Oak Park Mult-Hazard Mitigation Plan

Draft
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois
Draft
Table of Contents
Chapter 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Why a Plan is Required ..................................................................................................................9 1.2 Village of Oak Park: General Profile ............................................................................................10 1.3 Hazard Vulnerability Analysis (HVA) Prioritization ......................................................................12 1.4 Mitigation Planning Process ........................................................................................................21 Technical Expertise ............................................................................................................................21 Involving the Public ............................................................................................................................21 Incorporating Existing Plans ..............................................................................................................21 External Agency Coordination ...........................................................................................................22
Chapter 2 Risk Assessment.....................................................................................................23

2.1 Severe Winter Storms ..................................................................................................................23 Area Impacted ....................................................................................................................................24 Magnitude and Severity.....................................................................................................................24 Historical Events ................................................................................................................................24 Frequency...........................................................................................................................................25 Vulnerability........................................................................................................................................25 Potential Losses.................................................................................................................................26 2.2 Severe Storms ..............................................................................................................................26 Area Impacted ....................................................................................................................................28 Magnitude and Severity.....................................................................................................................28 Historical Events ................................................................................................................................28 Frequency...........................................................................................................................................28 Vulnerability........................................................................................................................................29 Potential Losses.................................................................................................................................30 2.3 Extreme Heat................................................................................................................................31 Area Impacted ....................................................................................................................................32 Magnitude and Severity.....................................................................................................................32 Historical Events ................................................................................................................................32 1
Draft
Draft
Frequency...........................................................................................................................................33 Vulnerability........................................................................................................................................33 Potential Losses.................................................................................................................................34 2.4 Tornadoes.....................................................................................................................................34 Area Impacted ....................................................................................................................................35 Magnitude and Severity.....................................................................................................................36 Historical Events ................................................................................................................................36 Frequency...........................................................................................................................................37 Vulnerability........................................................................................................................................38 Potential Losses.................................................................................................................................40 2.5 Drought .........................................................................................................................................40 2.6 Earthquakes .................................................................................................................................41 Area Impacted ....................................................................................................................................44 Historical Events ................................................................................................................................44 Frequency...........................................................................................................................................46 Vulnerability........................................................................................................................................46 Potential Losses.................................................................................................................................47 2.7 Sewer Backups.............................................................................................................................47 Area Impacted ....................................................................................................................................50 Magnitude and Severity.....................................................................................................................50 Historical Events ................................................................................................................................50 Frequency...........................................................................................................................................50 Vulnerability........................................................................................................................................50 Potential Losses.................................................................................................................................51 2.8 Flooding ........................................................................................................................................51 2.9 Areas of Concern..........................................................................................................................62 Critical Facilities .................................................................................................................................63 Vulnerability........................................................................................................................................64 Repetitive/Potential Loss Areas........................................................................................................66 2.10 Cyber Attacks/Security ..............................................................................................................66 Area Impacted ....................................................................................................................................68 Magnitude and Severity.....................................................................................................................68 2
Draft
Draft
Historical Events ................................................................................................................................68 Frequency...........................................................................................................................................68 Vulnerability........................................................................................................................................68 Potential Losses.................................................................................................................................68 2.11 Power Outages ...........................................................................................................................69 Area Impacted ....................................................................................................................................69 Magnitude and Severity.....................................................................................................................69 Historical Events ................................................................................................................................69 Frequency...........................................................................................................................................69 Vulnerability........................................................................................................................................70 Potential Losses.................................................................................................................................70
Chapter 3 Preventative Measures...........................................................................................71

3.1 Developing Trends .......................................................................................................................71 3.2 Preventative Measures................................................................................................................71 Planning and Zoning ..........................................................................................................................71 Open Space Preservation ..................................................................................................................73 Subdivision Regulations ....................................................................................................................74 Building Code .....................................................................................................................................74 Storm Water Management ................................................................................................................75 Development Incentives ....................................................................................................................76 3.3 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................................76 3.4 Recommendations.......................................................................................................................77
Chapter 4 Emergency Management and Response ..............................................................78

4.1 Threat Recognition.......................................................................................................................80 Winter Storms ....................................................................................................................................80 4.2 Warning.........................................................................................................................................80 StormReady........................................................................................................................................81 Local Implementation ........................................................................................................................82 4.3 Response......................................................................................................................................82 Local Implementation ........................................................................................................................83 4.4 Critical Facilities Protection .........................................................................................................83 Local Implementation ........................................................................................................................84 3
Draft
Draft
4.5 Recovery and Mitigation ..............................................................................................................84 Local Implementation ........................................................................................................................84 4.6 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................................85
Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy..................................................................................................86

5.1 Mitigation Goals ...........................................................................................................................86 5.2 Mitigation Measure Categories ...................................................................................................86 Prevention ..........................................................................................................................................86 Property Protection ............................................................................................................................87 Public Education and Awareness......................................................................................................87 Natural Resource Protection .............................................................................................................87 Emergency Services...........................................................................................................................87 Structural Projects .............................................................................................................................87 5.3 Potential Mitigation Measures ....................................................................................................87 Severe Storms....................................................................................................................................87 Severe Winter Storms........................................................................................................................88 Extreme Heat......................................................................................................................................89 Tornadoes...........................................................................................................................................89 Drought...............................................................................................................................................89 Earthquakes .......................................................................................................................................89 Sewer Backups ..................................................................................................................................90 Goal #1 ..........................................................................................................................................93 Goal #2 ..........................................................................................................................................94 Goal #3 ..........................................................................................................................................95 Summary of Recently Imposed/Expected Community Sustainment Activities.........................95 Baseline Metrics ...........................................................................................................................96 Cyber-Attack .......................................................................................................................................97 Power Outages ...................................................................................................................................98 Natural/Sustainable Landscaping....................................................................................................99 The Landscapes of Yesterday and Today ................................................................................. 100 Benefits of Natural Landscaping .............................................................................................. 101 Cost of Landscape Installation and Maintenance ...................................................... 101 Improved Water Quality ................................................................................................ 101 4
Draft
Draft
Reduced Air Pollution ................................................................................................... 102 Reduced Noise Pollution .............................................................................................. 102 Climatological Benefits ................................................................................................. 102 Conservation Education ............................................................................................... 102 Natural Landscaping on a Small Scale..................................................................................... 103 Plant Lists ................................................................................................................................... 104 Public Outreach............................................................................................................................... 106 Outreach Projects ........................................................................................................................... 106 Community Newsletter/Direct Mailings.................................................................................... 106 News Media................................................................................................................................ 106 Other Approaches ...................................................................................................................... 106 Local Implementation ................................................................................................................ 107 Libraries and Websites .............................................................................................................. 107 Technical Assistance ................................................................................................................. 107 Real Estate Disclosures............................................................................................................. 107 Other Methods ................................................................................................................................ 108 Insurance.................................................................................................................................... 108 Incentives ................................................................................................................................... 108 Funding Mechanisms ..................................................................................................................... 108 5.4 Mitigation Strategy and Analysis .............................................................................................. 109 Specific Strategies to Reduce or Eliminate Flooding Damages................................................... 109 Option 1: Downspout Disconnection ........................................................................................ 111 Option 2: Rain Barrel ................................................................................................................. 112 Option 3: Rain Gardens ............................................................................................................. 113 Option 4: Dry Wells .................................................................................................................... 114 Option 5: Overhead Sewers and Other Backflow Prevention.................................................. 114 Option 6: BMP Demonstration Site........................................................................................... 115 Option 7: Permeable Pavement ................................................................................................ 116 Option 8: Boulevard Bioswale ................................................................................................... 117 Option 9: Inlet Restriction.......................................................................................................... 117 Option 10: Local Sewer Improvements .................................................................................... 120 Option 11: Trunk Sewer Improvements.................................................................................... 122 5
Draft
Draft
Option 12: Sewer Study Update................................................................................................ 122 Other Mitigation Strategies ............................................................................................................ 123
Chapter 6 Action Plan............................................................................................................ 125

6.1 Action Plan Overview................................................................................................................. 125 6.2 Mitigation Action Items ............................................................................................................. 125 MHMP Adoption .............................................................................................................................. 125 Continuation of Stakeholders Committee ..................................................................................... 125 6.3 Plan Maintenance ..................................................................................................................... 126 MHMP Monitoring and Maintenance............................................................................................. 126 Implementation Through Existing Programs ................................................................................. 126
References ................................................................................................................................ 127 Appendices A: Planning Process and Contributing Members ................................................................... 128 B: Summary of Public Involvement ......................................................................................... 130
Agenda, Regular Board Meeting, September 6, 2011 ................................................................. 131 Minutes, Regular Board Meeting, September 6, 2011................................................................ 137 Agenda, Regular Board Meeting, October 6, 2011 ...................................................................... 148 Minutes, Regular Board Meeting, October 6, 2011 ..................................................................... 149 Agenda, Finance Committee Meeting, February 9, 2012 ............................................................ 154 Minutes, Finance Committee Meeting, February 9, 2012 ........................................................... 155 Agenda, Finance Committee Meeting, February 16, 2012.......................................................... 159 Minutes, Finance Committee Meeting, February 16, 2012......................................................... 160 Agenda, Special Meeting of the Board, March 1, 2012............................................................... 162 Minutes, Special Meeting of the Board, March 1, 2012.............................................................. 163 Webpage, Water and Sewer Division............................................................................................. 168
Attachments 1: Combined Sewer System Review and Short Term Improvement Study, 2011
Draft
Draft
Tables
11: 12: 13: 14: 15: 16: 17: 18: 21: 22: 23: 24: 25: 26: 27: 28: 29: 210: 211: 212: 213: 214: 215: 216: 217: 218: 41: 51: 52: 53: 54: 55: 56: 57: 58: 59: 510: 511: 512: PresidentialDisasterDeclarations:CookCounty PrioritizationofPotentialHazardsintheVillageofOakPark CompletedVillageofOakParkHVA,2012 VillageofOakParkHVA:NationalPlanningEvents VillageofOakParkHVA:NationalEventEMCycle VillageofOakParkHVA:LocalPlanningEvents VillageofOakParkHVA:LocalEventEMCycle VillageofOakParkHVA:CompleteThreatRankings SummaryofSnowClassificationsbytheNationalWeatherService Deaths/InjuriesDuetoWinterStormsReportedinCookCountySince2000 Deaths/InjuriesduetoThunderstormsReportedinCookCountySince2000 Possibleheatdisordersforpeopleinhigherriskgroupsforrangesofheatindex TotalDeathsinCookCountyduetoextremeheatsince2000 EnhancedFujitaScaleusedtocategorizetornadoes DeathsandinjuriesfromtornadoesinCookCountysince1954 Earthquakemeasurementscales SummaryofStormEventsandBasementBackups Summaryoftypesofcriticalfacilitiesandtheirdescription SummaryofcriticalfacilitiesandinfrastructureintheVillage Facilityvulnerabilitytoseverestormsandtornadoes Facilityvulnerabilitytoseverewinterstorms Facilityvulnerabilitytoextremeheat Facilityvulnerabilitytodrought Facilityvulnerabilitytoearthquake Facilityvulnerabilitytosewerbackups ComEdOutageReportbyCause ResponsibilityMatrix HazardMitigationStrategiesseverestorm HazardMitigationStrategiesseverewinterstorms HazardMitigationStrategiestornadoes HazardMitigationStrategiesearthquakes MitigationStrategiesforCombinedsewerBackups OakParkWaterUseandCost OakparkAverageHouseholdWateruse,2009 PlantsforFullSun PlantsforFullSunPartShade PlantsforShadedAreas IdentifiedSolutionsandtheirBenefits OtherMitigationStrategies
Draft
Draft
Figures
11: 12: 21: 22: 23: 24: 25: 26: 27: 28: 29: 210: 31: 51: 52: 53: 54: 55: 56: 57: 58: VillageofOakParkLocation VillageofOakParkVicinityMap Averagenumberofdaysatorabove90Fand100FinIllinois DesignwindspeedssetforthbytheAmericanSocietyofCivilEngineers MapofthenumberofEF3,EF4,andEF5tornadoespersparemileintheUnitedStates SeismicZonesinIllinois EarthquakesoccurringinIllinoisbetween1796and2008 Reportedearthquakeactivity(intensity)fortheJune28,2004earthquakeinIllinois Locationsofbasementfloodingfromcombinedsewerdischarge ComparisonofDWP100yrinundationmappingandFEMAeffectiveFIRMLowerDes PlainesRiverWatershed MaliciousCodesDetectedbySymantec EmailTrafficIdentifiedasMaliciousbyIndustrySector VillageofOakParkZoningMap PrairiePlantingatLucentTechnologies,Naperville,Illinois DifficulttoMaintainConventionalLandscaping NaturalLandscapingforHabitatandReducedMaintenance Representationofflowandvolumecomparisonutilizingdownspoutdisconnections Representationofflowandvolumecomparisonutilizingrainbarrels,raingardens,and downspoutdisconnection Representationofflowandcomparisonassociatedwithinletrestriction VillageofOakParkSewerImprovementsSince1984 ProposedLocalandSewerTrunkImprovements
Draft
Draft
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION
1.1 Why a Plan is Required
The Village of Oak Park (the Village), located in Cook County, Illinois, (Figure 1.1) has experienced a variety of flooding and drainage problems for numerous years. Storms in August 2007, September 2008, July 2010, and again in July 2011, greatly impacted homes in the Village. In September of 2008, the Village received over 6 inches of rain in less than 2 days again resulting in numerous homes flooding. The problems arise from strained storm and sanitary sewer systems which result in basements flooding with both rainwater and raw sewage in multiple areas of the Village. Figure 1-1: Village of Oak Park Location
In response to repeated flooding of basements in the Northeast quadrant of the Village, the Village directed the Public Works Department and the Emergency Preparedness Department to prepare and Multiple Hazard Mitigation Plan and to provide a mechanism for community involvement in the preparation of this plan. While flooding is a significant hazard of interest in the Village, the area is subject to the danger and damage caused by other hazards. Cook County has had 17 Presidential Disaster declarations in the last 45 years due to natural hazards (Table 1-1), including the severe storm and flooding experienced in the Village in both August 2007 and September 2008. In the 2010 Illinois Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan (2010 State Plan), the State rated hazards by County based on occurrence, vulnerability, severity of impact and population. For Cook County, the threat from severe storms, severe winter storms and severe heat are rated as Severe; Floods and 9
Draft
Draft
tornado events are rated as High; and drought and earthquake events are rated as Guarded (2010 State Plan, Page III-14).
Table 1-1: Presidential disaster declarations: Cook County Date Number Type April 1967 OEP 227-DR Tornado September 1972 OEP 351-DR Severe Storm, Flood April 1973 OEP 373-DR Severe Storm, Flood June 1976 FDAA 583-DR Severe Storm, Flood January 1979 FDAA 3068-EM Blizzards, Snowstorms June 1981 FEMA 643-DR Severe Storm, Flood, Tornadoes October 1986 FEMA 776-DR Severe Storm, Flood August 1987 FEMA 798-DR Severe Storm, Flood July 1993 FEMA 997-DR Flood, Severe Storm July 1996 FEMA 1129-DR Flood September 1997 FEMA 1188 Flood January 1999 FEMA 3134-EM Winter Snow Storm January 2001 FEMA 3161-EM Severe Winter Storm September 2007 FEMA 1729-DR Severe Storm, Flood October 2008 FEMA 1800-DR Severe Storm, Flood August 2010 FEMA-1935 Severe Storm, Torrential Rains March 2011 FEMA-1960 Severe Winter Storm (Source: http://www.state.il.us/iema/planning/planning.htm)
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (42 USC 5165) established the requirement of a multi-hazard mitigation plan as a prerequisite for Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mitigation funds and went into effect on November 2004. The Village has formally decided to prepare this Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan (MHMP) to serve as the cornerstone of a long-term hazard mitigation strategy with the objective of reducing future disaster losses and to meet the eligibility requirements for FEMA hazard mitigation grant funding. In response to the storms in August 2011, the communities of Oak Park, Berwyn, and Cicero began talks with Cook County to determine if funding was available to conduct a multi-jurisdictional mitigation plan. As there was no funding available to move forward on this plan, and individual jurisdictions did not have appropriate levels of funding available, it was directed by the Village manager for Oak Park to complete this plan internally for the Village.
1.2 Village of Oak Park: General Profile

The Village of Oak Park, located in Cook County, Illinois, sits approximately 11 miles west of Lake Michigan and shares a common border with Chicago on the north and west and covers an area of 4.5 square-miles (Figures 1.1 and 1.2). The 2010 census estimated the population of the Village at 51,878. There were 21,938 households within the Village limits and the median family income was 10
Draft
Draft
$73,086. (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/17/1754885.html)
Figure 1-2: Village of Oak Park Vicinity Map
Cold winters, warm summers, and relatively large daily, monthly, and yearly variations in both temperatures and precipitation characterize the climate in the County. Average annual temperatures in northern Illinois range from 48F to 57F. Average winter highs range from the 30s with average lows into the teens. Average summer highs reach the 80s while lows dip down to the 60s across the state. Spring and fall have more moderate temperatures with average spring temperatures ranging from 57F down to 36F. Average fall highs range from 60F down to 40F. Northern Illinois averages 10 days at or above 90F and days at or above 100F are quite rare, occurring about every other year. Approximately 16 days per year are at or below 0F. The highest and lowest ranges temperatures ever reported in Illinois were 117F in East St. Louis on July 14, 1954 and 36F in Congerville on January 5, 1999. (2010 State Plan, Page I-3) Northern Illinois averages 32 inches of precipitation annually with the average annual snowfall is 36 inches. Winter snowfall is heaviest in the Chicago area and in enhanced by lake-effect snows from Lake Michigan. The greatest 24-hour rainfall was 16.94 inches at Aurora, just southwest of the Village, on July 17-18, 1996. The greatest one-year precipitation was 74.58 inches at New Burnside, southern Illinois, in 1950. The greatest 24-hour snowfall was 37.8 inches at Astoria, central Illinois, on February 27-28, 1900. The greatest winter snowfall was 105.1 inches at Antioch, just north of the Village, in 1978-1979. (2010 State Plan, Page I-4) 11
Draft
Draft
1.3 Hazard Vulnerability Analysis (HVA) Prioritization

Hazards were prioritized on a countywide scale in the 2010 State Plan and in 2012 by Cook County. To help prioritize hazards within the Village, the Village conducted its own Hazard Vulnerability Study and involved numerous community partners. Hazard ratings for the County, as determined in the 2010 State Plan, were based on a combination of frequency of occurrence and severity of impacts. The following categories were used in the 2010 State Plan prioritization: Historical/Probability - Identifying what has occurred in the past to project the probability for future occurrences; Vulnerability - Potential residents impacted resulting from vulnerability assessment; Severity of Impact Potential dollar impacts resulting from vulnerability assessment; Population Considering both existing and future population trends; and Economic Impact Specific impacts experienced by the Village.
The Village of Oak Park chose the Wisconsin Hazard Vulnerability Assessment Tool. Respondents were asked to rate the effect of numerous national planning events (large scale disasters and terrorism), local planning events (smaller scale natural disasters and terrorism), and their effects on the following areas: Human Impact Healthcare Services Impact Community Impact Local Public Health Agency (LPHA) Impact Property Impact, and Business Impact
Where many HVA tools routinely use categories and descriptive words such as a few, several, or many, the Wisconsin tool uses precise language for each rating category. Respondents were asked to give their opinion on the percent of each category that would be affected by an average occurrence of a specific event and then assign the appropriate rating. As such, the Wisconsin HVA rating criteria are as follows: 0 1 2 3 No impact expected Low (less than 1% affected) Moderate (1%-10% affected) High (more than 10% affected)
12
Draft
Draft
Utilizing the Wisconsin tool also allows respondents to include their thoughts on the emergency management cycle for both the State and Village. This cycle includes: prevention, preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation. While the risk of a severe thunderstorm is high, planning and mitigation efforts taken in the Village reduce the overall impact that storm would have on the Village.
Table 2-17 ranks the hazards with the highest risk based on the 2012 Village HVA. It should be noted that the following terrorism-related activities were highly rated threats to the Village: Explosive/IED attack Biological attack food contamination Biological disease pandemic flu
TABLE 1-2: Prioritization of potential hazards in the Village of Oak Park Event Risk 59% Severe Thunder-storm 56% Extreme Heat 53% Extreme Cold 53% Blizzard 51% Power outage 49% Ice Storm 49% Cyber Attack 48% VIP Visit 45% Computer Failure 42% Flooding
NOTE: For the purposes of this HVA, flooding refers to basement flood/sewer backup. In completing the Hazard Vulnerability Analysis (HVA), Village employees and community partners including businesses, schools, representatives from surrounding communities, Faith-based organizations, hospitals and health care agencies, and volunteer agencies were asked to provide their input. Historical information was then reviewed to provide corroboration with current beliefs and plans to complete the project. With this completion, the Village is better prepared to focus mitigation and preparedness assets towards those threats most likely to cause damage, injury, death, and loss of life and property. The following pages show the completed 2012 Village of Oak Park broken out by major section.
13
Draft
Draft
Table 1-3: Completed Village of Oak Park HVA,
14
Draft
Draft
Name of Submitting Local Public Health Agency and Tribe: Public Health Department, The Village of Oak Park, Illinos List of Participating LPHA/Tribe(s), and other Partners: See attached list WI HVA Meeting Date(s): See attached list
RISK PROBABILITY HUMAN IMPACT HEALTHCARE COMMUNITY IMPACT SERVICES IMPACT LPHA IMPACT PROPERTY IMPACT BUSINESS IMPACT MITIGATION PREPAREDNESS RESPONSE RECOVERY
WI HAZARD VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT TOOL

National Planning Scenarios* Natural Disaster Major Earthquake Natural Disaster Major Hurricane Biological Disease Outbreak Pandemic flu Biological Attack Aerosol Anthrax Biological Attack Plague Biological Attack Food Contamination Biological Attack Foreign Animal Disease Chemical Attack Toxic Industrial Chemicals Chemical Attack Chlorine Tank Explosion Chemical Attack Blister Agent Chemical Attack Nerve Agent Explosives Attack Improvised Explosive Nuclear Detonation Improvised Device Radiological Attack Radiological Dispersal Cyber Attack Local Planning Events* Earthquake Drought Wild Fire Severe Thunderstorm Tornado Flooding Flash Flooding Landslide Extreme Heat Extreme Cold Blizzard Ice Storm Hazmat Release/Explosion (fixed site) Hazmat Release/Explosion (transport) Nuclear Facility Incident (fixed site) Nuclear Facility Incident (transport) Epidemic Pandemic Power Outage Water System Failure Major Communications Disruption Computer Failure Airplane Crash Civil Disturbance Fuel Shortage Multiple House/Building Fire Multiple Vehicle Highway Accident Municipal Water Contamination Supply Disruption VIP Visit Community-specific Planning Events** Civic/Sports Events High-density population (University, etc.) Military Base 2012 Other Federal Installations
Relative threat (increases with percentage)
Likelihood of future occurrence
Percentage of healthcare Percentage of population Percentage of community services likely to be likely to be injured or kil ed likely to be affected affected under an under an average under an average average occurrence of occurrence of the hazard occurrence of the hazard the hazard
0 = N/A (no impact expected) 1= Low (<1% affected) 2 = Moderate (1-10% affected) 3 = High (>10% affected) 0 = N/A (no impact expected) 1= Low (<1% affected) 2 = Moderate (1-10% affected) 3 = High (>10% affected) 0 = N/A (no impact expected) 1= Low (<1% affected) 2 = Moderate (1-10% affected) 3 = High (>10% affected)
Percentage of public Percentage of properties Percentage of health services likely to likely to be affected businesses likely to be Internal External Internal External Internal External Internal External be affected under an under an average affected under an (Jurisdictional) (Region/State) (Jurisdictional) (Region/State) (Jurisdictional) (Region/State) (Jurisdictional) (Region/State) average occurrence of occurrence of the average occurrence of the hazard hazard the hazard
0 = N/A (no impact expected) 1= Low (<1% affected) 2 = Moderate (1-10% affected) 3 = High (>10% affected) 0 = N/A (no impact expected) 1= Low (<1% affected) 2 = Moderate (1-10% affected) 3 = High (>10% affected) 0 = N/A (no impact expected) 1= Substantial 1= Substantial 1= Substantial 1= Substantial 1= Substantial 1= Substantial 1= Substantial 1= Substantial 1= Low (<1% affected) 2 = Moderate 2 = Moderate 2 = Moderate 2 = Moderate 2 = Moderate 2 = Moderate 2 = Moderate 2 = Moderate 2 = Moderate (1-10% affected) 3 = Limited or none 3 = Limited or none 3 = Limited or none 3 = Limited or none 3 = Limited or none 3 = Limited or none 3 = Limited or none 3 = Limited or none 3 = High (>10% affected)
0 - 100%
0 = N/A (implausible) 1= Low (0-1event / 30 yrs) 2 = Moderate (2-3 events / 30 yrs) 3 = High (4+ events / 30 yrs)
21% 11% 30% 24% 10% 35% 17% 32% 30% 23% 14% 29% 24% 20% 49%
1.00
0.43
1.71 1.14 0.57 1.71 0.71 1.29 1.57 0.86 0.86 1.57 1.00 0.86 2.43 0.71 0.71 0.00 2.86 1.57 2.14 1.43 0.00 2.29 2.43 2.86 2.57 0.86 1.14 0.29 0.43 0.86 1.43 2.86 1.14 1.86 2.29 0.71 1.57 1.29 2.14 2.71 1.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 0.00 0.00
1.29 0.20 2.29 1.57 1.00 1.83 0.80 1.40 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.17 2.25 2.00 1.17 1.29 0.57 0.17 1.14 2.00 1.00 0.83 0.20 1.57 1.29 1.14 1.29 1.67 1.71 0.60 0.80 1.14 1.71 1.29 1.00 1.00 1.29 0.83 1.29 1.17 1.14 1.00 2.00 1.00 0.57 0.83 0.25 0.00 0.25
1.67 0.25 2.67 2.00 1.75 2.20 1.75 2.00 2.20 1.25 1.25 2.00 2.67 1.67 1.80 1.67 0.67 0.00 0.83 2.00 1.17 1.00 0.25 2.17 1.67 1.33 1.67 1.80 2.00 0.50 1.25 2.33 2.83 1.50 2.00 1.50 1.83 2.00 1.33 0.80 1.50 1.00 1.80 1.00 0.50 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
1.71 0.20 2.57 1.86 1.40 1.83 1.20 1.60 2.17 1.40 1.40 1.67 2.25 2.00 2.33 1.57 0.86 0.17 2.00 2.29 1.86 1.33 0.00 2.00 1.71 2.43 2.43 1.50 2.14 0.20 1.20 1.86 2.43 1.86 2.17 2.14 1.71 1.33 1.57 1.83 1.14 0.86 2.33 0.83 1.29 1.00 0.25 0.00 0.00
1.60 0.50 2.67 2.00 1.75 2.20 1.50 2.00 2.20 1.25 1.75 2.20 2.67 2.00 2.00 1.67 0.83 0.20 1.17 2.17 1.17 1.40 0.00 2.33 1.83 1.83 2.00 1.80 2.00 0.75 1.50 2.17 2.83 1.50 2.40 1.50 1.50 2.00 1.50 0.80 1.33 1.00 2.20 0.80 0.50 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00
2.00 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.80 0.75 0.75 1.00 0.50 0.25 1.20 2.33 0.67 1.40 1.60 0.80 0.00 2.00 2.40 2.60 1.75 0.00 1.00 1.60 2.60 2.60 1.75 1.40 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00 2.20 1.25 1.60 1.00 1.50 1.40 0.75 1.00 0.60 1.25 0.75 0.80 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1.83 0.25 1.83 1.67 1.75 2.00 1.75 1.50 2.00 1.25 1.00 1.60 2.33 1.67 2.40 1.60 0.80 0.00 1.80 2.00 2.20 2.00 0.00 1.40 1.80 2.40 2.40 1.75 1.60 0.67 1.33 1.20 1.80 2.20 2.25 2.60 2.40 1.50 1.80 1.25 1.00 0.60 2.25 1.00 1.20 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00
2.00 3.00 1.75 1.50 2.00 2.00 2.67 2.33 1.75 2.50 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.50 2.33 3.00 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.00 3.00 2.25 2.50 2.25 2.25 2.00 1.75 3.00 2.00 1.33 1.50 1.75 1.33 1.75 1.50 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.25 1.25 1.33 2.00 2.33 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.00
2.00 3.00 1.75 2.25 1.50 1.75 2.33 2.33 1.75 2.50 2.00 2.25 2.50 3.00 2.25 2.75 3.00 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 2.33 3.00 2.75 2.50 1.75 2.00 2.00 1.75 1.00 3.00 2.00 1.50 2.00 1.33 2.50 2.25 2.33 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 1.33 2.00 2.67 1.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
2.25 3.00 1.25 2.50 3.00 2.00 2.50 2.50 1.67 3.00 1.00 1.67 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.33 2.00 3.00 1.33 1.67 2.00 1.50 3.00 2.00 1.67 1.67 1.67 2.00 1.33 3.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.33 2.00 1.67 1.67 2.00 1.67 2.50 1.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 2.50 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00
1.75 3.00 1.50 2.25 2.00 1.50 2.50 2.50 1.67 3.00 2.00 1.67 2.00 1.00 2.33 2.67 3.00 3.00 2.33 1.67 1.67 2.50 3.00 2.67 2.00 1.33 1.33 2.00 1.33 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.33 2.33 2.00 2.33 2.00 1.67 1.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 3.00
1.67 3.00 1.33 1.67 1.00 2.00 2.50 2.50 1.67 3.00 1.00 1.33 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.33 2.00 3.00 1.00 1.67 1.67 1.00 3.00 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00 2.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 2.50 1.00 2.00 3.00 3.00
2.00 3.00 1.00 2.33 1.00 1.67 2.50 2.50 2.00 3.00 2.00 1.67 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.67 3.00 3.00 2.67 2.33 1.67 2.50 3.00 3.00 2.67 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.33 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.67 1.00 2.33 2.33 1.50 2.33 1.50 1.67 1.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 3.00
2.00 3.00 1.33 1.67 2.00 2.00 2.50 2.50 1.33 3.00 1.00 1.33 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.33 2.00 3.00 1.67 1.67 2.00 1.00 3.00 2.00 1.33 1.67 1.67 1.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 2.50 2.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
2.00 3.00 1.00 1.67 1.00 2.00 2.50 2.50 1.67 3.00 2.00 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.67 2.67 3.00 3.00 2.67 2.00 1.67 2.50 3.00 2.67 2.33 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.33 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.67 1.00 2.33 2.33 1.50 2.33 1.50 1.67 1.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
18% 16% 0% 59% 34% 42% 28% 0% 56% 53% 53% 49% 17% 19% 5% 9% 15% 22% 51% 19% 38% 45% 13% 31% 26% 31% 30% 17% 25% 48%
40% 20% 0% 0%
Table 1-4: Village of Oak Park HVA: National Planning Events
15
Draft
Draft
Name of Submit ing Local Public Health Agency and Tribe: Public Health Department, The Vil age of Oak Park, Il inos List of Participating LPHA/Tribe(s), and other Partners: See attached list WI HVA Meeting Date(s): See attached list
PROBABILITY HUMAN IMPACT HEALTHCARE COMMUNITY IMPACT LPHA IMPACT PROPERTY IMPACT BUSINESS IMPACT SERVICES IMPACT
Percentage of businesses likely to be affected under an average occurrence of the hazard
RISK Relativethreat (increaseswith percentage) 0100% 21% 11% 30% 24% 10% 35% 17% 32% 30% 23% 14% 29% 24% 20% 49%

National Planning Scenarios* Natural Disaster Major Earthquake Natural Disaster Major Hurricane Biological Disease Outbreak Pandemic flu Biological Attack Aerosol Anthrax Biological Attack Plague Biological Attack Food Contamination Biological Attack Foreign Animal Disease Chemical Attack Toxic Industrial Chemicals Chemical Attack Chlorine Tank Explosion Chemical Attack Blister Agent Chemical Attack Nerve Agent Explosives Attack Improvised Explosive Nuclear Detonation Improvised Device Radiological Attack Radiological Dispersal Cyber Attack

Percentage of healthcare Percentage of community Percentage of public Percentage of properties Percentage of population services likely to be likely to be affected health services likely to likely to be affected Likelihood of future likely to be injured or kil ed affected under an under an average be affected under an under an average occurrence under an average average occurrence of occurrence of the average occurrence of occurrence of the occurrence of the hazard the hazard hazard the hazard hazard
0 = N/A (no impact expected) 0 = N/A (no impact expected) 0 = N/A (no impact expected) 0 = N/A (no impact expected) 0 = N/A (no impact expected) 0 = N/A (no impact expected) 0 = N/A (implausible) 1= Low (0-1event / 30 years) 1= Low (<1%affected) 1= Low (<1%affected) 1= Low (<1%affected) 1= Low (<1%affected) 1= Low (<1% affected) 1= Low (<1%affected) 2 = Moderate (2-3 events / 30 years) 2 = Moderate (1-10%affected) 2 = Moderate (1-10%affected) 2 = Moderate (1-10%affected) 2 = Moderate (1-10%affected) 2 = Moderate (1-10% affected) 2 = Moderate (1-10%affected) 3 = High (4+events / 30 years) 3 = High (>10%affected) 3 = High (>10%affected) 3 = High (>10%affected) 3 = High (>10%affected) 3 = High (>10%affected) 3 = High (>10% affected)
1.00
0.43
1.71 1.14 0.57 1.71 0.71 1.29 1.57 0.86 0.86 1.57 1.00 0.86 2.43
1.29 0.20 2.29 1.57 1.00 1.83 0.80 1.40 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.17 2.25 2.00 1.17
1.67 0.25 2.67 2.00 1.75 2.20 1.75 2.00 2.20 1.25 1.25 2.00 2.67 1.67 1.80
1.71 0.20 2.57 1.86 1.40 1.83 1.20 1.60 2.17 1.40 1.40 1.67 2.25 2.00 2.33
1.60 0.50 2.67 2.00 1.75 2.20 1.50 2.00 2.20 1.25 1.75 2.20 2.67 2.00 2.00
2.00 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.80 0.75 0.75 1.00 0.50 0.25 1.20 2.33 0.67 1.40
1.83 0.25 1.83 1.67 1.75 2.00 1.75 1.50 2.00 1.25 1.00 1.60 2.33 1.67 2.40
16
Draft

Table 1-5: Village of Oak Park HVA: National Event EM Cycle
Draft
Name of Submit ing Local Public Health Agency and Tribe: Public Health Department, The Vil age of Oak Park, Il inos List of Participating LPHA/Tribe(s), and other Partners: See attached list WI HVA Meeting Date(s): See attached list

National Planning Scenarios* Natural Disaster Major Earthquake Natural Disaster Major Hurricane Biological Disease Outbreak Pandemic flu Biological Attack Aerosol Anthrax Biological Attack Plague Biological Attack Food Contamination Biological Attack Foreign Animal Disease Chemical Attack Toxic Industrial Chemicals Chemical Attack Chlorine Tank Explosion Chemical Attack Blister Agent Chemical Attack Nerve Agent Explosives Attack Improvised Explosive Nuclear Detonation Improvised Device Radiological Attack Radiological Dispersal Cyber Attack

MITIGATION
PREPAREDNESS
RESPONSE
RECOVERY
Internal External Internal External Internal External Internal External (Jurisdictional) (Region/State) (Jurisdictional) (Region/State) (Jurisdictional) (Region/State) (Jurisdictional) (Region/State)
1= Substantial 1= Substantial 1= Substantial 1= Substantial 1= Substantial 1= Substantial 1= Substantial 1= Substantial 2 = Moderate 2 = Moderate 2 = Moderate 2 = Moderate 2 = Moderate 2 = Moderate 2 = Moderate 2 = Moderate 3 = Limited or none 3 = Limited or none 3 = Limited or none 3 = Limited or none 3 = Limited or none 3 = Limited or none 3 = Limited or none 3 = Limited or none
RISK Relativethreat (increaseswith percentage) 010 % 21% 1% 30% 24% 10% 35% 17% 32% 30% 23% 14% 29% 24% 20% 49%
17
1.00 0.43 1.71 1.14 0.57 1.71 0.71 1.29 1.57 0.86 0.86 1.57 1.00 0.86 2.43
1.29 0.20 2.29 1.57 1.00 1.83 0.80 1.40 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.17 2.25 2.00 1.17
1.67 0.25 2.67 2.00 1.75 2.20 1.75 2.00 2.20 1.25 1.25 2.00 2.67 3.00 1.80
1.71 0.20 2.57 1.86 1.40 1.83 1.20 1.60 2.17 1.40 1.40 1.67 2.25 1.00 2.33
1.60 3.00 2.67 2.00 1.75 2.20 1.50 2.00 2.20 1.25 1.75 2.20 2.67 3.00 2.00
2.00 3.00 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.80 0.75 0.75 1.00 0.50 0.25 1.20 2.33 1.00 1.40
1.83 3.00 1.83 1.67 1.75 2.00 1.75 1.50 2.00 1.25 1.00 1.60 2.33 3.00 2.40
2.00 3.00 1.75 1.50 2.00 2.00 2.67 2.33 1.75 2.50 2.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00
Draft

Table 1-6: Village of Oak Park HVA: Local Impacts
Draft
PROBABILITY HUMAN IMPACT HEALTHCARE COMMUNITY IMPACT SERVICES IMPACT LPHA IMPACT PROPERTY IMPACT BUSINESS IMPACT
RISK Relativethreat (increaseswith percentage) 0100% 18% 16% 0% 59% 34% 42% 28% 0% 56% 53% 53% 49% 17% 19% 5% 9% 15% 22% 51% 19% 38% 45% 13% 31% 26% 31% 30% 17% 25% 48% 40% 20% 0% 0%

Local Planning Events* Earthquake Drought Wild Fire Severe Thunderstorm Tornado Flooding Flash Flooding Landslide Extreme Heat Extreme Cold Blizzard Ice Storm Hazmat Release/Explosion (fixed site) Hazmat Release/Explosion (transport) Nuclear Facility Incident (fixed site) Nuclear Facility Incident (transport) Epidemic Pandemic Power Outage Water System Failure Major Communications Disruption Computer Failure Airplane Crash Civil Disturbance Fuel Shortage Multiple House/Building Fire Multiple Vehicle Highway Accident Municipal Water Contamination Supply Disruption VIP Visit Community-specific Planning Events** Civic/Sports Events High-density population (University, etc.) Military Base Other Federal Installations
Likelihood of future occurrence
Percentage of healthcare Percentage of community Percentage of population likely to be affected services likely to be likely to be injured or killed under an average affected under an under an average occurrence of the average occurrence of occurrence of the hazard hazard the hazard
0 = N/A (no impact expected) 1= Low (<1% affected) 2 = M oderate (1-10% affected) 3 = High (>10% affected) 0 = N/A (no impact expected) 1= Low (<1% affected) 2 = Moderate (1-10% affected) 3 = High (>10% affected) 0 = N/A (no impact expected) 1= Low (<1% affected) 2 = M oderate (1-10% affected) 3 = High (>10% affected)
Percentage of Percentage of public Percentage of properties businesses likely to be health services likely to likely to be affected affected under an under an average be affected under an average occurrence of occurrence of the average occurrence of the hazard hazard the hazard
0 = N/A (no impact expected) 1= Low (<1% affected) 2 = Moderate (1-10% affected) 3 = High (>10% affected) 0 = N/A (no impact expected) 1= Low (<1% affected) 2 = M oderate (1-10% affected) 3 = High (>10% affected) 0 = N/A (no impact expected) 1= Low (<1% affected) 2 = Moderate (1-10% affected) 3 = High (>10% affected)
0 = N/A (implausible) 1= Low (0-1event / 30 years) 2 = M oderate (2-3 events / 30 years) 3 = High (4+ events / 30 years)
0.71 0.71 0.00 2.86 1.57 2.14 1.43 0.00 2.29 2.43 2.86 2.57 0.86 1.14 0.29 0.43 0.86 1.43 2.86 1.14 1.86 2.29 0.71 1.57 1.29 2.14 2.71 1.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 0.00 0.00
1.29 0.57 0.17 1.14 2.00 1.00 0.83 0.20 1.57 1.29 1.14 1.29 1.67 1.71 0.60 0.80 1.14 1.71 1.29 1.00 1.00 1.29 0.83 1.29 1.17 1.14 1.00 2.00 1.00 0.57 0.83 0.25 0.00 0.25
1.67 0.67 0.00 0.83 2.00 1.17 1.00 0.25 2.17 1.67 1.33 1.67 1.80 2.00 0.50 1.25 2.33 2.83 1.50 2.00 1.50 1.83 2.00 1.33 0.80 1.50 1.00 1.80 1.00 0.50 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
1.57 0.86 0.17 2.00 2.29 1.86 1.33 0.00 2.00 1.71 2.43 2.43 1.50 2.14 0.20 1.20 1.86 2.43 1.86 2.17 2.14 1.71 1.33 1.57 1.83 1.14 0.86 2.33 0.83 1.29 1.00 0.25 0.00 0.00
1.67 0.83 0.20 1.17 2.17 1.17 1.40 0.00 2.33 1.83 1.83 2.00 1.80 2.00 0.75 1.50 2.17 2.83 1.50 2.40 1.50 1.50 2.00 1.50 0.80 1.33 1.00 2.20 0.80 0.50 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00
1.60 0.80 0.00 2.00 2.40 2.60 1.75 0.00 1.00 1.60 2.60 2.60 1.75 1.40 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00 2.20 1.25 1.60 1.00 1.50 1.40 0.75 1.00 0.60 1.25 0.75 0.80 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1.60 0.80 0.00 1.80 2.00 2.20 2.00 0.00 1.40 1.80 2.40 2.40 1.75 1.60 0.67 1.33 1.20 1.80 2.20 2.25 2.60 2.40 1.50 1.80 1.25 1.00 0.60 2.25 1.00 1.20 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00
18
Draft

Table 1-7: Village of Oak Park HVA: Local Event EM Cycle
Draft

Local Planning Events* Earthquake Drought Wild Fire Severe Thunderstorm Tornado Flooding Flash Flooding Landslide Extreme Heat Extreme Cold Blizzard Ice Storm Hazmat Release/Explosion (fixed site) Hazmat Release/Explosion (transport) Nuclear Facility Incident (fixed site) Nuclear Facility Incident (transport) Epidemic Pandemic Power Outage Water System Failure Major Communications Disruption Computer Failure Airplane Crash Civil Disturbance Fuel Shortage Multiple House/Building Fire Multiple Vehicle Highway Accident Municipal Water Contamination Supply Disruption VIP Visit Community-specific Planning Events** Civic/Sports Events High-density population (University, etc.) Military Base Other Federal Installations
MITIGATION
Internal (Jurisdictional)
1= Substantial 2 = Moderate 3 = Limited or none
PREPAREDNESS
RESPONSE
RECOVERY
External (Region/State)
RISK Relativethreat (increaseswith percentage) 0100% 18% 16% 0% 59% 34% 42% 28% 0% 56% 53% 53% 49% 17% 19% 5% 9% 15% 22% 51% 19% 38% 45% 13% 31% 26% 31% 30% 17% 25% 48% 40% 20% 0% 0%
0.71 0.71 0.00 2.86 1.57 2.14 1.43 0.00 2.29 2.43 2.86 2.57 0.86 1.14 0.29 0.43 0.86 1.43 2.86 1.14 1.86 2.29 0.71 1.57 1.29 2.14 2.71 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.57 1.14 0.00 0.29
1.29 0.57 0.17 1.14 2.00 1.00 0.83 0.20 1.57 1.29 1.14 1.29 1.67 1.71 0.60 0.80 1.14 1.71 1.29 1.00 1.00 1.29 0.83 1.29 1.17 1.14 1.00 2.00 1.00 0.57 1.00 0.25 0.00 0.25
1.67 0.67 0.00 0.83 2.00 1.17 1.00 3.00 2.17 1.67 1.33 1.67 1.80 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.33 2.83 1.50 2.00 1.50 1.83 2.00 1.33 0.80 1.50 1.00 1.80 1.00 0.50 0.60 0.00 3.00 3.00
1.57 0.86 0.17 2.00 2.29 1.86 1.33 3.00 2.00 1.71 2.43 2.43 1.50 2.14 1.00 1.00 1.86 2.43 1.86 2.17 2.14 1.71 1.33 1.57 1.83 1.14 0.86 2.33 0.83 1.29 1.00 0.25 3.00 3.00
1.67 0.83 0.20 1.17 2.17 1.17 1.40 3.00 2.33 1.83 1.83 2.00 1.80 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.17 2.83 1.50 2.40 1.50 1.50 2.00 1.50 0.80 1.33 1.00 2.20 0.80 0.50 1.00 0.00 3.00 3.00
1.60 0.80 0.00 2.00 2.40 2.60 1.75 3.00 1.00 1.60 2.60 2.60 1.75 1.40 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.20 1.25 1.60 1.00 1.50 1.40 0.75 1.00 0.60 1.25 0.75 0.80 1.00 0.00 3.00 3.00
1.60 0.80 0.00 1.80 2.00 2.20 2.00 3.00 1.40 1.80 2.40 2.40 1.75 1.60 3.00 3.00 1.20 1.80 2.20 2.25 2.60 2.40 1.50 1.80 1.25 1.00 0.60 2.25 1.00 1.20 1.50 1.00 3.00 3.00
2.50 2.33 3.00 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.00 3.00 2.25 2.50 2.25 2.25 2.00 1.75 1.00 1.00 1.33 1.50 1.75 1.33 1.75 1.50 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.25 1.25 1.33 2.00 2.33 1.00 2.50 3.00 3.00
19
Draft

Table 1-8: Village of Oak Park HVA: Complete Threat Rankings RISK RANK Event 0 - 100%
Draft
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
Severe Thunderstorm Extreme Heat Extreme Cold Blizzard Power Outage Ice Storm Cyber Attack VIP Visit Computer Failure Flooding (basement/sewer backup) Civic/Sports Events Major Communications Disruption Biological Attack Food Contamination Tornado Chemical Attack Toxic Industrial Chemicals Civil Disturbance Multiple House/Building Fire Chemical Attack Chlorine Tank Explosion Biological Disease Outbreak Pandemic flu Multiple Vehicle Highway Accident Explosives Attack Improvised Explosive Flash Flooding Fuel Shortage Supply Disruption Nuclear Detonation Improvised Device Biological Attack Aerosol Anthrax Chemical Attack Blister Agent Pandemic Natural Disaster Major Earthquake High-density population (University, etc.) Radiological Attack Radiological Dispersal Hazmat Release/Explosion (transport) Water System Failure
59% 56% 53% 53% 51% 49% 49% 48% 45% 42% 40% 38% 35% 34% 32% 31% 31% 30% 30% 30% 29% 28% 26% 25% 24% 24% 23% 22% 21% 20% 20% 19% 19% 20
Draft 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 Earthquake
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois 18% 17% 17% 17% 16% 15% 14% 13% 11% 10% 9% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Draft
Biological Attack Foreign Animal Disease Municipal Water Contamination Hazmat Release/Explosion (fixed site) Drought Epidemic Chemical Attack Nerve Agent Airplane Crash Natural Disaster Major Hurricane Biological Attack Plague Nuclear Facility Incident (transport) Nuclear Facility Incident (fixed site) Wild Fire Landslide Military Base Other Federal Installations
21
Draft
Draft
1.4 Mitigation Planning Process

According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hazard mitigation is sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and their property from hazards and their effects with the primary purpose of hazard mitigation planning being to identify policies, actions, and tools within the community. These tools and actions should be implemented over the long-term and will result in a reduction in risk and potential future losses in the Village. This MHMP was prepared utilizing Village and community experts, public input, and a thorough review of historical statistics.
Technical Expertise
Technical expertise was incorporated through the involvement of Village staff and representatives from other government agencies including the Illinois Emergency Management Agency and the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Involving the Public

External involvement is important to developing a good plan. Many activities outlined in a mitigation plan require community cooperation to be effective. Oak Park residents were invited to attend several Sewer/Flooding Public Forums hosted by the Village Board and the Public Works Department in late 2011 and early 2012 and were invited to speak at regularly scheduled Council meetings. Given that severe storms and basement flooding are high priority hazards, the Village tasked the Public Works Department and the Emergency Preparedness and Response Department with the following: Defining existing and future flooding issues, and Prioritizing flooding issues and improvement options
In conjunction with the sewer/flooding project, the Village implemented a three-pronged strategy: Conduct sewer/flooding studies and mitigation plans Complete a Hazard Vulnerability Analysis, and Incorporate the Village PlanIt Green philosophy into the overall MHMP
Incorporating Existing Plans

The following plans were reviewed and, where appropriate, incorporated into the Village MHMP Village of Oak Park Combined Sewer System Evaluation Study, 1994 Vulnerability Assessment, 2003 Village of Oak Park Water System Emergency Response Plan, June 2004 2007 Illinois Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan; 22
Draft
Draft
2007 Cook County Storm Water Management Plan Village of Oak Park Combined Sewer System Review and Short-Term Improvement Projects Study, October 2011 2012 Illinois Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park Snow and Ice Plan, 2012 Village of Oak Park Emergency Operating Plan The Village of Oak Park Comprehensive Plan
Six general strategies of hazard mitigation activities were explored and are discussed in Chapter 3 of this MHMP. The strategies include: Preventive (e.g., zoning, building codes and other development regulations); Property Protection (e.g., relocation, building retrofits); Natural Resources Protection (e.g., preserving wetlands, minimizing sedimentation); Emergency Services (e.g., warning, response, evacuation); Flood Control Projects (e.g., flood proofing, upgrade infrastructure, regional detention); and Public Information (e.g., outreach, technical assistance).
Drafts of this plan were provided to the Village and community partners prior to adoption by the Village. It is important to note that the recommendations contained in this MHMP are only recommendations and it is up to the Village Council to implement them as they see fit. Where future plans are created, updated, or revised, the Village government will seek to incorporate the recommendations contained in this plan into future municipal planning where appropriate.
External Agency Coordination

Both Federal and State agencies were contacted to ensure full coordination with external plans. Input from the following agencies was requested and obtained throughout this planning process: 1) Federal agencies Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region V; Housing and Urban Development 2) State agencies Illinois Emergency Management Agency; Illinois Environmental Protection Agency; 3) Regional Agencies Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago; and Oak Park Parks District. Oak Park Township
23
Draft
Draft
CHAPTER 2 - RISK ASSESSMENT

The Village of Oak Park is subjected to various natural hazards throughout the year. In addition to those identified by the State (extreme heat, tornadoes, drought, severe storms, and severe winter storms), the Village has also identified flooding due to sewer backups as a hazard. These hazards are outlined below.
2.1 Severe Winter Storms

According to IEMA, extreme winter weather is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of people in the United States each year, primarily due to vehicle crashes, fires from improper use of heaters, overexertion, and exposure. (http://ready.illinois.gov/during/winterstorms.htm). A severe winter storm is defined as A snowstorm that produces six inches of snow within 48 hours or less An ice storm which 10% of the cooperative National Weather Service Stations in Illinois report glaze, and/or A snowstorm or ice storm in which deaths, injuries, or property damage occurs.
Severe winters are characterized by either extremely cold periods for one to two months in duration, or by severe ice storms or heavy snowfalls occurring repeatedly over a period of six to twelve weeks. The Village of Oak Park is subject to lake effect snowstorms that develop from the passage of cold air over the relatively warm surface of Lake Michigan, which can cause heavy snowfall and blizzard conditions. Winter storms can occur as heavy snowfalls, ice storms or extreme cold temperatures. They can occur as a single event or they in combination, which can make an event more severe. For example, a moderate snowfall could create severe conditions if freezing rain and subsequent extremely cold temperatures followed it. The aftermath of a winter storm can impact a community or region for weeks, and even months, although improvements to infrastructure and public works agreements make this longer timeframe relatively unheard of in this area. Snow: Heavy snowfalls can range from large accumulations over many hours to blizzard conditions with blowing snow that could last several days. The National Weather Services snow classification is summarized in Table 2-1. In addition to the problems caused by a snowstorm, people must also be aware of the subsequent melting and possible flooding.
24
Draft
Draft
TABLE 2-1: Summary of snow classifications by the National Weather Service Snow Classifications
Blizzard Blowing Snow
Winds of 35 miles per hour or more with snow and blowing snow, reducing visibility to less than mile for at least 3 hours.
Wind-driven snow that reduces visibility. Blowing snow may be falling snow and/or snow on the ground picked up by the wind. Brief, intense snow showers accompanied by strong, gusty winds. Snow Squalls Accumulation may be significant. Snow falling at varying intensities for brief periods of time. Some Snow Showers accumulation is possible. Snow Flurries Light snow falling for short duration with little or no accumulation. Source: National Weather Service Ice Storms: An ice storm occurs when freezing rain falls and freezes immediately upon impact. Freezing rain is found in between sleet and rain. It occurs when the precipitation falls into a large layer of warm air and then does not have time to refreeze in a cold layer (near or below 32F) before it comes in contact with the surface which is also near or below 32F.
Area Impacted
Given the tendency for low temperatures, ice, and snow throughout the area, the entire Village is susceptible to severe winter storms.
Magnitude and Severity

Cook County has been rated as severe for severe winter storms in the 2010 State Plan.
Historical Events
The most recent winter storm to impact this area occurred February 1 and 2, 2011. Over twenty inches of snow fell during this storm which made it the third biggest storm in Chicago history. Due to the heavy snowfall and two accidents which shut down major off-ramps, hundreds of motorists were stranded on Lakeshore Drive. Some people were stuck in their cars for more than six hours and were not rescued by the fire department until late at night. Pictures taken the next day showed cars almost completely covered by drifts and it took several days to clear the road. Fortunately, less than ten people died as a result of this storm. One of the worst winter storms to impact the State was on January 26-27, 1967, when as much as 23 inches of snow fell on the Chicago area. Travel throughout northern Illinois was curtailed and areas to the south experienced a glaze of ice, which made travel virtually impossible until January 29. Fifty deaths were directly attributed to this storm. 25
Draft
Draft
In 1979, a Federal snow emergency was declared when the northern third of the State received 6 inches or more of snowfall between January 12 and 14. The heaviest snowfall, up to 20 inches, was recorded in the northeast quarter of the State, where traffic was paralyzed and transportation corridors closed. The 1999 New Years Day storm resulted in record snowfall across the northern half of the State. High winds and frigid temperatures caused blizzard conditions behind the snowfall which left 21.6 inches in Chicago, second only to the 1967 January storm. From December 10 through December 31, 2000, the cumulative effects of severe winter storms caused extensive road closures, school closings and hazardous road conditions and severely taxed snow removal resources. During this time period, the Chicago area received a record 41.3 inches of snow. Cook County received Presidential disaster or emergency declarations for the winter storms of 1979, 1999, 2001, and 2011.
Frequency
During the 20th century, there were at least two severe winter storms in Illinois each year. Due to the geographic latitude, and its proximity to the Great Lakes, most of these would hit the Village of Oak Park. The probability of a severe winter storm may be slightly higher for the northern half of the State (occurring more severely and more often), but all of Illinois has a high probability of a severe winter storm. While it is impossible to predict with any accuracy the probability of a severe winter storm, it is a near certainty that each winter will produce at least one or two severe winter storms
Vulnerability
Safety: Winter storms bring hazardous driving and walking conditions and heart attacks due to exertion caused by shoveling snow. Even small accumulations of ice can be extremely dangerous to motorists and pedestrians. Bridges and overpasses are particularly dangerous because they freeze before other surfaces. About 70% of the injuries caused by snow and ice storms result from vehicle accidents and 25% occur to people caught out in the storm. As seen in the Table 2-2, 69 people were killed by snow, ice or extreme cold in Cook County from 2000 to 2008. Certain populations are especially vulnerable to the cold, including the elderly, the homeless, and low income families with heating problems. 26
Draft
Draft
TABLE 2-2: Deaths/injuries due to winter storms reported in Cook County since 2000 Snow/Ice Extreme Cold Year Death Injury Death Injury 2000 0 0 0 0 2001 0 0 0 0 2002 0 0 0 0 2003 0 0 4 0 2004 0 0 13 0 2005 0 0 8 0 2006 0 0 8 5 2007 0 0 13 0 2008 0 0 23 0 2009 0 0 8 0 2010 0 0 13 0 2011 0 0 0 0
Overall safety hazard: Moderate Health Hazard: Winter storms bring extreme cold due to low temperatures and loss of heat during power outages. The effect on people is made more severe by the wind chill factor. Wind chill is reported as a temperature and is a measure of how wind and cold feel on exposed skin. As the wind increases, the bodys temperature is driven down as heat is carried away. Extreme cold can result in frostbite and hypothermia in both people and animals. Frostbite is damage to tissue caused by the effects of ice crystals that form in frozen tissue. Extremities with more circulation difficulties (hands, feet, nose, ears) are most frequently affected. Hypothermia is the lowering of the core body temperature. It is clinically significant when the body temperature is below 95F. Severe hypothermia occurs when the bodys temperature drops below 85F, resulting in unconsciousness and possibly death. Great care is needed to properly re-warm even mild cases of hypothermia. Overall health hazard: Moderate Economic: The major impacts of snow and ice storms on property are to utilities and roads. Power lines and tree limbs can be coated with heavy ice resulting in disrupted power and telephone service. Loss of power can cause businesses and stores to close until power is restored. Loss of access due to snow or ice covered roads has a similar effect. Since the Village is in a Northern climate, most people and businesses are prepared for the average winter storm. However, there is still a hefty public cost for snow removal, which was enough to trigger Presidential emergency declarations for Cook County for the snowstorms of 1999, 2001, and 2011. 27
Draft Overall economic impact: Low
Draft
Potential Losses
Historically, roofs have collapsed due to heavy snow loads, but most buildings in the Village have been constructed with low temperatures, snow loads and ice storms in mind (e.g., good insulation and strong roofs). Winter storms do not have a major impact on buildings and houses. Since severe winter storms can occur at any time and over any part of the Village, all property in the Village is vulnerable.
2.2 Severe Storms

Severe storms - thunderstorms - are most likely to occur in the spring and summer months during the afternoon and evening hours, but they can occur year round and at all hours. All thunderstorms produce lightning. According to FEMA, an average of 300 people are injured and 80 people are killed each year by lightning in the United States. Tornadoes, flash flooding, strong winds, hail, and microbursts are also associated with thunderstorms. Flash flooding is responsible for more than 140 fatalities per year, more than any other thunderstorm hazard. The effects of flooding and tornadoes caused by local storms are covered under separate chapters on sewer backups (Chapter 2.7) and tornadoes (Chapter 2.4). Thunderstorms occur when there is a collision of moist, warm air moving north from the Gulf of Mexico with colder fronts moving east from the Rocky Mountains. They may occur singly, in clusters, or in lines and in the course of hours it is possible for multiple storms to affect one location for an extended time. (2010 State Plan, Page III-11). Lightning, which occurs during all thunderstorms, can strike anywhere. Generated by the buildup of charged ions in a thundercloud, the discharge of a lightning bolt interacts with the best conducting object or surface on the ground and kills more people than tornadoes or hurricanes. Most lightning fatalities and injuries occur outdoors at recreation events and under or near trees. Illinois ranks high for lightning fatalities; from 1990 through 2003, lightning in Illinois has killed 24 people. As a result IEMA and NWS established the Lightning Safety Awareness Week as a public education project. (2010 State Plan, Page III-29) High winds produced during thunderstorms include downbursts and microbursts. These are strong, concentrated, straight-line winds created by falling rain and sinking air that can reach speeds of 125 mph (200 km/h). A downward rush of cool descending air causes microbursts from a thunderstorm. The air rushing to the ground may look like a cloud. Once the air strikes the ground at a high speed, the air has to go somewhere, which is usually in all directions. The horizontal spreading of this air along the ground is termed straight-line winds. These winds may be 100-150 miles per hour -- as strong as an EF2 or EF3 tornado. Hailstones are ice crystals that form within a low-pressure front due to warm air rising rapidly into the 28
Draft
Draft
upper atmosphere and the subsequent cooling of the air mass. The size of hailstones is a direct function of the severity and size of the storm. Significant damage does not result until the stones reach 1.5 inches in diameter. This occurs in less than half of all hailstorms.
Area Impacted
All counties in the State of Illinois are susceptible to severe storms; over 25% of the population in a county might experience a severe storm at any one time (2010 State Plan, Page III-11). Compared with other atmospheric hazards such as tropical cyclones and winter low-pressure systems, individual thunderstorms affect relatively small geographic areas. The average thunderstorm system is approximately 15 miles in diameter (75 square miles) and typically lasts less than 30 minutes at a single location. However, weather-monitoring reports indicate that coherent thunderstorm systems can travel intact for distances in excess of 600 miles. The entire Village is susceptible to severe storms.

Generally, thunderstorms and their accompanying hazards do not warrant a disaster declaration or a lot of documentation. The National Weather Service classifies a thunderstorm as severe if its winds reach or exceed 58 mph, it produces a tornado, or it drops surface hail at least 0.75 inch in diameter. Of about 100,000 thunderstorms that occur annually in the United States, approximately 10 percent are classified as severe. Cook County has been rated as severe for severe storms in the 2010 State Plan.
Historical Events
Storms in July 1993 caused numerous flash flood events. Three to six inches fell over portions of Cook counties on July 18-19, 1993. Some 500 residents below an earthen dam were evacuated in McHenry County after officials expressed concerns the dam might break; fortunately the dam held. Hail occurs frequently in Illinois averaging 74 times a year or 3,951 times since 1950. There have been no deaths, but 23 injuries. Wind speeds of 50 knots were reported on September 22, 2006 with no damages and wind speeds of 60 knots were reported on August 23, 2007 with one injury and $50,000 in reported property damages (NCDC Storm Event Database). April 23, 1961, several six-inch hailstones were reported in Kankakee, IL. (2010 State Plan, Page III-25)
Frequency
Of about 100,000 thunderstorms that occur annually in the United States, approximately 10 percent are classified as severe. Illinois experiences 40 to 60 thunderstorm days per year (http://www.srh.noaa.gov/key/HTML/tstmhazards.htm) and thunderstorm events in the Cook County area occur on average 60 to 70 times per year (2011 Calumet City Hazard Mitigation Plan, 234). As stated above, over 25% of the population in a county might experience a severe storm at any 29
Draft
Draft
one time; therefore, the Village is susceptible at any time during the storm season. According to the Illinois State Climatologists website, the average number of hail days in the Chicago area is 2.1 per year. Of the 3,951 times hail has occurred in Illinois since 1950, storms with hailstones greater than 2 inches occurred 327 times. Illinois experiences nearly 650,000 lightning strikes each year (2010 State Plan, Page III-25).
Vulnerability
Safety: The threat to life varies by the cause of death. Between 1995 and 2000, the National Weather Service reported that 20 people in Illinois were killed by flash floods, wind and lightning brought by thunderstorms (6 in Cook County). The number of deaths and injuries reported in Cook County are summarized in Table 2-2. The leading cause of death and injury in the County from thunderstorms is by lighting and high wind. Most of these deaths can be prevented through safe practices.
TABLE 2-3: Deaths and injuries due to thunderstorms reported in Cook County since 2000 Lightning Wind Flash Flood
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Death 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
Injury 1 1 1 1 0 1 2
Death 1 1 4 0 0 0 0
Injury 0 9 4 2 0 3 13
Death 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Injury 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2007 0 1 1 3 2008 0 0 0 7 *There have been no reported deaths due to lightning since 2008
Lighting kills more people than tornadoes or hurricanes. Most lightning fatalities and injuries occur outdoors at recreation events and under or near trees. Nationwide it is estimated that 25 million cloud-to-ground lightning flashes occur each year, 1,000 people are injured and 80 are killed (2010 Illinois Hazard Mitigation Plan, page III-25). In the almost 40- year period from 1970 to 2008, death tolls and injuries from severe winds exceeded tornado deaths. In this period there was only one year for which the death tolls from tornadoes exceeded that of severe winds and only four years for which the number of reported injuries exceeded from tornadoes exceeded that of severe winds. (NCDC Storm Event Database). 30
Draft
Draft
Hail occurs frequently in Illinois averaging 74 times a year and 3,951 times since 1950. There have been no deaths, but 23 injuries (2010 Illinois Hazard Mitigation Plan, page III-25). None of the reported injuries occurred in Cook County. Overall Safety Hazard: Moderate Health Hazard: No special health problems are attributable to thunderstorms, other than the potential for tetanus and other diseases that arise from injuries and damaged property. When lightning strikes a human being, serious burns or death are the common outcomes. For those who survive, their injuries can lead to permanent disabilities. 70% of the survivors suffer serious, long-term effects, such as memory loss, sleep disorders, depression, and fatigue. Overall health hazard: Low. Economic: Thunderstorms can impact transportation and utilities. Airplanes have crashed when hit by downbursts or lightning. Power lines can be knocked out by lightning or knocked down by wind and debris. Lightning can also cause power surges that damage appliances, electronic equipment and computers. However, many buildings have lightning rods and backup power systems that can recover quickly and the overall economic impact is low. Flash floods cause localized flooding problems that could impact transportation and business. Overall economic impact: Low to Moderate.
Potential Losses
Thunderstorm winds cause more damage year-to-year than tornadoes. In 1993, thirty-eight (38) thunderstorm events caused an estimated $5.0 million in damage (minimum estimate), while 34 tornadoes caused just over $1.5 million in damage (maximum estimate). The damages caused by high winds have been relatively consistent from year-to-year in the State. (2010 State Plan, Page III28) There is a potential for severe storms with high winds and hailstones greater than 0.75 inches, those of which cause the most damage, to occur in Glenview at any time during the storm season. Wind and water damage can result from flying debris and large hailstones breaking windows in buildings and vehicles. Lightning can cause direct damage to structures (especially those without lightning protection systems) and can cause fires that damage trees and structures. Straight-line winds can damage roofs, push autos off the road and possibly damage/destroy attached garages. Straight-line winds are the leading cause of wind related damage. Although they do not receive as much recognition as tornado events, high winds cause more damage year-to-year than tornadoes. (Calumet City Hazard Mitigation Plan, Page 2-30). Hail does extensive damage: property damage over $73 million in the last 53 years (2010 State 31
Draft
Draft
Plan, Page III-29). One study of insured losses from hail found that 75% of the dollar damage resulting from hail storms was in damage to a structures roofing, 12% to awnings, 6% to exterior paint, 4% to glass and 3% to siding (Hail Loss Potential in the US, Page 2).
2.3 Extreme Heat

Extreme heat for a region occurs when temperatures hover 10 degrees or more above the average high temperature for several days to several weeks. While definitions do vary by region, a heat wave is normally defined as a period of at least three consecutive days above 90 degrees. Heat kills by elevating the normal bodys temperature above its limits for a prolonged period of time. The bodys internal thermostat normally produces perspiration that evaporates to cool and regulate the bodys temperature to 98.6 degrees. Sweating does nothing to cool the body unless the sweat is removed by evaporation. High humidity retards this process. Because the body has been robbed of its ability to cool itself, the body must work much harder to maintain a normal temperature in extreme heat and high humidity. Sunburn also slows the skins ability to release excess heat. Stagnant atmospheric (humid and muggy) conditions and poor air quality can induce heat-related illnesses. In addition to air quality, concrete and asphalt store heat longer and gradually release the heat at night, which produces higher nighttime temperatures. Therefore, people living in urban areas may be at a greater risk than people in rural regions. The heat index is a measure of the air temperature in relation to the relative humidity and is used o to indicate the perceived temperature. For example, a temperature of 90 F combined with a relative o humidity of 85% equates to a heat index (or perceived temperature) of 115 F. Prolonged exposure to conditions with high heat indexes can cause heat stroke or sunstroke. Table 2-4 summarizes the medical problems that might be experienced by high-risk groups when exposed to different values of heat index.
TABLE 2-4: Possible heat disorders for people in higher risk groups for ranges of heat index Heat Index Possible Heat Disorders for People in Higher Risk Groups
130F or higher 106 - 130F 90 - 108F 80 - 90F
Heat stroke/sun stroke, highly likely with continued exposure. Sun stroke/heat cramps or heat exhaustion likely, and heat stroke possible with prolonged exposure and/or physical activity. Sun stroke, heat cramps and heat exhaustion possible with prolonged exposure and/or physical activity. Fatigue possible with prolonged exposure and/or physical activity
Heat related medical symptoms experienced include heat cramps, heat exhaustion, heat stroke, and sunstroke and are summarized below: 32
Draft
Draft
Heat Cramps Muscular pains and spasms due to heavy exertion. Although heat cramps are the least severe of heat related medical problems, they are often the first signal that the body is having trouble handling and distributing the heat. Heat Exhaustion Typically occurs when people exercise heavily or work in a hot, humid place where body fluids are lost through heavy sweating. Blood flow to the skin increases, causing blood flow to decrease to the vital organs. This results in a form of mild shock. If not treated, the victims condition will worsen. Body temperature will keep rising and the victim may suffer heat stroke. Heat Stroke Heat stroke (aka, sunstroke) is life-threatening. The victims temperature control system, which produces sweating to cool the body, stops working. The body temperature can get so high that brain damage and death may result if the body is not cooled quickly.
Area Impacted
The average annual high temperatures in northern Illinois are in the 80s. Extreme heat can occur anywhere in the Village during summer months. Therefore, the entire Village is susceptible to extreme heat conditions.

Cook County has been rated as high for extreme heat in the 2010 State Plan.
Historical Events
A total of 583 fatalities were associated with heat waves in July 1995, a number previously unseen in the State of Illinois from such a phenomenon. Throughout the entire State, the combination of record or near record high temperatures and high dewpoint temperatures led to heat indices routinely above the 120 degrees from July 12-17 of that year. The heat index peaked at 125 degrees on July 14 when the air temperature was 98 degrees and the relative humidity was 63%. Conditions such as these create hardships for respiratory and cardiovascular systems of every person, especially in toddlers and the elderly. Of the 583 fatalities associated with the July 1995 Illinois heat wave, 75 death certificates listed heat as the primary cause, and 508 as the secondary cause. In a sampling of 134 of the heat victims, 61% were over the age of 65, but only 2 of the 134 fatalities (1.5%) were toddlers; 504 of the deaths were in Chicago. At the time there was a perception that the numbers were inflated, later studies indicated the opposite was true and the heat victims were significantly undercounted. Local officials believed that many of the elderly were scared to come out of their apartments because of high amounts of crime in their neighborhoods. Many were found in their rooms with air temperatures in excess of 120 degrees. 33
Draft
Draft
In 1999, Cook County experienced another heat wave that closely matched the 1995 event, but the death toll was greatly reduced. A paper written by the State Water Survey attributes much of the reduction in deaths to mitigation efforts, such as education by the news media and monitoring procedures for the urban elderly. (2010 State Plan, page III-89)
Frequency
The Village can expect an average of 10 to 20 days with temperatures above 90 F, and can expect at least one day in every two years (50% annual chance recurrence) with temperatures above 100 F (Figure 2-1). Between 1995 and 2007, reports of death by excessive heat occurred 11 out of 12 years in Cook County.
FIGURE 2-1: Average number of days at or above 90 F and 100 F in Illinois
o o o o
Vulnerability
Safety: As discussed above, heat kills by pushing the human body beyond its limits. Heat waves kill more people in the United States than all other natural disasters combined (New York Times, August 13, 2002). The article goes on to state that a University of Delaware study indicated that 1,500 American city dwellers die each year because of heat compared with 200 from tornadoes, earthquakes and floods combined. Summarized in Table 2-5 are the deaths caused by heat in Cook County since 1995. Overall safety hazard: High
34
Draft

TABLE 2-5: Total deaths in Cook County due to extreme heat since 2000
Draft
Extreme Heat Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Deaths 0 35 40 3 0 1 38 5 0 0 4 *NOTE: As of August 21, 2012, there have been 26 reported heat related deaths in Cook County Health Hazard: Anyone is susceptible to health problems due to extreme heat, especially young children, the elderly, and those who are sick, overweight, or have alcohol problems. Men in general (because they sweat more and become more quickly dehydrated) can also be more susceptible to extreme heat. Usually extreme heat victims have been overexposed to heat or have over-exercised for their age and physical condition. Stagnant atmospheric (humid and muggy) conditions and poor air quality can induce heat-related illnesses. In addition to air quality, concrete and asphalt store heat longer and gradually release the heat at night, which produces higher nighttime temperatures. Therefore, people living in urban areas, such as the Village of Glenview, may be at a greater risk than people in rural regions. Overall health hazard: Moderate Economic: During a period of extreme heat, there will be a higher demand for water and electricity. Both of these can typically be supplied in the Village with no economic disruption. Heat may cause buckling of street pavements. Overall economic impact: Low
Potential Losses
Severe heat waves (prolonged periods of excessive heat) have caused catastrophic crop failures, thousands of deaths, and widespread power outages due to increased use of air conditioning. There is little or no damage to structures caused by high temperatures or humidity, thus potential losses in the Village should be minor.
2.4 - Tornados
A tornado is a swirling column of air extending from a thunderstorm to the ground. Tornadoes can have wind speeds from 40 mph to over 300 mph. A majority of tornadoes have wind speeds of 112 mph or less. Tornadoes are most frequent in the Midwest and Southeast. The usual tornado season runs March through August; however a tornado can occur in any month. Tremendous destruction can occur in paths over a mile wide and 50 miles long with winds reaching 300 mph. The Enhanced Fujita Scale (Table 2-6) uses the categories of EF0 through EF5 to rate the strength of tornadoes in the United States estimated via the damage they cause. Implementation of this enhanced scale began February 1, 2007. None of the tornadoes recorded on or before January 31, 2007, will be recategorized. 35
Draft
Draft
Category EF0
TABLE 2-6: Enhanced Fujita scale used to categorize tornadoes. Wind Speed Description (mph) Light damage. Peels surface off some roofs; some damage to gutters 65-85 or siding; branches broken off trees; shallow-rooted trees pushed over.
EF1
86-110
Moderate damage. Roofs severely stripped; mobile homes overturned or badly damaged; loss of exterior doors; windows and other glass broken. Considerable damage. Roofs torn off well-constructed houses; foundations of frame homes shifted; mobile homes completely destroyed; large trees snapped or uprooted; light-object missiles generated; cars lifted off ground. Severe damage. Entire stories of well-constructed houses destroyed; severe damage to large buildings such as shopping malls; trains overturned; trees debarked; heavy cars lifted off the ground and thrown; structures with weak foundations blown away some distance. Devastating damage. Well-constructed houses and whole frame houses completely leveled; cars thrown and small missiles generated. Incredible damage. Strong frame houses leveled off foundations and swept away; automobile-sized missiles fly through the air in excess of 100 m (109 yards); high-rise buildings have significant structural deformation; incredible phenomena will occur.
EF2
111-134
EF3
135-165
EF4
166 200
EF5
> 200
Area Impacted
Illinois is situated on the northeast edge of "tornado alley," the tornado-prone area that extends approximately 400 miles on either side of a line from Fort Worth, Texas, to Detroit, Michigan. This area is the battleground of warm, moist air from the Gulf of Mexico, cold air from Canada, and air moving off the Rocky Mountains into the plains resulting in the world's leading breeding area for twisters. The greatest frequency of tornadoes in Illinois occurs in a wide band from Madison and St. Clair counties northeastward to Lake and Cook counties. The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) set forth design wind speeds for the United States. Cook County is located in an area of highest design wind speed (Figure 2-2) The entire Village is susceptible to tornadoes.
36
Draft
Draft
FIGURE 2-2: Design wind speeds set forth by the American Society of Civil Engineers

Based on data on tornadoes in the Illinois between 1950 and 2007, nearly 73% were rated as weak, 25% were rated as strong, and 2% were rated as violent. From the same data it is that weak tornadoes are typically 100 yards wide with a path length of 1 to 2 miles, strong tornadoes are usually 0.25 to 0.5 mile wide with a path length of up to 20 miles, and violent tornadoes are around 1 mile wide with path lengths greater than 20 miles. (2010 State Plan, Page III-13) Cook County has been rated as high for tornadoes in the 2010 State Plan.
Historical Events
Officially, there have been 1,892 tornadoes in Illinois from 1950 through September 30, 2003. Between 1954 and 2010 there have been 53 tornadoes in Cook County. 37
Draft
Draft
Illinois has one of the higher tornado death tolls of the 50 states due to rare, intense tornadoes that have directly struck towns or cities. Since 1916, the State has recorded 1,109 tornado deaths. Of the 921 deaths prior to 1953, 695 occurred in 1925 in the Great Tri-state Tornado. This is the deadliest tornado in United States history. In the 53 years from 1950 to September 30, 2003, there were 192 deaths. Twenty-nine of these came in the Plainfield-Joliet tornado on August 28, 1990 (Presidential Disaster Declaration FEMA 878-DR). This was the worst to hit Illinois since the Oak Lawn and Belvidere tornado of 1967 which killed 57. Tornado outbreaks on May 9, 13, and 18, 1995 brought 54 tornadoes throughout the entire State, five reaching the F3 level and two the F4 level of the Fujita Scale. Even though there were no deaths attributed to these twisters, 87 people were injured, and the F3 and F4 tornadoes alone caused over $37,800,000 in property damage. Tornado outbreaks of this magnitude are not uncommon in Illinois.
Frequency
Since 1950, Illinois averaged 36 tornadoes per year; however, in some years, this average was greatly exceeded. In 1974, 107 tornadoes were reported and in 1998, 105 were reported, followed by 79 in 1999. 2003 had a record number of tornadoes with 155 occurring. There are between 5 and 10 EF3, EF4, and EF5 tornadoes in Cook County per square mile (Figure 2-3) Contrary to the belief that there are numerous tornadoes in March, during the last fifty years the primary tornado season in Illinois has been from April through June. Of the 1,892 tornadoes recorded since 1950, 62 percent (950 in number) occurred during the above three months. The months of March, July, August and September account for a total of 19 percent, leaving 19 percent for the period October through February. More than half of all tornadoes occur between the hours of 3:00 PM and 7:00 PM, but they can occur at any time of day or night. There are no official recurrence intervals calculated for tornadoes. Cook County has had 44 of the 1,472 tornadoes recorded in Illinois between 1950 and 1999. With 44 occurrences over 50 years, the likelihood of a tornado hitting somewhere in the county is 0.88 (88%) in any given year (Calumet City Hazard Mitigation Plan). Assuming a tornado affects one square mile and there are 946 square miles in Cook County, the odds of a tornado hitting any of the 4.5 square miles of the Village are roughly 0.004% (4.5/946*.88). According to a publication by the National Weather Service (A Study of the Chicago Areas Significant Tornadoes) there were 92 significant tornadoes in the 8 counties around the Chicago metro area (which includes Cook County) between 1855 and 2008. A significant tornado is defined as EF2 or greater. The most recent significant tornadoes occurred on June 2, 2008 over Will and Cook Counties. The majority of the significant tornadoes were F2, but the majority of deaths result from F4 and F5 tornadoes. The significant tornado frequency per 100 square miles in Cook County was determined to be 3.38. Thus, the odds of a severe tornado hitting any of the 4.5 square miles of the Village are roughly 0.001% (3.38/92*4.5/100). 38
Draft
Draft
FIGURE 2-3: Map of the number of EF3, EF4, and EF5 tornadoes per square mile in the United States
Vulnerability
Safety: Although there have not been any recent deaths as a result of tornadoes in Cook County (Table 2-7), death is still likely when a tornado does hit. The August 1990 twister and the 2004 Utica tornados resulted in 28 and eight deaths respectively. Physical injury from flying debris or collapsed buildings is the major hazard from tornados. Within a building, flying debris is generally stopped by interior walls. However, external debris blown into a building is just as deadly. Overall safety hazard: High
39
Draft

Table 2-7: Deaths and injuries from tornadoes in Cook County since 1954
Draft
Tornados Year 1955 1956 1959 1961 1962 1966 Death 0 0 0 1 0 1 Injury 2 3 14 115 10 30 Year 1967 1970 1972 1976 1983 1986 1991 Death 33 0 0 4 0 0 39 Injury 500 9 3 64 3 10 770
Health Hazard: Following a tornado, damaged buildings constitute a potential health hazard due to instability, electrical system damage, and gas leaks. Sewage, water lines, and electrical lines may also be damaged and cause risk to residents health. Tornadoes usually also lead to power outages, which can be hazardous during periods of extreme heat as happened in the Mt. Vernon area in July 2006 (2010 State Plan, Page III-23). Overall health hazard: Low Economic: The major impact of a tornado on the local economy is damage to businesses, infrastructure, and loss of services. The 1990 Plainfield tornado post-disaster damage report enumerated at least 50 businesses that had been destroyed. Infrastructure damage is usually limited to above ground utilities such as power lines. The 1990 tornado knocked out two 345,000 volt transmission towers, leaving 65,000 Com Ed customers without power. Damage to phone lines left 14,000 customers without service. Damage to utility lines can usually be repaired or replaced relatively quickly. Damage to roads and railroads are also localized. Typically alternate routes are available when repairs cannot be made promptly. Public expenditures include search and rescue, shelters, and emergency protection measures. The largest expenses are for repairs to public facilities and clean up and disposal of debris. Most public facilities are insured, so the economic impact on the local treasury may well be small. However, some public buildings, such as schools and fire stations, may be particularly susceptible to damage because of their long roof spans. Clean up and disposal can be a larger problem, especially with limited landfill capacity near the damage site. Preliminary damage assessments for public expenditures after the 1990 tornado totaled $4 million, 2/3 of that for debris clearance. Overall economic impact: High 40
Draft
Draft
Potential Losses
Although tornadoes strike at random making all buildings vulnerable, the types of structures more likely to suffer damage in the Village are homes built on top of crawlspaces (more susceptible to lift) and buildings with large spans, such as airplane hangars, gymnasiums, and factories. Structures within the direct path of a tornado vortex are often reduced to rubble. However structures adjacent to the tornadoes path are often severely damaged by high winds flowing into the tornado vortex, known as inflow winds. It is here, adjacent to the tornados path where the building type and construction techniques are critical to the structures survival. In 1999, FEMA conducted an extensive damage survey of residential and nonresidential buildings in Oklahoma and Kansas following an outbreak of tornadoes on May 3, 1999, which killed 49 people. The assessment found, among other things, that: Failure of many residential structures occurred where the framing was attached to the foundation or when nails were the primary connectors between the roofing and the walls. A home in Kansas was lifted from its foundation where the addition of nuts to the bolts anchoring the wood framing to the foundation may have been all that was needed to have kept this from happening, Roof geometry played a significant role in a buildings performance, and Failure of garage doors, commercial overhead doors, residential entry doors or large windows caused a significant number of catastrophic building failures.
In the 2010 State Plan, tornado-prone counties, including Cook County, were considered at risk for damages (Page III-34). The risks for each county were calculated from historic data from the NCDC Storm Event Database. The State determined the average number of tornadoes that each county would be expected to have. Then, an average dollar amount of property damage (not including crop damages), for each tornado event, was compiled. An estimate of annual losses was determined by multiplying the expected number of tornadoes by the average historic damages for each event. In Cook County, the estimated annual losses are $2.13 million. The 2008 Census Bureau reported a population of 5,294,664 in the County and the population of the Village is 46,329 or 0.9% of the Cook County population. Thus, the annual damages from tornadoes in the Village would be less than a percent of the County losses, or around $20,000. 41
Draft
Draft
2.5 - Drought
Cook County is ranked as guarded for drought in the 2007 State Plan. However, the source of the Villages drinking water is Lake Michigan. Many unincorporated water customers obtain water via the City of Chicago. The Village does not consume all of the water it receives and sells the remainder to other communities. Severe droughts impact agricultural areas most significantly. There are no agricultural areas in the Village. As the Village has an ample supply of Lake Michigan water, drought, although ranked as guarded for the County (as well as most of the State), is not considered a hazard to the Village.
2.6 - Earthquakes
Earthquakes are one of natures most damaging hazards. Earthquakes are caused by the release of strain between or within the Earths tectonic plates. The severity of an earthquake depends on the amount of strain, or energy, which is released along a fault or at the epicenter of an earthquake. The energy released by an earthquake is sent to the earths surface and released. There are several common measures of earthquakes, including the Richter scale and the Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) scale (Table 2-8). The Richter scale is a measurement of the magnitude, or the amount of energy released by an earthquake. Magnitude is measured using seismographs. The MMI is an observed measurement of the earthquakes intensity felt at the earths surface. The MMI varies, depending on the observers location to the epicenter of the earthquake. An earthquakes intensity depends on the geologic makeup of the area and the stability of underlying soils. The effects of an earthquake can be localized near its epicenter or felt significant distances away. For example, a 6.8-magnitude earthquake in the New Madrid Fault in Missouri would have a much wider impact than a comparable event on the California Coast.
42
Draft

TABLE 2-8: Earthquake measurement scales.
Draft
Modified Mercalli I II III
Richter 1.03.0 3.0 3.9
Earthquake Measurement/Felt Intensity Scales Not felt except under special conditions. Detected mostly by instruments Felt by a few people, especially those on upper floors of buildings. Suspended objects may swing.
Felt noticeably indoors. Standing automobiles may rock slightly Felt by many people indoors, by a few outdoors. At night, some people are IV 4.0 awakened. Dishes, windows, and doors rattle. 5.0 Felt by everyone. Many people are awakened. Some dishes and windows are V broken. Unstable objects are overturned. Felt by everyone. Many people become frightened and run outdoors. Some VI heavy furniture is moved. Some plaster falls. 5.0 5.9 Most people alarmed and run outside. Damage is negligible in buildings of VII good construction, considerable in buildings of poor construction. Damage is slight in specially designed structures, considerable in ordinary VII buildings, great in poorly built structures. Heavy furniture is overturned. Fall 6.0 VIII of chimneys, factory stacks, columns, walls. 6.9 Damage is considerable in specially designed buildings. Buildings shift from IX their foundations and partly collapse. Underground pipes are broken. Some well-built wooden structures are destroyed. Most masonry structures VIII - X are destroyed. Ground is badly cracked. Landslides occur on steep slopes. Few, if any masonry structures remain standing. Rails are bent. Broad 7.0 XI fissures appear in the ground. Virtually total destruction. Waves are seen on the ground surface. Objects are XII thrown in the air. Lines of sight and level are distorted. Source: www.usgs.earthquake.gov Earthquake intensity is a description of the effects of an earthquake using the observations of people in the area affected. Intensities are based on descriptive reports rather than calculated from instrument readings. In general, intensity decreases as the distance from the epicenter increases. Thick, loose, saturated soils such as that found in a river valley may amplify earthquake ground motions and therefore have higher intensities reported than just outside of the valley. In the U. S., earthquake intensities are reported using the twelve-point Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale, increasing from barely detectable to catastrophic. For any earthquake, there will be different intensities depending on the location of observers - but there will be only one magnitude.
43
Draft
Draft
FIGURE 2-4: Seismic zones in Illinois
(Source: http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-131-02/NMmap6flat.html)
Earthquakes in Illinois originate within the crust at depths of 1 to 20 km. The vibrations move out away from the point of origin, through the bedrock, and then up through the overlying soils on top of the bedrock. In the central part of the U.S., the bedrock is flat-lying, old, intact, and strong. Earthquake vibrations travel very far through material such as this in comparison to the young, broken, weak bedrock of the west coast. Because of this difference in bedrock, Central U. S. earthquakes are felt over, and cause damage over, an area 15 to 20 times larger than California earthquakes with similar magnitudes. 44
Draft
Draft
Area Impacted
The New Madrid Seismic Zone and the Wabash Valley Fault Zone (Figure 2-4) are the two main threats to the State of Illinois for earthquakes. The New Madrid Seismic Zone, sometimes called the New Madrid Fault Line, is a major seismic zone in the Southern and Midwestern United States stretching to the southwest from New Madrid, Missouri. The Wabash Valley Fault Zone is located in southeastern Illinois, southwestern Indiana, and adjacent corner of Kentucky and extends about 60 miles north-northeastward from just north of the Shawneetown and Rough Creek Fault Zones. Reports of shaking in and around the Village, which is located north of both fault zones, have been caused by and recorded for both fault zones. Earthquake activity has been experienced in the Village even though the Village is located to the north of both the New Madrid and Wabash Valley Seismic Zones. Information regarding earthquakes events is available through the USGS Earthquake Hazards Program (http://earthquake.usgs.gov/). Due to the size and location of the Village, the entire Village is susceptible to shaking from earthquakes from the seismic zones discussed above. Cook County is ranked as guarded for earthquakes in the 2007 State Plan.
Historical Events
The most frequent reports of earthquakes in the United States come from the West coast, but the largest earthquakes felt in the US occurred in Missouri in 1811 and 1812 along the New Madrid Fault Zone. The Great New Madrid Earthquakes are the benchmarks from which all earthquakes in the Midwest are measured. It is important to note that the earthquakes of 1811 and 1812 were a series of over 2,000 shocks in five months, and not single events. Of the approximately 250 small to moderate earthquakes are known to have occurred in Illinois during the past two centuries, 31 caused at least some damage. Figure 2-5 shows the locations of major earthquakes that have occurred within the state. The larger earthquakes are shown with filled circles and the year of occurrence. Smaller earthquakes are shown with open circles that are proportional to the size of the earthquakes. Of the 253 earthquakes (most shown in the figure), eighty percent occurred in the southern third of the State and ten percent (26) occurred in the northern part of the state. Thirty-one of these caused at least some damage.
45
Draft
Draft
FIGURE 2-5: Earthquakes occurring in Illinois between 1796 and 2008
(Source: Illinois State Geological Survey)
The largest earthquake experienced in Illinois occurred on November 9, 1968. It measured magnitude of 5.4 on the Richter scale and was centered in southwestern Illinois, but was felt farther north than the Village. Since 2003 there have been twelve earthquakes in Illinois, two-thirds of which were felt as far north as the Village with reported weak to light shaking and little to no damage (Table 2-5). On June 28, 2004 an earthquake, magnitude 4.2, centered near Ottawa, Illinois (approximately 100 miles south of the Village), was felt all over northern Illinois. People in and around the Village reported experiencing weak shaking (Figure 2-6). On April 18, 2008 an earthquake with magnitude 5.2, centered near Mt. Carmel, Illinois, was felt 400 miles north in the Village. There were reports of weak shaking from the Village. In Chicago, people reported experiencing weak to light shaking. Two aftershocks occurred on the same day with magnitudes 3.4 and 4.6. Weak shaking was reported for the larger of the two aftershocks.
46
Draft
Draft
FIGURE 2-6: Reported earthquake activity (intensity) for the June 28, 2004 earthquake in Illinois
Frequency
There have been over 250 earthquakes in experienced in Illinois since 1795, the majority of which occurred in the southern half of the state. However, two earthquakes greater than 4.5 in magnitude have occurred near the Village in each of the last two centuries. If this pattern holds, the area could expect an earthquake greater than magnitude 4.5 every 100 years, or less than a 1% annual chance occurrence.
Vulnerability
Safety: Trauma caused by partial or complete collapse of human-made structures is the overwhelming cause of death and injury in most earthquakes. (The Public Health Consequences of Disasters, pages 18 19). Temblors in the US have killed approximately 1,600 people since colonial times. 1,000 have been in California: 700 of those were in the 1906 San Francisco quake. Because the greatest potential for loss of life is to people within a collapsing building, the threat to Village residents is directly related to the condition of the buildings. Other life safety threats include collapsing roads and bridges, fires from ruptured gas lines, and release of hazardous chemicals from broken storage tanks or trucks. 47
Draft Overall safety hazard: High
Draft
Health Hazard: The main health concerns from earthquakes arise from sheltering people and caring for injuries. These would be the same as for other quick and destructive hazards, such as tornadoes. Overall health hazard: Low Economic: As with tornadoes, the major impact of an earthquake on the local economy is damage to businesses and infrastructure. Relatively minor amount of damages are expected. Overall economic impact: Low
Potential Losses
Generally, wood frame buildings and structures on solid ground fare best during an earthquake. Wood frame buildings are flexible enough to withstand ground shaking and swaying. Evaluations of recent earthquakes found that damage was primarily caused to: Un-reinforced masonry structures Older buildings with some degree of deterioration Buildings without foundation ties Multi-story structures with open or soft first floors
Most building codes have standards related to the first three concerns. This means that the most threatened buildings are older ones (built before current codes), masonry ones, and taller ones with open first floors. In addition to the building type, damage is related to the underlying soils. Buildings on solid ground fare better while those on loose or sandy soils will suffer more from shaking. These can be found in floodplains. If there is enough water present, the shaking can liquefy the underlying soils, which removes the support under the foundation. Given the relatively low threat of a quake at magnitude greater than 4.5, the expected threat to buildings in the Village would be limited to large, older, un-reinforced masonry structures is limited. Earthquakes less than 4.5 in magnitude typically have little or no damage reported.
2.7 Sewer Backups

The Village of Oak Park is a 100% combined sewer system that discharges all its sewage to the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicagolands (MWRD) interceptor sewer system for treatment. The sewer system of Oak Park was started in 1886 and consists of approximately 110 miles of sewer mains. Due to the sewer systems age and lack of capacity, properties in the Village of Oak Park are subject to basement backups during moderate to heavy rainstorms.
48
Draft
Draft
The heavy rains from the July 2010 and 2011 storms strained the Villages combined sewer system that led to basement backups in multiple areas of the Village. As a result of these events, the Village increased its efforts to improve the combined sewer collection system in the Village. To improve the combined sewer system and minimize basement backups during flood events, the Village hired a consultant prepare a short term improvement project study to identify a variety of improvements to the combined sewer system in order to mitigate basement backups and increase the capacity of the combined sewer system. The Village is currently implementing many of the recommended improvements identified in the study.
49
Draft
Draft
FIGURE 2-7: Locations of basement flooding from combined sewer surcharging.
50
Draft
Draft
Area Impacted
The priority areas were determined from reports of basement backups to the Village and are primarily in the northeast and northwest areas of the Village as noted in Figure 2-16 above. The shaded areas represent the Historical Districts of Oak Park and areas which include significant architectural buildings.

Backups occur during medium to large storm events. During the July 2010 and 2011 storms, approximately 663 homes reported sewer backups (see fig 2-7).
Historical Events
The storm events of July 2010 and 2011 strained the Villages combined sewers and led to basement backups in multiple areas of the Village. Backups have also been experienced during lesser storm events. A table of recent storm events, their frequency, and the number of reported basement backups is below.
TABLE 2-9: Summary of Storm Events and Basement Backups
Date August 13, 1987 September 1, 1989 August 23, 1993 July 24, 2010 July 23, 2011
Recent Storm Event Analysis Rainfall Rainfall Rainfall Rainfall Frequency Number of Depth Duration Intensity (year) complaints (inches) (hours) (inches/hour) 6.12 13 0.47 75 75 2.57 2.48 8.33 4.3 5 3 18 3 0.51 0.83 0.46 1.43 3 5 225 60 27 106 424 239
Frequency
The frequency of basement backups is related to the intensity and duration of a storm event. Rain storms are typically classified using a term that defines the annual probability of a particular storm occurring in a given year. For example a 100-year rain storm has a 1% chance of occurring in any single year. Basement backups in the Village of Oak Park typically occur when storm frequencies exceed the 3 to 5-year storm based on previous sewer studies and reports of backups.
Vulnerability
Health and Safety Hazards: Health and safety hazards come from the fact that there is sewage in 51
Draft
Draft
the backed up water. Backed up sewers create a significant health problem, even in empty basements. Clean up must be careful and thorough to ensure there are no lingering hazards. The health, mental health, and non-economic impacts are similar to those described for overbank flooding Safety hazard: Low Health hazard: High Economic: Flood insurance does not cover sewer backup. Most structures can be covered under a separate rider to the standard homeowners/property insurance. Other economic impacts can result from loss of income if businesses are impacted, however closures could be anticipated to last less than a few days. Overall economic impact: Moderate
Potential Losses
Sewer backups in basements can effectively destroy many basement contents. Finished basements, with carpeting and furniture, are especially susceptible to damage. Even in unfinished basements, water damages washing machines, dryers, furnaces, water heaters, and utilities. Since flood insurance does not cover sewer backup, there are no insurance figures to base the cost of property damage. Such flooding can be shallow or deep and can affect finished or unfinished basements.
2.8 Flooding
Oak Park is not in any known flood plain and is therefore not likely to experience overbank flooding. Maps on this and the following pages show the Des Plaines River Watershed and the 100-year inundation mappings, neither of which enter Oak Park boundaries.
52
Draft
Draft
Figure 2-8: Comparison of DWP 100-yr inundation mapping and FEMA effective FIRM Lower Des Plaines River Watershed
53
Draft
Draft
54
Draft
Draft
55
Draft
Draft
56
Draft
Draft
57
Draft
Draft
58
Draft
Draft
59
Draft
Draft
60
Draft
Draft
61
Draft
Draft
62
Draft
Draft
2.9 Areas of Concern

All areas in Oak Park are equally exposed to all hazards including sewer backups. Areas of major concern include those prone to sewer backups and those containing critical facilities. Critical facilities are buildings and infrastructure whose exposure to damage can affect the well-being of a large group. For example, the impact of a flood or tornado on a hospital is greater than on a home or most businesses. Generally, critical facilities fall into two categories: Buildings or locations vital to public safety and the disaster response and recovery effort, such as police and fire stations and telephone exchanges, and Buildings or locations that, if damaged, would create secondary disasters. Examples of such buildings or locations are hazardous materials facilities and nursing homes.
For this mitigation planning effort, the following the categories summarized in the below are included in the definition of critical facilities
TABLE 2-9: Summary of types of critical facilities and their description
Type of Facility Essential Facility Transportation Systems Lifeline Utility System High Potential Loss Facilities Hazardous Material Facilities
Description Essential to health and welfare of the Village and especially important following hazard events; hospitals, police and fire stations, emergency operations centers, evacuation shelters, schools Highways, expressways, railways, waterways, airways Potable water, wastewater, oil, natural gas, electric power, communications Facilities that would have a high loss associated with them; nuclear power plants, dams, military installations Include facilities housing industrial/hazardous materials such as corrosives, explosives, flammable materials, radioactive materials, and toxins.
63
Draft
Draft
Critical Facilities
Summarized in Table 2-11 are the critical facilities and infrastructure in the Village.
TABLE 2-11: Summary of critical facilities and infrastructure located in the Village Name Location In Flood Plain Sewer Backup Area 129 Lake Street Central Pump Station No 1010 N. Ridgeland North Pump Stn No 217 Garfield South Pump Stn No VILLAGE HALL 123 Madison St No Police Headquarters 123 Madison St No 100 N. Euclid Ave FD Main No 212 Augusta Blvd. FD North No 900 S. East Ave FD South No Public Works Center 201 South Boulevard No 834 Lake Street Main Library No 255 Augusta Street Dole Branch Library No 845 Gunderson Street Maze Branch Library No 610 S. Maple Ave. RUSH Oak Park Hospital No 3 Erie Court West Suburban Medical No Center 408 S. Oak Park Ave Oak Park Arms No 1025 Pleasant Place Mills Park Tower No 1035 Madison St. Belmont Village No Schools OPRF High School 201 North Scoville Ave No Beye Elementary 230 N. Cuyler No Hatch Elementary 1000 N. Ridgeland Ave No Yes Holmes Elementary 508 N. Kenilworth No Irving Elementary 1125 S Cuyler No Lincoln Elementary 1111 S. Grove No Longfellow Elementary 715 S. Highland Ave. No Mann Elementary 921 N Kenilworth No Yes Whittier Elementary 715 N. Harvey No Brooks Middle School 325 S. Kenilworth No Julian Middle School 416 S. Ridgeland Ave. No Ascension Catholic School 815 S. East Ave No
St. Giles Catholic School St. Edmund Parish School St. Giles Junior High School Fenwick High School St Catherine/St Lucy
1034 Linden Ave. 200 S. Oak Park Ave. 1101 Columbian Ave. 505 Washington Blvd. 27 Washington Blvd.
No No No No No
Yes
64
Draft Transportation Systems Green Line Harlem Green Line Oak Park Green Line Ridgeland Green Line - Austin Blue Line Harlem Blue Line Oak Park Blue Line - Austin High Potential Loss Facilities Write Inn Hotel Carleton of Oak Park
Draft
1 Harlem Ave 100 S. Oak Park Ave 36 N. Ridgeland Ave 351 N. Austin Blvd 701 Harlem Ave 950 S. Oak Park Ave 1050 S. Austin Blvd 211 N Oak Park Ave 1110 Pleasant St.
No No No No No No No No No
Vulnerability
The vulnerability of critical facilities and infrastructure, as identified in the 2007 State Plan, for each hazard is summarized below. Type of Facility Critical Buildings Parks Communications Infrastructure Natural Gas Transmission Lines Roads Electrical Lines and Relay Stations
TABLE 2-12: Facility vulnerability to Severe Storms and Tornadoes Vulnerability
Damage or destroy facilities cutting off vital services to the community Can fell trees, cut power, and leave debris, rendering park unsafe and forcing it to close Lightning from severe storms can disrupt radio and telephone communications. High winds can topple telecommunications lines and radio towers. When exposed above ground, they are vulnerable to high winds and tornadoes Debris can be deposited on roadways closing them to traffic Can knock down power lines and disrupt service
TABLE 2-13: Facility vulnerability to Severe Winter Storms
Type of Facility Critical Buildings Parks Communications Infrastructure Natural Gas Transmission Lines Roads Electrical Lines
Vulnerability Can cut off access to facilities by blocking roads. This not only prevents the public from traveling to the facility to access the services provided, but it can also degrade the emergency response capabilities emanating from there. Can block roads Can sever land-based telecommunications lines when they are covered with more snow and ice than the line can support Minimal effects Can block roadways with snow and ice Can bring down power lines with large amounts of snow and/or ice 65
Draft Type of Facility Critical Buildings Parks Communications Infrastructure Natural Gas Transmission Lines Roads Electrical Lines

TABLE 2-14 Facility vulnerability to Extreme Heat Vulnerability
Draft
Effects are minimal Park use may be down during episodes of extreme heat, however, effects are minimal Can cause power outages that may have a detrimental effect on the communications infrastructure Effects are minimal Can cause roadways to buckle which poses a hazard to traffic Can cause power outages when increased public demand for power outpaces the generating stations ability to produce power.
TABLE 2-15: Facility vulnerability to Drought Vulnerability
Effects are minimal Loss of appeal and tourist revenue. Effects are minimal Effects are minimal Effects are minimal Effects are minimal
TABLE 2-16: Facility vulnerability to Earthquake Vulnerability
Can destroy buildings, cut power and block access to the facility, rendering it inoperable to the detriment of the community Can knock over trees and buildings and destroy access roads Can bring down radio towers, telephone lines and/or the communications centers themselves Can rupture natural gas transmission lines resulting in a loss of service and a potential fire hazard Can sever roadways and stop the flow of traffic Can sever transmission lines and destroy generation and relay stations.
66
Draft Type of Facility Critical Buildings Parks Communications Infrastructure Natural Gas Transmission Lines Roads Electrical Lines

TABLE 2-17: Facility vulnerability to Sewer Backups Vulnerability
Draft
Create hazards in buildings causing them to be inoperable until cleanup is possible Effects are minimal Effects are minimal Effects are minimal Effects are minimal Effects are minimal
Repetitive/Potential Loss Areas

As of this time, no FEMA identified Repetitive/Potential Loss Areas exist within the Village due to flood plain identification and location as discussed in section 2.9. However, sewer backup and localized flooding due to combined sewer capacity issues are addressed in other sections of this plan.
2.10 Cyber Attacks/Cyber Security

Cyber-attacks are far more common in everyday life than most people and businesses - believe. Every time a person goes on the internet, he or she exposes themselves to a wide variety of viruses, malicious software (malware), spyware, and worms, etc. Many of these threats require an action by the use such as clicking on a pop-up window or opening an email attachment. Some attacks are initiated simply by visiting a website. Once a computer is infected, these attacks can delete computer files, steal personal information such as credit card numbers, bank account numbers, and passwords, or they can destroy the computer A successful cyber-attack requires three basic parts: Access: to a network or system Vulnerability: to a part of the system that the attacker can take advantage of Purpose: what is the target and how badly can the network or system be damaged.
According to the Symantec, an internationally recognized leader in virus protection software, the number of malicious codes detected is growing almost exponentially as shown in figure 2-9 on the following page. Additionally, the number of email traffic identified as being malicious in 2011 is shown by industry sector in figure 2-10 67
Draft

Figure 2-9: Malicious Codes Detected by Symantec
Draft
Figure 2-10: Email Traffic Identified as Malicious by Industry Sector
68
Draft
Draft
Area Impacted
The Village of Oak Park municipal offices consist mainly of Village Hall, four garages, the Public Works Center, three water pumping stations, and three fire stations. The IT Department is located in Village Hall and any cyber-attack would be directed at the equipment in this location. As the Village only maintains one central IT Department, an attack on these systems would affect all of the Village offices. The Village operates three water pump stations controlled by a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system. In the past few years, security issues revolving around SCADA systems have moved to the forefront as more and more attention is paid to critical infrastructure. In 2011, numerous security flaws were published on public websites in order to draw attention to the flaws. The Village is aware of these flaws and has made the necessary changes to its system.

It is estimated that the Village could lose one to two days of information should a cyber-attack occur and destroy our systems. While this is a great deal of information at any given time, mitigation efforts, security policies, and daily procedures limit the losses to a manageable level.
Historical Events/Frequency
There have been no known successful cyber-attacks directed on the Village computer systems or on the water pump SCADA system.
Vulnerability
No computer system or network is completely invulnerable. However, the IT Department has taken various steps to limit the exposure Village equipment and networks face. Regardless of steps taken on the technical aspects of the system, the largest vulnerability to any system remains the user.
Potential Losses
A full inventory of IT equipment including costs is maintained by the Village. However, the more probable losses stemming from a cyber-attack would likely be information and due to the mitigation efforts (discussed elsewhere in this document) taken by the IT Department, the Village believes any information loss would be manageable and easily rectified. For this reason, where the general computer/network systems are concerned, the overall impact of a cyber-attack is rated as medium.
69
Draft
Draft
2.11 - Power Outages

ComEd is the electrical provider for the Village of Oak Park and currently runs approximately 55 miles of lines in the Village. The vast majority of these lines are run above ground along alleys. Where alleys are not available, the lines are run through easements in residents back yards. In addition to this, ComEd maintains underground networks that feed this above ground system.
Area Impacted
Due to the structure of the ComEd power lines and system, the entire Village is at risk from power outages.
Historical Events
During a series of severe storms in June, 2010: Over 120,000 lightning strikes were recorded in the ComEd service area Wind speeds of 70-80+mph were recorded on June 18th and 23rd 550 utility poles were downed or damaged 113 transformers and 38 transmission structures were damaged. Approximately 80% of Oak Park residents experienced power interruptions
While this storm system was extreme, in any given year severe storms alone will cause numerous power outages throughout the Village. The following information is taken from the annual ComEd reports to the Village and outlines the number of outages and cause.
Table 2-18: ComEd Outage Report by Cause Cause/Year 2006 2007 2008 2009 Tree related 46 47 13 7 Malfunction 30 35 23 1 Weather related * 17/2/1 10/5/3 12 1 Animal related 12 18 6 13 Intentional (unscheduled) 11 17 1 1 Underground failure 11 11 14 14 Intentional (scheduled) 9 7 13 6 Other 8 6 30 26 Customer related 6 4 0 0 *where provided, weather outages are due to lightning/wind/ice or snow
2010 45 26 33 8 0 20 20 45 2
Frequency
Power outages can occur at any time during the year but weather related outages are most probable during summer and winter months.
70
Draft
Draft
Vulnerability
The Village as a whole is vulnerable to power outages. ComEd and the Village work together to identify critical infrastructure and prioritize reconnection should one of these buildings lose power, regardless of the reason.
Potential Losses
Where power outages are extended and run into the hours or, in some cases, days, one of the main losses is food spoilage in refrigerators for both residents and restaurants. This can be offset through homeowners or business insurance if residents submit the proper paperwork to their insurer. In most cases, power loss does not cause physical damage to buildings or structures.
71
Draft
Draft
CHAPTER 3 PREVENTATIVE MEASURES

3.1 Developing Trends
Since the Village is already fully developed, little change in the existing sewer system load is expected. With public information efforts on sewer backup protection and infiltration and inflow reduction (discussed in Chapter 2.7), it is not expected that this problem will significantly worsen over time.
3.2 Preventative Measures

Preventive measures, in the form of planning and regulations, can help to reduce the impact of future events. Four types of preventive measures were considered: Planning and Zoning Building code Development incentives Storm water management
Planning and Zoning

General: Planning and zoning activities are intended to direct development away from hazardous areas. Land use plans are used to plan proposed appropriate uses. However, a land use plan is just a guide for what the community would like to see. Authority to implement a plan is found in the zoning ordinance, capital improvements program, and subdivision ordinances. A zoning ordinance regulates development by dividing the community into zoning districts and setting development criteria for each district. Public use and conservation generally require public ownership of the land to avoid a legal challenge that the restrictions are so severe they amount to a taking of the land. A capital improvements program identifies where major public expenditures will be made over the next 5 years. These include the maintenance and replacement of public infrastructure including roadways, combined sewer systems, and public facilities. In 2012, the Village will undertake a complete review and update of the Comprehensive Plan with the plan being complete in 2013. The current zoning map for the Village of Oak Park is shown in figure 3-1.
72
Draft
Draft
Figure 3-1: Village of Oak Park Zoning Map
73
Draft
Draft
Open Space Preservation

General: The Village of Oak Park is almost entirely built-out with the vast majority of land devoted to residential dwellings. The remaining land is devoted to commercial businesses and parks. The Parks District of Oak Park manages the use of all parks in the Village. Oak Park and River Forest do not have great amounts of open space to contend with, and the strategies in the OPRF PlanItGreen focus on incorporating green infrastructure improvements into existing spaces and new developments that enhance natures services to our community. Recent community conversation around parks has centered on decisions related to athletic play space enhancement and the preservation of quiet, natural settings, and many community comments we received recognize the need for both and advocate a healthy balance. The strategies in PlanItGreen focus on preserving and enhancing the natural park and forest ambiances and services that reflect our communities names, while making both communities desirable places to live, work, and play.
Goals
Goal #1: Contribute to greater ecosystem services (aesthetics, air, water, soil, habitat wildlife). Strategies: 1. Assess long-term tree cover planning (tress spacing issues). 2. Incorporate green infrastructure into new construction and any retrofit ground work (e.g. native landscaping, green roofs, porous surfaces, swales). 3. Connect existing open spaces through greenways conduct a study and develop a plan. 4. Establish historic preservation guidelines and an ordinance to preserve trees on public and private land. 5. Develop tree corridors, parkways and native plant corridors as a part of overall corridor development strategy. Goal#2:Enhanceexistingopenspacesandecosystems. Strategies: 1. Create institutional policies around procurement that reduce/prohibit use of toxics and incorporate use of eco-safe alternatives. 2. Develop best practices guides, resources, tools for use of eco-safe materials and products, or access and distribute existing materials through workshops and training programs. 3. Enhance our communities Urban Forests. Goal#3:Createmorecommunityandrelationshipsthroughtheuseofopenspace. Strategies: 1.Organizeandtrainpeopletobuildraisebedswithincommunities. 2.Createecosystempolicyforeachcommunityinstitution. 3.Developcommunityinstitutionsasmodelsforgreenpracticesinopenspace. 4.Broadeneducationandinformationaccessthroughtheinternet,asustainabilitycenter,and educationalworkshops 74
Draft
Draft
RefertotheOPRFSustainabilityPlan(PlanItGreen)forfurtherinformationrelatedtoopenspace preservationandreferencesforimprovingsustainability.
Subdivision Regulations
General: With the Village being almost completely built-out, any subdivision of a current plot or property must be approved by the Village Board and must conform to current standards of design, and standards governing streets, alleys, public ways, ways for public service facilities, streetlights, public grounds, size of lots to be used for residential purposes, storm and flood water runoff channels and basins, water supply and distribution, sanitary sewers and sewage collection and treatment in conformity with the applicable requirements of the ordinances, including the Official Map (2-17-6 Village Code).
Building Code
General: Building codes provide one of the best methods of addressing the hazards discussed in this plan. They are the prime measure to protect new property from damage by floods, earthquakes, tornadoes, high winds, ice, and snow. When designed and constructed according to code, the average building can withstand the impacts of most of these forces. Hazard protection standards for all new and improved or repaired buildings can be incorporated into the local building code. Provisions that should be included are: Making sure roofing systems can handle high winds, rainfall, and expected snow loads Providing special standards for tying the roof, walls and foundation together to resist the effects of wind, Including insulation standards that ensure protection from extreme heat and cold as well as increasing energy efficiency, Ensuring that the foundations are strong enough for earth movement and that all structural elements are properly connected to the foundation, and Recommendation for overhead sewers for all new basements to prevent sewer backup.
Many communities in Illinois with building codes adopted various codes of the International Code Council. These standard building codes provide the basis for good building safety programs, especially protection from fire and electrical hazards. These codes are highly recommended by FEMA because it has so many provisions for protection against the forces of natural hazards. While the code standards are important, enforcement of the code is equally important. Many reports were filed detailing buildings that lost their roofs during Hurricane Andrew because sloppy construction practices did not put enough nails in them. Adequate inspections are needed during the course of construction to ensure that the builder understands the requirements and is following them. Ensuring a structure is properly anchored requires site inspections at each step.
75
Draft
Draft
The Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule (BCEGS) is used by the insurance industry to determine how well new construction is protected from wind, earthquake and other non-flood hazards. It is similar to the 15-year old Community Rating System and the century-old fire insurance rating scheme: building permit programs are reviewed and scored, a class 1 community is the best, and a class 10 community has little or no program. BCEGS grading includes a review of the municipalitys building codes, building plan approval process, and field inspection process. BCEGS classifications are used in insurance underwriting, so communities with a high BCEGS score are eligible for insurance rating credits. The Village of Oak Parks Regulations: Oak Park has adopted the 2006 edition of the International Code Councils (ICC) International Residential Code (IRC) which is endorsed by the U.S. Department of Urban Housing and Development (HUD), FEMA, and the American Institute of Architects (AIA) and has incorporated it as Chapter 7: Buildings, within the Oak Park Village Code. As of this plan development, the Village of Oak Park has recently undergone a BCEGS evaluation and is waiting for the final score to be confirmed
Storm Water Management

General: Floodplain regulations address development in the path of flooding. Flooding can also be increased by development outside the floodplain. When an area is urbanized, i.e., converted from farms, forests and fields to buildings and streets, the ground surface becomes more impervious. More storm water runs off the land instead of soaking in. At the same time, developers build gutters, sewers, and ditches to move surface water as fast as possible downhill to the river channels. Not only does this aggravate downstream flooding, it often overloads the communitys drainage system. The alternative, a storm water management regulation, requires developers to incorporate retention or detention basins to ensure that the rate of runoff after development is no greater than under pre-development conditions. Storm water management requirements for detention are generally found in ordinances governing subdivisions and larger new developments. Many developments utilize wet or dry basins as landscaping amenities. Larger detention basins are more effective than smaller ones, which drain relatively quickly. In some cases, advance community planning identifies the most effective location for a basin and requires developers to contribute funds for it in lieu of constructing on-site detention. The Villages Storm Water Management: The Village does not have a storm water ordinance. Detention, volume reductions, and runoff rate control provisions for new construction and redevelopment are contained within the Cook County Watershed Management Ordinance and the MWRD Development Ordinance. The Cook County Watershed Management Ordinance: The Cook County Watershed Management Ordinance, pending at the time of report preparation, includes additional volume reduction and runoff rate control provisions including retaining 1 inch of runoff from impervious area for volume 76
Draft
Draft
reduction purposes, and controlling the rate of runoff for the 2-year (0.04 cfs) and 100-year (0.15 cfs) storms. Detention requirements are set by the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago (MWRD): MWRD is concerned about excess storm water overloading its combined sewers or flooding its wastewater treatment plants. It has had storm water regulations in effect since the early 1970s. Before a new development can connect to sewers that MWRD serves, it must apply for a permit and show that it meets MWRDs detention standards. MWRDs regulations only affect single-family residential developments equal to or greater than ten acres and other developments equal to or greater than five acres. These developments must restrict the peak discharge from their sites during a base storm to that of a 3-year storms release under predevelopment conditions.
Development Incentives
General: Regulatory approaches react to developers proposals. They set limits on what private property owners can do, but they do not promote certain types of development. Development incentives are one way a community can take the initiative to encourage appropriate development of flood prone areas. Various incentives have been devised around the country to encourage developers to settle in a community and/or to exceed minimum zoning ordinance requirements and development regulations. Incentives include tax credits and density trade-offs. Alternate approaches to storm water regulations include fee-in-lieu-of detention with fees contributing to a regional or central detention facility. Incentives and alternate approaches can be developed in cooperation with landowners and developers to accomplish mutually supportive objectives. The Villages Incentive Programs: There are currently no development incentives related to storm water in the Village.
3.3- Conclusions
Preventive measures are designed to keep the problem from getting worse by ensuring that future development does not increase hazard damages. The Village utilizes most of the commonly used measures: Zoning Open space preservation Building code Storm water management regulations 77
Draft
Draft
Further, the Village has developed the following tools that can help reduce the impacts from hazards: Comprehensive plan Capital improvements program
Because there is little vacant land available for development, the measures that would be most effective in a developed community such as the Village are building codes and floodplain regulations.
3.4 - Recommendations
Continue to utilize the latest international series of codes, the new national standard that is being adopted throughout the Country. Maintain and continue to improve upon the Villages BCEGS rating. Ensure that design, construction or permitting for critical facilities accounts for natural hazards and adjacent land uses. Promotetheuseofgreenmaterialsforfutureconstructionorretrofitting. Implement a development incentive program for storm water.
78
Draft
Draft
CHAPTER 4 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND RESPONSE

Emergency management refers to those measures that protect people and property during an emergency. Emergency service measures protect lives and property. Emergency services have been traditionally framed around the five phases of emergency management: prevention, preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation. The Cook County Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management (CCDHSEM) coordinates emergency management services in Cook County. The Illinois Emergency Management Agency (IEMA) coordinates the state response to emergencies. The Oak Park Emergency Services Disaster Agency coordinates the efforts in the Village. The Village has an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) based on the authority of the State of Illinois Emergency Management Act that guides the Villages emergency management activities during and following an emergency. The EOP focuses on emergency management capable of operating in any type of emergency or disaster whether natural or man-made. Natural hazards identified in the EOP include severe and excessive heat or cold, severe storms, tornadoes, winter storms, and earthquakes. The EOP is activated upon the declaration of a local emergency or disaster. As such, preparedness activities taken prior to the onset of an emergency or disaster are not addressed in the EOP. The Village President or his emergency interim successor acts as the Principal Executive Officer and is responsible for all emergency operations within the Village. Department heads responsible to the Village President are responsible for providing direction to department personnel and mutual aid resources in accordance with the direction of the Village President. Different departments are assigned primary and support responsibilities for different disaster response duties in the Emergency Operations Plan (Table 4-1). These assignments are shown in the accompanying table for each of the main annexes to the plan.
79
Draft
Draft
Warning/Emergency Information
Resource Management
Damage Assessment
Public Information
Law Enforcement
Health & Medical
Communications
Assigned Agency EMA/ESDA
Executive Legal Clerk Finance ESDA/EMA Coordinator Police Fire & EMS WSCDC Public Works Public Health Building /Zoning Village Manager School District Park District Animal Control Other Dept/ Agencies American Red Cross
S P P P P P S S P S S S S P S P P S S S P P P P S S P P S S S S S S S P P
TABLE 4-1: Responsibility Matrix (P Primary Support; S Support)
A good emergency management program addresses natural hazards and it involves all municipal 80
Hazardous Materials
Animal Care & Relief
Public Works
Fire & EMS
Evacuation
Volunteers
Mass Care
Donations
Mortuary
EOC
Draft
Draft
departments. This chapter reviews emergency management activities that relate to natural hazards and identifies how the Village addresses these activities. There are four basic parts to emergency management in response to a natural hazard: threat recognition, warning, response, and critical facilities protection.
4.1 Threat Recognition

Planning resources and personnel are important elements of preparedness, but threat recognition is just as important. The first step in responding to a weather related emergency is knowing when weather conditions are favorable for that event to occur. With a proper and timely threat recognitions system, adequate warnings can be disseminated.
Winter Storms
The Village of Oak Park uses two Weather Service Vendors, Continental Weather Service, headquartered in Mesa, Arizona, and Telvent DTN, headquartered in Omaha, Nebraska. Continental has local forecasters that provide at least twice daily faxes and emails with the daily and seven day forecast. They are also available for conference calls from Village staff to discuss details of upcoming storms. DTN is primarily an on-line weather service, but also provides pager alerts to snow supervisors.
4.2 - Warning
After the threat recognition system indicates that a tornado, thunderstorm, winter storm or other hazard is coming, the next step is to notify the public and staff of other agencies and critical facilities, as identified in the Villages EOP. The earlier and more specific the warning, the greater the number of people who can implement protection measures will be. The NWS issues notices to the public using two levels of notification: Watch: conditions are right for thunderstorms, tornadoes or winter storms. Warning: a tornado, etc. has started or has been observed. A more specific warning may be disseminated by the community in a variety of ways. The following are the common methods: Outdoor warning sirens Sirens on public safety vehicles Commercial or public radio or TV stations The Weather Channel Village of Oak Park Cable TV, VOP6, emergency news inserts Telephone trees/mass telephone notification NOAA Weather Radio Tone activated receivers in key facilities 81
Draft
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois Door-to-door contact Mobile public address systems E-mail notifications
Draft
Multiple/redundant systems are most effective. If people do not hear one warning, they may still get the message from another part of the system. Each has advantages and disadvantages: Radio and television provide a great deal of information, but people have to know when to turn them on. NOAA Weather Radio can provide short messages of any impending weather hazard or emergency and advise people to turn on their radios or televisions, but Weather Radios are still not commonplace in homes. Outdoor warning sirens can reach many people quickly as long as those people are outdoors. The sound does not always penetrate tightly-insulated buildings or alert those around loud noise, such as at a factory, during a thunderstorm, or in air conditioned homes. Warning sirens do not explain what hazard is approaching, but most people do know to turn on a radio or television. Automated telephone notification services are also fast, but can be expensive and do not work when phones lines are down. Although individuals can sign up for notifications, these systems do not normally work for unlisted numbers and calling screener services, Where a threat has a longer lead-time, going door-to-door and manual telephone trees can be effective.
Just as important as issuing a warning is telling people what to do. A warning program should have a public information aspect. People need to know the difference between a tornado warning (when they should seek shelter in a basement) and a flood warning (when they should stay out of basements).
StormReady
The National Weather Service established the Storm-Ready program to help local governments improve the timeliness and effectiveness of hazardous weather related warnings for the public. Being designated a StormReady community by the National Weather Service is a good measure of a communitys emergency warning program for weather hazards. To be officially StormReady, a community must: Establish a 24-hour warning point and emergency operations center Have more than one way to receive severe weather warnings and forecasts and to alert the public Create a system that monitors weather conditions locally Promote the importance of public readiness through community seminars Develop a formal hazardous weather plan, which includes training severe weather spotters 82
Draft
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois and holding emergency exercises.
Draft
Local Implementation
Depending on the type of emergency and the time available to initiate a warning, notifications may be made in several ways, including but not limited to: Villages Siren Warning System used to warn residents when a tornado has been sighted or is approaching the Village Cable and local TV Public Radio Public address system of Police and Fire Door to door by police, fire, Public Works, EMA volunteers Village web site or email notification system Emergency Telephone Notification System (ETNS) The system passes recorded information regarding evacuations and shelter locations, shelter-in-place orders, extended utility interruptions, public health incidents, specific police operations, and other messages as directed by the Village Managers office.
The Village Manager, Emergency Preparedness and Response Manager, Communications Director, or other designated person issues the warning through the Rapid Notify mass communication system. The Village has not applied for StormReady status at this time. There are 84 StormReady communities in Illinois, with seven in Cook County. (www.nws.noaa.gov/stormready/)
4.3 - Response
The protection of life and property is the most important task of emergency responders. With threat recognition and issuing warnings, a communitys response should be with actions that can prevent or reduce damage and injuries. Typical actions include: 83 Activating the emergency operations center (emergency management) Closing streets or bridges (police or public works) Shutting off power to threatened areas (utility company) Ordering an evacuation (chief elected official) Holding children at school/releasing children from school (school district) Opening evacuation shelters (Red Cross/Village) Security and other protection measures (police)
Draft
Draft
Municipalities are responsible for warnings and fire protection in their incorporated areas until all of their resources are exhausted. If the severity or extent of an emergency were to exceed any municipalitys capability, numerous backup agreements are in place. The Mutual Aid Box Alarm System is used by fire departments in Illinois and the Illinois Law Enforcement Alarm System is used by police. Should those resources be exhausted, county emergency management will be able to provide additional resources and assistance as required. The Village EOP helps ensure appropriate response activities for expected threats. The EOP was developed in coordination with the local agencies and offices with responsibilities during an event. The Villages EOP is updated annually to keep contact names and telephone numbers current and to make sure that supplies and equipment are available. The EOP should be critiqued and revised, if necessary, after disasters and drills to take advantage of lessons learned and changing conditions. The Villages response activities involve Emergency Management, Police, Fire/EMS, and Public Works, with additional assistance provided by the County and State if necessary. Response activities include warning, evacuation, firefighting and rescue, emergency medical services, and other similar operations addressed in the Villages EOP. The Villages responsibility matrix is given in Table 4-1. The Villages Emergency Operations Center (EOC) contains the most up to date maps, aerial photographs and diagrams detailing major village infrastructure. The Villages master resource list is also located in the EOC. These resources would be used to assist planners, responders, and crisis managers as needed. The Villages EOP does not provide specific response procedures to a specific natural disaster event, but rather general guidance organized by function and responsibility.
4.4 Critical Facilities Protection

Protecting critical facilities during a disaster is the responsibility of the facility owner or operator. However, if they are not prepared for an emergency, the rest of the community could be impacted. If a critical facility is damaged, workers and resources may be unnecessarily drawn away from other disaster response efforts. If the owner or operator adequately prepares such a facility, it will be better able to support the communitys emergency response efforts. Many critical facilities have full-time professional managers or staffs who are responsible for the facility during a disaster. Some have their own emergency response plans. Illinois state law requires hospitals, nursing homes, and other public health facilities to develop such plans. Many facilities would benefit from early warning, response planning, and coordination with community response efforts.
84
Draft
Draft
The Villages critical facilities are discussed in Section 2.9 of this plan.
4.5 Recovery and Mitigation

After a disaster, communities should undertake activities to protect public health and safety, facilitate recovery, and help prepare people and property for the next disaster. Throughout the recovery phase, everyone wants to get back to normal. However, normal means the way they were pre-disaster, exposed to repeated damage from future disasters. Appropriate measures include the following: Recovery Actions Patrolling evacuated areas to prevent looting Providing safe drinking water Monitoring for diseases Vaccinating residents for tetanus Clearing streets Cleaning up debris and garbage
Mitigation Actions Conducting a public information effort to advise residents about mitigation measures they can incorporate into their reconstruction work Evaluating damaged public facilities to identify mitigation measures that can be included during repairs Acquiring substantially or repeatedly damaged properties from willing sellers Planning for long-term mitigation activities Applying for post-disaster mitigation funds Regulating reconstruction to ensure that it meets all code requirements
Following activation of the Villages EOP, the process of developing a preliminary damage assessment, or CCSEMA Incident Flash Report, will begin. The assessment is designed to provide a geographic overview of the damaged/impacted area, makeup of the area (e.g. residential, commercial, industrial, etc.), and a foundation for the deployment of emergency response resources. This preliminary damage assessment is submitted to IEMA. Incident Flash Reports are submitted to the County Sheriffs Emergency Management Agency. Following preliminary assessment, the Village will conduct a formal damage survey. During the 85
Draft
Draft
damage assessment process, Village Individual Assessment (IA) teams will conduct safety inspections to determine habitability of damaged structures. Residential properties will be inspected using the Villages Building Codes. Business properties will be inspected using the BOCA code.
4.6 - CONCLUSIONS
Emergency management planning in the Village is ongoing and generally comprehensive. Threat recognition in the County for severe weather hazards (tornadoes, thunderstorms, and winter storms) is relatively good. The Village has effective means to disseminate warnings to the general public. The Village has successfully responded to recent disasters, including winter storms.
86
Draft
Draft
CHAPTER 5 - MITIGATION STRATEGY

5.1 Mitigation Goals
The Village Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee met to review the risk assessment and to discuss the goals and objectives of the Villages MHMP. The Villages goals are long-term general guidelines to establish and serve as the Villages vision and direction for hazard mitigation and loss reduction measures. The overriding goal is to reduce damages to people and property from natural hazards. The committee adopted the following goals: Goal 1: Protect the residents of Oak Park, their homes, and their health, from the dangers of natural hazards. Goal 2: Place a priority on protecting public services, including critical facilities, utilities and schools. Goal 3: Increase public awareness about the hazards to facilitate support for and adoption of mitigation actions. Goal 4: Protect open space and natural areas for the public to enjoy and to prevent inappropriate development in hazardous areas. The goals will be obtained with the following objectives through mitigation strategies to Protect properties and critical facilities and infrastructure from damages from natural hazards; Protect public services; Encourage businesses and property owners to adopt appropriate mitigation actions to reduce storm water runoff; Develop education and outreach programs to reach all citizens regarding potential natural hazards; Establish preventive measures to reduce future impacts.
5.2 Mitigation Measure Categories

To assist in listing mitigation activities, the Planning Committee was provided with a list of the six mitigation measure categories from the FEMA State and Local Mitigation Planning How to Guides as follows:
Prevention: Government, administrative, or regulatory actions or processes that influence the way land and buildings are developed and built. These actions also include public activities to reduce hazard losses. Examples include planning and zoning, building codes, capital improvement programs, open space preservation, and storm water management regulations.
87
Draft
Draft
Property Protection: Actions that involve the modification of existing buildings or structures to protect them from a hazard or removal from the hazard area. Examples include acquisition, elevation, structural retrofits, storm shutters, and shatter-resistant glass. Public Education and Awareness: Actions to inform and educate citizens, elected officials, and property owners about the hazards and potential ways to mitigate them. Such actions include outreach projects, real estate disclosure, hazard information centers, and school-age and adult education programs. Natural Resource Protection: Actions that, in addition to minimizing hazard losses, preserve or restore the functions of natural systems. These actions include sediment and erosion control, stream corridor restoration, watershed management, forest and vegetation management, and wetland restoration and preservation. Emergency Services: Actions that protect people and property during and immediately after a disaster or hazard event. Services include warning systems, emergency response services including too-lending libraries and identification of neighborhood hubs, emergency response equipment including environmentally safe fire retardant, cargo bikes and trailers, connections to urban agriculture outlets, and protection of critical facilities. Village policy should require clean diesel vehicles for all emergency response equipment, recycling of rubble and deconstruction materials (http://www.rebuildingexchange.org/aboutus.html), and composting and/or sending to biomass facilities all vegetative debris. Structural Projects: Actions that involve the construction of structures to reduce the impact of a hazard. Such structures include dams, levees, floodwalls, seawalls, retaining walls, and safe rooms.
The development of the MHMP is the first step in a multi-step process to implement projects and policies to mitigate hazards in the Village. The list of potential mitigation actions/projects identified by the committee to reduce or eliminate damages is summarized in the following sections.
5.3 Potential Mitigation Measures Severe Storms

There are many mitigation measures that can be used to reduce or eliminate damages from severe storms. During severe storms property can be damaged by through electrical surges from lightning, hail, high winds and flash floods. Many retrofitting techniques can be applied to reduce potential damages. Community education and outreach and emergency response are discussed under separate sections.
88
Draft
Draft
Hazard
General
Hail
High Winds
Lightning
TABLE 5-1: Hazard Mitigation Strategies Severe Storm Mitigation Strategy A resilient and self-healing electrical grid system can increase power reliability during extreme weather conditions found in tornados. State-of-the-art substations, transformers and smart meters, as well as solid state communication devices, redundant circuitry and buried power lines create a grid system that can detect outages, remotely reroute power and improve the response time for vegetative and restoration crews. Critical facilities should have redundant circuitry to and from the utility as well as backup power resources to continue basic services, preferably from renewable resources such as solar panels with battery storage backup systems. Businesses can use backup sources to ensure security and protect refrigerated goods. Buildings can be designed with structural bracing, shutters, laminated windowpanes and hail-resistant shingles. Tree management/pruning near power lines can reduce the potential of trees falling on power lines. Temporary debris disposal sites can be protected by fencing or located away from residential areas. Loose items such as backyard/patio furniture should be secured. Buildings can be designed with structural bracing, shutters, laminated glass, reinforced pedestrian and garage doors, waterproof sealing strips, or interlocking roof shingles Surge protection should be installed on critical electronic equipment Lightning rods and grounding can be installed on community infrastructure and other critical facilities.
Severe Winter Storms

There are many mitigation measures that can be used to reduce or eliminate damages from severe winter storms. During severe winter storms property can be damaged through ice covered power and utility lines, collapse of roofs from snow loads, and snow and ice covered roadways. Community education and outreach and emergency response are discussed under separate chapters.
TABLE 5-2: Hazard Mitigation Strategies Sever Winter Storms Mitigation Strategy Building owners should be instructed on what to look for and encouraged to inspect older buildings for deterioration and make subsequent repairs Improved insulation would hold up better to drops in temperature. Underground electric and utility lines would prevent disruption by protecting lines from ice, wind or snow damage. Home and building maintenance should be encouraged in order to prevent roof and wall damage from ice-dams resulting from ice/sleet storms Snow fences can limit blowing snow over critical roads
Hazard General
Ice Snow
89
Draft
Draft
Support systems may be vulnerable to load stress. Departments may wish to set up an inspection system and recommend building repairs.
Extreme Heat
Extreme heat can cause roads to buckle. Design standards could be implemented to reduce the potential for road buckling on critical routes. Extreme heat can also cause heat island effect. Property design standards for white roofs, green roofs and natural landscaping could be implemented to reduce heat island effects. Community education and emergency response are discussed in separate chapters.
Tornadoes
Like severe winds, tornadoes can cause extensive damage to structures. It is not possible to entirely prevent damage, but damage can be minimized. Community education and outreach and emergency response are discussed under separate chapters. Other potential tornado mitigation strategies are discussed in Table 5-3 below.
TABLE 5-3: Hazard Mitigation Strategies Tornados Mitigation Strategy A resilient and self-healing electrical grid system can increase power reliability during extreme weather conditions found in tornados. State-of-the-art substations, transformers and smart meters, as well as solid state communication devices, redundant circuitry and buried power lines create a grid system that can detect outages, remotely reroute power and improve the response time for vegetative and restoration crews. Businesses and critical infrastructure should have redundant circuitry to and from the utility as well as backup power, preferably from renewable resources such as solar panels with battery storage backup systems, to provide security and protect refrigerated supplies. Loose items such as patio furniture should be secured. New construction should include techniques such as bracing, straps and clips, anchor bolts, impact-resistant glass and shutters
Hazard General
Wind
Drought
Drought conditions have little to no impact on property damage within the Village, therefore mitigation strategies addressing drought conditions are not a priority at this time.
Earthquakes
Although high magnitude earthquakes have a low probability of occurring in the region, they are still possible. Homeowners and businesses can take simple measures to strengthen their buildings. While some of these measures are simple and inexpensive and may be cost effective for a home or business, they may not be sufficient for protection of critical facilities. Fire stations need to be sure that they can open their doors and hospitals must be strong enough to continue operating during the 90
Draft
Draft
shocks and aftershocks. Community education, outreach, and emergency response are discussed in separate chapters. Other potential earthquake mitigation strategies are discussed below.
TABLE 5-4: Mitigation Strategies Earthquakes Mitigation Strategy Identify and harden critical lifeline systems (eg: utilities) to meet current seismic guidelines. Install flexible utility connections during future refits or upgrades Public Works should review construction plans for bridges/overpasses. Secure appliances, water heaters, bookcases and furniture so they wont fall over during a temblor.
Hazard
Earthquake
Sewer Backups
Sewer Backups have a high probability of occurring in the Village. The primary cause of sewer backups is surcharging of the aging combined sewer system during storm events. Mitigating sewer backups requires a multi-tiered approach that addresses the following factors: The condition of the aging sewer system Inadequate capacity of the Villages sewer system Solutions to reduce the volume and rate of storm water entering the combined sewers Programs to provide assistance to property owners to install sewer backflow prevention systems Inadequate capacity of the MWRDs receiving sewer system
Sewer backup mitigation strategies are described below and in more detail in the attached Combined Sewer System Review and Short-Term Improvement Project Study (attachment 1).
91
Draft
Draft
TABLE 5-5: Mitigation Strategies for Combined Sewer Backups Sewer Backup Mitigation Strategies: 1. Maintain the Villages existing combined sewer system Identify combined sewer system defects through video inspection. Conduct sewer main repairs, rehabilitation with lining, and replacement where needed with annual capital improvement program.
2. Improve capacity of existing combined sewer system Identify sewer capacity constraints and improvements through hydrologic and hydraulic modeling of the combined sewer system. Develop long term capital improvement plan to implement recommended improvements from sewer modeling. 3. Reduce the volume and rate of storm water entering the combined sewer system Install flow restrictors in existing drainage structures Create educational campaign to encourage downspout disconnection Install storm water BMPs and green technologies (i.e. permeable pavements and bio retention) when applicable with annual capital improvements Adopt a storm water management ordinance Implement recommendations from the Oak Park River Forest Sustainability Plan, PlanItGreen (see excerpt below) 4. Provide assistance programs to homeowners to install sewer backflow prevention systems Adopt financial assistance programs which encourage homeowners to install sewer backflow preventers to mitigate sewer backups which are likely to occur during large storm events 5. Collaborate with neighboring communities and MWRD to increase capacity of MWRDs interceptor sewer system which receives virtually all of combined sewage from the Village
The Village developed the Oak Park River Forest Sustainability Plan, PlanItGreen, which was adopted in June 2011. PlanItGreen is designed to develop and implement and environmental sustainability plan for two communities: Oak Park, IL and River Forest, IL. While this document focuses on sustainability through energy, waste, and community development, the chapter related to water usage is most applicable to this mitigation plan and is included below. For many Chicago metro area residents, being situated next to Lake Michigan and the other Great Lakes has created a sense of security about our water supply and a lack of urgency around the need to use water wisely. The use of water from Lake Michigan by the state of Illinois is regulated by a 1980 Supreme Court decision limiting the 40-year average water diversion from the watershed to 3,200 cubic feet/second (cfs) (U.S. Supreme Court WISCONSIN v. ILLINOIS, 449 U.S. 48 (1980) 449 U.S. 48). This includes water pumped from the Lake for water supply as well as storm water runoff that no longer flows into the Lake due to the reversal of the Chicago and Calumet rivers all of 92
Draft
Draft
which is tracked by the US Army Corps of Engineers. In 2007, the most recent year for which data is available, the 40-year average water diversion from Lake Michigan was 3,171 cfs. This average has been falling in recent years, but the addition of water demand from communities currently reliant on dwindling aquifer supplies and increased storm-water runoff could reverse that trend. As aquiferbased water supplies drop, evaporation from rising air temperatures increases, and demand for fresh water grows both region-ally and globally, pressure on our precious water resources will continue to mount. Water ranked as the fourth highest community concern in the PlanItGreen survey results and ranked one water conservation strategy among the ten most important strategies. Water strategies identified in the survey and community forums focused mainly on storm water management, but water conservation and water quality were considered as well. Since that time, Oak Park secured a Technical Assistance Grant from the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) to create a Village-wide water conservation plan that would expand upon the goals mentioned in PlanItGreen. Of note is the 50% increase in water rates expected from the City of Chicago, and the plans suggestion for a rate structure that would reward the most efficient water users. The plan is in its final draft form and staff review process with an expected Board action date in fall 2012.
93
Draft
Draft
Goals
Goal #1: Reduce overall community potable water consumption.
Strategies:
1. Residential Water Conservation Increase incentives and education regarding the use of water efficient toilets, faucets and showerheads for single-family, multi-family, commercial, and institutional units. Educate residents about water pricing and implement pilot smart water meter project. Create a Water Conservation Certificate Program for homeowners. 2. Lawns/Residential Runoff Implement an educational program/video that promotes native landscapes and water sipping lawns. Promote water efficient lawns via green garden tours and provide education and resources for people to implement water efficient lawn strategies. Improve information on water bills (show average consumption, provide tips). Change billing structure to incentivize reductions (storm water fees, seasonal rates, etc.). Create a Conservation Certification for lawn care companies/landscapers or require certification through existing outside certifying agency (like WaterSense). 3. Education Create educational materials/video/program that promotes the importance of the water cycle, the limited resource of the Great Lakes, water infrastructure, and strategies for conserving water and protecting water quality. Create a multi-pronged outreach strategy to target the various audiences, and make sure that children, specifically, are reached with some of the education. Create pool of resources, information, and experts for residents/stakeholders to easily access. Provide demonstration projects for strategy and technology implementation. 4. Municipal Incorporate water conservation and storm water runoff reduction technologies into all public projects (and incent private projects) and showcase technologies (natives in right-of-ways, permeable paving, and green alleys) through demo projects, case studies, and other activities and events. Review and change existing codes in accordance with new Illinois state codes that are being considered to allow for increased water conservation and reuse (waterless urinals, greywater systems). Promote and finance comprehensive water audits that check for system leaks and review opportunities for the incorporation of water saving technologies. Increase rates to reflect the true cost of water and institute an increasing rate structure to fund and provide incentives for leak detection and other water conservation efforts. Support efforts to change state policy to allow rainwater collection and use and grey water collection and use. Create a comprehensive water plan through the CMAP technical assistance program. Develop a benchmarking system so homeowners and businesses can see how they compare 94
Draft to their neighbors.
Draft
Goal #2: Reduce storm water runoff. Metric: Total volume of storm water runoff as measured by cubic gallons of waste water going to treatment plant. Metric: Square footage of permeable surfaces; # of downspout disconnects from sewer system.
Strategies:
1. Residential Water Conservation Educate residents about water pricing and implement pilot smart water meter project. Create a Water Conservation Certificate Program for homeowners. 2. Lawns/Residential Runoff Implement an educational program/video that promotes native landscapes and water sipping lawns. Promote water efficient lawns via green garden tours and provide education and resources for people to implement water efficient lawn strategies. Improve information on water bills (show average consumption, provide tips). Change billing structure to incentivize reductions (storm water fees, seasonal rates, etc.). Create a Conservation Certification for lawn care companies/landscapers. Develop a Green Alley contest that solicits designs for village alleys that are aesthetically inviting and supply green infrastructure solutions for storm water infiltration while still providing access for service vehicles. Evaluate the pros and cons of a downspout disconnect program and explore program implementation. 3. Education Create educational materials/video/program that promotes the importance of the water cycle, the limited resource of the Great Lakes, water infrastructure, and strategies for conserving water and protecting water quality. Create a multi-pronged outreach strategy to target the various audiences, and make sure that children, specifically, are reached with some of the education. Create a pool of resources, information, and experts that residents/stakeholders can easily access. Provide demonstration projects for strategy and technology implementation. 4. Municipal Incorporate water conservation and storm water runoff reduction technologies into all public projects (and incent private projects) and showcase technologies (natives in right-of-ways, permeable paving, and green alleys) through demo projects, case studies, and other activities and events. Increase rates to reflect the true cost of water and institute and increasing rate structure to fund and provide incentives for leak detection and other water conservation efforts. Support efforts to change state policy to allow rainwater collection and use and grey water collection and use. Create a comprehensive water plan through the CMAP technical assistance program. 95
Draft
Draft
Goal #3: Educate about and communicate the need for water management, water conservation and water quality to residents, businesses and municipalities. Strategies: 1. Residential Water Conservation Increase incentives and education regarding the use of water efficient toilets, faucets and showerheads for single-family, multi-family, commercial, and institutional units. Educate residents about water pricing and implement pilot smart water meter project. 2. Lawns/Residential Runoff Implement educational program that promotes native landscapes and water sipping lawns. Promote water efficient lawns via green garden tours and provide education and resources for people to implement water efficient lawn strategies. Improve information on water bills (show average consumption, provide tips). Develop a Green Alley contest that solicits designs for village alleys that are aesthetically inviting and supply green infrastructure solutions for storm water infiltration while still providing access for service vehicles. 3. Water Quality Develop educational materials/video about water contaminants that enter the sewer system (pharmaceuticals, salt, fertilizers, pesticides, etc.), the problems and costs they create, and residential/commercial strategies for protecting the quality of our water. 4. Education Create educational materials/video that promotes the importance of the water cycle, limited resource of the Great Lakes, water infrastructure, and strategies for conserving water and protecting water quality. Create a multi-pronged strategy to target the various audiences, and make sure that children, specifically, are reached with some of the education. Create pool of resources, information, and experts that can be easily accessed. Provide demonstration projects for strategy and technology implementation.
Summary of Recently Implemented/Expected Community Sustainability Activities

Village of Oak Park: Maintaining native plantings in commercial planters and landscaped areas. Encouraging water conservation by promoting rain barrel programs and joining the USEPA WaterSense program. Installing new water meters that detect leaks and provide other water conservation tools.
Park District of Oak Park: Installed 1/5 gallon restrictors on all pool showers at Ridgeland Common and Rehm Pool 96
Draft
Draft
Purchased an automatic pool vacuum which reduces the dumping of pool water, chemical use, and gas use to heat up the water. Install more rain barrels at all facilities. LEED renovation of pool and rink facilities at Ridgeland Common in 2013 is expected to drastically reduce water use and wastewater at one of the most heavily used parks in the Village.
OPRF High School: Added green machine to Chiller plant to eliminate chemical use in water in 2009. This reduces the water usages and chemical usage.
Baseline Metrics
Table 5-6: Oak Park Water Use and Cost 2009 Usage (1,000 gallons) 1,118,725
561,005 3,650 1,825 1,685,205
User
Residential Public Sector Construction Total
Cost $4,754,581 $2,384,271 $4,855 $8,815 $7,152,522
Commercial/Industrial
OakParkWaterUse2009
Residential 66.38% C&I 33.29%
Construction 0.11%
Public Sector 0.22%
The Village of Oak Park records water use by four categories, as listed in the water use and cost table above. The residential sector consumed the largest percentage of water by a significant amount, typical for a communitys water consumption. The lowest water consumption occurred in the construction sector.
97
Draft
Draft
Water charges (per 1,000 gallons) vary for each sector. For 2009, Oak Park water charges were $4.25 per 1,000 gallons for the residential and commercial/industrial sector; $1.33 per 1,000 gallons for the public sector, and $4.83 per 1,000 gallons for the construction sector. Due to the difference in charges, although the construction sector consumed less water than the public sector, the total water costs in 2009 for the construction sector were higher. Table 5-7: Oak Park Average Household Water Use, 2009 Average Annual Total Residential Average Daily Water Water Use per Use Use per Household Household Gallons 1,118,725,000 51,377 141
At the residential level, in 2009 the average household in Oak Park consumed 141 gallons daily or 51,377 gallons annually.
Cyber-Attacks
The Village IT Department has created numerous redundancies in its systems. Backup equipment has been incorporated into the overall network. Should an attack successfully knock these systems out, mutual aid agreements have been enacted to provide services and equipment until the Villages own networks are repaired. The Village also contracts with multiple internet service providers. Should one provider be attacked, this redundancy in providers ensures a minimum uninterrupted connection to the internet and other systems required to provide service to our residents. Information from databases hosted and created by the Village is routinely backed up and moved to a secure, secondary location. In the event of an attack that erases the data stored in our systems, the routine backup conducted by the IT Department would mitigate the loss of information to a point where probably a maximum of two days data could be lost. While the inconvenience to our residents is unfortunate, the mitigation and security efforts taken by the IT Department ensure any damage is minimal and disruption to the daily routine is quickly rectified. Various Village departments connect to numerous external programs, systems, and databases. As has been previously stated, the weakest part of any system is the user and possible lax security practices including weak passwords, not securing passwords, and sharing passwords. While the security of databases hosted by other organizations and on other systems is the responsibility of those organizations, it is equally important for Village users to use good judgment and abide by the user agreements and standard security guidelines in order to help keep those systems, and our own, secure from attack. The SCADA systems controlling the Village water pumps contain numerous redundancies to mitigate any effects of a cyber-attack. Each of the three stations can be operated independently and should one station become inoperable, the other two stations would be able to compensate for that loss.
98
Draft
Draft
Power Outages
As the Village does not own the wires or generating system, ComEd is solely responsible for maintaining and improving that system. While much of the efforts of ComEd are done in conjunction with Village input, mitigation efforts are largely out of the hands of the Village. Both ComEd and the Village conduct routine tree trimming programs to ensure clearer access to wires and limit the amount of damage from trees and tree branches should a severe storm hit the area. ComEd is working with the Village to install Smart Meters at residential sites and they are also looking into further modifications to generating systems by relocating several of these underground. Due to the massive storms of 2010, ComEd has created a Joint Operating Center (JOC) format to be used in conjunction with and in support of local communities. The JOC would open and be staffed with ComEd liaison managers, operations managers, and representatives from surrounding communities. The JOC would work from pre-populated critical infrastructure lists and would be in constant contact with leaders of the communities affected by the storms to adjust priorities as those communities require.
99
Draft
Draft
Natural/Sustainable Landscaping
This section is mostly taken from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, A Source Book on Natural Landscaping for Public Officials Landscaping is the physical modification of outdoors to serve the needs of people by planting, altering the contours of the ground, and building structures and amenities such as pedestrian ways, paths and picnic areas.
Native landscaping, Natural landscaping, and Beneficial landscaping

Natural landscaping is a relatively new term. Other terms in current use mean much the same thing and are somewhat interchangeable. The terms are discussed in the context of the Midwestern United States. Native landscaping refers to the use of plants -- for example, prairie, woodland and wetland plants -that flourished in northeastern Illinois prior to its occupation by settlers from eastern North America and Europe. Natural landscaping implies the use of native plants but has slightly broader implications because it also suggests landscaping to give the "look" of the landscape that existed before the mid 1800s. In addition, there may also be an attempt to restore or reconstruct the landscape to look and function more as it did before settlers, other than Native Americans lived here. Natural landscaping applies to a wide array of landscaping techniques that help retain natural landscape features, including wetlands, woodlands and natural drainage features. For Fig 5-1: Prairie planting at Lucent example, natural landscaping site design incorporates Technologies, Naperville, Illinois natural drainage features such as swales and vegetated "filter strips" in contrast to storm sewers and artificial drainage channels. Beneficial landscaping is another term in current use that embraces both native and natural landscaping. The term beneficial landscaping also includes the use of shading and windbreaks, which reduce heating and cooling needs for buildings. These terms are relatively new and their definitions are somewhat fluid. Questions of terminology should not obscure the basic intent or concepts. The term "natural landscaping" will be used throughout this guide. In the Appendix of this guide is a glossary of frequently used terms associated with natural landscaping. 100
Draft
Draft
The Landscapes of Yesterday and Today

Northeastern Illinois lies along the northeastern edge of the range of the Tall Grass Prairie of the Midwest. The prevailing landscape before European settlement was open prairie. In some areas the prairie was flat, in others rolling. The prairies were regularly interspersed with poorly drained lowland and dry, well-drained uplands. Rainfall flowed from the uplands into lowland wet meadows and marshes. Throughout the region were small to large tracts of savannas consisting primarily of scattered oak trees interspersed with characteristic grasses and forbs. More heavily forested areas, some covering vast acreages and known to the European settlers as "The Big Woods," grew on the eastern sides of our north-south running rivers, where they were protected from fierce prairie fires. In some places, impenetrable thickets covered sandy areas and low dunes. Fig 5-2: Difficult to maintain conventional landscaping.
Native prairie, woodland and wetland plants of the Chicago region have great beauty and are well Fig 5-3: Natural landscaping for habitat and adapted to local conditions. Unfortunately, they reduced maintenance. have been displaced to a large extent by non-native plants that were familiar to the people who first farmed and developed our urban areas. Only in recent years have the beauty and utility of our native plants and plant communities become widely appreciated. Our predominant landscaping material today, the green grass lawn, is borrowed from the heavily grazed, short grass pastures and formal gardens of Europe, particularly England. In that moist climate, the closely cropped grasses evolved with the grazing sheep, goats and cows. Understandably, pioneers from Europe, used to the short grasses, brought the grasses as well as medicinal and food plants to make the unfamiliar feel familiar and homelike. Unfortunately, the grasses they brought do not thrive as well-kept lawns without a great deal of effort to simulate the conditions under which they evolved in Europe. Our area of the country, with its harsher climate of extremes of heat and deep freezes, drought and drenching rains, is an inhospitable atmosphere for short-cropped, short-rooted grass. Therefore, the 101
Draft
Draft
contemporary weed-free lawn is maintained at a high price, not only in terms of dollars but also degraded water and air quality, water consumption, and the peace and quiet of our neighborhoods. We need to assess which parts of our landscapes could be replaced with native plants. In returning to a more natural landscape, we will be returning those plants which evolved under our conditions of climatic stress, which require less maintenance and coddling and provide environmental, economic and aesthetic benefits. One immediate result of the switch from conventional to native or natural landscaping is that our landscape can thrive under the diverse conditions across the region:

sandy soils associated with Lake Michigan and its larger predecessors; rich lowland forest soils in floodplains along streams and rivers; heavy clay soils in low-lying wooded areas; wet conditions associated with wetlands, wet prairies, and riparian corridors; dry rolling uplands on rolling lands left by glaciers; and moderate conditions originally covered by tall-grass prairies and groves of oaks and other hardwoods.
Fortunately, there is a selection of native plants that have a wide tolerance for varying conditions and work well in many locations. Where special expertise and resources are available, ambitious natural landscaping projects can attempt to restore the original soil and water conditions
Benefits of Natural Landscaping

Cost of Landscape Installation and Maintenance In the United States, approximately $25 billion is spent on lawn care. It is estimated a one acre lawn costs $400 - $700 to maintain and the average homeowner spends 40 hours per year mowing. Mowers are estimated to use 580 million gallons of gas per year and at current prices (approx. $3.50/gal), this represents a cost of $2 billion to US homeowners. Improved water quality Native vegetation in naturalized drainage ways enhances the infiltration of contaminated storm water. The dense, deep root systems augment the permeability of the soil and help the uptake of certain storm water pollutants. Native vegetation buffers are particularly effective along the edges of streams, lakes, and wetlands. They can intercept runoff and subsurface water pollutants from urban and agricultural land uses and construction sites. Emergent and submerged wetland vegetation provides an additional benefit along the edges of lakes and streams by serving as a growing surface for microorganisms. These microorganisms break down certain pollutants thereby reducing their harmful effects.
102
Draft
Draft
An additional benefit of native vegetation landscaping is its ability to thrive without fertilizers, or heavy use of pesticides and herbicides. Turf grass and other conventional landscapes are heavily dependent on chemical applications, and the excess chemicals inevitably find their way into our waterways where they cause excessive plant growth and toxicity to fish and other aquatic organisms. Reduced air pollution Standard lawn maintenance equipment creates significant amounts of air pollution. Equipment such as lawn mowers, chain saws, leaf vacuums, and other fossil fueled lawn maintenance equipment emit high levels of carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides, which contribute to the formation of ground level ozone (smog), toxins and other particulates. USEPA estimates that a gasoline powered lawn mower emits 11 times the air pollution of a new car for each hour of operation. Gasoline lawn and power equipment, on average, produce 5 percent of "smog" forming VOC in non-attainment areas (such as the northeastern Illinois region). Smog is a noxious irritant which impairs lung function and inhibits plant growth. In addition, the "driver" of such equipment is typically positioned where exposure to such carbon monoxide and toxic emissions is greatest. Small gasoline spills evaporate and pollute the air as well. USEPA estimates that every summer, the few ounces spilled during each refueling of lawn and garden equipment adds up to 17,000,000 gallons of gasoline nationwide. Natural landscaping can significantly reduce the need for fossil fueled lawn and garden equipment and this reduces the associated air pollution and health risks. In addition, the native plants themselves can help to improve air quality by reducing particulates and gaseous air pollutants. Reduced noise pollution Noise from lawn and gardening equipment has become a source of increasing dissatisfaction in some communities. The use of natural landscapes reduces the use of this equipment. Climatological benefits Trees and other vegetation benefit the climate on three levels: human comfort, energy conservation, and urban climates. Human comfort. Plants intercept infrared radiation directly by providing shade and indirectly by covering surfaces that reflect or reradiate solar energy. Trees and shrubs can channel air movement. Moving air feels cooler. In the winter, windbreaks reduce the wind chill factor. Energy Conservation. Windbreaks on the north and west sides of buildings reduce winter heating costs. In the summer, trees and other vegetation make non-air-conditioned buildings more comfortable and reduce energy costs for air-conditioning. Conservation education
103
Draft
Draft
Natural landscaping puts people in touch with a variety of plants, and if the plantings are native to the area, people can gain a sense of being in a unique and special place. Natural landscapes are an invitation to appreciate plant diversity, seasonal flowering cycles, sustainability of native landscapes, and wildlife habitat, all of which are absent in conventional landscapes. This familiarity can strengthen community support for habitat preservation and restoration, environmental protection, and open space acquisition. Municipalities, school districts, park districts, and forest preserve districts are critical entities for bringing natural landscaping into the public eye. This can be done through educational programs such as nature walks and talks, exhibits, and volunteer days sponsored by the above organizations. These opportunities provide positive examples of public land management and increase the awareness and understanding of the public about the community which they reside.
Natural Landscaping on a Small Scale

Realizing the true cost of Lake Michigan water and the true costs of maintaining a bluegrass lawn, including the application of costly chemical herbicides and fertilizers, many homeowners are looking for an alternative. The shift to a more natural, environmentally friendly yard with groundcovers, shrubs, grasses and colorful forbs is an inviting alternative. Natural landscape resources are available in libraries, conservatories, nature centers, park districts, nurseries, and in bookstores. In addition, local restoration organizations such as the North Branch Prairie Project in the Chicago region, regional nurseries devoted exclusively to native stock, local nurseries that are enlarging their selection of native plants, and professional landscape architects who "design with nature" will readily share their knowledge. Homeowners can volunteer with restoration organizations as producers of prairie and savanna seeds, beautifying their own yards in the process. It is important, however, that plants producing seeds intended for restoration grow in separate areas from those purchased at nurseries, because it is necessary to keep the native stock to be used for restoration "pure." Homeowners and owners of small sites who enjoy "digging in the dirt" may find the gradual approach to converting their lawns a less expensive alternative than a one-time project using a professional designer and installer. With this gradual approach comes the delight of experimentation with plants and their habitats. In addition, the maturing converted gardens can serve as plant nurseries for newly dug beds. Plants will teach the gardener where they like to grow and will relocate themselves over the years according to changing conditions of sun and shade. An ecologist who has tended a natural garden in Park Ridge for 27 years finds that a garden flows like a river; it is ever-changing. In the natural perennial garden, treasured sentimental favorites, even exotics, can thrive intermixed with native plants to create an aesthetically and personally rewarding landscape. Gardeners can even try incorporating food plants, such as herbs and tomatoes. It is tempting to begin with quick-spreading ground covers and perennials in order to make a beautiful display at the start and prevent soil erosion. Showy plants such as the exotic, early104
Draft
Draft
blooming dame's rocket, and later-blooming native black-eyed susans and purple coneflowers can be used to brighten a garden reliably in its first year. However, it is important to avoid the trap of starting with extremely aggressive perennials and groundcovers that will then require much time and effort to dislodge. In the first year, generous mulching will keep precious water in the soil and deter weeds and erosion. Eventually, the native flowers and grasses should out compete the non-natives, which are not so well adapted to the Midwest climate.
Plant Lists
The plant lists include some of the species that are common in nurseries and are relatively easy to grow, yet it lists only a small number in each category. It is directed towards the novice and the home gardener who is doing a modest first planting. Experienced gardeners with natural landscaping and maturing landscapes will go beyond this list. Large projects, which can accommodate a wide variety of species, will be led by a consultant and will also go well beyond the confines of this list. Relatively few plants grow exclusively in one community type. The species listed below as characterizing one type of woodland community are often also found in different community types. Let it be said that selecting representative plants from among the over 15,000 plants found in a region with one of the richest and most varied matrix of land forms and floristic communities is a daunting task. The lists must be taken as only the barest token selection. The herbaceous plant lists are divided into plants which thrive in full sun, partial sun and shade. A very general rule of thumb is that prairie species need full sun; savanna species will grow in partial shade and many will grow as well (or better) in full sun; and shade species will grow in woodlands. It is important to check catalogs and nursery information before you buy because plants also vary in their need for moisture. It is also important to understand that many plants have a "wide ecological amplitude," that is, they are not extremely picky about where they grow, while others have more exacting requirements. In any garden, the plants will sort themselves out according to their needs and the conditions with which they are presented.
Table 5-8: Plants for Full Sun Lead Plant Amorpha canescens Pasque Flower Anemone patens Heath Aster Aster ericoides Silky Aster Aster sericeus Cream Wild Indigo Baptisia leucophaea Sand Coreopsis Coreopsis lanceolata Prairie Coreopsis Coreopsis palmata Pale Purple Coneflower Echinacea pallida Rattlesnake Master Eryngium yuccifolium Prairie Smoke Geum triflorum Western (or Naked) Sunflower Helianthus occidentalis
105
Draft
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois False Boneset Round Headed Bush Clover Rough Blazing Star Cylindrical Blazing Star Pale Spiked Lobelia Prairie Cinquefoil Deam's Rosin Weed Gray Goldenrod Riddell's Goldenrod Golden Alexanders Kuhnia eupatorioides Lespedeza capitata Liatris aspera Liatris cylindracea Lobelia spicata Potentilla arguta Silphium integrifolium Solidago nemoralis Solidago reddellii Zizia aurea
Draft
Table 5-9: Plants for Full Sun-Part Shade Nodding Wild Onion Allium cernuum Prairie thimbleweed Anemone cylindrica Butterfly Weed Asclepias tuberosa Smooth Blue Aster Aster azureaus Sky blue aster Aster laevis New England Aster Aster novae-angliae White Wild Indigo Baptisia leucantha Showy Tick Trefoil Desmodium canadense Shooting Star Dodecatheon meadia Purple Coneflower Echinacea purpurea Wild Bergamot (Beebalm) Monarda fistulosa Foxglove Beard Tongue Penstamon digitalis Obedient Plant Physostegia virginiana Black-eyed Susan Rudbeckia hirta Ohio Goldenrod Solidago ohiensis Spiderwort Tradescantia ohioensis Heart-Leaved Meadow Parsnip Zizia aptera Table 5-10: Plants for Shaded Areas Wild columbine Aquilegia canadensis Jack-in-the-pulpit Arisaema atrorubens Wild Ginger Asarum canadense Dutchman's breeches Dicentra cucullaria Yellow Trout Lily Erythroniuim americanum Wild Geranium Geranium maculatum Virginia Waterleaf Hydrophyllum virginianum Virginia Bluebells Mertensia virginica May Apple Podophyllum peltatum
106
Draft
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois Solomon's Seal Bloodroot Trillium Polygonatum canaliculatum Sanguinaria canadensis Trillium spp.
Draft
Public Outreach
A successful hazard mitigation program involves a public information strategy and involves both the public and private sectors. Hazard mitigation public information activities advise property owners, renters, business, and local officials about hazards and ways to protect people and property from these hazards. These activities can motivate people to take steps necessary to protect themselves and others.
Outreach Projects
Outreach projects are the first step in the process of orienting property owners to property protection and assisting them in taking appropriate steps or designing and implementing a project. They are designed to encourage people to seek out more information in order to take steps to protect themselves and their properties. Sending notices to property owners can help introduce the idea of property protection and identify sources of assistance. Numerous government agencies and non-profit organizations publish public information and guidance regarding hazards and hazard mitigation for outreach purposes. Providing technical assistance and library resources are other forms of outreach. The challenge is to have these efforts effectively reach their intended audience. Community newsletters/direct mailings: One of the most effective types of outreach projects are mailed or distributed to everyone in the community. Research has proven that outreach projects work. However, awareness of the hazard is not enough; people need to be told what they can do about the hazard, so projects should include information on safety, health and property protection measures. Research has also shown that a properly run local information program is more effective than national advertising or publicity campaigns. Therefore, outreach projects should be locally designed and tailored to meet local conditions. News media: Local newspapers can be strong allies in efforts to inform the public. Press releases and story ideas may be all thats needed to whet their interest. People and the media become interested in their tornado hazard and how to protect themselves and their property after a tornado in another community. Local radio stations and cable TV channels can also help. These media offer interview formats and cable may be willing to broadcast videos on the hazards. Other approaches: Examples of other outreach project approaches include: School programs, Presentations at meetings of neighborhood, civic or business groups, 107
Draft
Draft
Displays in public buildings or shopping malls, Signs in parks, along trails and on waterfronts that explain the natural features (such as the river) and their relation to hazards (such as floods), Brochures available in municipal buildings and libraries, and Special meetings such as flood proofing open houses.
Local Implementation: Oak Park has a monthly community newsletter called the OP FYI and has developed brochures to inform residents about hazard mitigation and sewer backup protection/ prevention. Furthermore, the Village sends out regular eNews bulletins as situations dictate. Various agencies such as FEMA, IEMA and the American Red Cross, offer a variety of brochures and publications on safety measures for winter storms, heat, etc. The Red Cross also conducts specialized programs on topics such as home alone safety, first aid and CPR, and what to do during a disaster. Information can be found at www.redcross.org/pubs www.chicagoredcross.org www.fema.gov/help/publications.shtm www.state.il.us/iema Library and Web Sites: The community library and local web sites are obvious places for residents to seek information on hazards, hazard protection, and protecting natural resources. Books and pamphlets on hazard mitigation can be given to libraries, many of them obtained free from state and federal agencies. Libraries also have their own public information campaigns with displays, lectures, and other projects, which can augment the activities of the local government. Websites can link to information for homeowners on how to retrofit for tornadoes and earthquakes and a FEMA for Kids site. This website teaches children how to protect their home and what to have in a family disaster kit. Technical Assistance: Property protection assistance: While general information provided by outreach projects or the library helps, most property owners do not feel ready to retrofit their buildings without more specific guidance. Local building department staffs are experts in construction. They can provide free advice, not necessarily to design a protection measure, but to steer the owner onto the right track. Building or public works department staff can provide the following types of assistance: Visit properties and offer protection suggestions Recommend or identify qualified or licensed contractors Inspect homes for anchoring of roofing and the home to the foundation Provide advice on protecting windows and garage doors from high winds 108
Draft
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois Explain when building permits are needed for home improvements
Draft
Real Estate Disclosure: Three regulations, one federal and two state, require that a potential buyer of a parcel be told of their exposure to a hazard. The Illinois Residential Real Property Disclosure Act requires a seller to tell a potential buyer if the seller is aware any problems or hazards. Illinois Compiled Statutes require that all subdivision plats show whether any part of the subdivision is located in the 100-year floodplain.
Other Methods Insurance

Insurance should not be considered an alternative to reducing damages for any type of hazard, but it does have the value of protecting oneself from financial ruin if damage were to occur. Local governments can work with insurance industry representatives to increase public awareness of the importance of additional insurance (e.g. for earthquakes). Home structural improvements can be factored into the process of obtaining insurance coverage or reduced deductibles. Technically speaking, insurance does not mitigate damage caused by a natural hazard. However, it does help the owner repair, rebuild and potentially afford to incorporate hazard mitigation measures. Insurance has the advantage that, as long as the policy is in force, the property is protected and no human intervention is needed for the measure to work. A standard homeowners insurance policy will cover a property for the hazards of tornado, wind, hail, and winter storms. Separate endorsements are usually needed for earthquake and flood coverage. Several insurance companies have sump pump failure or sewer backup coverage that can be added to a homeowner's insurance policy. Each company has different amounts of coverage, exclusions, deductibles, and arrangements. Most are riders that cost extra and most exclude damage from surface flooding that would be covered by a National Flood Insurance policy (Oak Park is not eligible for the National Flood Insurance policy. Many insurance policies will only pay to repair the damage incurred. If damage is severe enough, the owner may have additional costs to bring the building up to current code.
Incentives
Local or state governments can support financial incentives like low interest loans or tax breaks for home and business owners who retrofit their structures against damages from hazards. Sometimes only a little funding is needed to motivate a property owner to implement a retrofitting project. The Village offers multiple grant and loan programs for upgrading properties and protecting from sewer backups by installing overhead sewers or sewer backflow prevention systems.
Funding Mechanisms
109
Draft
Draft
Providing basic information to property owners is the first step in supporting property protection measures. Owners need general information on what can be done. They need to see examples, preferably from nearby. Public information activities that can promote and support property protection are covered in Appendix A of this MHMP. Communities can help owners by helping to pay for a retrofitting project. Financial assistance can range from full funding of a project to helping residents find money from other programs. Some communities assume responsibility for sewer backups and other drainage problems that arose from an inadequate public sewer or drain system. Less expensive community programs include low interest loans and rebates. These approaches do not fully fund the project but they cost the community treasury less and they increase the owners commitment to a hazard protection project. Often, small amounts of money act as a catalyst to pique the owners interest to get a self-protection project moving. The more common outside funding sources are listed below. Unfortunately the first three are only available after a hazard has been declared, not before, when damage could be prevented.
FEMAs disaster assistance (for public properties) Small Business Administration disaster loans (for non-governmental properties) FEMAs Hazard Mitigation Grant Program FEMAs Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program Cook Countys Community Development Block Grant Environmental Protection Agency programs (for sewer backup problems)
5.4 Mitigation Strategy and Analysis

Implementation of the mitigation plan is critical to the overall success of the mitigation planning process. The first step is to decide based upon many factors, which action will be undertaken initially. In order to pursue the top priority first, an analysis and prioritization of the actions is important. Some actions may occur before the top priority due to financial, engineering, environmental, permission, and/or site control issues. Public awareness and input of these mitigation actions can increase knowledge to capitalize on funding opportunities and monitoring the progress of an action.
Specific Strategies to Reduce or Eliminate Basement Backup Damages

The Village has conducted a detailed analysis to determine priority areas prone to basement backups and is developing mitigation measures to specifically meet those needs. The overall goal of basement backup mitigation is to reduce probability of the Villages combined sewer overflowing into a basement or building. This goal will be satisfied through the following objectives: Maintain the current combined sewer system 110
Draft
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois Reduce the volume and rate of storm water entering the combined sewers Improve the capacity of the Villages combined sewer system Provide assistance to property owners to install sewer backflow prevention systems Promote regional improvements to increase capacity and/or storage of the MWRDs receiving sewer system
Draft
Mitigation measures and strategies were identified to satisfy the above goals and were identified on a regional basis, local basis (Public), and homeowner (Private) basis as follows: Regional Projects Village should promote projects with regional agencies including MWRD, City of Chicago, Berwyn, Cicero, and River Forest, that improve conveyance capacity of interceptor sewers, reduce storm water volumes and rates, and reduce flooding The Village should promote projects which incorporate regional storage of combined sewage from MWRDs interceptor sewers which serve multiple communities such as the Village of Oak Park, Berwyn, and Cicero. Village should promote projects which increase the conveyance capacity of MWRDs interceptor sewers which receive the majority of the Villages combined sewage.
A summary of the local (public) and homeowner (private) mitigation measures are summarized in the following table and described in more detail below.
Table 5-11 Identified Solutions and their Benefits Location Offset Reduce Increase Peak? Volume? Capacity? Downspout Disconnection Private X X Rain Barrels Private X X Rain Gardens Private X X Dry Wells Private X X Overhead Sewers and Other Private Backflow Prevention BMP Demonstration Sites Public X X Permeable Pavement Public X X Boulevard Bioswale Public X X Inlet Restriction Public X Local Sewer Improvements Public X Trunk Sewer Improvements Public X Sewer System Study Public and X X X Private
Project 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Increase Level of Service? X X X X X X X X X X X X
111
Draft
Draft
Option 1: Downspout Disconnection

Benefit: Moderate/High The practice of directing water from rooftops straight to sewers was common practice and is the standard throughout Oak Park. During small rainfalls, residents see a benefit from this practice from the reduction of surface water runoff. However, during larger rainfalls, direct downspout connections exacerbate basement flooding by quickly filling the sewers with rainwater and surcharging the system. Diverting storm water from the sewers will help reduce the occurrence of basement backups by reducing the load on the combined sewer system during rain events. In an effort to reduce the peak flow of a storm and slow the flow of storm water into the sewers, disconnecting roof downspouts was identified as a potential solution for the Village. As is shown in Figure 5-4, the intention of disconnecting downspouts is to redirect flow from storms (original shown in red) to flow over other surfaces before entering the sewer system. Through this additional drainage path, the flows into the sewers are potentially slowed down with the possibility of infiltrating as the water passes over pervious area, and the peak flow and volume have the potential to be reduced allowing better use of the capacity of the sewer system, as is illustrated by the blue line in figure 5-4.
Figure 5-4 Representation of flow and volume comparison utilizing downspout disconnections
Eliminating downspout connections helps address two potential causes of basement backups. First, disconnecting downspouts helps reduce the occurrence of basement backups caused by compromised residential service lateral connections that do not have the capacity to handle heavy stormwater flow, causing the home to back-up with its own combined sewer flow. Second, disconnecting downspouts benefits the system as a whole by reducing the overall system load. The flow from the downspouts does need to be managed appropriately and redirected to yards or parkways. However, this may not be possible in all locations. The redirected overland flow does need to be considered in all cases to check that no surface flooding problems are created. In cases where the additional overland flow would cause problems, direct downspout connections to the sewer system should be allowed to remain. It is estimated that approximately 0.06 cfs/acre or 29 112
Draft
Draft
gallons/min/acre of runoff per rooftop would be redirected through catch basins if all four downspouts were disconnected. Cost: Low The cost to the resident for disconnecting downspouts is minimal and involves little more than some basic tools, items to redirect the storm water flow, and the time to do the work. The cost to the Village is minimal and based on community outreach and education consisting of items such as flyers sent to homeowners, instructions provided to local hardware stores, and communication through other public venues. Action The Village can continue or increase community outreach and education to promote voluntary downspout disconnections. Alternately, the Village can adopt an ordinance mandating the disconnection of all downspouts with the ability for the Village to provide waivers if there is no opportunity to manage overland flow.
Option 2: Rain Barrel

Benefit: Moderate Rain barrels provide another opportunity to divert or delay the flow of stormwater to the combined sewer system and provide all the benefits of downspout disconnection described previously. Rain barrels can result in better managed overland flow than basic downspout disconnections as residents using rain barrels are typically conscious of the landscaping and overland flow paths through their yard. Rain barrels also have the added benefit of offsetting potable water consumption with rainwater for irrigation and other outdoor water use. The typical rain barrel that is installed has the ability to store 55 gallons of roof runoff. Though this is minimal storage for a large rain event, rain barrels have the additional benefit of disconnecting a roof downspout and therefore redirecting flow across a longer drainage path. The flow and volume curve would look similar to the graph developed for the downspout disconnection with some potential for an overall decrease in total volume as is shown in Figure 5-5 below.
Figure 5-5 Representation of flow and volume comparison utilizing rain barrels, rain gardens, and downspout disconnection
113
Draft
Draft
Cost: Low The cost to the resident to install a rain barrel includes the cost for the rain barrel, optional stand, appurtenances, and the time to do the work. The cost to the Village is minimal and based on community outreach and education consisting of items such as flyers sent to homeowners, instructions provided to local hardware stores, and communication through other public venues. Because the Village of Oak Park is tributary to MWRD, it can participate in the current MWRD rain barrel program through which residents can purchase rain barrels at a cost of $51 each. The Village may choose to provide further incentive to the program by: Publicizing the current MWRD promotional information. Hosting an in-town rain barrel pickup location. Providing supplemental information regarding installation and maintenance. Developing demonstration sites as described later in this section.
Action The Village can create a public awareness campaign to promote the use of rain barrels in conjunction with downspout disconnections in line with the Villages previous efforts. Similar to downspout disconnections, the Village can develop an ordinance to limit the amount of stormwater runoff from properties both into sewers and over land.
Option 3: Rain Gardens

Benefit: Moderate While stormwater diverted by downspout disconnections or overflowing from rain barrels may eventually find its way into the sewer system, the goal of rain gardens is to promote the infiltration of rainwater into the ground rather than sending it all to the sewers. This is particularly viable in areas of Oak Park where there are sandy soils. However, with additional planning and continual maintenance, rain gardens can be effective most anywhere. Based on the Green Values Stormwater Management Calculator 2, a 0.15 acre lot with a roof of 1500 square feet has the ability to reduce peak discharge by 43% and total volume by 39% if roof downspouts are disconnected and drain to rain gardens. The figure illustrating the benefits of the rain barrels option is also applicable to the potential improvements that rain gardens could offer. Cost: Low/Moderate The cost to the resident for installation of a rain garden can vary greatly depending on the size, soil conditions, and vegetation that is selected. The cost to the Village is minimal and based on community outreach and education consisting of items such as flyers sent to homeowners, instructions provided to local nurseries and home improvement stores, and communication through other public venues. Action 114
Draft
Draft
Similar to the incentives with the rain barrels, the Village can promote the use of rain gardens through a variety of avenues from outreach programs to subsidies. The visible and aesthetically pleasing nature of rain gardens provides an additional benefit to their use. In addition to the outreach and subsidies that can be considered, the Village can sponsor a rain garden design contest where a number of residents on a particular block commit to participating with the goal of reducing runoff by a specified percentage. Like the other programs associated with downspout disconnection, Village can develop an ordinance to limit the amount of stormwater runoff from properties both into sewers and over land.
Option 4: Dry Wells

Benefit: Low/Moderate Dry wells provide a method of managing overland stormwater flow when downspouts are disconnected and the rainwater would otherwise result in unwanted flooding. The dry wells also delay the flow from entering the system, which can reduce the overall peak flow in the sewers and the occurrence of basement backups. Depending on soil conditions, they may also reduce the total flow into the sewer system by promoting infiltration. The potential improvement that dry wells could contribute is dependent on the design, but because it is incorporated into the disconnection of downspouts, it is likely that it would at least offer the same benefit as that program. Cost: Low The cost to homeowners for dry wells can be relatively high, requiring new sewer lines, excavation, materials, and restoration. Estimated typical costs can range from $900-1,400. The cost to the Village is minimal and based on community outreach and education consisting of items such as information provided directly to homeowners and communication through other public venues. Action The Village can continue to provide educational material to private property owners to consider for the mitigation of excessive stormwater runoff. Some information previously provided by the Village to residents is included in Appendix A. Like the other programs associated with downspout disconnection, Village can develop an ordinance to limit the amount of stormwater runoff from properties both into sewers and over land.
Option 5: Overhead Sewers and Other Backflow Prevention

Benefit: High The installation of overhead sewers provides residents a high level of protection against sewer backups. When installed and working properly, the system stops sewage from backflowing into a home, while providing a positive discharge for regular sanitary flows. The level of protection provided by this home improvement far exceeds the level of protection typically provided by the public sewer system. While overhead sewers are typically considered an improvement to private property, some municipalities have determined that the cost for the higher level of protection is less than the cost of system-wide improvements to the public system that would provide a lower level of protection, and 115
Draft
Draft
therefore have provided financial support for these improvements. With the potential for a study in 2012 that will clearly identify and define the necessary solutions and associated costs for bringing the sewer system to a 10-year level of service, a cost-benefit analysis of the potential for overhead sewers to raise level of service can be performed. This analysis will help better understand how an overhead sewer program can be incorporated into the overall solution in helping the Village raise the sewer systems level of service. In addition to providing protection for residents, when overhead sewers are implemented, they are typically coupled with the disconnection of downspouts as well. With disconnection, there is a potential for the decrease in volume and peak flow as was seen by the downspout disconnection option and is illustrated below. There are also other lower-cost backflow prevention devices that provide a lower level of protection. In some communities, there are concerns that the residents on a block who do not install overhead sewers will see a potential increase in the number and severity of sewer backups when their neighbors install overhead sewers. In Oak Park, basements currently serve as additional storage for combined sewer flows. When some residents install overhead sewers, eliminating the associated storage from the system, there is a possibility that backups will occur where they have not occurred previously or that backups will be more severe. However, once long-term improvements are made to the public system to provide a target base level of protection, the installation of overhead sewers in some homes will not reduce that level of protection for homes without overhead sewers. Overhead sewers are intended to provide short-term protection to private residents while public system improvements are being implemented, and also provide a higher level of protection to residents in the long run. Cost: Moderate The cost to residents for the installation of overhead sewers is typically on the order of $15,000. The cost to the Village is low to moderate, depending on the level of participation that the Village chooses to promote the program. Action The Village can provide information to encourage residents to take action to protect their property against sewer backups with the installation of overhead sewers and other backflow prevention systems. The Village can consider a cost-sharing program to further encourage these systems. A sewer system study would be required to understand the full cost/benefit of the tradeoff between installation of overhead sewers and public sewer system improvements.
Option 6: BMP Demonstration Site

Benefit: Moderate Because downspout disconnection and rain barrel and rain garden installation have not been traditional options for managing stormwater in the Village, educating residents on proper installation is the key to obtaining the best results from implementing those programs. Installing a best management practice (BMP) demonstration site or sites at buildings easily accessible to all residents 116
Draft
Draft
may help the Village in encouraging residents to take on these types of programs by allowing the Village to demonstrate proper installation. Because this program is not intended to be a wide-scale program, it is unlikely to have a significant, direct reduction on stormwater flows. However, it offers the Village a relatively low-cost program alternative that is visible to the residents and offers residents additional resources for taking on private property-focused programs. Cost: Moderate The cost to the Village would be relatively low, involving the cost of disconnecting downspouts and potentially implementing a rain barrel or rain garden. Additional cost would be necessary for educational material distribution and signage at the location to inform residents about the demonstration sites and how they could implement similar measures on their properties. Action To implement this type of program, the Village will need to identify sites that offer high visibility to residents that also have the space to install a rain garden, a rain barrel, or disconnect the roof downspout, or a combination of all three. The Village will also need to develop the signage and materials necessary to provide residents with information at the demonstration site locations. This type of program would also benefit from marketing and advertisement after the sites are completed as well as the organization of an event to create public interest around the project and bring residents to the site or sites.
Option 7: Permeable Pavement

Benefit: Moderate As roadways and alleys are rehabilitated and replaced in the Village, they offer the opportunity for detaining stormwater through the installation of permeable pavement systems. Permeable pavement systems replace traditional, impervious hard surfaces with a pervious surface coupled with storage underneath. The main goal of most permeable pavement installations is to provide detention to reduce the peak loading of stormwater into the sewer system. However, depending on subsurface conditions, infiltration of stormwater into the ground may be possible reducing the overall volume of stormwater entering the sewers. Several factors must be addressed when considering installation of permeable pavements, including maintenance, durability, cost, and impact to the sewer system. Permeable pavements can be considered for roads, driveways (public and private), parking lots, and alleys. The City of Chicago is currently piloting a Green Alley program, installing permeable pavements in alley ways throughout the City. Without further understanding of the specific designs of the permeable pavement systems, it is difficult to quantify their benefit, but Chicagos program has shown the potential to reduce alley runoff flows for smaller rain events. Costs: High The relative costs of permeable pavement projects along with the additional infrastructure needed for stormwater management are relatively high. 117
Draft
Draft
Action The Village can perform a survey of potential sites, the benefit to the sewer system, and associated costs with the project to determine the best locations for implementation, particularly when considered system-wide. The potential benefits of detention and infiltration should be considered
Option 8: Boulevard Bioswale

Benefit: Low/Moderate Oak Parks boulevards and green space offer the opportunity to install public green infrastructure systems that can serve as another method of reducing the peak load on the combined sewer system for the Village to implement. In addition to potential public parks and gardens that can be converted into rain gardens or bioswales, Village staff has identified the boulevards along Lemoyne Parkway and Kenilworth Avenue as potential locations for implementing green infrastructure. To allow greater stormwater to flow to these systems in addition to the rain directly landing on the site, consideration for directing stormwater to these systems is necessary. Tributary areas should be regarded to create drainage paths to the bioswales to improve the benefit to the Village in reducing stormwater volume or off-setting peak flows into the sewers. Cost: Moderate/High The cost for establishing public rain gardens or bioswales is moderate, but can be high depending on the subsurface conditions and the infrastructure required to direct stormwater to these systems. Action The Village can perform a survey of potential sites, the benefit to the sewer system, and associated costs with the project to determine the best locations for implementation, particularly when considered system-wide. In addition to the surface vegetation, below grade conditions need to be considered. If natural infiltration is not possible with native soils, detention can be incorporated into the project.
Option 9: Inlet Restriction

Benefit: Moderate/High Inlet restrictors provide another method of reducing and controlling the amount of stormwater entering a combined sewer system. There are several types of inlet restrictors that can be utilized depending on flow requirements, maintenance needs, and budget. The restrictors are installed inside catch basins and inlets to reduce the inflow of stormwater into the sewers and detain the stormwater in the streets. Water is typically held in the streets for a few hours until the peak rain event has passed. The temporary nuisance flooding in the streets and parkways is accepted to reduce the occurrence of combined sewage backups in basements.
118
Draft
Draft
Figure 5-6 Flow and comparison associated with inlet restriction
The inlet restrictor program is most successful when considered on a system-wide basis and implemented in conjunction with downspout disconnections and sewer improvements as part of an overall sewer management plan. Inlet restrictors will not eliminate all basement backups, particularly when installed in a piece-meal fashion without consideration of overall sewer capacity. However, any reduction of storm water flows through a combined sewer system will increase the level of protection to residents against basement backups, provided that the detained storm water does not find another way of entering the sewers. Depending on the size of restrictors and the available detention volume, the installation of restrictors can have varied effects on the flow into the sewer system. When designed properly, restrictors can significantly restrict flows into the sewers allowing for better use of sewer capacity. Inlet restrictors should only be installed after thoughtful selection of the implementation area and proper planning to manage the detained stormwater to minimize disruptions and unwanted flooding. Cost: Moderate/High Because of the need to adequately manage detained stormwater to avoid flooding of private property and minimize disruption caused by the stormwater, installation of inlet restrictors needs to be carefully planned. Action The Village can install restrictors in selected areas where detained stormwater can be adequately managed. The Village can consider the use of inlet restrictors in the overall sewer system management plan to be updated in the 2012 Study, analyzing and maximizing the benefit of the inlet restrictors. 119
Draft
Draft
Figure 5-7: Village of Oak Park Sewer Improvements Since 1984
120
Draft
Draft
121
Draft
Draft
Option 10: Local Sewer Improvements

Benefit: High The 1994 Sewer Study analyzed and recommended options for local sewer improvements in the Village to be coupled with larger, trunk main improvements. Specifically, the improvements included: Construction of approximately 17,500 feet of new 15-inch and 18-inch diameter lateral sewer to replace existing 9-inch diameter lines; Construction of approximately 15,200 feet of new branch relief sewers to relieve areas where small diameter laterals are draining areas greater than one block; and Rehabilitation or replacement of approximately 6,100 feet of 12-inch, 15-inch and 18-inch diameter determined to be in poor structural condition.
These improvements are shown on Figure 5-9 below along with the trunk sewer improvements proposed in the 1994 Sewer Study. When Figure 5-9 is compared to Figure 5-8, which shows the sewer improvements during the period of 1995-2011, it appears that the Village has constructed some of these local sewer improvements. As an option for 2012, the Village could continue to construct these improvements as these improvements will help the system better convey water away from homes to trunk mains. Combined wastewater flows from more than 60% of Oak part are initially collected and conveyed by lateral collector sewers 18-inches in diameter or smaller. Because of the heavy reliance on the local sewers, improving the performance of these sewers has the potential to help maintain and improve the performance of the sewer system resulting in a high benefit to the Village if implemented.
122
Draft

Figure 5-8: Proposed Local and Sewer Trunk Improvements
Draft
123
Draft
Draft
Option 11: Trunk Sewer Improvements

Benefit: High The 1994 Combined Sewer Study identified three large scale sewer improvement projects with potential to bring the existing sewer system to a 5-year level of service. Those alternatives are presented here as options to help the Village obtain a higher level of service. These projects include: 1. Relief sewer in addition to capital improvement projects; 2. Additional outlet in addition to capital improvement projects; and 3. Inlet restriction program in the northwest in addition to capital improvement projects. The relief sewer alternative is shown on Figure 5-8. When coupled with the proposed local sewer improvements from the study, brings the Villages system to a 5-year level of service. The review of these projects is outside the scope of this current study, and will be deferred to the Sewer Study Update described below. Cost: High Costs associated with large scale sewer improvement projects can be very high. When the costs were estimated in 1994, updating the sewer system to a 5-year level of service would cost 16.1 million 1994 dollars. Current costs for improving the system to a 10-year level of service would be considerably more. Action The Village can consider large-scale sewer improvement projects as part of a Sewer Study Update.
Option 12: Sewer Study Update

Benefit: High The 1994 MWH Study provided a thorough review of the Villages combined sewer system and recommendation for large-scale improvements to address basement backups. Over the past 17 years, the Village has made improvements to the sewer system. The Study should be updated to account for these improvements and consider the latest approaches to combined sewer and stormwater management. In addition, the technology used to perform the previous analysis and develop the corresponding improvement recommendations has changed considerably. The true capacity of a sewer system is based on the sum of its components, and can be fully appraised with the use of a hydraulic model. A model update will facilitate an efficient analysis of the current system and provide the Village with a tool to help develop specific sewer system projects and quantify improvements. Specific tasks that should be included in the Sewer Study Update include: Define the goals and timeline for sewer system improvements. Develop a 5-year Capital Improvement Plan. Update the Villages sewer system GIS database. Prepare updated sewer atlases from the GIS database. Link the Villages sewer televising inspection library to the GIS database. 124
Draft
Draft
Update the sewer system model based on the updated GIS database. Perform field testing and verify the model results. Analyze the current capacity of the sewer system. Determine the receiving capacity of the MWRD facilities, in particular the West Town Outlet Sewer and the Northwest Intercepting Sewer. Refine the previously recommended improvements, including the impact of implementing the east-west separation of the northern portion of the Villages sewer system along Thomas and Greenwood prior to construction of additional relief sewers. Account for green infrastructure improvements within the recommended improvements.
Cost: Moderate The relative cost of an update to the sewer study is moderate, considering the potential to reduce overall program costs with a properly planned and implemented long-term improvement plan. Action The Village can hire a qualified engineering firm to perform an update to the 1994 Sewer System Study.
Other Mitigation Strategies

Strategies and priorities not solely specific to flooding and basement backups are summarized in Table 5-12. Funding mechanisms will need to be established for all efforts. Hazard mitigation grant funding could be sought for some.
Cost Benefit Analysis

Please see attachment 1: Combined Sewer System Review and Short-Term Improvement Projects Study, dated October 13, 2011 for information on cost benefit studies completed in relation to this plan.
125
Draft Mitigation Action Provide website links to hazard information and hazard mitigation information

TABLE 5-12: Other Mitigation Strategies Hazard Priority Responsibility Addressed All High Oak Park ESDA
Draft
Comments The Village's website is an obvious place for residents to seek information regarding hazards and hazard protection. Cost should be minimal. Although the frequency of earthquakes is low, the Village is in the proximity of fault zones Although the frequency of earthquakes is low, the Village is in the proximity of fault zones Establish stricter building codes.
Develop public outreach program to inform residents of types of hazards, what to do, and what they can do to minimize damage. Conduct earthquake drills and training Ensure new construction meets ICC Codes.
All
High
Oak Park ESDA
Earthquake
Moderate Oak Park ESDA Moderate Oak Park Building and Property Standards Dept. Moderate Oak Park Building and Property Standards Dept. Moderate Oak Park Public Works Department Moderate Oak Park ESDA
Tornado, Storms, Earthquake Tornado, Storms, Earthquake Storms
Adopt the latest international series of codes (ICC Codes).
The new standard is being adopted throughout the County. Work with local utility companies to implement. Reduces potential damages during high wind events. The Village will evaluate the cost benefit and define specific locations. Funding has not been secured as of 2012. The Village will evaluate needs and determine the cost/benefits of the radios. Funding has not been secured as of 2009. Evaluation completed in 2012. The Village is currently awaiting the final grade assignment. 126
Establish tree trimming program
Harden existing shelters
Tornado, storms, flood Tornado, storm, earthquake
Purchase weather radios for schools and critical facilities
Moderate Oak Park ESDA
Apply for BCEGS rating
Storms, Moderate Oak Park earthquake, Buildings & tornado Property Standards
Draft
Draft
CHAPTER 6 ACTION PLAN

6.1 Action Plan Overview
The findings, conclusions and recommendations presented in Chapters 1 through 5 of the Villages Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan have been aggregated into this Action Plan. The Action Plan presented in this chapter establishes the overall direction of the Villages hazard mitigation program. Specific mitigation activities pursuant to the general direction are detailed in Section 6.2. Section 6.3 addresses plan maintenance. Recommendations for this MHMP appear at the end of Chapters 3 and 5. This chapter converts those recommendations to specific action items. Action items have been developed for recommendations that are both a priority and feasible in the next few years. Feasibility has to do with current Village resources and the likelihood of grant funding from state and federal agencies. Recommendations not included in the Action Plan are no less important. Some recommendations act as building blocks to other recommendations. Some recommendations may not be fundable until mitigation funds are made available following a disaster declaration.
6.2 - Mitigation Action Items MHMP Adoption

The final Village Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan should be formally adopted by resolution of the Village Board. Adoption of the MHMP ensures that the Village is authorized to implement the action items with available resources. Adoption is also a requirement for recognition of the MHMP by mitigation funding programs, including the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, the FEMA Flood Mitigation Assistance Program, and the National Flood Insurance Programs community Rating System. Responsible Agency: Village Board of Trustees
Continuation of Stakeholders Committee

The Villages resolution to adopt this MHMP should encourage the Stakeholder Committee to become a permanent advisory group. It would: Act as a forum for hazard mitigation issues Disseminate hazard mitigation ideas and activities to all participants; Allow for continued public participation in the implementation and future revisions; Ensure incorporation of this MHMPs goals and guidelines into other planning documents; Monitor implementation of this Action Plan; Report on the progress and recommended changes to the Director of Public Works
Responsible Agency: Department of Public Health 127
Draft
Draft
6.3 Plan Maintenance MHMP Monitoring and Maintenance

A meeting will be held at least once per year and opportunities for the public to comment on the plan will be held to evaluate and monitor progress on implementation. An evaluation report will be submitted to the Village Manager and Board on an annual basis and will summarize both the current years activities, the previous reports (within the 5-year cycle), and describe any gaps regarding implementation of the mitigation strategies. At the annual meeting, along with an assessment of the implementation efforts, the planning team and the Stakeholder Committee (representing business, health care, special needs, government, education, and volunteer agencies) will determine if other mitigation issues or efforts, based on any natural hazard occurrences or input from agencies or the public, should be added to the MHMP. This meeting is currently scheduled to be held each February after adoption by the Board. Representatives from neighboring communities are invited to participate in the review process and should those communities at a future date request the participation of the Village in creating a multijurisdictional plan, Oak Park will fully participate. The MHMP is required by FEMA to be updated every five years. Every five years, or if any substantial revisions to the MHMP are recommended to the Action Plan in any year, the MHMP must be adopted by the Village Board of Trustees. Responsible Agency: Public Works Department, Public Health Department, and the Emergency Services and Disaster Agency (through the Emergency Preparedness and Response Manager).
Implementation through Existing Programs

The results of this plan will be incorporated into ongoing planning efforts. Many of the mitigation projects identified as part of this planning process are ongoing. If necessary, the Village will update the planning documents, zoning plans, and ordinances as necessary and as part of regularly scheduled updates previously discussed in this plan.
128
Draft
Draft
References
Village of Oak Park Combined Sewer System Evaluation Study, 1994 Oak Park Hazard Vulnerability Assessment, 2003 Village of Oak Park Water System Emergency Response Plan, June 2004 PlanItGreen Oak Park River Forest Sustainability Plan, 2011 Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning GoTo 2040 Plan, 2010 2010 Illinois Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan; 2007 Cook County Storm Water Management Plan Chicago Climate Action Plan, 2008 Village of Oak Park Combined Sewer System Review and Short-Term Improvement Projects Study, October 2011 2012 Illinois Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park Snow and Ice Plan, 2012 Village of Oak Park Emergency Operating Plan Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan, Calumet City, Illinois Local Multi-Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance, FEMA, 2008 State and Local Mitigation Planning How-To-Guide: Getting Started, 2002, FEMA 386-1 State and Local Mitigation Planning How-To-Guide: Understanding Your Risks, 2001, FEMA 386-2 State and Local Mitigation Planning How-To-Guide: Developing the Mitigation Plan, 2003, FEMA 386-3 State and Local Mitigation Planning How-To-Guide: Bringing the Plan to Life: 2003, FEMA 386-4 U.S. Geological Survey Illinois State Geological Survey NOAA National Weather Service Illinois Emergency Management Agency Stormready SHELDUS (Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the United States)
129
Draft
Draft
APPENDIX A PLANNING PROCESS AND CONTRIBUTING MEMBERS Over the course of several months, discussions both in person and via telephone helped shape this plan. At the direction of the previous Village Manager, the Director of Public Works and the Emergency Preparedness and Response Manager were tasked to draft this plan. Over the ensuing months, numerous other people were brought in to discuss, comment on, and draft section of the plan. On August 2, 2012, representatives from FEMA Region 5 and HUD attended a meeting at Village hall to provide input on the combination of the Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan and the Village Sustainability Plan, PlanItGreen. Comments resulting from this meeting were subsequently included in the document. A Public Meeting was held September 18, 2012 in which Village staff and residents were invited to view a presentation on the Plan. This meeting was advertised through numerous means including the Village Facebook page, Twitter, the Village website, and community bulletin boards. Planning Team Members John Wielebnicki, Public Works Director Murray Snow, Emergency Preparedness and Response Manager K.C. Poulos, Sustainability Manager Jim Budrick, Village Engineer Bill McKenna, Engineer Steve Witt, Director Building & Property Standards Craig Failor, Village Planner Alvin Nepomuceno, IT Director Rob Cole, Assistant Village Manager Planning Team Advisory Group Cara Pavlicek, Village of Oak Park Interim Village Manager Lisa Shelley, Village of Oak Park Deputy Village Manager Rick Tanksley, Oak Park Chief of Police and Emergency Services and Disaster Agency Coordinator Tom Ebsen, Fire Chief, Oak Park Tony Ambrose, Deputy Police Chief, Oak Park Ken Klemm, Deputy Fire Chief Margaret Provost-Fyfe, Public Health Director Elisabeth Bacani, Public Health Nurse Gavin Morgan, Oak Park Township Manager 130
Draft
Draft
Greta Pemsl, Emergency Preparedness Coordinator, West Suburban Medical Center Planning Team Advisory Group (continued) John Mckillop, Emergency Preparedness Coordinator, RUSH Oak Park Hospital Henry Gralak, Director, West Suburban Consolidated Dispatch Center Mary Jo Burns, Principal, Ascension Catholic School Nathan Rouse, Principal, Oak Park and River Forest High School Peter Groom, Principal, Fenwick High School Sue Poetzel, Principal, St. Giles School Elviraida Rios, PCC Wellness Jan Arnold, Executive Director, Oak Park Parks District Ron Calloway, Safety Officer, Oak Park Parks District Mike Grandy, Oak Park Parks District
131
Draft
Draft
APPENDIX B SUMMARY OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT September 6, 2011 As a result of the July 23, 2011 rainstorm event, staff made a presentation to the Village Board providing a history of the Villages combined sewer system. Five residents spoke at this meeting. The Village Board directed staff to execute a Professional Services Contract with MWH for Sewer System Evaluation. October 20, 2011 This meeting was a follow up report to the Village Board by MWH on the combined Sewer System Review and Short-Term Improvements Project Study. Eight residents spoke at this meeting. February 9, 2012 The Finance Committee of the Village Board met at a Public Meeting to review basement flooding prevention programs as presented by the Public Works Department. February 16, 2012 - The Finance Committee of the Village Board met at a Public Meeting to review additional information that was requested at the February 9, 2012 meeting. March 1, 2012 The Village Board heard a presentation on the status of the report on potential flood mitigation efforts as outlined in the MWH report. Four residents spoke at this meeting. The following items were approved by the Village Board: o The Department of Public Works was directed to pursue a voluntary downspout disconnection program. o A Sewer Backflow Protection Program was approved to allow for a grant up to an amount of $3,500.00 per home. o The Department of Public Works was directed to prepare a Request for Proposal to prepare a combined sewer system computer model. o The Board approved moving forward with a pilot program for inlet restriction.
132
Draft
Draft
TENTATIVE A g e n d a President and Board of Trustees Tuesday, September 6, 2011 Village Hall 123 Madison Street Open Meeting/Regular Meeting at 6:30 p.m. The Board is expected to immediately adjourn into Executive Session (Closed Session) in Room 130 at approximately 6:30 p.m. and will return to Open Session in the Council Chambers at 7:30 p.m. I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call III. Consideration of Motion to Adjourn to Executive Session to Discuss Sale of in Room 130 at 6:30 p.m.
Property, Labor
IV. Return to Open Session at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers The President and Board of Trustees welcome you. Statements may be made by citizens at the beginning of the meeting, as well as when agenda items are reviewed. If you wish to make a statement, please complete the Instructions to Address the Village Board form which is available at the back of the Chambers, and present it to the staff table at front. When recognized, approach the podium, state your name and address first, and please limit your remarks to three minutes. Instructions for Non-Agenda Public Comment (3 minutes per person; 30 minutes maximum) Non-Agenda Public Comment is a time set aside at the beginning of each Regular Meeting for citizens to make statements about an issue or concern that is not on that meetings Agenda. It is not intended for a dialogue with the Board. You may also communicate with the Board via the Village Board voicemail at 708-358-5784 or email Board@oak-park.us. Non-agenda public comment will be limited to 30 minutes with a limit of 3 minutes per person. If comment requests exceed 30 minutes, public comment will resume after the items listed under the Regular Agenda are complete. Instructions for Agenda Public Comment (3 minutes per person; 3 items per person maximum) 133
Draft
Draft
Comments are 3 minutes per person per agenda item, with a maximum of 3 agenda items to which you can speak. In addition, the Village Board permits a maximum of three persons to speak to each side of any one topic that is scheduled for or has been the subject of a public hearing by a designated hearing body. These items are noted with a (*). V. Agenda Approval VI. Minutes Special Board Meeting Minutes of July 25, 2011, Special Board Meeting Minutes of August 1, 2011 Non-Agenda Public Comment Please refer to instructions above. Proclamation The Nineteenth Century Charitable Association Celebrates 120 Years of Service to the Community Resolution The Village of Oak Park Joining the National Moment of Remembrance of the 10th Anniversary of September 11th Village Manager Reports Village Board Committees Overview: This section is intended to be informational. If there are approved minutes from a recent Committee meeting of the Village Board, the minutes will be posted in this section. Citizen Commission Vacancies Overview: This is an ongoing list of current vacancies for the Citizens Involvement Commissions. Residents are encouraged to apply through the Village Clerks Office. Citizen Commission Appointments, Reappointments, Removal, Resignation and Chair Appointments Overview: Names are forwarded from the Citizens Involvement Commission to the Village Clerk and then forwarded to the Village President for recommendation. If any appointments are ready prior to the meeting, the agenda will be revised to list the names. Civic Information Systems Commission David McNutt, Member Community Relations Commission Bamshad Mobasher, Remove as Member Serena Brewer, Appoint as Member Housing Authority Doris Kelley, Appoint as Member Plan Commission Gail Moran, Reappoint as Member Police Pension Board Dennis Marani, Reappoint as Member - Robert Planek, Reappoint as Member Public Art Advisory Commission Alison Fraunhar, Appoint Member Transportation Commission Craig Chesney, Appoint as Member
VII. VIII.
IX.
X. XI.
XII.
XIII.
134
Draft XV. A. Regular Agenda
Draft
Motion to Approve Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments relative the B-1/B-2 General Business District and C Commercial District, the Madison Street Overlay District, the Roosevelt Road Overlay District and Accessory Structures, and Direct Staff to Prepare the Necessary Documents Overview: The Plan Commission held a public hearing on several staff initiated Zoning Ordinance text amendments and has made recommendations for the Village Boards review. Staff is seeking support for these amendments and direction to prepare the necessary ordinance for adoption. Presentation of Recommendations by the Liquor Control Review Board 1. Motion to Accept the Report of the Liquor Control Review Board to the Oak Park Village Board Regarding Proposed Revisions to the Oak Park Liquor Ordinance and Direct Staff to Prepare the Necessary Documents Overview: Motion to Accept the Liquor Control Review Board Report and direct staff to prepare necessary ordinance changes. This report recommends changes based on direction from the Village Board on June 6, 2011, regarding additional proposed liquor ordinance changes.
B.
D.
Executive Summary Update on the July 23, 2011 Rainstorm Event 1. Resolution Authorizing Execution of a Professional Services Contract with MWH for Sewer System Evaluation in an Amount not to Exceed $22,142. Overview: To assist in addressing issues raised following the July, 2011 storms, staff contacted MWH, a consultant that specializes in sewer and water engineering. It is recommended that a contract be awarded to MWH to help in assessing the Village's sewer system. This project is paid for with funds in the 2011 budget already designated for sewer televising.
XVI. E.
Consent Agenda Motion to Accept Recommendation to Deny Parking Restriction Changes on Superior Street from Humphrey to the East Alley Overview: This is a recommendation from the Transportation Commission to deny the petition to replace the existing No Parking 8am-10am Monday thru Friday restriction with a Resident Permit Parking 8am-5pm restriction on Superior Street from Humphrey Avenue to the east alley. Staff concurs with the recommendation.
135
Draft F.
Draft
Resolution Authorizing a Contract in the Amount of $29,000 with Preservation Services and Technology Group to Conduct an Architectural Survey of the I-290 Corridor as Reviewed at the August 1, 2011 Meeting Overview: Motion to accept recommendation from Historic Preservation Commission to approve signing a contract with Preservation Services and Technology Group to conduct an architectural survey of the I-290 Corridor. Most of this project is funded with a grant in the amount of $ 20,300.
G.
Motion to Accept Historic Preservation Commission Resolution and Findings of Fact with Regard to the Nomination of 700 South Lombard Avenue and Direct Staff to Prepare an Ordinance Designating it as an Oak Park Historic Landmark Overview: On July 14, 2011 the HPC made a preliminary determination of eligibility and held a public hearing on August 11, 2011. The HPC approved the nomination on August 11, 2011. The HPC is therefore requesting the Village Board accept their recommendation and direct staff to prepare an ordinance to formalize this action. Ordinance for the Approval of the Special Use Application for 715 South Boulevard (Forest Park National Bank and Trust) Authorizing Issuance of a Special Use Permit to Permit A Financial Institution with Drive Through Facility and ATM Overview: This is a request to approve an ordinance to allow a financial institution with a drive-thru and ATM facility. The Village Board approved the Plan Commissions recommendation at the August 1, 2011 meeting. Resolution Authorizing the Execution of an Intergovernmental Master Agreement for State Maintained Traffic Signals and a Resolution Authorizing the Execution of an intergovernmental Master Agreement for Local Maintenance of State Traffic Signals Overview: The State of Illinois is responsible for the maintenance and energy costs for all traffic signals located on the State highway system. Typically, the State enters into intergovernmental agreements with local jurisdictions to define the responsibilities for the maintenance and energy costs for these traffic signals. One agreement if for traffic signals the State maintains in Oak Park and the other is for traffic signals the Village maintains for the State. Resolution Authorizing the Purchase of 4,800 Tons of Rock Salt From Cargill Incorporated Salt Division of North Olmstead, Ohio, at $62.51 Per Ton for the 2011/2012 Snow Season, in an amount Not to Exceed $300,048 and Waiving the Village's Bidding Process To Participate in the State of Illinois Joint Purchasing Program Overview: This item authorizes the Villages annual purchase of rock salt for snow & ice deicing of Village roadways. The purchase is through the State of Illinois Department of Central Management Services Department joint purchasing program.
H.
I.
J.
136
Draft K.
Draft
Resolution Authorizing an Additional $50,000 to the Contract with G.A. Paving Construction Co. of Bellwood, Illinois for Village Wide Utility Pavement Patching Services, Increasing the Not to Exceed Amount to $100,000 Overview: The Village makes repairs to the water distribution system and sewer collection system. These repairs typically require final pavement restoration. After a competitive RFP process, at the May 16th Regular Board Meeting, the Village authorized a contract with the lowest bid GA Paving for a pilot program to contract out pavement repairs instead of using inhouse crews. The Public Works Director found this pilot project to be successful and is seeking an additional $50,000 of repair work. The additional contract work will be charged to the savings in materials & supplies for this project not used by the Village in-house crews. Motion to Refer Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment for Beauty Supply Stores to the Plan Commission to Hold a Public Hearing and Prepare Findings of Facts Overview: The applicant has requested to modify the Madison Street Overlay District to restrict beauty supply stores within 500 feet of one another. This is a request to refer the application to the Plan Commission for a public hearing. Resolution Awarding a Small Rental Properties Rehabilitation Loan and Energy Efficiency Loan and Authorizing the Execution of a Small Rental Rehab and Energy Efficiency Loan Commitment and Agreement SRP-002 Overview: The purpose of the Small Rental Properties Rehabilitation Loan Program is to address and to correct deteriorated and blighted homes throughout the village, to provide affordable rental housing, and to improve the energy efficiency of small rental properties. The eligible owner of this two-unit property is requesting a forgivable rehab loan of $10,000.00 and an energy efficiency loan of $5,000.00 from the village. Resolution Authorizing a Subordination of Lien: BPIP-006 Overview: The loan recipient is requesting a subordination of their Barrie Park Investment Program loan mortgage to a new first mortgage. The Village remains secure in junior position on the title. Resolution Authorizing a Subordination of Lien: BPIP-038 Overview: The loan recipient is requesting a subordination of their Barrie Park Investment Program loan mortgage to a new first mortgage. The Village remains secure in junior position on the title. Resolution Designating Charter One as the Villages Authorized Depository Overview: This item completes the transition from US Bank to Charter One pursuant to a compatibly bid process. Resolution Authorizing Execution of an Amended Intergovernmental Agreement for OHare Noise Compatibility Commission Membership 137
L.
M.
N.
O.
P.
Q.
Draft
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois Overview: This agenda item is to authorize execution of an amended intergovernmental agreement for OHare Noise Compatibility Commission Membership. This is a no-cost membership Commission.
Draft
XVII.
Approval of Bills
Call to Board and Clerk Adjourn
(*) The Village Board permits a maximum of three persons to speak to each side of any one topic that is scheduled for or has been the subject of a public hearing by a designated hearing body. For more information regarding Village Board meetings and agendas, please contact the Village Managers Office at 708.358.5770. If you require assistance to participate in any Village program or activity, contact the ADA Coordinator at 708.358,5430 or e-mail adacoordinator@oak-park.us at least 48 hours before the scheduled activity. Agendas and agenda materials are now available electronically on the village web site. Visit www.oak-park.us, mouse-over News, then click on Board Agendas and Minutes. Get the latest Village news via e-mail. Just go to www.oak-park.us and click on the e-news icon to sign up. Also, follow us on Facebook, twitter and YouTube.
138
Draft
Draft
MINUTES - REGULAR BOARD MEETING PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK PARK HELD ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6TH, 2011 AT 6:30 P.M. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF OAK PARK VILLAGE HALL I. CALL TO ORDER PresidentPopecalledthemeetingtoorderat6:30p.m. II. ROLL CALL PRESENT: TrusteesBrewer,Hedges,Johnson,Lueck,SalzmanandTucker;PresidentPope ABSENT: None III. ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS SALE OF PROPERTY AND LABOR IncompliancewiththeOpenMeetingsAct,itwasmovedandsecondedtoadjourntoExecutiveSession todiscussthesaleofpropertyandlaborinRoom130. Therollcallonthevotewasasfollows: AYES:TrusteesBrewer,Hedges,Johnson,Lueck,SalzmanandTucker;PresidentPope NAYS:None ABSENT:None Themotionwasapproved. IV. RETURN TO OPEN MEETING 7:30 PM IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS PRESENT: TrusteesBrewer,Hedges,Johnson,Lueck,SalzmanandTucker;PresidentPope ABSENT: None TheRegularMeetingreconvenedat7:40p.m.inCouncilChambers. V. AGENDA APPROVAL Itwasmovedandsecondedtoapprovetheagendaforthemeetingaspresented.VillageManagerTom Barwin suggested that Item D be moved to the front of the agenda. A voice vote was taken and the agendawasapprovedasamended. VI. MINUTES 139
Draft
Draft
It was moved and seconded that the minutes of the Special Meeting of July 25, 2011 and the Special Meeting of August 1, 2011 be approved. A voice vote was taken and the minutes were approved as presented VII.NON-AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENT GalenGockel,230S.Kenilworth.Mr.GockelspokeaboutthezoningrestrictionsinOakParkandnoted thatallowingmoreservicebusinessesinaretaildistrictispreferabletovacancies. Charlene JonesFoster, 1011 N. Lombard. Ms. JonesFoster wanted to know the status of street work beingdoneonthe1100blockofN.Lombard. VIII. PROCLAMATION THE NINETEENTH CENTURY CHARITABLE ASSOCIATION CELEBRATES 120 YEARS OF SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY PresidentPopereadtheProclamationaloud.ItwasmovedandsecondedthattheProclamationentitled THE NINETEENTH CENTURY CHARITABLE ASSOCIATION CELEBRATES 120 YEARS OF SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITYbeadopted.AvoicevotewastakenandtheProclamationwasadopted. IX. RESOLUTION THE VILLAGE OF OAK PARK JOINING THE NATIONAL MOMENT OF REMEMBRANCE OF THE 10TH ANNIVERSARY OF SEPTEMBER 11TH PresidentPopereadtheResolutionaloud.ItwasmovedandsecondedthattheResolutionentitledTHE VILLAGE OF OAK PARK JOINING THE NATIONAL MOMENT OF REMEMBRANCE OF THE 10TH ANNIVERSARY OF SEPTEMBER 11TH be adopted. A voice vote was taken and the Resolution was adopted. X. VILLAGE MANAGER REPORTS Mr. Barwin stated that construction continues on the final section of Roosevelt Road between Ridgeland and Austin. All concrete work is done on the south side of the street. Water and sewer improvements have begun on LeMoyne and North Lombard. Local street resurfacingcontinues.Curbandsidewalkworkiscompleteandpavingisunderwayonvariousblocks. PlanningcontinuesforthestreetscapeprojectonMadisonStreetandtheinitialpresentationtothe Village Board is being scheduled. Streetscape improvements for South Marion continue; curb and electrical work are underway. Work on the Bus Shelter Grant project has begun. Work on the Ridgeland Avenue water main crossing under I290 continues. Contracts for sewer televising and surveying for 2012 Capital Projects are being bid and will be brought to the Board for approval in October. Mr. Barwin noted that there is a Housing Visioning Workshop scheduled on Thursday, 140
Draft
Draft
September 8 at the Nineteenth Century Club and invited all to attend. On Saturday, September 24 andSaturday,October29,residentsmaybringtheiroldelectronicstothePublicWorksbuildingfor recycling.UnusedmedicationmaybebroughttothePublicWorksbuildingonSaturday,September 17fordisposal.HealsoannouncedthatIGowillbeprovidingtwoelectric/solarchargedcars;onewill be available at Village Hall. In conclusion, Mr. Barwin stated that the Board approved a resolution with the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning to begin a water conservation program; a draft residentialsurveywillbeoutinthecommunityaswellascollectionofbaselinedata. XI. CITIZEN COMMISSION VACANCIES PresidentPopereferredtotheBoardandCommissionvacancyreport,andurgedresidentstovolunteer. XII. CITIZEN COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS, REAPPOINTMENTS, REMOVAL, RESIGNATION AND CHAIR APPOINTMENTS ItwasmovedandsecondedtoconcurinthefollowingremovalandappointmentsbyPresidentPope: CivicInformationSystemsCommission AppointmentofDavidMcNutt,asMember,withatermtoexpireSeptember6,2014 CommunityRelationsCommission RemovalofBamshadMobasher,asMember AppointmentofSerenaBrewer,asMember,withatermtoexpireSeptember6,2012 HousingAuthority AppointmentofDorisKelley,asMember,withatermtoexpireSeptember6,2014 PlanCommission ReappointmentofGailMoran,asMember,withatermtoexpireSeptember2,2014 PolicePensionBoard ReappointmentofDennisMarani,asMember,withatermtoexpireJune6,2013 ReappointmentofRobertPlanek,asMember,withatermtoexpireJune15,2013 PublicArtAdvisoryCommission AppointmentofAlisonFraunhar,asMember,withatermtoexpireSeptember6,2014 TransportationCommission AppointmentofCraigChesney,asMember,withatermtoexpireSeptember6,2014 141
Draft
Draft
Therollcallonthevotewasasfollows: AYES:TrusteesBrewer,Hedges,Johnson,Lueck,SalzmanandTucker;PresidentPope NAYS:None ABSENT:None Themotionwasapproved. XV. REGULAR AGENDA AllOrdinancesandResolutionsadoptedhereinare herewithorderedfiledintheOfficeoftheVillageClerk D. ExecutiveSummaryUpdateontheJuly23,2011RainstormEvent
Director of Public Works John Wielebnicki introduced Village Engineer Jim Budrick, who gave a presentation providing an overview of the history of the Villages sewer system and upgrades done throughout the years. He noted that this system has been in place for over 125 years, with the first study done in 1948 and another in 1994, following a major storm in 1993. Over $20 million has been invested in local sewers since the 1994 study. Mr. Budrick explained that Oak Parks sewer system, which has the capacity for a 510 year storm, discharges to the Metropolitan Water Reclamation Districts (MWRD) interceptor system, which has a similar capacity. The interceptor sewers then flow into the Districts Stickney Water Treatment Plant. Mr. Budrick gave a detailed description of how the system works. Mr. Wielebnicki explained how the MWRD sewers limit the Villages ability to increase the overall capacity of their system. The intensity of the rain on July 23, classified as a 50-year storm, overburdened the sewers. Since that event, the Village has and will be taking several steps to improve the situation, including public education, data collection, conducting an updated sewer study, televising of sewers and researching of sewer backflow protection reimbursement programs and other funding programs. Randy Laeble, 1010 Forest Ave. Mr. Laible spoke about the flooding on his block. Eric Davis, 1112 N. Lombard Ave. Mr. Davis thanked the staff for their responses to the flooding issues. He spoke about programs such as the Multi Hazard Mitigation Program that are available for flooding assistance.
142
Draft D1.
Draft
It was moved and seconded that Resolution 2011R141 entitled RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH MWH FOR SEWER SYSTEM EVALUATIONINANAMOUNTNOTTOEXCEED$22,142beadopted. JeffDanielski,122LeMoyneParkway.Mr.DanielskireferredtoMr.Davisscomments.Heasked whynoactiontorectifythisproblemhasbeentakenyet. Rich Bodner, 312 N. Harvey. Mr. Bodner stated that better followup is needed regarding floodingissues. AngelaSpinillo,40LeMoyneParkway.Ms.Spinilloreferredtothemapofthesewersystemin Mr.BudrickspresentationandaskedhowthenortheastsectionofOakParkisaffectedbythe routingoftheirsewerstotheChicagoquadrantasopposedtotheothersthatarenot. Mr.Budrickexplainedthattheeffectisnotdifferent;thissmallportionoftheVillageisrouted throughChicago,butstillendsattheStickneyplant. Trustee Salzman acknowledged that enlarging the sewer capacity is a major expense that the Village is not in a position to incur but noted that temporary solutions such as subsidizing individualhomeownerscanbecomealargeexpenseoverthelongterm.Heaskedhowfaralong the Village is regarding televising of sewers. Mr. Budrick replied that currently five miles have been covered;theyplannedto doapproximately25miles.PresidentPopenotedthat thereis $75,000inthebudgettocoverthecostofthisprocess. TrusteeJohnsonaskedwhentheBoardcouldexpectthereportfromMWH.Mr.Budrickstated thatthisshouldbereadybymidOctober,withrecommendationstobeworkedintothebudget. Mr. Barwin commented that staff was in the process of contacting various agencies for information regarding available funding and offered to have a written report done regarding progressmade. Trustee Johnson asked if the Village should move forward with the Multi Hazard Mitigation Program. Mr. Wielebnicki stated that this program included tornados, snowstorms, etc., in addition to flooding. The county was already starting this process but there was merit in Oak Parkinitiatingtheirownprogram.HenotedthatBoarddirectionwasneededtomoveforward withthis,asitisaninvestmentinresources. President Pope asked Mr. Wielebnicki if it would be worthwhile to dedicate the necessary resourcestolookatalloftheseelementsimmediately,astheyareworkingthroughthebudget, ortoreachouttothecounty.Mr.Wielebnickistatedthatthecountystimeframeistwoyears 143
Draft
Draft
andrecommendedthattheVillagecontactoneofthecommunitiesthathavealreadyputthisin placetofindoutwhatresourcesareneedediftheywantedtomoveaheadsoonerthanthat.
Trustee Lueck commented that topics that had been discussed this evening are in the report from 1994; she did not know what a new report would tell them that they dont already know. She also stated that not all flooding is sewer related and that they need to be mindful of that when considering solutions. She also noted that there are residents that experienced flooding who may not have reported it to the Village.
President Pope stated that once the report is presented, the total magnitude of the impact needstobedeterminedaswellasthetotalcostassociatedwithanyofthealternatives. Therollcallonthevotewasasfollows: AYES:TrusteesBrewer,Hedges,Johnson,Lueck,SalzmanandTucker;PresidentPope NAYS:None ABSENT:None Theresolutionwasadopted. It was moved and seconded that a Motion to Approve Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments relativethe B1/B2GeneralBusinessDistrictand CCommercialDistrict, theMadisonStreet OverlayDistrict,theRooseveltRoadOverlayDistrictandAccessoryStructures,andDirectStaff toPreparetheNecessaryDocumentsbeapproved.
A.
Village Planner Craig Failor gave an overview and history of the proposed amendments that were reviewed by the Plan Commission. The amendment regarding setback and density would allow for mixed use developments in the B-1/B-2 Business District and C Commercial District to be developed to the front of the property line as opposed to 20 feet back and reduce the minimum lot size to 3,000 square feet for the first two units in a multi-family dwelling in these same districts.
The amendment regarding the Madison Street Overlay District proposes having a zero lot line setbackforsideyards. The amendment regarding accessory buildings or structures is clarification of the Zoning Ordinancelanguagetostatethatanattachedgarageispartoftheprincipalbuildingandnota variablestructure.
144
Draft
Draft
B.
ThefinalamendmentregardingtheRooseveltRoadOverlayDistrictwillrequireenclosures,such as decorative fences or walls, as well as appropriate landscaping, to be constructed along the streetinregardstooutdoorequipmentandstorageyards. Therollcallonthevotewasasfollows: AYES:TrusteesBrewer,Hedges,Johnson,Lueck,SalzmanandTucker;PresidentPope NAYS:None ABSENT:None Themotionwasapproved. PresentationofRecommendationsbytheLiquorControlReviewBoard VillageClerkPowellgaveabriefhistoryoftheitemsunderconsideration.Sheraisedthesubject ofadjustingtheliquorlicensefees. LiquorControlReviewBoardMemberVictoriaScamanpresentedtherecommendations.These included9:00a.m.liquorserviceonSaturdays,Sundaysandholidaysforbrunches,earlyclosing of full kitchen service for B4 license holders, mandatory BASSET training for all sellers and servers of alcohol, revision to the D12 license to include the sale of artisanal local distilled spiritsandprovidingforabrunchtypeserviceforguestsatbedandbreakfastfacilities. Therewasadiscussionregardingbedandbreakfasts. Ms. Scaman noted the last of the recommendations, expanding the A2 license to loosen the restrictiononwhereonthepremisesliquormaybeserved.SheaddedthattheyLCRBwasasked tolookintoamicrobreweryorbrewpublicenseandreportedthattheLCRBrecommendedto waituntilanapplicantapproachedtheVillageforthattypeoflicense.VillageClerkPowellstated thatthisisthetypicalprocedurefornewlicensetypes.Sheaddedthatamicrobrewerywould involve going through the zoning process as well, since Oak Park is not zoned for light manufacturing. TrusteeJohnsonstatedthatamicrobreweryownerisnotgoingtosignalease,hireanarchitect and go through the construction process unless they are sure they can secure a license to operate. He added that, as complex as it may be to create the ordinance without a business model,theVillageneedstobeproactiveandhavesomeframeworkinplaceforthemtomove forwardtoencouragebusinessessuchasthis. Acting Village Attorney Simone Boutet explained that to create a license without an applicant sendsthemessagethatbecausetheVillagecreatedit,someonehasarighttoit. 145
Draft
Draft
B1.
TrusteeLuecknotedthatchangingthezoningordinanceisalongandcomplicatedprocess. Therewasdiscussionregardingwhethertocreatethelicensefirstorcreateitafteranapplicant approachestheVillage. ItwasmovedandsecondedthataMotiontoAccepttheReportoftheLiquorControlReview Board to the Oak Park Village Board Regarding Proposed Revisions to the Oak Park Liquor OrdinanceandDirectStafftoPreparetheNecessaryDocumentsbeapproved. Therollcallonthevotewasasfollows: AYES:TrusteesBrewer,Hedges,Johnson,Lueck,SalzmanandTucker;PresidentPope NAYS:None ABSENT:None Themotionwasapproved.
XVI. CONSENT AGENDA E. MotiontoAcceptRecommendationtoDenyParkingRestrictionChangeson Superior Street fromHumphreytotheEastAlley F. Resolution2011R142entitledRESOLUTIONAUTHORIZINGACONTRACTINTHEAMOUNTOF $29,000 WITH PRESERVATION SERVICES AND TECHNOLOGY GROUP TO CONDUCT AN ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY OF THE I290 CORRIDOR AS REVIEWED AT THE AUGUST 1, 2011 MEETING G. MotiontoAcceptHistoricPreservationCommissionResolutionandFindingsof Fact withRegardtotheNominationof700SouthLombardAvenueandDirect Staff to PrepareanOrdinanceDesignatingitasanOakParkHistoricLandmark H. Ordinance 2011O053 entitled ORDINANCE FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE SPECIAL USE APPLICATION FOR 715 SOUTH BOULEVARD (FOREST PARK NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST) AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO PERMIT A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION WITHDRIVETHROUGHFACILITYANDATM I. Resolution 2011R143 entitled RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL MASTER AGREEMENT FOR STATE MAINTAINED TRAFFIC SIGNALS and Resolution 2011R144 entitled RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN 146
Draft
Draft
J.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL MASTER AGREEMENT FOR LOCAL MAINTENANCE OF STATE TRAFFIC SIGNALS Resolution2011R145entitledRESOLUTIONAUTHORIZINGTHEPURCHASEOF4,800TONSOF ROCK SALT FROM CARGILL INCORPORATED SALT DIVISION OF NORTH OLMSTEAD, OHIO, AT $62.51 PER TON FOR THE 2011/2012 SNOW SEASON, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $300,048ANDWAIVINGTHEVILLAGE'SBIDDINGPROCESSTOPARTICIPATEINTHESTATEOF ILLINOISJOINTPURCHASINGPROGRAM Resolution2011R146ENTITLEDRESOLUTIONAUTHORIZINGANADDITIONAL$50,000TOTHE CONTRACT WITH G.A. PAVING CONSTRUCTION CO. OF BELLWOOD, ILLINOIS FOR VILLAGE WIDEUTILITYPAVEMENTPATCHINGSERVICES,INCREASINGTHENOTTOEXCEEDAMOUNTTO $100,000 MotiontoReferZoningOrdinanceTextAmendmentforBeautySupplyStorestothe PlanCommissiontoHoldaPublicHearingandPrepareFindingsofFacts Resolution 2011R147 entitled RESOLUTION AWARDING A SMALL RENTAL PROPERTIES REHABILITATION LOAN AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY LOAN AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OFASMALLRENTALREHABANDENERGYEFFICIENCYLOANCOMMITMENTANDAGREEMENT SRP002 Resolution2011R148entitledRESOLUTIONAUTHORIZINGASUBORDINATIONOFLIEN:BPIP 006 Resolution2011R149entitledRESOLUTIONAUTHORIZINGASUBORDINATIONOFLIEN:BPIP 038 Resolution 2011R150 entitled RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CHARTER ONE AS THE VILLAGES AUTHORIZEDDEPOSITORY Resolution 2011R151 entitled RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AMENDED INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR OHARE NOISE COMPATIBILITY COMMISSION MEMBERSHIP APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA
K.
L. M.
N. O.
P. Q.
ItwasmovedandsecondedtoapprovetheitemsundertheConsentAgenda. Therollcallonthevotewasasfollows: AYES:TrusteesBrewer,Hedges,Johnson,Lueck,SalzmanandTucker;PresidentPope 147
Draft
Draft
NAYS:None ABSENT:None TheConsentAgendawasapproved. XVII. Approval of Bills
Itwasmovedandsecondedtoapprovethebills. Therollcallonthevotewasasfollows: AYES:TrusteesBrewer,Hedges,Johnson,Lueck,SalzmanandTucker;PresidentPope NAYS:None ABSENT:None Themotionwasapproved. CALL TO THE BOARD AND CLERK Village Clerk Powell reminded drivers to be watchful for children walking now that school is back in session. She referred to this evenings appointments to Board and Commissions urged residents to volunteer. Village Clerk Powell stated that there is a report she would like to presenttotheBoardthisfallthatincludedinformationonprotectionofVillagerecordsfrom floods.SheconcludedbyencouragingresidentstoattendtheHousingVisioningWorkshopat theNineteenthCenturyClubSeptember8. TrusteeTuckeralsourgedalltoattendtheworkshop. TrusteeHedgesspokeabouttheCommunityChestofOakParkRiverForest. TrusteeSalzmancongratulatedVillageClerkPowellregardingthenominationofherhouseasahistoric landmark. He also stressed the importance of attending the workshop as well. He noted that therewillbesomeupcomingopportunitiesforresidentstomeetwithTrusteesandspokeabout anupcomingeventatEastgateCafonOctober12. Trustee Johnson spoke about the town hall meeting with local congressmen. He noted that Board memberswouldbeinattendanceattheMidWeekMarketonSeptember7andtheFarmers MarketonSeptember24.HediscussedaproposedVillagepolicyregardingpurchasingthrough localbusinesseswheneverpossible. TrusteeBrewerspokeaboutzoningissuesandcongratulatedhisdaughteronherappointmenttothe CommunityRelationsCommission. TrusteeLueckcongratulatedtheNineteenthCenturyCharitableAssociationontheir120thanniversary. ShealsoencouragedresidentstoattendtheHousingVisioningWorkshop.TrusteeLueckspoke aboutherattendanceattheChairpersonsMeetingandnotedthattheroleoftrusteeliaisonto variouscommissionsneededtobeclarified.ShealsosuggestedthattheentitiesintheVillage relatedtopublicartholdajointmeeting,asacoordinatedpublicartplanwouldbepreferable tothecurrentpiecemealapproach. 148
Draft
Draft
President Pope stated that some of the areas under construction around town are starting to take shape. ADJOURN It was moved and seconded to adjourn. A voice vote was taken and the motion was approved. The meetingadjournedat11:05P.M.Tuesday,September6,2011. SUBMITTED AND RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF: ______________________________ TeresaPowell,VillageClerk By: MaryAnnSchoenneman InterimDeputyVillageClerk
149
Draft
Draft
TENTATIVE A g e n d a President and Board of Trustees Thursday, October 20, 2011 Village Hall 123 Madison Street Special Meeting at 7:00 pm, Room 101 I. II. III. Call to Order Roll Call Agenda Approval
Instructions for Agenda Public Comment

(3 minutes per person; 3 items per person maximum)
Comments are 3 minutes per person per agenda item, with a maximum of 3 agenda items to which you can speak. In addition, the Village Board permits a maximum of three persons to speak to each side of any one topic that is scheduled for or has been the subject of a public hearing by a designated hearing body. These items are noted with a (*).
IV. V.
Public Comment Follow-up Report to the Board/MHW Report on the Combined Sewer System Review and the Short-Tem Improvements Projects Study
At the September 6, 2011 Regular Board Meeting staff recommended the Village revisit the 1994 sewer study and in particular review the recommendations in that report and update them to current conditions and provide any new or additional recommendations related to the sewer system. MHW will provide a brief overview of the report. The recommendations contained in this report are not funded. Staff is seeking Board direction if any of these recommendations should be considered for funding in 2012 or if there is a need for additional information. If not tonight, the Capital Improvement Plan and the Public Works budget will be reviewed on Monday October 24th. Staff believes all of the recommendations have merit; however funding will need to be examined carefully based on the overall priorities of the Village Board. Staff will provide a brief overview of potential first steps.
VI.
Adjourn
For more information regarding Village Board meetings and agendas, please contact the Village Managers Office at 708.358.5770. If you require assistance to participate in any Village program or activity, contact the ADA Coordinator at 708.358,5430 or e-mail adacoordinator@oak-park.us at least 48 hours before the
150
Draft
Draft
scheduled activity. Agendas and agenda materials are now available electronically on the village web site. Visit www.oak-park.us, mouse-over News, then click on Board Agendas and Minutes.
MINUTES - SPECIAL BOARD MEETING PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK PARK HELD ON THURSDAY, OCTOBER 20, 2011 AT 7:00 P.M. IN ROOM 101 OF OAK PARK VILLAGE HALL I. CALL TO ORDER PresidentPopecalledthemeetingtoorderat7:02p.m. II. ROLL CALL PRESENT: TrusteesHedges,Johnson,Lueck,SalzmanandTucker;PresidentPope ABSENT: TrusteeBrewer PresidentPopeannouncedthatthismeetingwillincludethepresentationofafollowupreporttothe Boardregardingthecombinedsewersystemreviewandtheshorttermimprovementsprojectstudyas wellaspubliccomment. IV. PUBLIC COMMENT Eric Davis, 1112 N. Lombard Ave. Mr. Davis stated that he is working with Berwyn and Cicero to developacombinedMultihazardMitigationPlan,addingthatitisaprerequisitetoanumberofFederal supportmechanismsforpreventionofthistypeofdamage. DamonBrown,1014N.Lombard.Ave.Mr.Brownaskedwhathasbeendonetoquantifythelevelof sewerbackupandfloodingintheVillage. ChuckMishoulam,1031Woodbine.Mr.MishoulaminquiredabouttheVillagesubsidizingfloodcontrol systemsforresidentsonanindividualbasis. MikeReust,607BelleforteAve.Mr.Reustspokeaboutflooddamagetohishomeasaresultofawater mainbreakinthearea. VII. FOLLOW-UP REPORT TO THE BOARD/MHW REPORT ON THE COMBINED SEWER SYSTEM REVIEW AND THE SHORT-TERM IMPROVEMENTS PROJECTS STUDY VillageEngineerJimBudrickstatedthatstaffhaslookedatanumberofinitiativesinresponsetothe floodingconcernsinportionsoftheVillage.Theseincludedlookingattheoverallsewersystemandto identify ways to help mitigate future flooding. The Village has retained the services of Montgomery WattsandHarza(MWH),whodidanextensivereviewofthesewersystemn1994,forthispurpose. For the past six weeks, Public Works staff and MWH staff have worked together in developing both shorttermimprovementoptionsaswellasfutureoptions. 151
Draft
Draft
Joe Johnson of MWH presented a chart going back to 1960 that gave an historical overview of 2day rainfalltotalsatOHare.Heindicatedthattherewerevariationsinthetotals,notingthattheJuly2010 andJuly2011totalswereoversixinchesandovereightinches.Despiteperiodicextremerainfallevents, therehavebeenperiodsoftenyearswithoutaneventofthatnature. Mr.Johnsonreferredtoamapsummarizingwherefloodingcomplaintswerereported.Hecommented that there are clusters of complaints in the northeastern and northwestern sections of the Village, indicating the need to focus on the northern part of the Village and understand the widespread floodinginthatarea. Mr. Johnson discussed causes of flooding, noting that Oak Park has no river, creek or waterway that drainsthroughtheVillage.ThewaterinOakParkisentirelydependentuponitssewersystemandthe Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD) sewer system for drainage. Individual homes have sewerservicesthatconveywatertothepublicsewerinthestreet.Fromthesouthernboundaryofthe Village,theygototheMWRDinterceptor,whichthenconveysthewastewatertotheStickneyWater Reclamation Plant. When the interceptor receives more than it can handle, the excess goes into the TunnelandReservoirPlain(TARP).WhentheTARPfillsup,asitdidduringthepasttwoextremerain events, the combined sewer overflow and excess rainfall cannot be accommodated by the Water Reclamation Plant or the TARP, and water remains in the local sewer system. If that water cant get out,thecombinedwastewatercanbackupintolocalbasements.TheVillagesewersystemcapacityis limitedbythecapacityoftheMWRDsystemandbuildingbiggerpipesinOakParkwillnotresolvethe backupinextremeevents. Trustee Lueck noted that other factors that cause flooding, such as water runoff through basement doorsorfromcracksinthefoundation,andaskedhowmanyofthefloodedbasementsintheanalysis were from sewer backup. Mr. Johnson stated that generally most of the problems reported were perceivedtobesewerbackup.SurfacefloodingisnotawidespreadproblemintheVillage. Mr. Johnson spoke about longterm flood mitigation options. Conveyance can be increased by replacingthesewersystem,amajorcapitalimprovementthatisdisruptiveandexpensive.Lowinterest loanstohelpfinancetheseprojectsareavailablethroughtheStatebutthesekeycapitalprojectsare typicallyonlydoneinresponsetomajorproblemsinthesystem.Anotheroptionistemporarystorage, suchasstoringstormwateronthestreet,indetentionbasinsandundergroundstorage.Otheroptions included rain barrels, rain gardens, and permeable pavement, which can provide benefits only if distributedoveralargearea.Headdedthatanincreasingnumberofgrantprogramsareavailableto helpfinancesomeoftheseprojects.Thelastoptiondiscussedwasindividualpropertyprotection,such asbackflowpreventersoroverheadsewers,whichisolateabasementfromasewersystem.Headded that these typically cost $10,000 to install, and while they have specific benefit to an individual property,theirbenefitonacommunitywidebasisdependsonoverallparticipationandhowtheyare implementedwithotherprojects. Mr.Johnsonnotedthattheselongtermstrategieswillrequiresignificantinvestmentandplanning.The focus during the last six weeks has been shortterm strategies for the Village to consider while developingalongtermstrategythatwouldachieveanincreasedlevelofprotection. 152
Draft
Draft
Thefirstoptiondiscussedwasdisconnectingdownspouts.Mr.Johnsonnotedthatthismustbedone properlyorresidentswillsendwaterontotheirneighborsproperty. President Pope asked how differentials in elevation and the water level contribute to seepage and sewerissues.Mr.JohnsonnotedthatthewatertableisclosesttothesurfaceinnortheastOakPark, which is the lowest part of the Village. He reviewed the sewer system diagram and noted that the sewers leaving Oak Park at Roosevelt Road are 20 to 30 feet deep, while the sewers at Le Moyne Parkwaymaybeonlyeightorninefeetbelowthesurface.Atthenorthernendoftown,ifthetrunk sewer backs up, it goes into the basements. When trunk sewer improvements, as well as overall capacityimprovementsofthesystemwerelookedatin1994,theytriedtodeterminehowtoprovide bettercapacitytothatlowareaoftheVillage. The second option discussed was an overhead sewer cost share program, which some communities currently offer. Mr. Johnson summarized how the program works. He added that overhead sewer systems provide individual residents with a level of protection beyond what the public systems can normally afford to provide and is something that the Village should look at as a viable alternative to increasingthesizeofpublicsewers. Trustee Hedges asked if the flooding would simply move to other parts of town if residents in the current floodprone areas install overhead sewer systems. Mr. Johnson stated that if the volume of watertakenawayfromthoseareasispushedtowherethesewersaredeepenough,aproblemisnot aslikely,butthismayrequiresomeimprovementstothesystem. TrusteeTuckeraskedfordatafromothercommunitieswhichhaveimplementedtheoverheadsewer cost share program. Mr. Johnson stated that typically the cost share is 50%; he is not aware of any communitiesthathavefunded100%asanalternativetopublicinfrastructure. Mr. Johnson presented the third option, implementing low impact design and storm water best management practices. For these to be successful, a strong effort needed to be made to get informationtothepublic. Anotherrecommendationistolookmorecloselyatsomeofthelocalissuesofthesewersystemand establishwhatdecisionsneedtobemadeoverthenext10to20yearsregardingimprovementtothe combinedsewersystem. Mr.JohnsonexplainedthattheVillageisnowreplacingawatermainonLeMoyneParkwayandstaff havesuggestedthatthecurrentmedianbeinvertedintoabioswaletocapturerainwater;someofthe streetrunoffcanbedirectedthere.Therewasabriefdiscussionregardinglandscapingofthebioswale withhardynativeplants. Mr.Johnsonspokeaboutinletrestrictiononthestreets,thelastshorttermoption.Thisoptionwould keepstormwateronthestreetduringtheraineventandthenallowitintothecombinedsewerata ratethatthesewersystemcanhandle.Hediscussedhowandwherethiswouldbeimplemented,and suggested working with staff to identify a demonstration area to determine the challenges of installation.PresidentPopecommentedthatitwouldalsobehelpfultoknowhowpoolingwaterwould 153
Draft
Draft
impactthelifecycleofthestreetsandcurbs.Mr.Johnsonnotedthatthewateronthestreetisusually goneinacoupleofhours. Mr.Johnsonreviewedsomeoftheexternalfundingsourcesfortheseprojects.PresidentPopeaskedif someoftheseprojectswereeligibleforPredisasterMitigationFunding.Mr.Johnsonsaidanyproject thatdemonstratesanattempttomitigatetheimpactofasimilardisasteriseligible.TrusteeJohnson noted that an approved Multihazard Mitigation Plan was needed prior to applying for funding and askedifthecountysplanwouldsupersedeOakParksorwhethertheVillageshouldcreatetheirown. PublicWorksDirectorJohnWielebnickinotedthatseveralstaffmembers,aswellasstafffromBerwyn andCicero,wouldmeetwithaconsultanttolearnmoreaboutthisandaddedthattheVillagecanwait fortheCounty,partnerwithBerwynandCicero,orcreatetheirownplan.HenotedthatIllinoisonly fundspublicpropertyimprovements. PresidentPopeaskedifpartneringwithBerwynandCicerowouldputOakParkinabetterpositionto qualifyforthegrantfunds.Mr.WielebnickisaidthatitwouldputtheVillageinabetterpositionthan doingthisalonebutdidnotknowifitwouldbebetterthanthecountyspositionoverall. Therewasdiscussionregardingtherecommendedprogramsandhowtheywouldbeincorporatedin the Public Works budget. Mr. Barwin noted that the trunk sewer improvements, local sewer improvements,permeablepaversanddemonstrationsiteswouldfallunderCapitalImprovements.He addedthatMr.Wielebnickihadalreadyincluded$250,000toaddressfloodmitigation. EricDavis,1112N.LombardAve.Mr.DavisreferredtothepartnershipwithBerwynandCicero,adding thatthisgroupwillberecommendingthattheVillagesubmitanintenttofileforanannualallocation fromtheStateofIllinoisHazardMitigationAssistanceProgram.HenotedthatiftheVillagewaitsforthe Countysplantobecompleted,theywillmisstheirwindowofopportunitytoapplyforthesefundsin 2012.HealsosaidhewasinfavoroftheVillagesubsidizingoverheadsewers. Mr.Wielebnickispokeabouttheoverheadsewerprogram.PresidentPopestatedthattheBoardwould haveamoredetailedfollowupconversationregardingthisoption,asitwillbealongtermprogramand theBoardneededtounderstandhowmanyresidentsitwillimpactalongwiththeassociatedcosts. AngelaSpinillo,40LeMoyneParkway.Ms.Spinilloaskedifthebioswaleprojectwouldbeeligibleforan IllinoisGreenInfrastructureGrant,notingthedeadlinetoapplyisDecember15.Shealsosuggestedthat thedownspoutdisconnectionprojectbetestedfirstinoneareaoftheVillage. LawrenceMsall,824N.Harvey.Mr.Msallstatedthatresidentswhohavealreadyincurredthecostof installingoverheadsewersshouldbeconsideredaswellintermsofthecostsharingprogram.Healso statedthatresidentsneedtobebettereducatedregardingdisconnectingtheirdownspouts. RichBodner,812N.Harvey.Mr.BodnercommentedthatthehousesinnortheasternOakParkaretoo close together for downspout disconnection to be effective. He also questioned the capacity of the MWRD.Mr.BodneraskediftelevisingthesewersonHarveywouldcontinue. Mr.JohnsonexplainedthattheMWRDdoesnotguaranteeacertaincapacityfortheirsystem. 154
Draft
Draft
Water and Sewer Superintendent Brian Jack responded to Mr. Bodners concern regarding sewer televising, stating that all sewer lines on the 800 and 900 blocks will be completed. Issues with the equipment that have been resolved and the program will be continuing, as there are a number of homesthathavetobecompletedbytheendoftheweek. TomCofsky,1127N.Kenilworth.Mr.Cofskyaskedwhatthestatuswasregardingtelevisingthesewer onthe1100blockofNorthKenilworth. WaterandSewerEngineerBillMcKennaspokeabouttheuniqueconfigurationonKenilworth;100feet of homeowner sewer runs under the Villageowned parkway and street where homeowners cannot maintaintheirsewer.Headdedthatasewertelevisingprogramisscheduledforlatefallthatincludes Kenilworth.Thecostofinspectingthoseserviceswillbelookedat. AngelaSpinillo,40LeMoyneParkway.Ms.SpinilloaskedifthesewersunderLeMoyneParkwaywere scheduledfortelevisingaswell. Mr. McKenna stated that a new main was installed in 1982 adding that if the bioswale is done, the Villagewillmakesurethisisnotconstructedoverabadpipe. TrusteeSalzmanaskedforclarificationregardingsewermaintenanceresponsibilitiesofhomeowners, specificallyonastreetsuchasKenilworth. Mr.Wielebnickistatedthatsewermaintenancesuchasroddingouttreerootsistheresponsibilityof the homeowner. The Village is responsible for the maintenance from the curb to the sewer, even thoughtheparkwayisVillageownedproperty. Chuck Mishoulam, 1031 Woodbine. Mr. Mishoulam noted that Lindberg Park was not holding water anymoreandaskedifrestrictorswereputinplace. Mr.WielebnickistatedthattheParkDistrictdidnotinstallrestrictors;repairsweremadetoasewer maininthepark. Mr.Barwinreferredtothepubliccommentregardingthewatermainbreak.Anordinanceaddresses thisissueandhewilldistributecopiestotheBoard. VI. ADJOURN IncompliancewiththeOpenMeetingsAct,itwasmovedandsecondedtoadjourntoExecutiveSession for discussion of litigation. A voice vote was taken and the motion was approved. The meeting adjournedtoExecutiveSessionat9:20P.M.Thursday,October20,2011. SUBMITTED AND RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF: ______________________________ By: MaryAnnSchoenneman TeresaPowell,VillageClerk 155
Draft InterimDeputyVillageClerk
Draft
156
Draft
Draft
Finance Committee of the Board Thursday, February 9, 2012 7:00 p.m. 9:30 p.m. Conference Room 130
Agenda I. II. III. IV. Call to Order Approval of Minutes Public Comment A. Fund Balance Report B. Fund Balance Policy C. Review & Consideration of FY12 Requests to Amend the Budget D. Use of CIP Art Fund E. Basement Flooding Prevention Programs & Hazard Mitigation Plan F. Debt Capacity Policy Status G. FY10 Audit Wrap-Up H. Other I. Review Agenda for Next Meeting February 16, 2012 Adjourn
V.
For more information regarding Village Board meetings and agendas, please contact the Village Managers Office at 708.358.5770. If you require assistance to participate in any Village program or activity, contact the ADA Coordinator at 708.358.5430 or e-mail adacoordinator@oak-park.us at least 48 hours before the scheduled activity. Get the latest Village news via e-mail. Just go to www.oak-park.us and click on the e-news icon to sign up. Also, follow us on facebook, twitter and YouTube.
157
Draft
Draft
158
Draft
Draft
159
Draft
Draft
160
Draft
Draft
161
Draft
Draft
162
Draft
Draft
Finance Committee of the Board Thursday, February 16, 2012 7:00 p.m. Conference Room 130
Agenda I. II. III. IV. Call to Order Approval of Minutes Public Comment A. B. Revised Draft Fund Balance Policy (as discussed February 9th) Review and Consideration of FY12 Requests to Amend the Budget
1. 2. Request for Additional Information Regarding the unfunded OPDC $50,000 Grant Program in DTOP (as discussed February 9th) Request for Additional Information Regarding the Housing Authority Request for $ 75,000 (as discussed February 9th)
C. D. E. F. G Adjourn
Request for Additional Information Regarding the Basement Flooding Prevention Programs Proposals (as discussed February 9th) Debt Capacity Policy Status FY10 Audit Wrap-Up Other Review Agenda for Next Meeting March 12, 2012
V.
For more information regarding Village Board meetings and agendas, please contact the Village Managers Office at 708.358.5770. If you require assistance to participate in any Village program or activity, contact the ADA Coordinator at 708.358.5430 or e-mail adacoordinator@oak-park.us at least 48 hours before the scheduled activity. Get the latest Village news via e-mail. Just go to www.oak-park.us and click on the e-news icon to sign up. Also, follow us on facebook, twitter and YouTube.
163
Draft
Draft
164
Draft
Draft
165
Draft
Draft
166
Draft
Draft
TENTATIVE A g e n d a President and Board of Trustees Thursday, March 1, 2012 Village Hall 123 Madison Street Special Meeting at 7:00p.m. in the Council Chambers I. II. III. Call to Order Roll Call Agenda Approval
Instructions for Agenda Public Comment

(3 minutes per person; 3 items per person maximum)
Comments are 3 minutes per person per agenda item, with a maximum of 3 agenda items to which you can speak. In addition, the Village Board permits a maximum of three persons to speak to each side of any one topic that is scheduled for or has been the subject of a public hearing by a designated hearing body. These items are noted with a (*).
IV. V.
Public Comment Status Report on Potential Flood Mitigation Efforts as Outlined in the MWH Consulting Engineers Report
Overview: In October, the Village Board was presented with various options for potential flood mitigation strategies that may be considered in Oak Park. The Village Board then referred the issue to Finance Committee for further review and discussion with staff on the financial implications of some of these strategies. Tonights meeting is a follow-up discussion with the staff and the full Board regarding these potential strategies and direction to staff regarding funding in 2012 or future years if any or some of these strategies are selected.
V.
Adjourn
For more information regarding Village Board meetings and agendas, please contact the Village Managers Office at 708.358.5770. If you require assistance to participate in any Village program or activity, contact the ADA Coordinator at 708.358.5430 or e-mail adacoordinator@oak-park.us at least 48 hours before the scheduled activity. Agendas and agenda materials are now available electronically on the village web site. Visit www.oak-park.us mouse-over News, then click on Board Agendas and Minutes.
167
Draft
Draft
MINUTES - SPECIAL BOARD MEETING PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK PARK HELD ON THURSDAY, MARCH 1ST, 2012 AT 7:00 P.M. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF OAK PARK VILLAGE HALL I. CALL TO ORDER PresidentProTemLueckcalledthemeetingtoorderat7:00p.m. II. ROLL CALL PRESENT: ABSENT: TrusteesHedges,Johnson(7:10),SalzmanandTucker;PresidentProTemLueck TrusteeBrewerandPresidentPope III. AGENDA APPROVAL
It was moved and seconded to approve the agenda for the meeting. A voice vote was taken and the agendawasapprovedaspresented. IV. PUBLIC COMMENT EricDavis,1112N.LombardAve.Mr. DavisspokeinfavorofaVillagecostsharinggrant programto assisthomeownersaffectedbyflooding. Zerrin Bulut, 1105 N. Harvey. Ms. Bulut urged the Board to take measures on improving the sewer systemaswellasofferinggrantstohomeownersforfloodpreventionimprovementsintheirhomes. JeffDanielski,122LeMoyneParkway.Mr.Danielskialsospokeinfavorofacostsharingprogramfor floodprevention. JosephMeyer,805Gunderson.Mr.Meyernotedthataddressingfloodconcernsshouldbeapriorityof theVillage. V. STATUS REPORT ON POTENTIAL FLOOD MITIGATION EFFORTS AS OUTLINED IN THE MWH CONSULTING ENGINEERS REPORT President Pro Tem Lueck stated that topics to be discussed will include downspout disconnection, overhead sewer systems, Villagewide study of the sewers, inlet restrictions, bioswales on Le Moyne andhazardmitigation. DownspoutDisconnection PublicWorksDirectorJohnWielebnickigaveanoverviewoftherecentstormeventsandsubsequent discussions that followed. He stated that several opportunities for improvements were suggested in thisreportandnotedthatdownspoutdisconnectionrankedhighest.Thiscouldbeincorporatedaspart of Building and Property Standards neighborhood walk inspection program. The downspout 168
Draft
Draft
disconnectionprogramiscurrentlybeingproposedasvoluntarybutcanbechangedtomandatory.He referredtothebrochuredrafted,statingthatitwillbedistributedtohomeownersanddescribesthe benefitsofdisconnectionaswellasstepbystepinstructions. Trustee Johnson asked that the section in the brochure regarding disconnecting and extending the downspout be clarified. Mr. Wielebnicki explained that the downspout should be disconnected from thepipegoingintothesewerandextendedawayfromthebuildingtopreventseepage.Henotedthe needforclarification. TrusteeJohnsonaddedthatsomedistinctionbetweensinglefamilyandmultifamilyresidencesshould beaddressedinthelanguage,astheincreasedrunofffrommultifamilybuildingsmaycreateadditional problems.Mr.Wielebnickiagreed,addingthatthisiswhytheymustbecautiousinregardstomaking thisamandatoryprogram. ItwasmovedandsecondedtodirecttheDepartmentofPublicWorkstopursueavoluntarydownspout disconnectionprogramaspresentedwiththesuggestedchangesdiscussed. Therollcallonthevotewasasfollows: AYES:TrusteesHedges,Johnson,SalzmanandTucker;PresidentProTemLueck NAYS:None ABSENT:TrusteeBrewerandPresidentPope Themotionwasapproved. OverheadSewersandBackflowPrevention The next topic of discussion was overhead sewers and backflow prevention. Mr. Wielebnicki acknowledged that these types of systems give residents almost 100 percent protection from Village sewer backup. He gave a presentation that described how gravity and overhead sewers and backflow prevention valves operate. Mr. Wielebnicki stated that a grant versus loan program was discussed at lengthwiththeFinanceCommittee.Theirrecommendationistomoveforwardwithaloanprogramof 50 percent reimbursement up to a maximum of $2,500; $225,000 would be dedicated towards this program. PresidentProTemLueckconfirmedthattheBoardwasinagreementthatitisanappropriateactionto supporttheoverheadsewerandbackflowpreventionprograminsomeway.ShestatedthattheVillage hasahistoryofinvestinginprivatepropertyforthepublicgoodandnotedthatthefloodingisapublic infrastructurefailure,althoughnotentirelyOakParks.Changesontheindividualpropertyarethemost effectiveandefficientwayofdealingwiththefloodingissueandit'sinthepublicinteresttomaintain propertyvalues.TrusteeJohnsonaddedthatthis impactsthehouseholdandthehealthandwellbeing andthequalityoflifeofresidents,basedonanimpactfromsomewhereelse. President Pro Tem Lueck stated that the two major issues to be decided are the dollar amount to be investedinindividualhouseholdsandwhetheritbeagrant,loan,oracombinationofthetwo. Trustee Salzman asked for a recap of what was discussed by the Finance Committee and how they arrived at their recommendation. Trustee Hedges stated that other communities provide matching 169
Draft
Draft
funds. Also, this would be consistent with some of the Villages other loan programs, given that the money would come due when the house is sold. He added that this would not cause an immediate financialburdenandbeinterestfree,unlikeahomeequityloan.TrusteeTuckerwasinfavorofagrant program and noted that there are problems with the loan program, such as hurting ones credit or placingasecondaryloanonapropertywhenitsprincipaldoesnotsupporttheloan. HousingServicesManagerTammieGrossmanspokeaboutthecurrentgrantandloanprogramsthather departmentadministers,addingthatthefloodmitigationprogram,whetheritbeloansorgrants,should coordinatewiththoseprograms. TrusteeHedgessuggestedameanstest.Ms.GrossmannotedthatHousingServicesatonetimehada garagegrantprogramwithameanstestassociatedwiththatprogram.Differentlevelsofgrantswere givenbasedonthehomeownersincome. There was a discussion regarding whether this program should be grants or loans. Trustee Johnson spoke in favor of grants, and at a higher level than what was proposed by the Finance Committee. Trustee Tucker agreed and referred to Ms. Grossmans comments and stated that should they move forwardwithagrantprogram,thoseoflowerincomestatusshouldalsostillbeeligibletoparticipatein thegrantprogramaswellasthecurrentHousingServicesloanprogram. WiththeconsensusoftheBoardfavoringagrant,thediscussionfocusedondeterminingwhatamount shouldbeoffered.TrusteesJohnsonandTuckerwereinfavorof$4000$5000,whichwouldcoverhalf thecostofinstallingafloodmitigationsystem.PresidentProTemLueckpointedoutthatthehigherthe amountgivenout,thefewerpeopleitwouldbenefit.TrusteeSalzmanagreed,statingthatthisshould be available to the largest amount of people possible and suggested $1500. President Pro Tem Lueck suggested$3500asacompromisebetweenthehighestandlowestfiguresdiscussed. Trustee Hedges stated that those with financial difficulty should be considered first. Ms. Grossman recommendedthatpeopleunderacertainincomethresholdbeallowedtoapplyfirst,byaspecificdate. Oncethoseapplicationsareprocessed,grantscanbeofferedtootherapplicants. Trustee Tucker raised the issue of a retroactive component; those who were already issued a permit couldretroactivelyapplyandbereimbursed.TheBoardagreedtoatwoyearretroactivity.PresidentPro TemLueckaddedthattheseresidentswouldthenbeinlinebeforeanybodyelse,exceptforthosewho meettheincomecriteria. Therewasdiscussionregardingthemeanstestaswellasdocumentationofpriorflooding. It was moved and seconded to create a $3500 grant program with a means test and instruct staff to preparethenecessarydocumentsfortheBoard'sfinalizationandtheretroactivitycomponent. Therollcallonthevotewasasfollows: AYES:TrusteesHedges,Johnson,SalzmanandTucker;PresidentProTemLueck NAYS:None ABSENT:TrusteeBrewerandPresidentPope Themotionwasapproved. 170
Draft
Draft
SewerStudyUpdate Village Engineer Jim Budrick spoke about the next step being considered; a combined sewer system modelingproject.Thefirstphase,tobecompletedin2012,isthedevelopmentofadetailedGISmapof the existing sewer system that will give three dimensional information regarding locations and elevations.Thecostforthisis$100,000.Thenextphase,tobecompletedin2013,consistsofcreatinga workingmodelofthesewersystemtobeusedforfutureplanninganddesigns,forworkingoutamore detailedinletrestrictionprogram,aswellasfocusaroundcapitalimprovementsasimprovementsare made to the sewer system. The cost for this is $150,000. He added that the Finance Committee supportedthisproposalandismovingaheadwithanRFP. TrusteeJohnsonexpressedconcernregardinghowbeneficialandappropriatethissystemwouldbeand askedifothercommunitieswereusingthistypeofsoftware.CivilEngineerBillMcKennaexplainedhow thiswilladdresstheneedsoftheVillage. ItwasmovedandsecondedtodirectstafftoprepareanRFP. Therollcallonthevotewasasfollows: AYES:TrusteesHedges,Johnson,SalzmanandTucker;PresidentProTemLueck NAYS:None ABSENT:TrusteeBrewerandPresidentPope Themotionwasapproved. InletRestriction Mr. Wielebnicki stated that Inlet restriction is another opportunity that was recommended regard to dealingwithflooding.Hewasproposingtobeginapilotprogramtotesttheeffectivenessofthatonone blockintheNorthwestportionoftheVillage.TheFinanceCommitteerecommendedallocating$25,000, which includes surveying, the cost of the restrictors and monitoring afterwards. The work would be doneinhouse. It was moved and seconded to move forward with the pilot program and the Finance Committees recommendationofupto$25,000fortheinletrestrictioninitiative. Therollcallonthevotewasasfollows: AYES:TrusteesHedges,Johnson,SalzmanandTucker;PresidentProTemLueck NAYS:None ABSENT:TrusteeBrewerandPresidentPope Themotionwasapproved. Mr.WielebnickiandMr.McKennagaveanupdateonthesewersysteminspection. Bioswales Mr. Wielebnicki commented that the construction of bioswales was also included in the recommendations.HeaddedthattheVillagehadappliedforaGreenInfrastructureGrantforLeMoyne Parkway,fromLombardtoAustinandHarveytoAustin,toconvertwhatiscurrentlyagrassparkwayand thehighestpointonthestreet,toabioswale,whichwouldbecomethelowestpartofthestreet.The 171
Draft
Draft
grantisfor40percentofatotalestimatedcostof$1.9million;thisworkwouldbecompletedin2013. Headdedthatshouldthisgoforward,apublicmeetingwiththeresidentsofthatareawouldbeheld,as thiswillchangetheoveralllookofthatwholesectionoftheVillage.Mr.WielebnickiandMr.McKenna explainedtheconstructionprocessandfunctionofbioswales. Mr. Wielebnicki stated that infrastructure grant application has been submitted for a Green alley project, which will convert eight alleys to permeable pavement. This would be a 2013 capital improvementprojectfor2013aswell. Mr. Wielebnicki gave an update on discussions regarding approaching FEMA with a multihazard mitigationplan. VII. ADJOURN It was moved and seconded to adjourn. A voice vote was taken and the motion was approved. The meetingadjournedat9:30P.M.Thursday,March1,2012. SUBMITTED AND RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF: ______________________________ TeresaPowell,VillageClerk By: MaryAnnSchoenneman InterimDeputyVillageClerk
172
Draft
Draft
Put fyi here
173
Draft
Draft
174
Draft
Draft
175
Draft
Draft
176
Draft
Draft
177
Draft
Draft
178
Draft
Draft
179
Draft
Draft
Public Works

Living In Oak Park | Doing Business in Oak Park | Visiting Oak Park | Departments | News | About Our Village | Search
Adjudication Building & Property Standards Community Services Development Services Finance Fire Human Resources
Water & Sewer

Division

Sewer Maintenance | Water Maintenance | Water Service | Hydrant Flushing | Flood Prevention
Contact Number: 708.358.5700 E-mail: PublicWorks@oak-park.us Address: South Boulevard @ Lombard Avenue News Oct. 18, 2011 -- Sewer study Aug. 25, 2011 -- Letter from Cook County: No disaster declaration Aug. 5, 2011 -- Efforts underway to diagnose, stem neighborhood flooding Forms County Damage Data Collection Form Publications Basement Flooding/Sewer Back Up Prevention Tips
Information Prevention is the key to reducing basement flooding Technology
and sewer back ups

Law Police Understanding the sewer system Public Health The Villages sewer system is designed to match the Public Works District (MWRD) system, which serves the region.
Building Maintenance Fleet Services Streets & Signs
capacity of the Metropolitan Water Reclamation
Since the Oak Park sewer system connects directly to the MWRD system, the maximum capacity of the Village municipal sewer system is limited to the capacity of the MWRD system. When rainfall exceeds the capacity of both the Oak Park and MWRD systems, localized flooding and sewer backups are likely in some homes in the community.
180
Draft
Engineering Forestry Parking Lighting
Draft
The impact of heavy rainfall is especially problematic in the northeast quadrant of the Village because this is the lowest point in the community.
After the Flood Repairing Your Flooded

Home
Why the sewer backups occur
Almost all the homes in Oak Park were built with gravity sewer systems. This means the house sewer lines, which typically are only four-to-six inches in Refuse & Recycling diameter, run directly into the main sewer in the street. Many homes also have all internal drain lines Village Clerk from toilets, sinks and other fixtures, as well as gutter downspouts, connected to their sewer system, Village Manager which leads to the main system in the street. When the main sewer line in the street is full, the flow of house sewer lines into the main sewer line is greatly diminished. As rainfall levels exceed the municipal system capacity, the sewer lines cannot handle the additional loads from downspouts and water use inside the home, sometimes causing them to back up into the house.
Water & Sewer
Reducing the chances of a sewer back up

Steps can be taken to reduce the chances of a sewer back up in the home. These include the following: Disconnectgutterdownspoutsfromthe sewerlineandrunthemintotheyard.A oneinchrainfallona1,000squarefoot roofcanproduce600gallonsofwater.By eliminatingthewaterfromtheguttersthat isflowingintothesewersystem,this simplestepcanhelpreducethechancesof asewerbackupintolowerareasofthe home.Somecommunitiesrequireproperty ownerstodisconnecttheirguttersfrom thesewersystem. Limitwateruseinsidethehomeduringa heavyrainfall.Washingmachines, dishwashers,toiletsandsinksallfeedinto thesewersystem.Postponingtheiruse duringaheavyrainfallcouldhelpeasethe sewerload. Sealbasementfoundationwallsand floors.Whenrainfallreacheslevelsthattax thecapacityofthesewersystem,chances arethoseareasmostsusceptibleto
181
Draft
Draft
floodingalsowillencounterseepage,asthe pressureofthewaterinthesoilfinds cracksandsmallopeningswherewatercan seepinsidethestructure.Agood commercialsealerproperlyappliedcan helpreducethechangesofseepage. Installperimeterdraintilesandasump pump.Perimeterdraintilessometimes calledaFrenchdrainisaperforatedpipe inatrenchcoveredwithgravelorrockthat redirectssurfaceandgroundwateraway fromanarea.Asumppumpisanelectric pumpplacedinabasementfloorpitto collectwaterandpumpitoutsidethe home. Replacetheoriginalgravitysewersystem withoverheadsewerplumbing.These systemsraisethebuildingsoriginallowest drain,whichusuallyisthebasementfloor drain,toahigherlevelandincludeacheck valvethatpreventsbackupfromthe municipalsewer.Sinceeachsystemmust becustomizedtoanindividualhome,itcan beasomewhatcostlyundertaking. However,forahomeownerintendingto useabelowgradespaceforlivingquarters, thistypeofsystemcouldbeawise investment.Thesetypesofsystemsare requiredonallnewconstruction.
Permits May Be Needed

Most changes to plumbing systems in homes require permits from the Village of Oak Parks Building & Property Standards Department, including installing drain tiles and sump pumps. Be sure to consult with the Village when considering any work. Call 708.358.5430 or e-mail building@oak-park.us for more information.
Living In Oak Park | Doing Business in Oak Park | Visiting Oak Park | Departments | News | About Our
182
Draft
Draft
Village | Search
Copyright 1997 - 2006 Village of Oak Park, All Rights Reserved
183

Oak Park Mult-Hazard Mitigation Plan

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Oak Park Mult-Hazard Mitigation Plan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Draft

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Chapter 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1

Chapter 2 Risk Assessment.....................................................................................................23

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Chapter 3 Preventative Measures...........................................................................................71

Chapter 4 Emergency Management and Response ..............................................................78

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy..................................................................................................86

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Chapter 6 Action Plan............................................................................................................ 125

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

1.2 Village of Oak Park: General Profile

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

1.3 Hazard Vulnerability Analysis (HVA) Prioritization

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Table 1-3: Completed Village of Oak Park HVA,

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

WI HAZARD VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT TOOL

Relative threat (increases with percentage)

Likelihood of future occurrence

Table 1-4: Village of Oak Park HVA: National Planning Events

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

WI HAZARD VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT TOOL

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

WI HAZARD VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT TOOL

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

WI HAZARD VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT TOOL

Likelihood of future occurrence

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

WI HAZARD VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT TOOL

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

1.4 Mitigation Planning Process

Involving the Public

Incorporating Existing Plans

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

External Agency Coordination

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

CHAPTER 2 - RISK ASSESSMENT

2.1 Severe Winter Storms

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Blizzard Blowing Snow

Magnitude and Severity

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Draft Overall economic impact: Low

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

2.2 Severe Storms

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Magnitude and Severity

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Village of Oak Park, Illinois

2.3 Extreme Heat

130F or higher 106 - 130F 90 - 108F 80 - 90F