Stormwater Commission

STORMWATER COMMISSION MEETING SUMMARY Friday, February 23, 2012 The following persons were present: Chair Joe Lo Verde, Steven Vinezeano, Andrew Vitale, Richard Wlodarski, Fred Kudert, Tom Polcyn, Chuck Ostman, Mousa Nazzal, Scott Jochim and Jeff Wickenkamp of Hey and Associates. Also in attendance was Mayor Robert Callero. Absent: George Van Geem The meeting was called to order at 8:30 a.m. 1. Approve Meeting Summary of Friday, February 10, 2012: The summary was approved to be posted on the Stormwater Commission web page. 2. Old Business: a. February 28 Board Presentation Review (Open House/Cost Share). Vinezeano provided an overview of the meeting and the cost share packet to go to the board about the pre-board. Jeff started by sharing it will not be an extensive presentation on Tuesday, February 28. The meeting begins at 6:00 p.m. and the presentation will take about 10 to 15 minutes at the most. The remainder of time will be for questions and Fred’s comment at the end. The Mayor mentioned that the presentation will be ended before 7:00 p.m. because of the need to start that meeting exactly at 7:00 p.m. Jeff showed a Power Point. He outlined the presentation layout and who and which organizations will be present. Hey will have several engineers on hand to answer questions at all the stations, the Village will have staff on hand to discuss cost share and local drainage. There will also be a rain garden/barrel table. IDNR/FEMA and MWRD will also be at the event to discuss TARP, flood mitigation, and preferred flood insurance and more. Engineers will be able to discuss individual homeowner risk levels and past rain events such as 2008 and 2011. They will share neighborhood flooding issues and the solutions to bring them under control. A resident will be able to come in and get answers about their issues from the engineers. The Mayor asked about his neighbors and whether or not they would be able to get FEMA Flood Insurance since they are not in the flood plain. Jeff explained that preferred flood insurance is meant for those outside of the flood plain. He also stated that insurance claims against this insurance does not impact or count against a homeowners policy. This is government backed, but purchased from a 3rd party preferred vendor. Jeff stated that the presentation outlined the need for the cost share program and that the commission is 100% behind them. There are three key factors of why cost share is needed beyond those stated on the sheets. Jeff again stated that (1) TARP will not improve flooding or prevent basement backups in Niles. It must be clear that future improvements for TARP will not impact flooding in Niles. The backup is caused by the inability of the Niles system to get it to TARP. Jeff stated that if the Village was to (2) fix the sewers on the eastside alone to prevent basement backups, it would cost in excess of $10,000 per home or over $40M. Individual sewer solutions for Niles will not fix every problem in Niles. There will need to be prioritization of the work and even then, (3) there will be pockets of homes that will not be served with the first round of funding, so cost share is their only benefit. The Chair asked about the flood proof program and the funding. Jeff stated that there is a potential for $8,000 to stop overland flow issues, but most will be less. The temporary barriers are about $1,000. Chuck mentioned there are residents on Courtland that could benefit from this greatly. Vinezeano stated that it must be clear that this program is not for the average flood proofing of a home. It is not for cracks or seepage, etc. It is for stopping overland flow. The Mayor asked how we will ensure those who get this funding are getting it for the right reason. Does this commission choose? Jeff mentioned that many communities already do this, so no need to recreate the wheel. Some communities do this as first come first serve, but there is an objective way to approach this based on where the home is and the history of the area. The chair asked if there was a hardship, would it be considered. The Mayor stated it could be brought to the commission to discuss. The cost share program would be in place until it was not needed. Vinezeano mentioned that in many towns the budget dropped greatly due to a lack of interest, which seems to increase after storms. The Mayor stated that the number one goal is to get the water out of the basements. The chair asked if there is an engineering explanation of whether or not a home would be flooded down stream if his up stream neighbor put in flood control. Jeff again explained that there is nothing out there for this. He  could not say if it would be worse for a downstream neighbor or not, but he stated it would be fractions of an inch worse if it did impact the situation. Fred asked if the presentation should address this issue. And it was agreed that Jeff would work on this issue. Vinezeano discussed the layout for the open house. He asked the group to brainstorm on the types of information boards we may be able to have. The typical sanitary system sectionals will be available. Jeff was asked to provide a copy of the early overland flow map of Niles. Andrew mentioned large posters from Jeff’s presentation would be valuable showing how homes flood even though Tarp is not full. 3. New Business: Discussion of South Niles Analysis. Jeff started the presentation with the historical flow path of regional water. He showed how it came from Chicago and flowed southeast to the Chicago River. This flow path intersects the identified problem areas. Jeff discussed how overland flows to Neva area flow from the City of Chicago. The Niles water tank tends to slow that overland flow path which continues to sewers and a complicated convergent system in the middle of Touhy and Milwaukee. Jeff mentioned how overland flow goes past Block Electric where the TARP system is. Jeff mentioned the complicated structure design information came from the City of Chicago sewer atlas. It shows a shelf that diverts sewage to MWRD under dry weather flow. When there is more flow, it goes over a shelf to the river and TARP. He stated that the design of this structure could be improved to prevent the bottle neck that causes flooding to the north. He stated that this work could also benefit Chicago and there may need to be discussions with them if the project is done to ensure there is a project cost share. He stated that MWH is reviewing Chicago’s sewers to the west of Niles. Jeff took time to draw a sectional view of what the structure looks like. Chuck Ostman mentioned a “relief” drain near Touhy that allows the water to spill out and offers positive flow near Neva. Jeff mentioned the grades at Touhy are higher then Neva. Neva at the street is at 626 and pipe in Touhy is 628. Chuck asked if Jeff had the newest data on this and Jeff replied that he went to the site and pulled real data. He said in flooding conditions, it does pass water, but not in the bigger rains. Upsize the connection on Touhy and fix the structure will improve flow in the area during the larger  rains. This will be enhanced by the IGIG project at the end of Neva near the snow dump. The chair started discussion about the Birchwood sewer from west to east. It was mentioned that it connects to the river. It serves Chicago and Niles and is a large sewer. 4. Open Discussion: 5. Next Scheduled Meetings: March 8 at 8:30 a.m. and March 19 at Noon.