous inlets downstream that were unprotected received sediment. One was completely filled--up to the top--with sandy sediment.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Temporary Slope Stabilization: Erosion Control Mat
Inspected: Yes Status: Active
Required: Yes Condition: Correct    No slope stabilization matting was applied, anywhere.

For this project, the gravel road is the bottom of the ravine. So the road itself is vital for slope stabilization. A good layer of gravel on the road can help stabilize the ravine, not to mention prevent equipment from foundering. Yet the gravel layer was thin and spotty. This should have been reported.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Temporary Slope Stabilization: Polymer Application
Inspected: Status: Inactive
Required: Yes Condition: N/A
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dust Control: Polymer/Water Application
Inspected: Yes Status: Active     Status: Inactive
Required: Yes Condition: Correct   Condition: N/A

An inspection after heavy rain would be unable to determine if polymer had been applied. So why would the inspector certify that it had been applied?   Why not write "Unable to verify?"

Inspecting a day later, 10/25, S. Mael reports Status Inactive, Condition N/A for this and the Slope Stabilization item above. So again the two inspectors don't agree.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Perimeter Control: Silt Fence
Inspected: Yes Status: Active
Required: Yes Condition: Correct    Missing. No silt fences on site.

A silt fence was required to protect a stockpiled pile of soil, at the west end of the greenway. After the rain of 10/26, this unprotected pile was partly eroded, since it was right next to the channel. A silt fence would also be a good idea along the N side of the entrance, to protect the Ozanne property.  But there were NO silt fences anywhere on the site.

Perhaps the sediment trap was what this part of the report refers to. As one of the most important erosion control measures, this report should say more than just "correct" for the sediment trap. The sediment trap had several problems. These reports are shockingly short on important detail.

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

Velocity Check: Stone Check Dam

Inspected: Yes Status: Active

Required: Yes Condition: Correct One of two dams damaged.

There are two check dams now. The upper one had been overtopped, but was intact. The lower one (to divert flow into the sediment trap) had been partly eroded, with fist-size rocks moving into the sediment trap.

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

Recommendations

Besides improvement in accuracy, much more detail is needed.
In particular, the time of the observation is needed. Otherwise, it's difficult to check on the report's accuracy. Any kind of report should include the time. It's basic!
The report should include comments on what needs to be done to improve the measures.
The most common error on reports is reporting gravel tracking pads as "correct," when they are too short. They are required to be 50 feet long. If 50' is impossible, the report should state that, and report what alternate method is employed.
Adjust the format of the report for each project. The standard form used for every project is inadequate for the specifics of different projects.
It would be helpful, when checking inlet filters, to say if they need cleaning or not.

# # #

* By this rather broad generalization, I don't mean to imply that City inspections are very inaccurate, or even fudged. What I do mean is that if reports aren't accurate 99% of the time, then their value in enforcement is degraded. As the example shows, Madison falls short of the 99% level.

** Update: On 10/27, I found a photo of the gravel pad closer in time to the inspection it is compared to. The previous photo, now deleted, was a day earlier. I also added some comments, comparing Lauby's inspection to the one done a day later by Mael. I am continuing to update this article, as I refine my ideas, partly thanks to discussions with City officials.

*** Paul Lauby (first inspection above) might reply, "Our two reports about street sweeping don't agree because the inspections were made on different days. The situation changed." That's possible, but it shows how an inspection with no time recorded is worthless when it comes to a contested report. If Stewart Mael's inspection on Monday 10/25 was made before work started, then he saw the same thing as Paul Lauby's inspection the day before, on Sunday. But if Mael's was made the end of the day on Monday, then, yes, it was a day later.

The dangers of bidding low on erosion control

2010-10-26T13:37:00.001-05:00

On the Hillcrest-Upland Greenway project, S&L Underground and Trucking bid only $500 on "stormwater control."

Either they were completely ignorant that this was a ravine draining half a mile of basin... or they thought: "We'll get the contract, then worry about the details later."

Oops!

Now the time to "worry about the details" has arrived.

City Engineering is also responsible, because they provided almost no guidance in the specifications about what "Stormwater Control" might entail. They left the details up to the "creative neglect" of whoever won the contract--"Let the bidder beware." Writing specifications this way is like selling a house with a leaky basement, and not telling the buyer.*

Now Contractor Report aims to see that "Stormwater Control" is done properly, no matter what the expense. S&L Underground and Trucking accepted that responsibility, when they signed the contract.

There is a pending lawsuit against the City and Speedway Sand and Gravel, over erosion control problems at Edgewood Av. At present, this lawsuit cannot go forward, since that project was finished before the 60 day "grace period" expired. But it seems logical that the lawsuit could still succeed if the plaintiffs can prove that the City shows ongoing negligence in erosion control.

Even if that lawsuit is dropped, the Greenway seems like an ideal place for another lawsuit. There are plenty of upset neighbors, and the project is going to last longer than 60 days. Fines of $37,500 per violation per day are possible.

We are not just nutty neighbors complaining about escaping mud. The law is on our side, and the health of our lakes is at stake.

# # #

* Storm Control is item 90036 on p. D-28 of the specifications . The specs did have a standard phrase (one you see in many contracts) that "the channel can be expected to fill rapidly during rain events"--but no details were given about how to deal with this. Erosion control is too often an afterthought on City projects... poorly thought out.

More photos taken during rain Oct. 24.

Problems with water main project on Gilmore St

2010-10-26T00:50:00.001-05:00

Parisi has been doing a good job with the water main project on Gilmore St. It's a site of special concern, because of steepness and proximity to LakeWingra. Here's what we liked...

Construction phasing was good. They quickly went to work on the steepest part of the hill, then put an initial surface of asphalt on the street to stabilize it.
They stabilized the surface by the end of every work day--spraying polymer and using a roller to smooth and compact the surface.
They used gabions--cages filled with rocks--as movable check dams. These seemed to work well, though some of them apparently broke open when moved. We haven't seen this elsewhere in Madison and appreciate the innovation.
Until recently, little sediment escaped from the site.
While pavement on Gilmore was still present, it was diligently swept by day's end.

We had a few minor bones to pick, though some of these were corrected promptly when we pointed them out...

Runoff entering the site from above could easily have been deflected, but wasn't.
Not enough stormwater inlets downstream were protected with filters, but more were added later.
The streets nearby were sometimes left dirty.

Violation on Cross St.

But over the last weekend with heavy rains, we noticed an important slip-up...

Cross St has a moderately steep hill for one block. The upper half of the street (including terraces) was left bare over the rainy weekend, with no check dams or other protection at the bottom. A good deal of sediment washed towards the Lake.

Lots of sediment escaped down Cross St...

...And onto Chapman St (right), where it moved beyond the last inlet filter. More filters need to be installed along Chapman, on both sides. Looking uphill on Chapman towards Cross St.

Probably the most sediment was lost from unprotected terraces, on either side of Gilmore St (here), and on Cross St. From the bottom of Gilmore, sediment flowed SW on Monroe St.

See all the photos here.

Rawson Contractors pumps unfiltered muddy water into Monona Bay

2010-10-25T21:11:00.001-05:00

This is the third dirty project we've noted for Rawson Contractors. The first. The second.

Over the rainy weekend, I received a tip from a local resident that a stormwater project on Lowell St. had unprotected stormwater inlets. This is a site of special concern, because it's just a few feet from Lake Monona. So Monday afternoon, I looked at the site.

All but one of the stormwater inlets had been excavated--the remaining one was still unprotected, next to some very dirty pavement. It's likely this inlet didn't lead directly to the lake, but rather to the unfinished excavations.

There were two excavations--the one closer to the lake (below) was being dewatered by two hoses...

The green hose led to a large black filter, as required by erosion regulations. The blue hose led directly to the lake, where it was dumping unfiltered, muddy water into Monona Bay--in violation of regulations and in violation of the contract with the City.*

Shore of Monona Bay. The muddy water being pumped from the excavation (blue hose) is entering the lake near the concrete pipe.

On the scene of the violatiion.

Dirty street at end of day; the stormwater inlet was left unprotected over the rainy weekend.

The streets nearby were left quite dirty, despite rain forecast for tomorrow morning.

This mud dribbled on pavement indicates excavated mud was carried away in trucks that weren't sealed. This violation means that mud was dribbled for miles, to be washed into the lakes during the next storm. Corner of Whittier & W. Lakeside.

Beautiful Monona Bay, and our Capitol City, deserve better treatment.

On the positive side, by the end of the work day, an inlet filter had been installed.

# # #

Link to all of the photos taken on Oct. 25, 2010.
Photos taken by a whistleblower early Oct. 25, showing inlet filters left unprotected over rainy weekend. Yes, more people are getting involved.
This is one of four similar projects. Details can be found here.

* Here's the link to the project specs. On page D-6 of the specs, it states that the contractor is aware that water pumped during dewatering operations has to be filtered, and gives detailed requirements. Evidently, Rawson ignored these legal requirements that they had signed their name to.

Reports about problems from the weekend's rain

2010-10-25T02:25:00.000-05:00

Today we'll be reporting on...
Sequoia Commons--Krupp Construction
Gilmore Street water/stormwater--Parisi Construction
For S&L Underground & Trucking at the greenway project, go here.

Stay tuned...

Starting coverage of S&L Underground and Trucking at Greenway project

2010-10-22T07:36:00.001-05:00

This is a project of special concern, due to fears of residents that too many trees will be removed or damaged, and due to the steep ravine that drains a large basin.

S&L Underground and Trucking already has a reputation for damaging trees.

The project is being followed here

Articles so far on this project

Tree protection and erosion control off to a sloppy start.

What residents are doing to monitor damage to trees.

Summary of required tree protections for this project. Thanks to S&L's misadventure at Spaight St., there are now tighter rules for all contractors.

Details of required tree protections for sewer projects.

Did the Lindsay paint factory contaminate Madison's water supply?

2010-10-06T16:11:00.001-05:00

Hallman Lindsay manufactures paints in Sun Prairie, WI. They proudly display their "Green Leaf Promise of responsibility to the environment. But there is evidence that the old Lindsay* paint factory in Madison contaminated Madison's water supply, requiring the abandonment of Well #3 and a costly search for new supplies.

As part of their Green Leaf Promise, would Hallman Lindsay like to promise a million dollars to Madison's Water Utility, to help drill a new well?

It isn't easy being green.

Watershed abuse = high costs to taxpayers

Well #3 on the east side of the Isthmus was shut down in 2006 after carbon tetrachloride was detected in water from the well. The industrial solvent is a known carcinogen. In 2008, the well had to be permanently abandoned. Source.

"Estimated costs for replacing polluted wells and improving supply show that fixing problems will not be cheap. The utility, for example, has penciled in a tentative $7 million in its long-range capital budget for solving issues on the Isthmus, though that is for siting and building a new well rather than other potential solutions such as a treatment plant or pumping water from elsewhere."

"...Cleaning up and monitoring the landfills has so far cost more than $35.2 million. Of that amount, about $25.2 million has been raised through fees collected on water utility bills. Source

The law allows Madison to recover some of these costs from the polluters. Read on...

The old Lindsay paint factory

"In 2003, high levels of carbon tetrachloride...in Well No. 3... prompted the DNR to begin an investigation of the pollution and its source.

Within just a quarter mile of the well, McCutcheon -- whose job includes investigating sources of contamination -- found nearly a dozen sites that had a history of contamination including a railroad yard, a city of Madison garage and waste oil recovery site, a couple of auto repair shops and paint and machine shops. Leaking underground storage tanks were found on at least six of these sites.

In his investigation, McCutcheon zeroed in on the site of an old paint factory, Lindsay Finishes. There had been previous detections of carbon tetrachloride on the property at 1902 E. Johnson St.

McCutcheon sampled the soil and found 17 different industrial contaminants, including carbon tetrachloride.

As he frequently does when he is tracking pollution through time, McCutcheon found a former employee of the now-closed paint factory, a 77-year-old man who had worked at the factory for about 18 years, starting in 1946.

The employee recalled that coal and coal ash were dumped by wheelbarrow on the ground behind the plant and that liquids from the factory were dumped directly on top of the ash piles. The worker recalled that the factory used both carbon tetrachloride and trichloroethylene as degreasers on equipment.

In the end, McCutcheon concluded that the industrial contaminants found at the site of the old paint factory may indeed have been the source of pollutants found in both the deep and shallow aquifer from which the nearby city well pumped drinking water. But the findings, he added, were not conclusive." Source

One reason the findings were inconclusive: "Within just a quarter mile of the well, McCutcheon... found nearly a dozen sites that had a history of contamination."

Holding companies responsible

"City attorney Jim Voss said the law allows the city to pursue claims from private companies... to help offset the costs of cleanup. Such companies are considered "potentially responsible parties," Voss said.

Also, negotiations with companies that disposed of wastes in the landfills resulted in payments from at least two -- $430,000 from Madison Gas & Electric and $300,000 from Giddings and Lewis. Source

Further research could help prove the case against the former Linsay paint factory. Mart Oostrom is a scientist who has done much research on carbon tetrachloride in groundwater. What's required is more sampling of contaminants in the soil, and in deeper groundwater. Finding the direction of groundwater flow can help zero in on the source.

# # #

* "In 1991 Hallman Paints joined forces with Lindsay Finishes to form hallman/lindsay quality paint." They say they are "Quick to remember our humble beginnings...." Source

From Hallman Lindsay's corporate "Vision and values: Servanthood - Make everyone better."

We are grateful to the excellent reporting by Ron Seely in the Wisconsin State Journal, which is quoted extensively above.

Parisi Construction VS Mother Nature

2010-09-20T23:53:00.000-05:00

Score: Parisi 1, Nature 0... But nature always bats last

Since Gilmore St is a hilly construction site, close to Lake Wingra, Contractor Report is going to monitor events closely. It's an especially interesting match, with Parisi going the extra mile to meet the challenge.

The first inning began with a rain of 0.57 inches on Saturday (9/18/10). Photos were taken about 6:00 pm on Sunday. Overall, the erosion-control measures were adequate for this amount of rain. But it was a light rain--probably the measures would have started to fail--dumping sediment beyond the site--above perhaps 1 inch of rain. Details for each method...

Overall, very little sediment left the site.

Photo shows bottom of Gilmore at Monroe.

Check dams

Runoff did an end run around most of the nine check dams on Gilmore St, but as you would expect, the further down Gilmore, the more water accumulated. So the lowest 4 check dams all had water flowing around them.

Dam 7 at Cross St, a small one, had water flow around and then down Cross St, washing a small amount of sediment into an unprotected inlet on Chapman St.

The check dams are robust and fairly effective. Their problems:

Runoff flowed around most of the dams, especially on the inside where space has been left for traffic.
The dams are made of large stones. Check dams are supposed to have 1" stone on the upper side, to more effectively filter sediment--but these dams do not have small stones.. Dam 6 was so porous that much runoff flowed through the middle, creating a small gully below it.

Solutions: Create or enlarge gravel wings on either side of the dams. Add 1" clear stone to upper side.

Catch basins

A lot of runoff entered Gilmore from Gregory St.

The basins were too small to contain all of this light rain, overflowing and causing end runs around the dams. But the small basins did catch a lot of the sediment.

At the bottom of Gilmore, runoff overflowed the basin

and did an end run around the dam.

Solutions: Dig larger basins, and/or divert clear runoff entering from upper Cross St and Gregory St. Another catch basin needs to be built below Dam 7 on Cross St, using silt socks anchored by concrete or gravel barriers. The overflow from this basin should be directed into the stormwater inlet there.

Compacted sand on excavated side of street

For this light rain, the compacted sand (probably with polymer added) worked well--although a few small gullys did form (right).

This site is similar to Edgewood Avenue, except that here runoff enters from two blocks--Cross and Gregory Streets. The Edgewood site wasn't fed by any other streets. Nevertheless, Edgewood was heavily gullied by only 1.75 in of rain last summer.

The cause of the Edgewood disaster was leaving both sides of the street bare, plus inadequate check dams. The dams were too few, and they didn't protect the whole street. Projecting a short distance from the sides, they aimed water towards the middle, where large gullies formed.

Edgewood Av during a storm of 1.75 inches on June 21

Compacted sand isn't strong enough to prevent this from happening on Gilmore in a similar storm.

Improvements needed to prevent gullies:

If possible, don't remove pavement on both sides at once.
Use silt socks to fine-tune direction of runoff between dams, preventing one gully from forming.
Reduce volume of runoff by diverting clear runoff from Gregory St, and by diverting runoff from upper Gilmore to a temporary catch basin on Cross St.

Update--Monday evening

Monday's work suggests that Parisi may be trying to divert runoff from Gregory St by removing the pavement, to create a shallow channel so runoff from Gregory can get over the hump of Gilmore St and continue down Gregory (rather than flowing down Gilmore).

Looking up Gregory from Gilmore. Runoff can still enter Gilmore (L)

If that is the goal, the grade isn't sufficient to divert runoff coming from Gregory. Further grading needs to be done. Removal of the pavement has actually made things worse--now runoff from the upper (NW) gutter of Gregory can also flow down Gilmore.

More photos of Sept 19 after rain

Parisi shows welcome creativity and care at sensitive Gilmore site

2010-09-15T22:03:00.000-05:00

Parisi Construction recently began work resurfacing Gilmore St, between Monroe and Gregory. Contractor Report is very pleased to note this company's creativity and diligence in erosion control.

Note large check dams, long gravel pad, clean street/gutters on left.

View from Monroe St up Gilmore.

This is a sensitive site, because it's steep, close to Lake Wingra, and has runoff entering from outside, from Cross and Gregory streets.

We appreciate these measures that go beyond the minimum

Large check dams, holding large stones together with wire cages (called gabions)
Silt sock in one of the gravel pads; gravel pads of regulation length
Thorough cleaning of the street, using water plus a bobcat
Sand compacted with a roller on the disturbed side of the street.
Parisi responded within hours to requested improvements

Nevertheless, one concern remains: The catch basins (pits in the street) at the bottom of the hill are almost certainly too small for all the runoff resulting from a big storm.* The pits there may overflow, flushing much sediment onto Monroe St and into the stormwater inlets there.

Pit (catchment basin) in front of dam, at bottom of Gilmore.
The pit will quickly overflow; then water will flow around the dam.

Solutions exist to reduce the runoff going down the steep hill:

Deflect clean runoff coming from Gregory Street, so it continues down Gregory
Send some runoff from higher on Gilmore St into a temporary cloth catchment basin on the lower side of Cross St (where there's a stormwater inlet).
There is also one stormwater inlet next to Wingra School which could accept some runoff from Gilmore St. A temporary channel to that inlet would have to be built.

# # #

* Probably the pits will get larger as construction proceeds--as pipe is laid. Still, the same solutions apply. By deflecting and detaining runoff higher up, less runoff will come down the steep hill--meaning less erosion, less damage to the construction zone, and less cleanup.

More photos from 9/15.

Erosion control error will cause extra work for Rawson

2010-09-14T11:10:00.001-05:00

At their Old Middleton Rd construction site, Rawson Construction has had numerous problems. Now, failure to filter runoff flowing into a box culvert will cause additional, unnecessary work.

This is the sole exit for stormwater from a large basin. Rawson neglected to filter stormwater entering this box culvert during recent heavy rains of over 2 inches.

The area around the culvert construction, especially its sides, are heavily disturbed. The only protection between this culvert and Lake Mendota, half a mile away, is one gravel dam. It's quite porous, allowing fine sediment to pass.

During recent storms, a layer of fine sediment 1-2 inches deep was deposited in the culvert.

This sediment will have to be removed before the next rain. Otherwise, it will fill the pool above the gravel dam, and/or pass through the pores in the gravel dam.

If it's not cleaned out before the gravel dam is removed at the end of the project, then obviously it will flush to Lake Mendota in subsequent storms.

There's a significant amount of sediment here. I made a rough estimate--the box culvert now contains from 1/5 to 2/5 of a dump truck of sediment.*

This error could have been avoided if the sides of the pit had been better protected, and if the clear water coming from the creek above had been channeled directly into the culvert (before it picked up sediment).

The bottom line: Poor erosion control can result in costly delays and remedial work.

# # #

Who is responsible for this site

Design Engineer: Lisa Coleman, 266-4093, City Engineering, lcoleman@cityofmadison.com

Construction Engineer: John Fahrney, City Engineering, jfahrney@cityofmadison.com

Contractor: Rawson Contractors, Kenneth Servi, President, kservi@rawsoncontractors.com http://www.rawsoncontractors.com/

Permit authority: Tim Troester, (608) 267-1995, ttroester@cityofmadison.com

Erosion Control Permittee: Signed by Robert Phillips, delegated to John Fahrney, City Engineering,(608) 266-9091, jfahrney@cityofmadison.com

Grantor of permit for construction of ponds: DNR Water Management Specialist Cami Peterson, 608-275-3208. No mention was made in the permit of the need to deflect runoff from the ponds under construction.

* Calculations: The culvert is 94' long and 12' wide. The mud inside was estimated at 1-2" deep. A dump truck contains 16 cubic yards.

Other articles on Rawson

Old Middleton Rd More

W. Gilman St. downtown

Rawson pumps unfiltered muddy water into Monona Bay

What it means to be cited on Contractor Report for violations

2010-09-08T01:51:00.000-05:00

If your company is cited here for violations....

You could be sued, with penalties of $37,500 per violation per day. Reports on this blog led to a citizen's suit against Speedway Sand and Gravel. More
The detailed photo documentation we provide is there for all to see, including the courts.
Potential clients will find out. If a client simply googles your company name, and we have covered you, our story will appear on page two of Google results. This is how some new readers find our blog.
You will be inspected soon. But no problem--the City is on your side. They are being sued by citizens also. Agencies like DNR are too overworked to inspect unless there is a complaint (from this blog).
Our reports provide the basis for stories in the press. We don't actively seek press coverage, because that promotes posturing and hot air. We'd prefer honest discussion and a search by all for a solution to the problem. One news story. Another.
The Alder for your area will find out. We usually notify Alders when there's a violation in their district. Several Alders read this blog often, and one is a "follower."
If you have a public relations firm, they will send you a big bill for following the negative publicity on our site. The PR firm of one large contractor spent hours crawling over our site (17 return visits). In the end, their advice will probably be: "Obey the law if you want to keep your green image."
City Engineering sent a letter to one contractor warning them they could be "decertified" after we discussed the company with City officials.
We are watching for falsified self-inspection reports. One contractor reported the stormwater inlet filters had been inspected and cleaned, when the photos from a day or so later showed weeds growing in the same clogged inlet. Falsified reports are fraud.
City officials have visited this blog at least 59 times (to date).
DNR officials have visited this blog.
People from 23 US states and 17 countries have visited this blog. Your deeds are known across the world.
We average about 10 hits a day. Sometimes up to a hundred. Not large, but it's a local blog, and the readers are your clients, boss, inspectors, peers, and investors. A few readers have spent hours on the blog.
Major violations get coverage in two blogs--this and Save Our Stream (intended for citizens). We may also notify a large list of people by email, and post factual unfavorable reviews of your company on other websites.
After a storm, we receive a flurry of hits. Presumably, companies are checking to see if anyone noticed their shortcuts. Likewise, inspectors may be looking for leads.
In the case of companies with repeated violations, we may attempt to influence the bidding outcome for future contracts. This may be hard with the City, but it's a distinct possibility for a private project like the Edgewater reconstruction.
If you repeat violations, we will follow you from job to job. Example
A "green image" is becoming essential for every business. We love to poke holes in green baloney.

We do notice, respect, and reward companies who do good work

We made positive comments about Krupp Construction, Miron Construction, and several firms working at the Target site. If you take prompt remedial action and have few future violations, we will remove or reduce negative comments on this blog.

Speedway Sand & Gravel continues violations at a new site: Segoe Rd.

2010-09-07T23:20:00.003-05:00

Construction sites with several risk factors deserve special attention to erosion control. Risk factors are sites with...

steep slopes
proximity to a waterway or lake
a lot of runoff entering from above.

The water main project on Segoe Rd is located over a large stormwater conduit to Lake Mendota via Willow Creek. Segoe Rd. esentially follows a buried creek. Located in a low point, much stormwater is funneled to this construction site from higher up on Segoe, and from side streets all along Segoe. So it has two of the three risk factors.

Speedway Sand and Gravel (plus City engineers designing projects) continue to treat these risky sites with disinterest and neglect.

Speedway at work (Segoe & St. Croix, 9/9 11:11 am)

Given the risk factors, this site deserved speedy completion. Yet progress has been slow.

So, during the heavy rains of 9/2 and 9/3, when it rained about an inch each day, it wasn't surprising that Segoe Rd flooded.

The most serious problem was the stormwater inlets located within the median of Segoe Rd. Most of the median is slightly concave, to serve as a channel for stormwater on the surface. And much of it was devoid of grass cover. So when it rained, great quantities of sediment washed down Segoe and towards the 19 inlets on the median.

Amazingly, none of these inlets had filters, and most had inadequate rings of silt sock around them. Several had no protection whatsoever--a complete lapse. While 5 of the median inlets seemed well-enough protected by silt socks, socks on the other 14 failed. Some of the inlets were so buried in detritus and mud that Sherlock had to dig to find the inlets.

Stormwater inlet on median--buried in sediment

Since there were no dams or silt socks across the median to slow the floodwaters, the sediment became progressively worse further downhill along Segoe. Meandering channels were carved into the freshly seeded median, and much sediment was dumped into the street gutters, where it clogged nearly all of the street stormwater inlets. Clogged inlets caused water and sediment to flow further downhill beyond the site.
By Sept. 7, none of the blocked inlets had been maintained, cleaned, or corrected. Inspection and maintenance is required within 24 hours.

Inspection reports could not be found on the City website.

Additional faults

The streets were very dirty. Residents were angry about the dust, having to keep their windows closed. There was evidence of sweeping with a bobcat on 9/7, but the sweeping was spotty and ineffective. Concrete wastewater, plus dust control chemicals had been spilled on the street.

Piles of gravel and dirt had no silt socks around them. A few gravel check dams were made of unwashed gravel and appeared ineffective.

Wastewater from concrete was dumped in several places. It's highly alkaline, and can kill everything in the soil nearby. More.

Due to sloppy back fill of excavations on the terraces, plus the rain, holes developed along the edge of the sidewalk in about 5 places. Residents were concerned about pedestrian safety, and so were filling the holes themselves.

The whole construction area had a seedy, neglected, and dirty appearance.

Mixed reviews for basins as a control measure

This site seems to have relied partly on the numerous holes in the pavement--which could act as temporary retention basins, confining water and sediment. These holes in the pavement were not part of the erosion control plan--so perhaps they were just a happy coincidence. Nevertheless, they weren't sufficient due to the large amount of stormwater entering from beyond the site. Hence many of them probably overflowed, limiting their effectiveness.

See photos from 9/6 and 9/7.

Photos of 19 median stormwater inlets. Only 5 of 19 did not fail--that is, receive significant sediment.

Update: City officials responsible for this site

Apparently Madison Water Utility was responsible, since this was a water main replacement (plus resurfacing and stormwater inlet replacement).

Permit authority: Tim Troester
(608) 267-1995
ttroester@cityofmadison.com

Permittee: Madison Water Utility
Adam Wiederhoeft
608-266-9121
awiederhoeft@madisonwater.org

Inspector: Harley Lemkuil
hlemkuil@cityofmadison.com See reports

Speedway Staff responsible
Todd Timmerman (608) 575-1499 todd@speedwaysg.com
Josh Stieve (608) 836-1071 Josh@#speedwaysg.com

Another sediment spill by Rawson at Old Middleton Rd

2010-08-18T00:36:00.000-05:00

This site needed special attention to erosion control, because:

The site is steep.
It straddles a creek that coveys stormwater directly to Lake Mendota.
Considerable runoff enters the site from both ends of Old Middleton Rd.

Despite these obvious warning signs, the erosion control plan was mediocre and poorly implemented.

Ponds still filled

The unfinished sediment ponds remain partially filled, due to previous neglect in allowing them to fill while under construction. The presence of water in the ponds is probably going to delay completion, and some damage has occurred.

Since my earlier comments on this, runoff from Old Middleton Rd into the ponds has been mostly blocked by a gravel dike.

Silt fences failed again, sediment spill into creek

Silt fences guarding both sides of the creek failed.

The first failure occurred because the stakes holding the fence were too small. Where the fence failed the first time, larger stakes were added, but not all the stakes were upgraded. So when another storm hit, the fence failed again where the smaller stakes remained. The lesson--"stakes too small"--wasn't learned the first time.

The erosion control plan states: "Do not disturb existing channel between ponds." Yet due to the failure of stilt fences on at least two occasions, two gravel dams were recently placed in the creek itself. The fence itself hasn't been repaired, at least several days after the storm.

There's a delta of sediment in the creek where the south fence failed.

Below the gravel dams in the creek, you can see small patches of sediment, showing the gravel dams in the creek didn't prevent sediment from moving downstream towards Lake Mendota.

The arrangement of gravel dam, rock dam, and silt fence on the south side of the creek was illogical and ineffective, allowing water to easily bypass and dump sediment into the creek.

The whole approach to erosion control at this site has been ineffective, constantly closing the barn door with gravel dams after the horse has escaped.

An opportunity missed on the south side of the project

An erosion control checklist should include: "Survey the site to determine if runoff entering the site can be diverted around the site. If it can't be diverted, determine if it can be conveyed through the site in pipes or channels, without eroding or picking up sediment."

If water entering the site is clean, then it can be dumped beyond the site--even into lakes or streams--if it is kept clean while passing through the site.

There's clean runoff coming from this block above the start of construction, on the S approach of Old Middleton Rd.

Here's where the runoff from the block above enters the site... lots coming in.

This runoff could be diverted to the NE onto Capitol Av. Or, it could be conveyed through the site in a plastic pipe, and dumped into the creek, since it would be clean. This diversion would relieve some of the strain on the erosion control measures closer to the creek.

At the very least, this entering runoff could have been diverted down the west side of Old Middleton Rd, where the pavement is still intact.

Instead, the incoming runoff was allowed to run down the east side of Old Middleton Rd, where the pavement was ripped up. Hence, much more erosion occurred.

Additional problems reveal a sloppy approach

In three places, the creek (right) is not protected from disturbed areas by any fence or silt sock.

The gravel dams were breached in several places by tracks, making them ineffective.

This pile of dirt, in the middle of the runoff flow on the hill, should have been protected with silt socks.

Runoff and sediment is moving around some of the gravel dams on the hill.

The bottom line: Lots of dirty runoff, like this filling one of the ponds, got into the creek.

Who is responsible for these continuing problems:

Design Engineer: Lisa Coleman, 266-4093, City Engineering, lcoleman@cityofmadison.com . No mention of the need to deflect runoff was made in the erosion control plan.

Construction Engineer: John Fahrney, City Engineering, jfahrney@cityofmadison.com

Contractor: Rawson Contractors (Low bid was $1, 399, 029.85), Kenneth Servi, President, kservi@rawsoncontractors.com http://www.rawsoncontractors.com/

Permit authority: Tim Troester, (608) 267-1995, ttroester@cityofmadison.com

Erosion Control Permittee: Signed by Robert Phillips, delegated to John Fahrney, City Engineering,(608) 266-9091, jfahrney@cityofmadison.com

Inspector on 7/23 who missed last chance to deflect inflow: Stewart Mael, (608) 261-9695, smael@cityofmadison.com

Grantor of permit for construction of ponds: DNR Water Management Specialist Cami Peterson, 608-275-3208. No mention was made in the permit of the need to deflect runoff from the ponds under construction.

# # #

More photos.

Course on Construction Site Erosion Control

2010-08-17T18:36:00.000-05:00

"Learn techniques to establish Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) for your construction site, and eliminate problems before they cause higher costs and slowdowns for your project.
This practical seminar can help you and your project staff save time and money by avoiding erosion and sediment releases. You will learn about proper installation and maintenance of typical BMPs as well as proper documentation to help keep your project in compliance with local and state regulations.

This course is of benefit to inspectors, contractors, foremen, project managers, consultants, stormwater managers, and owners of construction site projects and related activities (grading, culvert replacements, utility trenching, etc.)"

Source, and more info...

Street sweeping--remarkably ineffective

2010-08-16T11:01:00.001-05:00

Today as I walked along Caromar Dr, a Bobcat passed right next to me as it swept the street in front of the Sequoia Commons II construction site.

Street sweeping is required as far from the site as necessary, and by the end of the work day. It's one of the six erosion control methods most frequently used in Madison.

I could see the sweeping was remarkably ineffective--there were tracks of dried mud still on the street where it had just passed. I fixed my eyes on one large, dried clod as the Bobcat passed right next to me--the clod was still there after the Bobcat passed over it.

A 1996 EPA study also found street sweeping to be the least effective of the three methods studied for keeping muddy tracks from construction off streets

Besides failing to remove mud where sweeping occurs, the method has other shortcomings:

It creates dust, adding to air pollution
It simply spreads the dirt more widely around the street
Sweepers frequently miss the gutters--the most important area to sweep. Any dirt there is washed directly to the lakes.

No contractor that relies on ineffective methods deserves a GREEN rating from this blog.

I believe the City deserves the most responsibility for this failure, because they continue to rely on sweeping, rather than on more effective BMPs, such as tire washing at construction sites.

The Parking lot at Sequoia Commons, just minutes after having been swept by the Bobcat in the rear.

Violations by Ellis Stone Construction of Stevens Point

2010-08-02T13:39:00.000-05:00

On the Ellis website: "Ellis is committed to Green building practices." "Our team is well versed in sustainable design and construction...." "We are a proud member of the U.S. Green Building Council."

But at an out-of-the-way site, where inspection is unlikely, the story is different.

At Wildcat Mountain State Park, a new entrance station is under construction by Ellis Stone Construction of Stevens Point.

The fence failed in about four places, spilling much sediment down steep slopes in two directions. The sediment fence was poorly designed--one fence cannot handle this large and steep disturbed area.

In nearby Viroqua, rain of 1.06 inches was recorded on 7/28; 0.36 inches on 7/24; and 1.84 inches on 7/22. The fence failure probably occurred during the big storm on 7/22. If this is true, then the fence has gone at least 11 days without repair (7/22-8/2). And that's assuming Ellis plans to repair it when work resumes on Monday, 8/2.

Poor erosion control elsewhere on site led to a large gully forming in the drive approaching the new building, dumping gravel down a steep slope towards the Kickapoo River. Likewise, this has gone unrepaired for many days, through several subsequent rains.

Breach in silt fence--unrepaired long enough for new grass to grow.

It's bad enough that poor design allowed the erosion control measures to fail in the first place, harming a State Park. But the failure to follow up and fix the problems within 24 hours represents serious negligence.

See all the photos here.

Edgewater Hotel reconstruction--a site with special challenges

2010-08-02T11:58:00.000-05:00

A new tower for the Edgewater Hotel will rise on the steep, wooded site to the right.

The contractor chosen for the Edgewater Hotel reconstruction must be prepared for some significan erosion-control challenges. The site has a number of risk factors for a major sediment spill:

Close to the lake
Steep slopes
Caving bank above the shore
Cramped site

In addition, the project is controversial and highly visible. The contractor will either gain a reputation for being GREEN, or for GUNK in the Lake.

Ordinary erosion control measures won't cut the mustard. The anemic, ordinary methods of erosion control required by Madison didn't begin to protect Lake Wingra from the June 21 storm that ravaged the Edgewood Av project. That storm was only 1.75 inches.

The Edgewater project has to be prepared for a major storm, like the one that recently pummelled Milwaukee with six inches of rain in a few hours. In the 1990s, a storm of 7-11 inches flooded Madison and Baraboo.

The new tower will rise on the wooded area to the left.

One challenge is the caving bank of soil, 20-30 feet high, ready to collapse into the lake. The previous owner should have taken care of this. Nevertheless, the contractor chosen for this site WILL OWN THIS PROBLEM.

Caving bank by shore, 20+ ft high. Only roots prevent collapse.

The Contractor Report will be watching--and hold this project to higher standards.

Problems continue at Rawson site on W. Gillman St

2010-08-02T11:17:00.000-05:00

As of August 1, the gravel pad at on West Gillman had been moved to the center of the street (outside the Tri-North site) and was now sufficiently long. However, before trucks can get to the pad, they have to traverse a long stretch of dirty street from Henry St, where there are piles of disturbed soil. So the pad still does not seem to be fully functional.

Intersection of Henry & Gillman is still very dirty, and there is no inlet filter at Henry & Gormam preventing this dirt from washing to the lake.

While the Gillman-State St intersection seemed to be cleaner than before, the Gillman-Henry St intersection remained very dirty. An added problem was that, even though Gillman St was marked "closed," public vehicle traffic was moving through it, tracking dirt out.

A clear violation was the new stormwater inlet at the intersection of Gillman and Henry: The inlet was filled with sediment from recent storms, but had no filter.

Towards the upper end of the Gillman St construction area, there was much disturbed soil, and several piles of soil, with no silt socks or other containment measures.

The only measures preventing a major sediment spill from this site

A shallow berm (the present gavel pad)
Gravel dams in the gutters at the lower end of the street
An excavated area at the end of the gutters , lower end (to serve as a small basin)

While Contractor Report notes that these measures are probably sufficient for the current standard (a two-year storm), we believe these would be easily overwhelmed with a larger storm, such as the 6" storm that recently occurred in Milwaukee. We believe erosion control measures in Madison should prepare for larger storms.

More photos from 8/1.

Gravel tracking pads are important for your health

2010-07-28T16:11:00.000-05:00

I've found that nearly all gravel tracking pads in Madison are out of compliance. They are almost universally too short, and often they are so dirty as to be useless. Happy exceptions are--one of two pads at the Target site are in compliance, and Sequoia Phase II is in compliance.

Today I found a 1996 EPA study about the effectiveness of measures to prevent tracking of mud. For preventing the trackout of sediment, gravel pads were found to be the most effective, followed by wood-chip mulch (produced from waste on-site), with sweeping the least effective.

Walking on a street just swept by a Bobcat, you can easily see how ineffective it is--the dirt is just spread about kind of evenly. Nevertheless, we should enforce sweeping when the day is done, because it serves as a backup to the gravel pads. The gutters below check dams should be thoroughly swept with hand brooms, since what's in the gutters goes directly to the lakes when it rains.

The muddy tracks go for miles, although the quantity drops off rapidly with distance. I believe the most effective kind of sweeping would be intensive sweeping, with water, close to the site. Of course, details have to be adapted to each site.

But here's the big surprise (for me) from this study. Tiny particles of dust are hazardous to health, because they can penetrate deeply into lungs, carrying other toxins which adhere to them. When dirt lies on the roads, traffic moves over it, grinding it down to smaller particles, then wafting it into the air.

The study shows that construction site tracking of mud is a significant contributor to this load of dirt on our streets. Who would have thought that some of that mud on tires--would wind up in our lungs? First it's second-hand smoke. Now, it's second-hand mud in our lungs!

Yesterday, I was downtown on State Street, photographing the Rawson and Tri-North sites. The whole area within several blocks of these sites was more dirty than usual, and it was easy to see dirt was escaping from the sites largely on tires--day in and day out.

These two companies, through their non-compliance--are not just being sloppy neighbors to nearby businesses. They are not just harming the lakes. They are also harming the health of the people who work and shop downtown.

Entrance to the Rawson and Tri-North sites from State St, 7/27.

# # #

Related news item from New York Times: "The quality of air in Chinese cities is increasingly tainted by coal-burning power plants, grit from construction sites and exhaust from millions of new cars squeezing onto crowded roads, according to a government study issued this week."

The Badger on campus with no bark and no bite

2010-07-28T02:00:00.000-05:00

We notice that many construction sites on and around the UW campus in Madison are out of compliance with construction site erosion control. Typically, gravel pads are too short, stormwater inlet filters unmaintained, and muddy tracks on the streets are not cleaned up.

Such negligence has resulted in muddy plumes into Lake Mendota, at Lake Street and at Willow Creek, after rains.

Lake Mendota at Lake St after rain, 7/7.

Convoluted responsibilities may be part of the problem

Typically, the City is the Permit Authority.
But they don't have or exercise authority at the University (So why are they listed as the "permit authority" on the permits?)
The state Department of Administration therefore oversees the compliance.
But they passed or delegated this to the DNR.
Meanwhile, some of the contractors like Findorff are inspecting themselves, with poor results.

Who is responsible--what I've found out for some of these cases:

Permit Authority: City of Madison, Tim Troester, ttroester@cityofmadison.com
Permittee: Wisconsin Division of State Facilities, Russ Van Gilder, russ.vangilder@wisconsin.gov
Gary Brown, UW facilities manager, seems to play a coordinating role. gbrown@fpm.wisc.edu,
The DNR South Central Region stormwater program supervisor is James (Andy) Morton.
Laura Madsen is the DNR stormwater specialist who handles inspection of construction sites with stormwater permit coverage in Dane County. mailto:CLaura.madsen@wisconsin.gov

Sediment tracking from Tri-North site on State St.

2010-07-28T01:22:00.000-05:00

This contractor touts itself as the Green Building Leader. "It's so easy being green," they say.

We wonder why it was so hard to avoid tracking sediment out of their site. Sediment is scattered all around the busy State Street downtown area, including N. Henry and N. Broom streets Sweeping wasn't done after work.

In fairness, we might acknowledge that Tri-north traffic passes through the Rawson site on the way out. But since the Rawson site isn't in compliance with gravel pads or sweeping, this puts Tri-North out of compliance. Some of that sediment downtown is Tri-North's, no matter how you cut it.

This site is the Elizabeth Link Peace Park redevelopment, between State Street and W. Gillman.

The gravel pad at this site is clearly too short, and barely visible in the soil, which will turn to mud with the next rain.

Who is responsible:

Contractor: Tri-North Builders

Permit Authority: City of Madison, Tim Troester 210 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd, Rm 115, Madison WI 53703 (608) 267-1995 ttroester@cityofmadison.com

Permittee: City of Madison - Parks William Bauer 210 Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd., Madison WI 53703 608-267-4921 bbauer@cityofmadison.com

Minor problems with Miron Construction at Chadbourne and Barnard Halls

2010-07-28T00:28:00.000-05:00

The following problems with Miron Construction were observed on the afternoon of 7/27:

Inlet filter on University Av near Park St clogged, needs service.

Sediment fences down along sidewalk, University Av.

Who is responsible: This site seems to have been omitted from the City's map of construction projects.

Good erosion control at Target site by Ryan Companies

2010-07-27T22:57:00.000-05:00

At the Target Store construction site by University Ave at Hilldale, there was almost no sediment leaving the site after the heavy storm of 7/22. This looks like a challenging site inside, due to soft sand and slopes. But the slope bottoms out to the east before reaching the edge of the site. There's enough room for settling ponds on-site.

Ryan Companies, the contractor, is using StormProMax software for tracking stormwater compliance.

Grant Pokos, an engineer specializing in erosion control, was on site after the storm, making the 24-hr inspection after the recent storms. Grant is a consultant from JSD Professional Services.

The foundation on the E side filled with water. It was being pumped to a basin on the SW corner.

Erosion control cloth was being used on the sandy banks of the cut along the S side.

View from S side looking E.

Only two minor problem areas: One was the NE corner, where a little sediment was getting into a clogged filter.

Grant Pokos said the filter belonged to University Av reconstruction.

The only other problem: The gravel pad on the S side (left) was too short. But the pad on the N side was the proper length.

Kudos to those responsible:

Permit authority: Tim Troester, City of Madison, (608) 267-1995, ttroester@cityofmadison.com
Permittee: Target Corporation, Marc Steadman, PO Box 1173, Minneapolis MN 55440, 612-761-1518, stormwater@target.com
Stormwater consultant and site inspector: Grant Pokos, JSD Professional Services, 608-848-5060
Contractor: Ryan Companies, Ben Wise-Field Engineer, 612-492-4449 office, 612-554-6748 cell

Violations by Findorff Construction at Park St

2010-07-27T22:27:00.000-05:00

Violations by Findorff Construction on Park St between University and Johnson:

Streets dirty, tracks coming out, not swept after work
No gravel tracking pad
No filter on an obvious stormwater inlet, which receives runoff from the dirty pavement

Looking N on Park St from Johnson St. Dirty tracks.

Stormwater inlet without filter, looking W across Park St from E side.

More photos of this site here.

Who is responsible:

Findorff Construction Company

This project seems to have been omitted from the City's map of construction sites.

Violations at Findorff Site for Chazen Museum addition

2010-07-27T21:04:00.000-05:00

Above and below: The gravel pads at the two construction entrances of University Av are too short.

The storm sewer inlets on University Ave are clogged and need service.

Who is responsible

Apparently, no one is responsible, because the erosion control is not getting done properly. I heard that the City doesn't exercise or have authority over the University--so why are they listed on the permit as the "permit authority"? On University property (is Chazen the Univ?), the state's Department of Administration has authority, but they passed it off to the DNR. Are you following this? In the end, the contractor is inspecting itself, as they were doing at Henry Mall, with bad results.

Permit authority: City of Madison, Tim Troester, 210 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd, Rm 115, Madison WI 53703, (608) 267-1995, ttroester@cityofmadison.com
Permittee: University of Wisconsin FPM, Gary Brown, 610 Walnut Street, Madison WI 53726, 608-263-3023, gbrown@fpm.wisc.edu
Authorized inspector: Jason Jones, 300 S. Bedford Street, Madison WI 53703, 608-442-7346, jjones@findorff.com

Heroic sediment control by Miron Construction on Langdon St

2010-07-27T19:57:00.000-05:00

The Miron Construction site on Langdon St, next to the Memorial Union and Lake Mendota, requires special precautions, because it's so close to the lake.

But really, any job on pavement, with a stormwater inlet below, can be considered "next to the Lake." Sediment on pavement runs down the nearest stormwater inlet, then to the lakes via stormwater pipes. Inlet filters are not very effective.

One method we seldom see employed, is to deflect incoming stormwater. Here, runoff from the roof of a nearby building is piped directly to the stormwater inlet.

Miron is pumping muddy water from the construction hole into a tank where it passes through several filters.

From the filter tank, it feeds by gravity to a large bladder of filter cloth. The water leaks out perfectly clear into the storm sewer.

We observed this system earlier after a storm. At that time, there was much more water, with a pump running. Under those conditions, water coming out of the bladder was not clear but muddy.

Miron has built an effective berm around the hole to keep runoff out. This means less pumping and filtering is needed.

Congratulations, Miron!

Photos of how this system works right after a heavy rain here.

Sediment tracking out of Rawson Construction site on Gillman Ave

2010-07-27T19:02:00.000-05:00

On 7/27, I looked at the W. Gillman St. construction site by Rawson Contractors.

State St end of W. Gilman. The gravel pad is too short, and is clearly inadequate for this vehicle.

This street construction site is easy to control, because all you have to do is control tracking in and out, and control the runoff at the intersection of State Street and Gillman St. The runoff has no other place to exit except at the bottom of Gillman St.

What I liked about measures at this site was gravel check dams in either gutter, near State Street. The dams appeared to be catching most of the sediment before it could reach the inlet filters or State Street.

What was sloppy about this site

Much sediment was leaving by vehicle tracks. Streets were very dirty. Two construction jobs enter the area by either end of Gillman St. Violation: Street sweeping after work needed. I checked after work on 7/27, and no sweeping had been done, either end.
The gravel tracking pads are inadequate--at State St, the pad is too short. At Gillman and Henry St., the pad is nonexistant. Violation: gravel pad non-compliance.
Most vehicles were entering via N. Henry St, where there was no gravel pad. Consequently, sediment was washing down Henry St to the corner with W. Gorham St, where there were no inlet filters. See photo below. Inlet filters at corner of Henry & Gorham needed.

Who is responsible:

Rawson Contractors Sussex WI; Kenneth Servi, President; 262-695-2900, http://www.rawsoncontractors.com/
Permit authority: City of Madison, Tim Troester, 210 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd, Rm 115, Madison WI 53703, (608) 267-1995, ttroester@cityofmadison.com
Permittee: City Engineering, John Fahrney, 1600 Emil Street, Madison WI, (608) 266-9091
jfahrney@cityofmadison.com

Photos here showing that no sweeping was done after work on 7/27.

A debate over sediment pond under construction

2010-07-26T16:23:00.000-05:00

The issues behind the Old Middleton Road pond that nearly failed are complex. I thought it might help to have an imaginary debate between two engineers. Mr. Raise wants to "raise the bar" on erosion control measures in Madison. Mr. Stand designed the project, is a little defensive, and wants to stand his ground.

Stand: I don't see what the problem is with the plan, or what we did. We allowed runoff into the pond during construction, because it was going that way anyway. Once in the pond, the runoff was retained and had a chance to settle. So with a minimum of work, we started treating runoff nearly from day one. What's wrong with that? Cheap and effective.

Raise: True... but the pond nearly failed. If we had received the 6 inches of rain they had in Milwaukee that night, surely it would have. Then there would have been a big sediment spill--plus repair to the pond itself. OK, we're lucky the pond didn't fail. But now the work is set back for weeks while the pond drains--and we could have another storm during that time. And the runoff going into the pond--during the storm--eroded the inside slope of the pond. We're going to have to dredge the pond several years earlier than we hoped. All those are costs of NOT doing better erosion control. Photo: Gully from runoff going to pond, 7/26.

Stand: In a few more days, we would have finished the spillway. In just a few days, the pond would have been protected against overflow. The probability of a big storm during those few days was pretty remote.

Raise: Yes, but it happened. Don't forget, you have to multiply those small probabilities by the hundreds of projects we have in Madison. Even if they are rare, it's the big storms that cause big erosion and big pollution to the lake. Besides, with climate change, big storms are going to be more common.

Stand: You said you wanted to deflect the runoff coming down the south slope of Old Middleton Road to the downstream (E) side of the road--away from the pond? Well, that's a steep bank, disturbed when they cut the trees. Without added runoff, there's already a big gully forming there. The silt fences below failed. How can that area take any more runoff? Better to send it to the pond, just as I did.

Looking down steep bank on E side of Old Middleton Rd. Runoff from E side of road formed a gully here, and breached the silt fence below.

Raise: I can see there's a problem on the downstream side of Old Middleton Rd. Yes, that's a sign that overall erosion control for this project wasn't sufficient. Controls there should be "beefed up" enough so that road bank can take runoff that would have gone into the pond. I see you've already added a big check dam of gravel at the bottom.

Stand: Yes, the the bank from the road to the flood plain is steep and eroding. You can't stop that with just a check dam at the bottom.

Raise: That's where you need more tools in your kit. At the Target construction site, they are using erosion control fabric on the steepest slopes. You could use it on this slope.

Erosion control fabric at Target construction site in Madison, 7/24/10

In fact, if you had protected the pond with a temporary fabric spillway, and the side of the pond where the runoff went in, then you could still have put runoff into the pond, with less chance of failure.

Stand: Fabric sounds pretty fragile against a flood. Won't the water get under it, and erode anyway?

Raise: It's not that fragile--it's good enough for one or two storms. As you said yourself, it's only needed for a short time. And you could reuse it on another project. To keep water from getting under, you have to tuck the top and edges under the soil, like you do for a silt fence. You can hold it down and channel the water with sand bags or silt socks.

Stand: All these extra measures--fabric spillways--redirecting runoff away from the pond.... sound expensive. You have to multiply those expenses by the hundreds of projects we have.

Raise: Yes, it does require an increase in our budget for erosion control. But the people want cleaner lakes. Over the next few years, we have millions budgeted for more retention basins, and other measures to ensure Madison's compliance with 40% reduction in sediment by 2013. If we have a big spill here, causing more pollution just to save a few thousand dollars, then won't we be partly wasting those millions? Robbing Peter to pay Paul? Doesn't it make sense to figure out here how to make retention ponds without causing a lot of pollution, before we make more ponds?

If you are worried about expense, you can focus on the biggest problems. By walking around a site, you can judge which ones pose the greatest risk. Some sites are much more difficult to control than others. Risk factors are sites with steep slopes, sites close to a waterway or lake, and sites with a lot of incoming runoff. This site had all three risk factors. The disastrous Edgewood Av project had two risk factors. The upcoming Hillcrest-Upland Greenway project has two of three risk factors, but the amount of incoming runoff there will be especially large. And the contractor for that project, S&L Underground and Trucking, budgeted only $500 for "stormwater control!" We let them get away with that! Insane!

Stand: Well, I don't know about all those future benefits of more erosion control. I'm a "here and now" kind of guy. As an engineer, you gotta focus on your project. But I am annoyed that now, with this pond full of water, we can't finish the job. We're going to be late in getting the banks stabilized with plants before winter.

Sediment pond under construction at risk during storm

2010-07-24T19:27:00.000-05:00

Pond under construction nearly overflowed by 7:00 am 7/23.

Two sediment ponds are under construction along the SW side of Old Middleton Rd, a bit west of Capitol Drive. The purpose is to treat stormwater coming mostly from Old Middleton Rd. There are also plans to widen the road here, with the addition of sidewalks and bike lanes.

Neighbors in the area have been opposed to the widespread disturbance to the wild area from construction. About 200 trees were cut to make way for the ponds, and another 200 for widening the road. News story.

The pond nearly overflowed

After the recent rain storms of 7/22 and 7/23, the southern pond under construction could have failed. By failure, I mean that the pond filled by the morning of 7/23 to within about a foot (in elevation) of overflowing.

"The National Weather Service indicated that nearly four (4) inches* of rain fell yesterday and they are predicting up to three (3) more inches by 7:00am 7/24. Dane County is currently under a flash flood watch until 10:00am Saturday." Source.

The pond's spillway hasn't been constructed yet. If the pond were to overflow, rushing water could cut into the soft bank of loose soil, unprotected by any vegetation. It's possible erosion would continue till the pond emptied. Large amounts of sediment would spill into the creek next to the pond. And from there, it's only half a mile to Lake Mendota. There would also be a huge gash in the side of the pond to repair.

An outlet pipe also has not been installed. The pond is close to the water table, and has walls made of clay (plus some clay in the bottom). So it's going to drain very slowly, and will probably have to be pumped out, in order to finish construction.

A basic precaution overlooked

Runoff from Old Middleton Rd. entered pond just in front of the shovel, running in a pipe under the gravel pad.

One of the basic rules of erosion control--often neglected--is to deflect any runoff coming from outside, so it doesn't get into the construction site. The rain itself is enough of a problem, without having more water flowing in from the outside.

In this case, Old Middleton Rd has a long slope to the SE of the pond, feeding much stormwater into the unfinished pond. The pond was designed to handle this runoff, but not yet! This incoming runoff could have been easily deflected from the unfinished pond.**

This construction site has already experienced some erosion problems. Prior to 7/22, the silt fence protecting the creek from sediment had leaked. Then during the rains on 7/22, the silt fence for the south pond collapsed, dumping sediment into he creek. By 7/24, that had been repaired, plus the addition of a gravel dam. But the runoff from Old Middleton going into the overfilled pond still had not been deflected, even though there was a flash flood warning in effect for three more inches of rain!

By neglecting this basic precaution of deflecting runoff--even after the pond filled and with more flash floods forecast--the work already done on the pond was jeopardized, and Lake Mendota was put in danger of a large sediment spill.

Deflecting incoming water was not mentioned in the erosion control plan, which illustrates just how inadequate these plans typically are.

Destroying nature to save nature

Sediment ponds serve an important function--protecting the lakes. But large sediment ponds, with poor erosion control during construction, may not be the best way to protect the lake.

Sediment ponds are supposed to "save nature" by keeping sediment out of the lakes. But here, with cutting 200 trees plus a close call with a bad sediment spill, we have another example of "destroying nature to save nature."

The pond on the left is the one that nearly failed. The notch in the wall, above the sediment fence, is where it would have overtopped. Sediment would then have been flushed down the creek (center) to L. Mendota.

This is the long slope of Old Middleton Rd, down which the runoff came. The gray pipe in the lower right corner goes under the gravel pad by the shovel, and into the pond.

This pipe should have been plugged.

Here's where the pipe goes under the gavel pad, taking water to the pond. Some water flowed past the caterpillar (center). Water could have been directed that way around the pond.

Could the pond really have failed, emptied, and sent a major sediment spill to L. Mendota? It probably would have taken 1-2 more inches of rain to overflow--but three more were forecast. The newly disturbed soil was wet and soft--and the slope from overflow point to creek was relatively steep. This photos shows two of three gullies where runoff came into the pond. When overflowing, water would have created one gully much deeper. We were lucky--but what this incident shows, is that plans were poor, no one noticed the danger, and no one took corrective action.
Photo 7/23, 7:00 am, by Tim Heath.

Who is responsible for this lapse

Design Engineer: Lisa Coleman, 266-4093, City Engineering, lcoleman@cityofmadison.com . No mention of the need to deflect runoff was made in the erosion control plan.
Construction Engineer: John Fahrney, City Engineering, jfahrney@cityofmadison.com
Contractor: Rawson Contractors (Low bid was $1, 399, 029.85), Kenneth Servi, President, kservi@rawsoncontractors.com http://www.rawsoncontractors.com/
Permit authority: Tim Troester, (608) 267-1995, ttroester@cityofmadison.com
Erosion Control Permittee: Signed by Robert Phillips, delegated to John Fahrney, City Engineering,(608) 266-9091, jfahrney@cityofmadison.com
Inspector on 7/23 who missed last chance to deflect inflow: Stewart Mael, (608) 261-9695, smael@cityofmadison.com
Grantor of permit for construction of ponds: DNR Water Management Specialist Cami Peterson, 608-275-3208. No mention was made in the permit of the need to deflect runoff from the ponds under construction.

Slide shows
Failure of the silt fences due to stakes (about 1" x 1") being too weak.

* The report of 4 inches was for parts of Dane Co. For Madison, the rainfall was very spotty. Wunderground indicates that rainfall at zipcode 53705 for 7/22 and 7/23 was only 1.63 in. The pond is supposed to fill with about 2-3 in of rain, which is what it seems to have done.

** The runoff into the pond could have been easily deflected to the other side of the street, and downstream of the pond, by building a small berm of asphalt on the street; or around the SE side of the pond to the creek, using a silt sock to deflect the water (or a minimal amount of grading).

Why erosion can be called "a sediment spill"

2010-07-20T23:39:00.000-05:00

Sediment spilled at the bottom of Edgewood Av, after June 21 storm.

By Jon Standridge

Many of the causes of Madison's sediment problems are similar to the causes of the BP disaster in the Gulf.

Both oil and mud are very harmful to aquatic ecosystems. Here's a summary from a USGS fact sheet:

Results of a local study "indicated that small construction sites are potential sources of large amounts of sediment erosion. Sediment loads from the two monitored construction sites were 10 times larger than typical loads from rural and urban land uses in Wisconsin."

"When left uncontrolled, large amounts of soil and other small particles collectively called sediment can move off of construction sites along with other attached pollutants. By volume, sediment is the greatest pollutant entering our surface waters, and causes multiple problems."

"Sediment buries plant and animal habitat critical to healthy streams, lakes, and wetlands. Loss of habitat reduces the number, diversity, and productivity of plants and animals living in aquatic environments."

Sediment that remains suspended in the water column reduces water clarity, inhibits aquatic plant growth, lowers the aesthetic and recreational values of water resources, and makes it difficult for some fish to find food.

Suspended sediment increases the solar heating of water, scours aquatic life in streams, and clogs the gills of fish and aquatic insects. Warm water holds less oxygen than cooler water (oxygen is vital to aquatic animals) and increased water temperatures are stressful to coldwater fish such as trout.

Particulate-bound nutrients, such as phosphorus delivered to surface waters by eroded soils, often causes algal blooms and alterations in the food chains, which further reduces the quality of these water resources.

Standing in the rotting "delta" at the bottom of Edgewood Av. It's black, and it stinks.

Some differences between oil and mud

Oil is more sticky, fouling birds and mammals more than mud. But mud also fouls many aquatic organisms.
Mud sinks, while oil rises to the top.
Oil is more toxic. Yet mud ends up being quite toxic through a chain of cause and effect. By heating the water and diminishing the oxygen, it can kill fish. Mud stimulates algae blooms, which can be toxic enough to kill your pet.
Oil stinks more than mud, but mud stimulates algae, which then dies and rots.

Because of the similarities between oil and mud, and because big storms dump enough sediment to qualify as a "spill," I'm going to use the term "sediment spill" in future articles.

Mud plume into L. Mendota--it looks like an oil spill.

WSJ story: Standards are going down the drain

2010-07-20T09:43:00.000-05:00

On Sunday, there was a big story in the Wisconsin State Journal about problems with enforcement at construction sites.

The story documents how the City and State are failing to enforce laws on erosion control, and why that harms the health of our lakes. The story is now available online here, and a video showing City inspector Tim Troester and resident David Thompson is available here.

City lowers the bar for erosion control

On the video, I found Tim Troester's explanation of where the City sets the bar for erosion control to be very informative. Here, in the video, he's referring to a project's Erosion Control Plan, which is frequently designed by City engineers:

"...[For] most plans the standard has been to design those erosion controls to the one and two year rain events. Of course we have rainfall that exceeds these frequently, but it comes to a cost comparison, a cost effectiveness. We can always do more for erosion control, but at some point, it can end up costing more for the erosion control, than it does to redo a street or a project. And where that tradeoff is, is still to be debated."

The law--on which the EC Plan is based--makes no such excuse or exception for costs. It makes no exception for big or small rain events. So Madison has rewritten the law for its own convenience.

One thing I learned from following the Edgewood Av sediment spill of June 21, is that certain hilly sites, close to waterways, are much more prone to failure than others. So the "tradeoff" Troester speaks of ought to be adjusted for these difficult sites. Let's dig into some numbers.

How much does erosion control cost at a difficult site?

The Hillcrest Upland Greenway is due for construction starting Oct. 4. It presents a site more challenging than the Edgewood Av site because it's a narrow ravine emptying a basin half a mile long. So the Greenway project could be a good test to see whether, the way the City practices erosion control, costs are getting out of hand.

Troester said: "...at some point, [erosion control] can end up costing more than it does [for] a project." Is that what's happening here?

I looked at the bid from the low-bidder for the project. The cost for erosion control measures during construction amounted to 7.4% of the total contract amount.*

Given that this is a difficult site, and that one of the reasons for this project is to control sediment from the ravine after the project is finished, 7.4 % does not look like a very high standard for erosion control.

# # #

* This figure included erosion control matting, which might be considered part of the post-construction planting, depending when it's applied. But the figure excludes planting of ground cover, planting of trees, or the riprapped channel, which amount to restoring the land surface to what it was before it was disturbed. Included in my total for "erosion control during construction" were items 21001, 20217, 21014, 21015, 21017, 21018, 21019, 50361, 90035, 90036, 90037, 90038, and 90039.

Why erosion control fails--slippage at every step

2010-07-19T11:40:00.001-05:00

Summary

Poor results are the outcome of slippage at every step of the erosion control process, starting with...

Poor erosion control plans, which depend on not very effective BMPs, applied by reluctant contractors, who are seldom inspected by overly permissive inspectors, and so on.

Update 6/7/11: I used to think, as many citizens believe, that construction site problems are due to negligent contractors. But this is an oversimplification. If the symphony sounds sour-- is it the fault of the Conductor or the musicians? Well, it's both... but I'd give most blame to the Conductor.

Same with construction. City Engineering (or DNR is some cases) is like the Conductor. They formulate the erosion control plans, and tell the contractors how and when to carry them out. The contractor just follows their orders. So the City (or DNR) is really responsible for the failures we see. Yes, sometimes a contractor drops the ball--but the City's responsibility is to make sure they don't.

The list

Below, I've listed the most “systemic” problems higher on list, with local problems lower on list.

1. Private enterprise is poorly suited to managing a “commons” (our lakes). There are no economic incentives for improving the lakes.

2. Erosion control is an art rather than a science. Every construction site and storm is unique.

3. Construction sites are constantly & rapidly changing; erosion control is a moving target.

4. Erosion control at the watershed level is a complex task, which must involve the community and requires strong leadership.

5. Bureaucracies focus on rules rather than outcome (which is clean lakes); complex tasks must focus on outcomes.

6. Culture of engineers--likes certainty, doesn’t like to engage community. Weather not certain.

7. Construction sites are very cramped, so solutions are difficult (unless storm water is exported to other treatment locations nearby)

8. Everyone (public, officials, contractors) is focused on short-term goals and outcomes

9. People (public, contractors, officials) seldom see the invisible damage caused by erosion

10. Apathetic public doesn’t understand the issues or causes of lake problems

11. Ideological clash between “grey infrastructure” and “green infrastructure” concepts

12. Bureaucracy set in ways, & not representing diverse views (Engineering Dept. and Board of Public Works). See the Stormwater Management initiative.

13. Alders have power if they work with Engineering, but little power individually to oppose.

14. Resistance to change; traditions of City Engineering--they respond mainly to complaints about drainage, want to “work with” contractors

15. Budgetary constraints--too few inspectors; too little budget for robust erosion control. "Penny-wise but pound foolish" approach.

16. To compete for contracts, contractors underbid on erosion control items. The City permits this.

17. Contractors need better understanding of erosion control basics

18. Low priority given to erosion control plans (they get much less attention than the project plan)

19. Watershed approach to storm water is “not my job, ” say City engineers. How do we make it their job?

20. Poor communication between agencies (a fragmented view of watershed; conflicting goals)

21. Hoping for good weather, rather than planning for storms

22. Byzantine division of responsibilities enable passing the buck

23. Some BMPs (like tire washing) are dismissed out of hand; reluctance to adopt new ones.

24. Wording of regulations is flawed: “Streets will be swept daily OR as ordered by the City.”

25. Lack of leadership at highest levels concerning the issues and goals for City

26. Contractors and city would rather pay the fines or fill the gullies than prevent them

27. Conflicting motivations (or departments) in City. Save time, save money, or save the lakes?

28. Engineers have to “work with” contractors, and so can’t be enforcers, who relate differently

29. Unwritten Department policy that only smaller storms (2 inches of rain) will be planned for

30. Current enforcement is too “cozy,” with self-inspections, few fines, and warnings of inspections. More reliance on “deterrence” is needed.

# # #

That list is a mouthful.

We need to start by acknowledging that this is a difficult problem. It's difficult for contractors too, because of intense competition, and because their sites are chaotic and constantly changing. Good book on difficult problems.

This list is the result of about two months of my reading, inspecting sites, and listening to others. Thanks to Jon Standridge for contributing #16.