Stormwater Commission

Stormwater Commission Meeting Summary Thursday, November 30th, 2017 Members Present: Fred Kudert, Steven Vinezeano, Rich Wlodarski, Thomas Powers, Mary Anderson, Andrew Vitale, and Chuck Ostman. Others present: Jeff Wickenkamp from Hey & Associates, The Stormwater Commission meeting convened at 8:00 a.m. in the EOC room 218 at Village Hall. October 31st Meeting Summary: The Meeting Summary for the October 31st , 2017 meeting was approved. Old Business: The following topics were presented and discussed. MWRD Green Infrastructure Grant The senior center Green Infrastructure grant was not selected but would be kept in the queue for next year. New Business: The following topics were presented and discussed Stormwater Management Plan MS4 – Public Meeting The MS4 Stormwater Management Plan was reviewed in a public setting for compliance with the MS4 program permit requirements. There were very few revisions made from the previous year’s plans. Community Development and engineering planned to meet to discuss MS4 commercial property inspection requirements. This could potentially be a budgetary issue if the inspections were outsourced. No public comments on the MS4 stormwater management plan were received. Stormwater update The commission previously provided comments on the draft stormwater update. Hey and Associates presented comment disposition on the comments received to date. Hey also prepared a draft informational presentation which would eventually be presented to the board. The target would be a 30 minute maximum informational presentation to the Board. The presentation covers the general program, with a focus on infrastructure plan update. The infrastructure portion includes discussing problem areas, ranking process, infrastructure improvements, and recommended projects. The presentation of the ranking system was significantly revised with a focus on project precedence and value. The “highest bank for buck” projects were prioritized and separated into four quartiles. A few projects fell into a conditional space as they were either dependent on other projects, or would not be done if a larger overlapping project was implemented. Overlapping projects 9B and 9A in particular were potentially a problem to explain to the board. It was discussed that the commission and staff are responsible for recommending the initial project prioritization. The intricacies of a few non-standard projects should be handled below the board level. The infrastructure plan resulted in 12 priority projects recommended to continue to move forward. This should be presented to the board in a generic fashion, with the backup information available to review upon request. Detail on the 12 projects should be provided in the board packet. Staff will need to be able to discuss the availability of funds for future projects. Ideally once the capacity of the stormwater fund is known then a 5-year CIP will be developed and presented. There was detailed discussion on Project #4/17-13 being presented as an above ground basin. The cost for and underground vault should be shown even though the underground vault is not needed for a stormwater benefit. The cost for underground storage should also be identified, in part because the underground storage cost may be eligible for MWRD funding in accordance with the goals of their stormwater program. The underground storage is linked to a dual-use facility. Project #4/17-13 should be evaluated consistently for what is required stormwater benefit only. The underground storage provides additional economic benefit from the dual use. The commission discussed to what extent finances should be discussed in the stormwater update. It was determined that staff is responsible for determining funding scenarios and that should not be part of the stormwater report. The stormwater commission reviewed the 12 recommended projects (table ES-1) in detail. Even though there are 6 projects in the first quartile, due to the preliminary nature of the projects some may eventually be eliminated from consideration as the designs are developed. Therefore it is recommended by Hey to move forward in further developing all the 12 projects so that a more flexible list of projects is available. The exhibits were split into three series Series 1 problem areas Series 2 project maps Series 3 before and after (project benefits) Each potential project was reviewed: Project 17-3 Install new storm sewer from Seward and Oakton to Oakton and Caldwell. Sewer runs across Forest Preserve Property. Project needs concept development to further refine project. IDOT may also have involvement. Project 17-14A is a tier 3 project that is fully designed on Washington Street. This is an 18” overflow sewer to increase capacity during flood conditions. 14A overlaps with project 14B, if 14B was implemented then 14A would not be implemented. Washington is a FAU route which is eligible for federal funding. 14A may not meet the needs of the residents on Churchill as it does not eliminate the street flooding that many residents complain about. The project score well doe to the low cost and due to a single structure flood reduction benefits. The calculated structure benefit is within the margin of error of the model and without the structure flooding the project would not score well. The history/nature of calls do not calibrate to the model results. Community Development would investigate structure flooding along Churchill to determine if the flooding is as modeled. The project may list out in the quartiles for consistency of approach but may not ultimately be recommended based on rational analysis. Project 17-14B is a more comprehensive flood solution to the flooding on Churchill than as provided by 14A. It involves increasing the wet well/storage for the pump station to allow storage for the runoff prior to pumping. Project 17-26, 17-4, and 17-27 are sewer extensions for the Cleveland Sewer Project. Project 17-13 is the Greenwood and Church storage basin. The program was discussed previously in the meeting Project 17-9C is the regrading of Jonquil Terrace to allow an overland flood route out of the neighborhood into the Forest Preserve. The project needs concept development to further refine project feasibility. Project 17-7A is a large scale sewer improvement similar to the Cleveland project. The project serves multiple neighborhoods and involves a new outfall to the Chicago River. An outfall at Howard also remains a possibility for this project. Project 17-29 is sewer capacity improvement to serve the Carol/Crain neighborhood. The project is dependent on the downstream tail water condition. At times the Des Plaines tail water could keep the project form working, but the project would still provide benefit for many storm events. Project 17-8 is the Jonquil Terrace/Lawler underground storage within the right-of-way. Project 17-14B was discussed earlier under project 17-14A, Project 17-23B is the Jarvis Relief sewer. There was some question as to the extent of flooding in the neighborhood. The commission confirmed the flooding indicated at Jarvis and Harlem. This project was at the bottom of the list and unlikely to move forward without further investigation and confirmation of the problem areas. The commission approved the changes and recommendations discussed at meeting. Staff would reach out to the commission chair to review the presentation and report as presented today. Staff would obtain the chairs comments. Since the revised report was delivered at the current meeting, a 10 day business period for further comments was established. A meeting of the commission would be held to finalize the report recommendation. Next Meeting Date The date of the next meeting will be late December/January timeframe. The next meeting will be held after the 10 day comment period and Hey has addressed the resulting comments. The meeting was adjourned at 10:17 a.m.