Stormwater Master Plan reviewed

by Austin Stanton

I have read the Stormwater Master Plan published by Christopher B. Burke Engineering, Ltd dated July 2003 for the City of Des Plaines, IL.

To place our beliefs before the detail below, we believe that the City should strongly consider  revisiting the design standards for the proposed options since the comments below show that the proposed solution may fall short of the necessary requirements and expectations for our area. The City should take into account the results of the questionnaire/survey results that we produced last summer. The proposed solutions were based on virtually no input from our area.

The entire document is 140 pages, and currently is not publicly available in its entirety, so you can look here for the portions of the report relevant to the comments below where important key passages have been noted.

My comments about this report are as follows:

1. It is unclear when The City sent out the Flood Protection Questionnaire. The report implies that it was sent out after the 2001 flood event, but it may have been in 1986. Burke includes a separate table that documents phone calls received by The City during the 2001 event. It is important to note that there were very few respondents in our ward. I have no recollection of receiving the questionnaire, and I have been here since 1995.
2. The Plan is an update to the 1986 Storm Water Master Plan.
3. The proposed solutions are designed to handle the October, 2001 rain event (p 75), which was 3.8 inches of rain in 3-4 hours. This is close to last June’s event, but significantly under the September, 2008 event.
4. The report briefly addresses rear yard flooding (p. ES-3) and provides an estimate, but this issue appears to be outside the scope of this plan.
5. The priority list (p.ES-4) lists our area as the 4th highest priority. The highest priority area is in The Highwood Knolls. They have or had a significantly higher weighted score, by far, than any other area. This can probably be linked to the high level of responses to the questionnaire. Therefore, the lack of responses from our area may have hurt us.
6. On page 28, the report states that the “existing Marshall Drive storm sewer has insufficient capacity to convey tributary October, 2001 historic storm event runoff”.
7. On page 31, it states the same thing for the Pennsylvania Avenue storm sewer. These sewer systems are undersized. This is a critical piece of information.
8. Page 41 states the extent of the October, 2001 event and discusses the methods used to arrive at their recommendations.
9. Pages 73-77 provide a detailed description of how the storm systems in these 2 areas work. There are various alternatives that are discussed and evaluated; some are quite impractical, such as buying Friendship Park and turning it into a detention pond.
10. Alternative 1A solves the problem for Area 8 at the expense of Area 9. Alternative 1B is recommended to be used in conjunction with 1A. However, this is dependent on the existence of “the proposed Wille Rd. storm system”. It is not clear if that system was built. Note that Spaceco is the surveying division of Christopher Burke Engineering, so it should be assumed that the information they provided is accurate. Also, as I suspected, there are many technical difficulties with this option including easements and existing utilities. It is stated that if Alternatives 1A and 1B are done, flood protection for Area 8 is achieved during the October, 2001 event and “acceptable flood levels of 4.1 inches” occur at Pennsylvania and Oakton. This means that any event that exceeds the October, 2001 event would result in flooding exceeding 4.1 inches at Pennsylvania and Oakton.
11. Option 2, which seemed to be the most practical, won’t work due to existing elevations.

However the most disturbing aspect of this report by far, is addressed on Page ES-3. The report addresses the issue of the sanitary system surcharge. It recommends that the burden for this problem be put on the homeowner. I think that it is erroneously assumed that this problem is due to a combined sewer system, which we don’t have in our areas. Again, I believe that the proposed solution for our area will have little or no impact on the issue of the sanitary sewer surcharge. This should become a priority for us.

Going forward, we should determine if the City is going to revisit the design standards for the proposed options. Under the circumstances, the proposed solution may fall short of the necessary requirements for our area and almost certainly fall short of expectations. The City should take into account the results of the questionnaire/survey results that we produced last summer. The proposed solutions were based on virtually no input from our area.

Rear Yard Drainage -- cost sharing?

As we move into a new year, it seems that there will be some discussion about cost sharing mechanisms between residents and the City on the "rear yard drainage" part of the Flood Water Management project in Des Plaines. The topic is an the agenda os a Engineering Committee Meeting, chaired by Alderman Matt Bogusz on January 7 at 6:30 PM at City Hall. Rosemary Argus is also on this Engineering Committee and will attend.

This reporter senses that residents attending this meeting will be most vocal about and costs imposed on them for flood management.

Des Plaines vows to make streets, neighborhood flooding 2010 priorities - Daily Herald

The Daily Herald has given this blog some ink
http://www.dailyherald.com/story/print/?id=340302
thanks to one of our members, Austin Stanton (major contributor of a blog post)
is quoted in this extensively. 

Comments on 8th Ward Flooding Issues

The purpose of this article is threefold:

1. To help people understand that the now approved acceleration of the Storm Water Master Plan will likely result in minimal relief to the 8th Ward;
2. To highlight those issues which still need to be investigated and addressed by the City of Des Plaines; and
   
3. To help people understand the process and timeline for completing the storm sewer upgrades
   

SANITARY SEWER INFILTRATION ISSUES

While the proposed storm sewer work will likely reduce the occurrences of street flooding, the real issue is the sanitary sewer system. This issue is more complex and potentially more troubling than the storm sewer issue.

Since August 2007, I have experienced seepage in my basement six(6) times due to a surcharge in the sanitary system. Four (4) of these instances occurred when there was NO street flooding. On February 26th, considering the possibility that my sewer line was blocked, I had it rodded. No significant blockage was found. I asked the City to investigate, which they immediately did. They stated that they jet rodded the system and televised it and no blockages were found. On March 7th, I experienced the same problem, indicating a surcharge in the sanitary system. The possible causes of this surcharge can include the following:

1. Cross connections with the storm sewer system, possibly left over from the conversion of the combined sewer system
   
2. Infiltration of ground water due to collapsed or broken pipes
   
3. Infiltration due to tree roots into the system, causing larger breaches in the joints
   
4. Infiltration through the pipe joints, which I believe are not sealed, (or the seals have deteriorated). It is my understanding that the sanitary pipes are 7 foot clay pipes with a bell and flange joint
   
5. Infiltration through sanitary manholes that are below the water level of the flooded streets. This occurred in September and June
   
6. Infiltration through yard cleanouts of individual houses. The typical cleanout cover has a square stud on it that allows a pipe wrench to loosen or tighten the cover. These are often broken off by lawn mowers, leaving a hole about 1 inch square. When the top of the cleanout is below the water level of the flooded area, the water pours in, filling the system.

At my September meeting with Mayor Moylan, Tim Oakley, and Jon Duddles, Oakley stated that the source of infiltration was ground water due to an old system. He assured me that there were no cross connections that the City was aware of. However, based on the level of the water in the system in non-storm situations, this is hard to believe.

In order to identify and address infiltration issues with the sanitary sewer system, the City should do the following:

1. Perform a flow monitoring test on the entire system. They would measure the flow during periods of dry weather and compare it to the flow during various rain events.
   
2. Perform an infiltration inflow analysis based on the results of the flow monitoring. The purpose of this is to limit the amount of water required to be treated. The hierarchy of the regulatory agencies that govern this is USEPA/IEPA/MWRD/Local Municipality. This is a result of the Clean Water Act of 1976. MWRD does not want to treat any more water than it has to.
   
3. After the infiltration inflow analysis, the City should attempt to identify the major sources of infiltration. This could be done by televising the main lines. Blocked, broken, or collapsed lines or structures could be identified and repaired. Other solutions, short of replacing the entire system, would be to install liners in the worst lines. During times of street flooding the time it takes for the sanitary system to drain lags the storm system by 8-12 hours.
   
4. Smoke tests could be conducted to determine if there are any cross connections.
   

The Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD) is the independent governmental authority that treats sanitary waste water. The plant that services our neighborhood is located at Elmhurst and Oakton. The sanitary lines in the 8th Ward were originally designed to flow north, where they were then routed east and south again to the treatment plant in Stickney. When the Oakton plant was built, an interceptor sewer was run from Golf Road (or thereabouts) south to the new plant. This was more practical than reversing the flow in all the neighborhoods. This interceptor collects all the sanitary lines running north and returns it to the plant for treatment. I assume the treated water is then released into Willow Creek.

In MWRD's Manual of Procedures for the Administration of the Sewer Permit Ordinance, Section 6-5 specifically addresses the issues of groundwater infiltration and storm water inflow (I/I) into sanitary systems. This section addresses the reasons to minimize I/I, the limits of allowable I/I, the procedures local communities are required to perform to be in compliance, reporting requirements, and the long term maintenance and operations communities must undertake to remain in compliance. Based on my experience in the last year, it seems that the sanitary system may not comply with these requirements. It is unclear if the City is moving towards compliance or what MWRD's position on this is. There are potential sanctions for non-compliance, but the status of this whole situation is not known to me.

It is very unlikely that the proposed storm sewer improvements will have any impact on the sanitary system situation.

STORM SEWER ISSUES

It would be worthwhile to determine whether the design standard for the storm water system follows recommended guidelines set by expert authorities and those having jurisdiction. All new development above a certain area is required to detain some nominal quantity of storm water on site. This has been a requirement since the late 70s. MWRD sets the release rate and many cities, including Mt. Prospect, exceed that. I don't know about Des Plaines.

There is no enforceable "standard of care" that a municipality owes it's residents when it comes to storm drainage. There are health related issues that involve inadequate sanitary systems. These are overseen and enforced by the IEPA.

The design criteria should be re-examined. Duddles stated that the Plan was based on the October 2001 event. According to a Tim Oakley memorandum, that was approximately 3.4 inches in 4 hours. This is below the June 2009 event and significantly below the September 2008 event. The June event was over 5" between 3:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m., and the September event was over 6.5 " between 3:30 a.m. and 9:30 a.m with another 1.5" by 5:00 p.m. (Being a gardener and contractor, I have kept a weather journal for over 10 years) It is not practical or economical to design to the September event, which probably falls into a 50-75 year occurrence. However, to change the design criteria, it may be necessary to commission another report or at least amend the current one.

SCHEDULING ISSUES

To elaborate on the time line communicated by Jon Duddles (Asst Dir. of Public Works and Engineering) posted in a prior article:

• A formal Design Bid Package will have to be prepared by the city. This will tell the bidding engineering firms exactly what they will be bidding on. There will have to be some reasonable time allowed for the firms to put their bid together. If, during the bid process, questions or ambiguities are identified in the documents, addenda may be issued, and the bid period extended. The bid process could be 4 or even 6 weeks. After the bids are received, they will have to be reviewed for compliance with the requirements and budget. If the responsible low bid exceeds the budget, there will have to be some approval process to increase the design budget. If it's in budget, then the City will offer a contract. Budget increases and actual awards may require Council approval. Then the successful firm will enter into negotiations over the contract. This should be a relatively quick process. It is likely that the firm will have to post a bond, to ensure that the City is protected in the event breach of contract. Only when all this is done will the actual design start.
  
• There will likely be a preliminary design phase, in which numerous logistical issues are addressed, such as crossing Oakton St., getting easements, and coordinating with whatever utilities are currently running under Oakton. A point of discharge into Willow Creek will have to be determined. However, I'm told that approval to discharge into Willow Creek will not be required if it is in the City's limits. There will be issues with the elevations between the low point of the sewer on Marshall and the normal water level of the creek. There will be some minimal pitch required to ensure that the water will flow. I don't know how this will work after crossing Oakton. It seems likely that the sewer will be deep under Oakton to avoid whatever is currently there and may involve relocation, at least temporarily, of other utilities, i.e., Com-Ed, NICOR, etc. When this is done, the preliminary design may have to be submitted to various entities for review, i.e., MWRD, IDOT, etc. These entities will review and comment on the design, possibly making changes. The engineer will incorporate these changes into the design and continue. Upon completion of the design, it will likely have to be resubmitted to all entities for final approval. This process generally takes more time than it should, due to the bureaucracy involved.
  
• Then the Construction Bid process will start. It will be similar to the Design Bid process, but will not involve any intermediate steps. There will probably be a permit process and the City and contractor will have to agree on a schedule. There will be multiple trades involved, periodic inspections and approvals, and weather will be a factor. Material will have to be ordered, manufactured, and shipped. The construction process could easily extend to six months, probably no less than four at best. The work would probably start at the point of discharge and work backwards to keep the system from filling during rain events while work is proceeding. There may be an alternate to this. At some point, they will have to switch over from the old system to the new system. They would want all new asphalt and concrete work to be done by Thanksgiving, as well as any landscape restoration, although landscaping could be deferred until the following spring, if necessary.
  

COMPLETED WORK OR WORK IN PROGRESS

In addition to the work already designated in the City's Storm Water Master Plan, there are other projects in the 8th Ward that are already completed or are in progress. These projects include the City's work on Jeffery Lane and their televising of the sewer lines, and Illinois American's work in the Waycinden area.

Jeffery Lane Issues

In August, Jon Duddles stated that the work on Jeffery was the replacement of the water mains. The structures that were installed were not catch basins, which imply storm sewer work, but rather valve vaults, which allow the city to isolate smaller sections of the water main. Thus, in the event of a water main break, they don't have to shut down the entire neighborhood to make repairs. This is standard engineering practice.

Televised Sewer Lines

In his response to my second letter, Duddles listed the streets and dates that the sewer lines were televised.

• Dover, Danbury, Roxbury, Jeffery, and Devonshire 2009
• Jeffery, Doreen, and Westfield 2008
• Diamondhead Drive 2005

Illinois American

The Illinois American Water Association is a private utility company that services areas of Waycinden, dating back to before Waycinden was annexed. The conversion of the combined sewer system in Waycinden can only help our situation.

FLOOD CONTROL SOLUTIONS FOR HOMEOWNERS

I have reviewed the flood control systems on the City's website and have met with a contractor that installs these systems. Both the overhead sewer and flood control system should work if installed properly. In my opinion, the flood control system would be more effective. The overhead system may not work if storm water from drain tile is included. However, when the City states that the cost for the flood control system is around $8000, that does not include all the the electrical connections for the pump, landscape restoration, or repairs to interior finishes damaged by the installation. This system requires annual maintenance and has limitations on what can be run through the system; no Kleenex, tampons, Handiwipes, etc. The pump should be replaced every 6-8 years and it's expensive Neither of these systems work without power, necessitating some form of back-up power. Typical battery back-up is only good for 4-8 hours, not sufficient to have helped in August of 2007. The City should be lobbied to increase their contribution to homeowners to 50% for installing this system. For residents who have these systems (or think they have them), I can only speculate that they are not performing as designed, or not designed properly, because they should work.

It s a long road from budget to reality

Any city's budget is a major document that needs to be studied and scrutinized. The conversations and comments by Council Members and citizens alike at the well-attended budget meeting on Oct 13, 2009 was proof of that. And this was just one of many throughout the month of October. The culmination is tentatively scheduled for Oct 29th.

It seems that the administration and City Council did hear the pleas of, not only the 8th Ward residents, but also, their city-wide constituencies, about flooding issues throughout the city. So is this a done deal? Not likely. Discussions and comments by Alderman and city engineers are implying that the shovels will not hit the dirt until 2011. So what is the time line and milestones between now and then? Here is what I believe to be the short story:

• Oct 29th - final approval of budget
• What to watch for
1. Was the Stormwater Management Master Plan accelerated to move the start of problem areas 8 and 9 to 2010?
2. Was the revenue to support the acceleration approved at sufficient levels?

• Bidding the work (Survey Request for proposals sent scheduled for completion Dec 2009)
• What to watch for
1. Bid notices in the papers and on the Des Plaines web site.
2. Dates for Bid opening and acceptance.

• Design Phase of Problem areas 8 and 9 (Scheduled for winter - spring 2010)
  
• What to watch for
1. Has design work started by winter of 2010?
2. Is design work completed by Spring of 2010?
3. Activity of engineers and design teams on Marshall and Pennsylvania throughout this time frame.

• The work is beginning on Marshall and Pennsylvania (Fall 2010- Winter 2011)
• What to watch for
1. Notices to residents of traffic inconveniences in the vicinity
   
2. "Julie" markings and flags in the vicinity of the construction
   
3. Appearance of heavy equipment and porta-potties on and near Marshall and Pennsylvania

There is a long road between talking about this type of project and seeing it come to fruition. It would behoove us to continue to ask questions and learn more about how and when Problem areas 8 and 9 of the Stormwater management Master plan will be complete.
Updated 10/23/2009 -- scheduling information (in red); courtesy of Jon Duddles, Asst. Dir. of Public Works and Engineering

A plea to the Mayor and City Council at the October 13, 2009 Budget Meeting

Mayor Moylan and City Council Members,

My name is Halina Kraszewski, and I have resided at 685 Devonshire Drive in Des Plaines for 16 years.
As a resident of the 8^th Ward and as a Realtor with over 19 years of experience in the Real Estate industry, I am requesting that you approve the acceleration of the Storm Water Master Plan. Due to frequent floods our City has a stigma attached to it - “Des Plaines floods” - and some buyers would never consider looking for properties in our town, knowing that flooding also occurs in areas that are not even designated as flood zones.

Some of our residents in the 8^th Ward have exhausted their insurance claims and their insurance companies have canceled their coverage. At this time, those people do not have any protection against losses due to storm and sanitary sewer back up.

In order to be in compliance with the law, every Seller has to disclose to a potential Buyer any problems with flooding or leakage in the basement or crawlspace and explain it to a potential buyer in writing. A potential buyer has the right to check the CLUE report: this is a national insurance industry database that contains personal claims. A CLUE report is the equivalent of a credit report for a house, which examines all claims reported to the insurance company in a given period for five years. When a potential buyer learns about the extent of our flooding problems, he or she walks away from the purchase.

Banks have the right to check the CLUE report prior to approving a mortgage. Due to the tightening of lending requirements, financial institutions may deny issuing a mortgage because they do not want to get stuck with a high risk or uninsurable property.

When Sellers cannot sell, they walk away from the property and the home eventually ends up in foreclosure, thus bringing the value down for the neighboring properties. When property values decrease, the City of Des Plaines collects less revenue in transfer taxes. It should be in the best interest of our City to keep the value of the properties up and invest in our infrastructure.

Our 8^th Ward consists of middle class residents. Our homes are our biggest investments which we have to protect. Our property comes with a bundle of legal rights. One of those rights is enjoyment. Due to frequent floods, we cannot enjoy our homes. We are worried about our homes being invaded by water or sewage even though our homes are not located in the flood zone. We are worried when we go to work, when we go away for the weekend or when we go away on vacation. We are worried about the potential risk of disease from the contaminated water that sewage leaves in our homes. Our homes are not being used the way we intended to use them. Our family rooms in the lower level are left without carpets due to frequent water and sewer invasions. Again, I am talking about homes that are located in a NO FLOOD ZONE.

I am asking that you please help us by approving the acceleration of the Storm Water Master Plan and formulating an interim flood protection plan while residents await construction.

Thank you for your support!

For access to the CLUE database point your browser to
http://www.choicepoint.com/products/risk_reports.html?l2=homesellers_disclosure&bc=c&sb=c

Accelerating the Stormwater Management Master Plan -- Dollars and Votes

On October 13, Rosemary Argus will propose that the Stormwater Management Master Plan be accelerated to be completed by 2013 as opposed to the current schedule of 2017 completion. So as I see it, the issue will come down to Dollars and Votes.
Let's talk Dollars.
During a meeting (Oct. 1, 2009) attended by over 100 8th Ward residents, Councilman Argus attempted to facilitate a discussion about the Dollars issue, "can we raise revenue via a water bill or property tax increase?" She did not have the "how much" at hand; but if she did, I believe it would have been a non-issue. So how much revenue are we talking about?

• There are approximately 23,000 households (comments welcomed from authoritative sources on this number. )
• A presentation delivered (City of Des Plaines Jon Duddles P.E.) at this Oct 1 meeting estimated that the city will need $6,603,881 over 4 Fiscal Years (2010-2013) to accelerate the Flood Control CIP. Doing the math, that is:
  
• $287/household (over 4 years)
• $72/household/year

Note that the above amounts will actually be lower because the businesses in our community will bear some of the expense.

These dollars do not seem exorbitant to improve our flooding infrastructure. So raising this kind of revenue per household seems, I think, very doable -- $72/tax bill; or on a bi-monthly water bill, $12/bill. (Comments and math corrections welcomed).

Now let's talk Votes.
Looking at a table of the Stormwater Management Master Plan that lays out the yearly expenditures to complete the Plan in 4 rather than 8 years, the plan would have improvements in five out of the eight wards (Wards 2,3,5,7,8). All of a sudden there should be five out of eight Councilmen voting YES, since it positively affects their constituency.

A$72/ year increase to either my tax bill or water bill to help Des Plaines mitigate the flooding risk is a worthwhile investment with far-reaching implications.