Stormwater Commission

Stormwater Commission Meeting Summary Friday January 26, 2018 Members Present: Rich Wlodarski, Thomas Powers, Mary Anderson, Andrew Vitale, Joseph LoVerde, Robert Callero, and Chuck Ostman. Others present: Jeff Wickenkamp from Hey & Associates, Jack Grana Utilities Superintendent. The Stormwater Commission meeting convened at 8:05 a.m. in the Council Chambers 114 at Village Hall. November 30th Meeting Summary: The Meeting Summary for the November 30th, 2017 meeting was approved. Old Business: There was no old business discussed. New Business: The following topics were presented and discussed Stormwater Update – Final Report Review The commission last met on November 30th to review a draft of the stormwater report. The commission previously approved the draft report in concept but wanted additional time to prepare comments and discuss with Chair LoVerde. Tom Powers, Joseph LoVerde, and Chuck Ostman since provided comments on the report. The major change from the November draft was the way projects were divvied up into quartiles. The projects did not seperate out evenly into 4 quartiles. The projects are now allocated as follows 1st Quatile:6 projects, 2nd Quartiles: 6 projects, 3rd Quartile: 7 projects, 4th Quartile: 7 projects. Project 23B (Jarvis relief sewer) was dropped from the top 12 projects. Dobson sewer 9B moved up in priority. The scores and rankings of the projects did not change, but the assignment to quartiles did. The reconfiguration was based on feedback from the November 30th meeting. The quartile chart was also revised to show relative value based on x-axis and matched the pie chart concept. This further demonstrated the concept of diminishing returns as more money is spent. The above changes were the only significant revisions since the November draft. Chair LoVerde asked about how to determine the benefit scores and structures benefitting from each project. For instance how does the $8 million 17-7A Dobson project score? The Village Engineer indicated the report finds that 24 home benefit during the 25-year storm and 66 homes benefit during the 100- year storm. It was noted that this particular project addresses a long term problem area. Hey discussed how previously a sewer project only serving Dobson and Oconto was not beneficial due to the cost involved, however if additional flood relief can be provided downstream then the project makes more sense. Regarding the Jarvis project, Chair LoVerde asked about the sewer installed in the police parking lot years ago and what that does to relieve flooding. Hey clarified that the Jarvis project addresses overland flooding coming from Chicago further upstream. The Commission discussed if the flooding describe was accurate, Hey indicated they had witnessed some of the flooding shown in the model. Commissioner Ostman had some lingering concerns about the cost of the 17-7a project and the benefits provided. Hey pointed out that the benefit calculation for Cleveland was different than the current approach which focuses on completely removing structures for flood area. The previous calculation during Tier1 awarded benefit for reduction in flood depth, even if a structure still flooded. By the nature of the process, the current list of projects will provide less benefits than Tier 1 due to diminishing returns. There was a discussion about whether Tier 1 should be re-scored for comparison purposes. The Village Engineer noted that rescoring the Tier 1 projects was outside the scope of the stormwater updates. Chair LoVerde felt that the stormwater report is a living document and really the report is meant to look forward instead of backwards. The important issue is that the current logic is well thought out. The commission agreed to present the results of the stormwater update at the March Informational Consideration meeting and followed by the Board Meeting. The board presentation should include information on schedule and funding. The stormwater update was approved by the commission by formal vote. MWRD – Call for projects A discussion was held regarding whether to apply for the upcoming MWRD call for projects funding opportunity. A question was asked whether the Greenwood project would qualify as shovel ready. According to the MWRD rules a 2019 construction timeframe is still considered shovel ready. The effort put forth in stormwater update counts towards the shovel ready definition. Overall, the Greenwood project is a very strong candidate for funding based on the information provided by the MWRD to date. Even if the project might not receive funding on this cycle, it is important to get the project in front of the MWRD so they become familiar with it. Another discussion was held regarding how much funding to request from the MWRD. Based on funding available it seems $2 million or 20% of the project cost was a reasonable amount to ask for. It was agreed by the commission to apply for the MWRD funding. New Greenwood Park Concept Design Update The commission reviewed some preliminary park design sketches prepared by Uhlir-Nelson for information purposes only. Next Meeting Date The date of the next meeting will be called at the discretion of the chair. Staff and Hey would present the stormwater update to the board in March. A follow up meeting with finance committee was also recommended to determine how much the Village could afford to build. The meeting was adjourned at 9:11 a.m.