A prior post dealt with city of Waukesha and its having once been a recognized water resort community, due to the springs that were in the area. The irony, or sad situation now faced by Waukesha, is that because of the radium in its groundwater supply it will be obtaining water from Lake Michigan. The Waukesha water woes story should be of interest to others as we inhabit a world of decreasing natural resources. This post will deal with how land use affects ground water and the situation now faced by Waukesha.
Springs in the landscape are, quite simply, places where groundwater reaches the ground surface. Groundwater is generally considered to feed most of our lakes and streams. This leads to a variety of issues related to lack of stream flow. Groundwater is recharged by precipitation. However, as development occurs, in some instances groundwater instead of feeding streams and lakes is fed by the streams and lakes. This is thought to be happening in Madison, WI. With development, you get less recharge of groundwater than would exist in natural conditions due to impervious surfaces. But, don’t think that agriculture is the answer either, because a row crop infiltrates about as much rain water as a suburban yard. Yet, development, due to these impervious surfaces (e.g. pavement and buildings), also produces more runoff because less water is infiltrated or recharged and hence you get more flooding of streams and lakes. Detention basins exist to control the rate of release of runoff. More recently recharge is required to assist in replacing groundwater lost to pumping. Yet, it can take years for recharged water to move to any significant depth into an aquifer, or move laterally. Rain gardens have entered the popular lexicon, and they represent one method of groundwater infiltration and recharge. Infiltration requirements, which are fairly recent, only require up to 90% of the predevelopment rate be designed for this measure. This means that 10% is not infiltrated. There are also parcels exempted due to soil conditions. And, due to evapo-transpiration, not all infiltrated storm water runoff makes it way to the aquifer (i.e. recharge).
Our aquifers, even with recharge, can be reduced by pumping. Wells pull groundwater out, and Waukesha, like other communities, is finding that its groundwater is being replaced at a rate slower than it is pulled out. Municipal wells. Waukesha has seen a drop in its aquifer of over 500’ from 1900 to 2000. The level in their municipal wells is said to be dropping at 5’-9’ a year. (thi smay not be the whole aquifer, but what is known as the cone of depression taht forms near wells.) One effect to reduce spring flow in Waukesha was not only development, and paving over the springs, but also the large limestone quarries from which many buildings in southeast Wisconsin were built. The quarries pump groundwater out so that it would not inhibit operations of going to greater depths. This would also draw down the water that fed the springs. Draw down has not only affected the springs, but also the quality of the groundwater. The deeper the water being pumped for municipal use, now at about 2000’ deep, the more radium the water contains. Radium is a naturally occurring element, and in Waukesha, it happens to be in concentrations too high for public health.
The problem Waukesha faced is that it is outside of the Lake Superior watershed. The hydrologic cycle is important to life, and one idea is that it is also important is to retain water in its own watershed. What Waukesha did have going for it is that part of Waukesha County is in the watershed, and more importantly, that part of the Lake Michigan groundwater shed is under the city of Waukesha. One report indicates that when the city of Waukesha no longer uses its wells, about 1.3 mgd of ground water will flow to Lake Michigan that is now intercepted by their deep wells. Of course, this does not fully offset the 8.2 mgd Waukesha will use, but because the city will return treated effluent to Root Creek in Franklin, it is thought that it will be about even. There will be water loss due to plant and lawn watering, and other water not sent down the drain to the sewage treatment plant.
This raises the issue of Waukesha’s laxity in water conservation. Waukesha not only had a long-standing water rate structure to reduce rates for the more water used, in a sense promoting water waste, it also credited water utility customers on some basis for water that did not go to the treatment plant. How they calculated the credit I do not know, because you would not be able to meter outfall of every sanitary sewer lateral, although it could compare winter use to summer use. Waukesha is part of the problem the human population continually faces--that we too often view our resources as abundant and conservation is not necessary. Water is the next oil. All one has to do is live in the drought in California. Or live in Flint, MI where the water has too much lead. Or, live in Waukesha were the water has too much radium. In Waukesha the cheap upper level water has been used, probably a good deal wasted.
This past waste of water will now have an effect on Waukesha’s growth. It had requested to be able to withdraw 10.2 mgd of water for a much larger territory than it now serves. However, the Great lakes Compact requires the city to reduce its demand to 8.2mgd, and reduce its service territory to those customers already served, and town islands within the city itself. Waukesha’s mayor seems to recognize this new reality, as he said the approved compact “would set the [municipal] boundary for the foreseeable future.” He continued to say that “the future of Waukesha is redevelopment.” However, Waukesha has not been built in a compact manner, and it is used to having unbridled growth. As Lutgen has noted the structure of a place can shape political attitudes. Can
Waukesha now contain itself? On the plus side the planning literature contains many examples of densifying the suburban shopping mall and big box stores. New urbanists are continually creating new techniques for sprawl repair. The question will be if city as a whole can make the required cultural and political shift to redevelopment from greenfield development.
Waukesha received approval to use Lake Michigan water on June 21, and is now looking for taxpayer dollars to fund about 20% of the cost of the obtaining and directing the water to Root Creek. That is another ironic twist in tself. A community which so strongly guarded its water from being piped (although had no qualms about shipping it in barrels or bottles over the nation) in 1891 will be asking taxpayers nationwide to pony up to help solve a water crisis part of their own making. Other nearby communities, it has been said, have been able to handle the radium in water issue without using Lake Michigan water. Waukesha did not have to use lake Michigan water, it could have used a reverse osmosis treatment process, but chose not to due to its cost. Waukesha’s past practice of lower
water bills for the more a customer used, development pattern and form, the pumping by its quarries have all played a role in its water woes, and to now ask taxpayers to foot 20 or more percent of a $187 to $200 million project cost seems to me to represent the hubris that helped get them into the water woes in the first place. That is the greater lesson for all, that our resources, as plentiful as they may seem, are subject to misuse and waste, and at some point securing a resource will become more costly, and even more difficult to obtain. The federal government to the rescue The irony of it all.
 |
| Hydrologic cycle |
Waukesha Is no longer a suburb of Milwaukee. It has developed as an employment center in its own right. Torben Lutgen, a visiting professor at the UW-Madison from Germany says that Waukesha’s success has transformed it into a “politically and culturally exceptional place.” Based on US Census data, he says that almost as many vehicles now “commute into Waukesha County from Milwaukee County as the other way around.” I suspect 50 and 60 years ago few saw that coming. But, growth comes with cost, and Waukesha now faces the piper in regard to its water situation.
Springs in the landscape are, quite simply, places where groundwater reaches the ground surface. Groundwater is generally considered to feed most of our lakes and streams. This leads to a variety of issues related to lack of stream flow. Groundwater is recharged by precipitation. However, as development occurs, in some instances groundwater instead of feeding streams and lakes is fed by the streams and lakes. This is thought to be happening in Madison, WI. With development, you get less recharge of groundwater than would exist in natural conditions due to impervious surfaces. But, don’t think that agriculture is the answer either, because a row crop infiltrates about as much rain water as a suburban yard. Yet, development, due to these impervious surfaces (e.g. pavement and buildings), also produces more runoff because less water is infiltrated or recharged and hence you get more flooding of streams and lakes. Detention basins exist to control the rate of release of runoff. More recently recharge is required to assist in replacing groundwater lost to pumping. Yet, it can take years for recharged water to move to any significant depth into an aquifer, or move laterally. Rain gardens have entered the popular lexicon, and they represent one method of groundwater infiltration and recharge. Infiltration requirements, which are fairly recent, only require up to 90% of the predevelopment rate be designed for this measure. This means that 10% is not infiltrated. There are also parcels exempted due to soil conditions. And, due to evapo-transpiration, not all infiltrated storm water runoff makes it way to the aquifer (i.e. recharge).
 |
| Waukesha and the Great Lake Watershed divide |
The problem Waukesha faced is that it is outside of the Lake Superior watershed. The hydrologic cycle is important to life, and one idea is that it is also important is to retain water in its own watershed. What Waukesha did have going for it is that part of Waukesha County is in the watershed, and more importantly, that part of the Lake Michigan groundwater shed is under the city of Waukesha. One report indicates that when the city of Waukesha no longer uses its wells, about 1.3 mgd of ground water will flow to Lake Michigan that is now intercepted by their deep wells. Of course, this does not fully offset the 8.2 mgd Waukesha will use, but because the city will return treated effluent to Root Creek in Franklin, it is thought that it will be about even. There will be water loss due to plant and lawn watering, and other water not sent down the drain to the sewage treatment plant.
 |
| Pump out, pump back |
This past waste of water will now have an effect on Waukesha’s growth. It had requested to be able to withdraw 10.2 mgd of water for a much larger territory than it now serves. However, the Great lakes Compact requires the city to reduce its demand to 8.2mgd, and reduce its service territory to those customers already served, and town islands within the city itself. Waukesha’s mayor seems to recognize this new reality, as he said the approved compact “would set the [municipal] boundary for the foreseeable future.” He continued to say that “the future of Waukesha is redevelopment.” However, Waukesha has not been built in a compact manner, and it is used to having unbridled growth. As Lutgen has noted the structure of a place can shape political attitudes. Can
Waukesha now contain itself? On the plus side the planning literature contains many examples of densifying the suburban shopping mall and big box stores. New urbanists are continually creating new techniques for sprawl repair. The question will be if city as a whole can make the required cultural and political shift to redevelopment from greenfield development.
 |
| Image of a cone of depression |
Waukesha received approval to use Lake Michigan water on June 21, and is now looking for taxpayer dollars to fund about 20% of the cost of the obtaining and directing the water to Root Creek. That is another ironic twist in tself. A community which so strongly guarded its water from being piped (although had no qualms about shipping it in barrels or bottles over the nation) in 1891 will be asking taxpayers nationwide to pony up to help solve a water crisis part of their own making. Other nearby communities, it has been said, have been able to handle the radium in water issue without using Lake Michigan water. Waukesha did not have to use lake Michigan water, it could have used a reverse osmosis treatment process, but chose not to due to its cost. Waukesha’s past practice of lower
water bills for the more a customer used, development pattern and form, the pumping by its quarries have all played a role in its water woes, and to now ask taxpayers to foot 20 or more percent of a $187 to $200 million project cost seems to me to represent the hubris that helped get them into the water woes in the first place. That is the greater lesson for all, that our resources, as plentiful as they may seem, are subject to misuse and waste, and at some point securing a resource will become more costly, and even more difficult to obtain. The federal government to the rescue The irony of it all.
No comments:
Post a Comment