HomeMy WebLinkAbout1273_001MINUTES
COMMITTEE OFTHE WHOILF
MARCH 28, 1995
Mayor Gerald Farley called the meeting to order at 6:12 p.m. Present at the
meeting were: Mayor Gerald L. Farley; Trustees George Clowes, Richard
Hendricks, Michaele Skowron and Irvana Wilks. Trustee Paul Hoefert arrived at
6:41 p.m and Trustee Timothy Corcoran arrived at 7:03 p.m. Also present at the
meeting were: Village Manager Michael Janonis, Assistant to the Village Manager
David Strahl, Finance Director David Jepson, Public Works Director Herb Weeks,
Deputy Public Works Director Glen Andler, Fire Chief Edward Cavello, Deputy Fire
Chiefs Steve Dumovich and Del Ulreich, Assistant Finance Director Carol Widmer,
Community Development Director William Cooney, Public Works Superintendents
including Solid Waste Coordinator Lisa Angell and Administrative Aide Dawn
Wucki and Police Chief Ronald Pavlock.
Acceptance of the Minutes from March 14, 1995. Motion made by Trustee
Skowron and Seconded, byTrustee Wilks. Trustee Clowes requested some minor
changes on page five but would accept the Minutes as written. Minutes were
approved with revision outlined by Trustee Clowes.
CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
Carl Hogland, of Five North Pline, spoke. He commented on the proposed
expansion of Northwest Electric. He stated that the western expansion,,of this
business is contrary to the Comprehensive Plan. He stated this expansion limits
the future development of Wille Street.He stated Northwest Electric should
maintain its focus on its Main Street frontage. He urged the Village Board to reject
Northwest Electric!s proposed. plan for expansion.
IV. 1996 BUD GETDISC-U SSION
Melas Park Improvement Project is currently under construction as We speak and
the Village will be responsible for expending approximately $300,000 for the
construction of an access road into the Park. He also stated that the
Superintendents, will be more involved in the Budget,procelss in the future so they
become more familiar with their operations and the necessary funding to provide
the ap propriate service s. He also stated that even though he will be retiring at the
end of May, he is confident that Glen is fully capable of running the Department
and continuing the good things which have previously been accomplished with
Glen's assistance in the past.
Deputy Public Works Director Glen Andler provided an overview highlightin' g each
Division within the Public Works Department. He stated that this Budget reflects
no additional employees. The current staffing level is at 64 full-time employees
-and nine part-time employees. He stated all employees are cross -trained in
various Divisions so employees are comfortable with any operation they may be
involved in as part of the overall Public Works services. He stated this Budget
reflects. an additional new mandate for Random Drug Testing. The
Department of Public Works' Budget is approximately $9.7 million for the coming
fiscal year.
Among the items the Department will be working on in terms of Projects in addition
o the items previously identified by Mr. Weeks are the rehabilitation of two traffic
signals on Central Road, 4.8 miles of street reconstruction and an update of the
topographic maps including water main rehabilitation/r6placierrient and pump
maintenance. One of the Capital items also included is the new Relief Storm
4
Sewer Plan for Catalpa and Birch and the expansion of the Solid Waste Division
services into multkfalmilywaste and recycling programs.
Fill ;I I III 111 11 111 111
A lengthy discussion ensue,d where the cost of the extended Leaf Pick -Up
Program was discussed And analyzed by numerous Trustees. As part of the
dewalk hazard survey, there is a special emphasis being placed r in
which there is heavy pedestrian traffic. There is a priority to resolve these
sidewalk hazards. North Louis Street is also included on the reconstruction list but
it is expected•
that a neighborhood meeting will be convened to discuss whether
Louis Street improvements will r6 main in this fiscal years budget prior to any
imp rovements starting.
Consensus of the Village Board was to approve the Leaf Program extension as
proposed in the Public Works Department
Clowes notedthat thd the recent changesBudget document,
highlighting Performance Measures is very valuable in understanding the Budget
and the Budget process. Hestated he is concerned about the additional Police
Officers that have been budgeted for. He would prefer to look at opportunities to
reduce once these Officers comeon board •that theVillage # r with
the same number of employe es two years from now as it does today. He also felt
the downtown could really do without the* additional Christmas lights and
suggested the elimination of •rical Society funding. With these reductions,
the monies # # cover the necessary costfor additional Officers once the
HendricksGrant money is terminated. He also stated that inspection and reinspection fees
should be consistent for both multi -family and single-family housing enforcement.
Trustee •that hisgoal torequestVillage •
• ••- by $250,000. He also recommended that the CommunicationsDivision be
terminated along with the Officer Manager position in the Human Services
Department. He stated that he also has concerns about the spending for the
Space Study at,the Village Hall and felt the money should be put into rehabilitation
instead of studying the situation at the Village Hall. He also felt that the Louis
Street funding should be deleted from the Budget and the money transferred to
fund other street improvementsbesides • `• that he would
concur# •recommendations - # # .reduction
trainingthe budget for - Communications # # of
downtown Christmas lights and the elimination of the Historical Society distribution.
Trustee Hoefert stated that he feels this is a very tight Budget which reflects basii
quality services. He is satisfied that the Village has been able to move orwar
with necessary computerization, flood control a nd downtown redevelopment alon
with refuse reduction programs. He feels that emphasis on new technology wi
save the Village money in the long -run. He also wanted to highlight the fact th
the rtr- great deal of benefit fromr r I
- Village and #r not affect bottom - on ` Budget.He stated
satisfied with the Budget as presented and reserves the rightto review request,,,..
or purchases as they are presented to the Village Board.
Trustee Corcoran stated that he felt the Budget document was quite detailed an
well thought-out. He stated that he has concerns relating to the Police Fals
Alarm Fees and would like the Police Department to consider charging dollar -pe
dollar forto respond to a false alarm. He would also recommen#
Inspection operations,` source and charge people who ar
Trustee '""lowes commented on the '"WAN""' Newsletter andf felt that the 70 000
ru 'Le %; %14) koka I
pieces of paper which were distributed as part of the Newsletter provided little
additional information and would request SWANCC reconsider such publications
in the future.
Trustee Hendricks stated that he would like the Village Board to change the status
of the ZBA and Sign Review Board. He stated that these Boards currently have
final say and do not recommend to the Village Board as other such Boards do in
other communities.
Manager Janonis reminded the Board that there is an upcoming Public Hearing on
March 30 concerning the Citizens' Utilities rate increase request. The Hearing will
take place at Hersey High School in Arlington Heights. He also stated that the
Village Board meeting will be on April 5 instead of April 4 due to the consolidated
election on April 4.
On a Motion made by Trustee Hoefert and Seconded by Trustee Wilks, the
Commiftee of the Whole moved Into Closed Session to discuss property
acquisition/disposition at 9:23 p.m. There was no need for personnel. The
Committee of the Whole reconvened at 10:18 p.m.
V1. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:19 p.m.,
Respectfully submitted,
DAVID STRAHL
DS/rcc Assistant to the Village Manager
fi
Village a of Mount Prospect
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: VILLAGE MANAGER, MICHAEL E. JANONIS
FROM: ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT, CATHLEEN R. FREELS 64
DATE: APRIL 5, 1995
SUBJECT: WELLER CREEK ISSUES TO CONSIDER
.Between 1975 and 1976, improvements were made to Weller Creek
between Williams Street and Mount Prospect Road. In 1982,
improvements were made to Weller Creek between School Street and
Williams Street. RJN's 1990 stormwater study included improvement
to Weller Creek but the Board decided to remove these improvements
from the projects list. In 1990, the Weller Creek improvements
were estimated at over $6. million.
A storm June 23, 1994 created flooding problems in the area.
Weller Creek rose to the bottom of the Emerson Street bridge
headwall. on July 9, 1994, four residents attended Coffee with
Council to discuss Weller Creek. Since then, Ms. Grace DeVito has
begun to unify support in her neighborhood (residents along Weller
Creek between Elmhurst Road and School Street) for improvements to
Weller Creek.
What follows is a list of items to be considered when discussing
possible improvements to Weller Creek. Also, please see my memo
of March 10, 1995 which includes a copy. of Ms. Devito's letter
summarizing the residents' issues.
PROBLEMS
- Bank erosion, property loss, lass of trees
- Flooding
Drainage
Creek obstructions
- Jurisdiction, easements, and access
April 5, 1995
Demo; Weller creek
Page 2
TIMETABLE
Community Input (Ad Hoc Citizens Group)
Project Study/Design • Issues
Coordinate with • agencies (IDOT, IEPA, Dept. •
Conservation, Army Corps of Engineers)
• •
Project priority versus other flood control projects
• improvements to • of the Creek
Cost/Benefit of project
Availability of funds (2004 at the earliest; please see
Finance Director's memo)
Grant/Loan availability
4M Property owner participation
DESIGN ISSUES
Acceptable by residents (aesthetics)
Acceptable by Village (long term effectiveness)
Acceptable by state and federal agencies
Designs required by grant applications
FV V% A 'IN Lid 4-51 An, Ta-"
� Responsibility
� Cost (will be a function of design)
am Access
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
IM Improvements to other portions of Weller Creek
go Improvements to other creeks in Village
IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATIONS
- creation of an ad hoc citizens committee
Need for a more detailed professional study @ $50,000
Finalize jurisdictional questions (part of professional study)
CRF/
Village Of MOUnt Prospect
40
Mount Prospect, Illinois
r 't%
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: VILLAGE MANAGER, MICHAEL JANONIS
FROM: ADMINISTRATIVE INTERN, CATHLEEN FREELS
DATE: MARCH 10, 1995
SUBJECT: WELLER CREEK EROSION
On Februar y 27t 1995 'we received a letter from Ms. Devito statini
'that she contacted TO
gand
neihbors the•
response
has bee
OVerwhelmingly Positive. Grace Devito is requesting
Preliminary meeting with neighbors,, Village staff., and Trustees t
I
dIsCuls-S concerns and ask questions. This memo serves to infor
you that we need to make arrangements for an informal meetin
either in April or, May, I
Attached is a cod" of the letter Grace Devito sent to her neighbors
along with a list of concern,s. Please let me know if you have any
questions or need more information, at this time.
CRF/
Attachments
C" c : Director of Public Works
February 22, 1995
Dear Weller Creek Neighbors:
Weller Creek has deteriorated greatly in the last 20 years. All we have to do is look
in our backyards to realize a great deal of damage has been caused by erosion. During
one bad storm in early July of 1994, 3 trees and a telephone pole came down near
Main Street . .. all from one 1-1/210 rainfall. Over the years this has occurred in
varying degrees all along the Creek. We have a problem that will not go away until
we address the issue and take positive steps to correct the existing and ongoing
conditions. We must have some form of erosion control and bank stabilization.
Some neighbors have done work over the years to stabilize their property adjacent to
the Creek. The vast majority of residents, however, have no erosion I control adjacent
to their property and are having problems of varying degrees due to, the severe
erosion.
My husband and I had conversations with Village Trustees late last summer to ask
them what can be done about the tenuous conditions along the Creek. They agreed
that although previous attempts to revitalize and stabilize Weller Creek were not
successful, it is time to again put the Creek on the agenda with considerations for
improvement. They agreed to research exactly what local, state or federal agencies
are responsible for the easements that contain the waterway. We were hoping to
start conversations among our neighbors to gain support for this effort.
As I have been slow to contact neighbors, so has the Village been slow to do their
research in preparation. I realize now that until we join together as a group and
approach the Village Trustees en masse with our desire to have erosion control and
bank stabilization work done, nothing will happen.
The following pages contain a summary of our preliminary conversations with the
Village. Please read this important information, and then call us so we can organize
ourselves and then meet with the Village Trustees to begin this long overdue project.
Sincerely,
Grace and Jack Devito
701 S. Main St.
255-2290
GOALS FOR WELLER CREEK: to stabilize the Creek banks
so as to prevent further erosion
to remove obstacles within the
Creek that restrict water flow
The Village intends to replace the Emerson St. bridge and Main St. walk bridge, as
well as repair the Elmhurst Rd. bridge within the next 2-3 years. Their discussions
concluded that it would be beneficial to both the residents and the Village budget if
the creek bank stabilization and work done on the bridges can be done in a
cooperative effort so as not to duplicate expenses. Coordination of these efforts
within this time frame will not be easy. Many federal and local agencies will be
involved. Among these are the Illinois Dept. of Transportation,, the Metropolitan Water
Reclamation District, the EPA,, the Illinois Dept. of Conservation, and the Weller Creek
Drainage District, to name a few.
The area that our intentions are focused on is Weller Creek from School Street, west,,
to the bridge on Elmhurst Rd.
Major concerns to homeowners:
1. FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY. The Village Trustees have indicated that there
should be NO individual property assessments for this undertaking, due to the fact
that the rain water that drains through Weller Creek causing the erosion comes from
such a vast area. They feel that the costs could be covered under a local sales tax
created a few years ago for flood control. If need be, bonds could be sold.
2. REMOVAL OF TREES AND SHRUBS. Many trees will have to be removed,
especially those with exposed roots. However, the Illinois Dept. of Conservation will
require that trees and shrubs be replanted upon completion. They will specify the
types to be planted that will be suitable to the local climate and wildlife.
3. CLEAN-UP OF THE CREEK BED. The EPA will require that all polluted soil in the
creek bed be replaced with clean soil. It would be in our best interest to encourage
the Village to evaluate the local drainage system to prevent future contamination of
the new Creek bed from released overflows of sewage during heavy rains.
4. ACCESS TO THE CREEK FOR CONSTRUCTION. Our goal is for access to the
Creek to be obtained from existing access ways or vacant lands. There are several
existing access areas: the empty lot on Hiawatha, one lot east of Elmhurst Rd.
(owned by the Village); the park on the north side of Weller Creek at Main St.; the
empty lot on the south side of Weller Creek at Emerson (owned by a resident who has
volunteered this land for access); and the bridge area at School St. There should be
no reason for the Village to have equipment accessing the Creek in between two
homes where minimal footage is available.
5. HOW WILL EROSION CONTROL HELP PREVENT LOCAL FLOODING? - Combined
with other flood control projects the Village has and is now completing, we should see
a major improvement from the 80's. During heavy rains, the water will move
downstream faster if the lower banks have no obstructions to impede the water flow.
The details of exactly what it will all look like are yet to be determined. Surveyors will
have to do their work before the Village will be prepared to discuss this. It is
important that an open line of communication be maintained between Village and
residents. But please remember, without our support and involvement, the Village will
not move ahead with this project.
Improving the Creek will increase our property values and assist each of us personally
when we are ready to sell our homes. Ultimately the whole community will benefit
from this improvement. We should work together towards that goal.
Jack and Grace DeVito 255-2290
Addendum to February 27, 1995 letter to Cathleen Freels
1. Residents are concerned that trees will be ind'is,c4minately removed Without
consideration for salvage. However, ver, most residents understand that, due to
the severity of the eroslon,a certain amount of trees will be lost,. There
was only one resident who was adamantly against removal of any trees on
her property, regardless of condition or position.
2. Residents are asking for a commitment that trees (broadleaf and evergreeM
and shrubs of some substance (not sticks 11 foot tall) be replanted when th e!
project is completed. Are there county, state or federal agencies that can
assist to lower Village costs?
3. There is concern over the type of material that will be used to stabittize the
bottom and lower sides of the creek (ex. concrete blocks or alternatives).
Also, what type of vegetation would be planted to prevent erosion on the
top of the slope. There was some conversation as to alternatives to grass,
which needs periodic maintenance. One suggestion was the use of a
perennial ivy.
4. Will the creek be re-established in the center of the current easement?
Will the creek bed width be established as to allow for the appropriate bank
slope to minimize any property modification?
Will it be possible for people who have lost property to creek erosion to have
their property restored to them after the creek bed has been redirected and
banks reestablished?
Several residents want assurance that they will not lose more property in
addition to what has already been lost to creek' erosion,
SM
Page 2 "CONCERNS"
Addendum to February 27,, 1995 letter to Cathleen Freels
5. Previous attempts to correct creek problems, regardless of the extent of
work and effort attempted, have been somewhat unsuccessful. Once plans
for this, project, are approved, what can be done to insure that thispro
*act
iil
ill a successfuland timely conclusion?w
6. Can we have a river walk for Village officials and residents who do not have
a grasp of the severity of the erosion?
7. Who will be responsible for the maintenance of the now creek structure.
How often will the structure be checked? How often will maintenance be
performed?
8. Residents want firm commitments that we will not receive individual
property assessments for this project.
9. Correct the open spillage of rain water from Main Street into Weller Creek.
The current drainage system is a safety hazard as well as a major cause of
erosion at this location.
10. It would appear that over the years as trees have gone down and were
removed from the creek, several residents have had negative experiences
with Some �village, workers relating to, whirisresponsible for ma,intenance, of
these trees and the creekbank. In particular, I heard' several accounts of
verbal conflicts with people, in the Village Forestry Department Having had
one such experience myself, I respeco"tfulty request, that you let Village
employees know that there is a 60 foot easement in the center of the creek
and, except for the block of West Hiawatha, the residents do not own,, nor
are they responsible for the trees and banks and creek within this 60 foot
easement. This may come up in the April meeting, as it is a very sore spot
with several residents.
Wa
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
FINANCE DEPARTMFNT
tkf) =1 col WJ I O)
TO: Michael E. Jannis, Village Manager
FROM: David C. Jepson, Finance Director
DATE: April 7, 1995
SUBJECT: Debt Capacity for Flood Control Projects
When the Flood Control Project was approved, in 1991 the plan was to phase the overall project so
that the first 1/4, Home Rule Sales Tax would be sufficient to make the principal and interest
payments on the debt that would be required to finance the various phases. Since that time, the
Village has issued four series of general obligation, bonds along with funding from the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency NEPA) to finance the first five phases of the total project.
Additionally, it is expected that three additional bond 'Issues will be required to complete the approved
projects included in the original schedule, as revised.
The existing bond issues have been structured and the various phases have been scheduled in a way
to maintain adequate cash reserves as well as to complete the individual projects as expeditiously as
possible. The first two bond issues were relatively short (6 and 8 years), the next bond issue was
somewhat longer (12 years) because of the size of the issue, and the fourth issue was for a period of
10 years. The IEPA funding is for a 20 year period to take advantage of below market interest rates.
It is expected that the three remaining bond issues will be sold in 1996, 1998, and 2001.
The attached schedule shows the Annual Debt Service Requirements and the Estimated Cash Flows
for existing debt and the debt that is expected to be used to complete the projects. The schedule shows
the estimated cash balance to start each year, estimated revenues for the year, the debt service
requirements for each existing and planned debt issue, and the cash balance at the end of each year.
The assumptions used for the revenue projections" and estimated debt service for the planned bond
issues are included in the notes to the schedule.
The schedule shows very adequate cash balances through 1999, but then these balances are reduced
to n1limimurn levels from 2000 through 2005. The balances then start building again in 2006. The
estimated balance at the end of 2006 is $687,655 and, although not shown on the schedule, the year-
end balances would grow to about $1,130,000 in 2007 and about $1,800,000 in 2008. The build-up
in 2006 and 2007 is the result of the final payment of the 1993E series and in 2008 to the final
payment of the 1996 series. Based on the original Plan, the expected balances would build-up
dramatically after 2008.
Michael E. Jannis
Page 2
Debt Capacity for Flood Control Projects
As with any projections, there are a number of factors that could affect the amounts on the attached
schedule. Revenues may be more or less than anticipated; construction costs are only estimated; and
additional IEPA funding could reduce expected debt service costs. However, the amounts represent
the best information that is available at this time.
The information will need to be reviewed annually and will need to be updated prior to planning the
1998 and 2001 bond issues. If the projections are relatively accurate, the earliest that additional
projects could be financed from the first 1/4C Home Rule Sales Tax is 2004.
DCJ/sm
WM
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS
Annual Debt Service Requirements
and Estimated Cash Flows
--------- - ---- ----- . ..... - --------------- . .....
1997 19" 19" 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Cash Balance - Start of Year (1)
$1,033,460
$ 980,875
$ 768,995
$ 612,875
$ 275,735
$ 302,575
$ 371,165
$ 229,350
$ 107,710
$ 262,260
Revenues (7.)
$1,275,600
$1,285,300
$1,297,500
$1,312,700
$1,329,400
$1$364,400
$1,384,900
$1,405,700
$1,426,800
$1,448,200
Debt Service Requirements
Flood Control Projects - I" I A
$ 195$545
$ -
$ -
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Flood Control Projects - 1992A
435,095
397,210
359,615
342,550
-
Flood Control Projects - IMB
112,185
306,765
306,820
307,275
309,395
303,895
307,815
306,270
249,445
-
Flood Control Projects - EPA (Est) (3)
396,855
396,855
396,855
396,855
396,55
396,855
396,855
396,855
396,855
396,855
Flood Control Projects - 1994A
188,505
197,700
181,680
185,660
179,210
177,760
196,095
198,265
-
-
Flood Control Projects - 1996 (Est) (4)
-
208,650
208,650
208,650
208,650
208,650
208,650
208,650
209,650
208,650
Flood Control Projects - 1998 (Est) (4)
-
-
208,650
208,650
208,650
208,650
208,650
208,650
208,650
Flood Control Projects - 2001 (Est) (4)
2N- 1
2-08
208
209
Totals
- --- - ------
$1,328,185
$1,497,180
------
$1,453,620
$1,649,640
$1,302,760
--------
$1,295,810
$1,526,715
$1,527,340
------ ---------------
$1,272,250
-- --------
$1,022,805
-------
(1) The Cash Balance 1/1/97 is the estimated amount included in the 1995 (May -December) Budget.
(2) Revenues assume the 1/40 Home Rule Sales Tax will increase I % per year. (Revenues also includes investment income)
(3) The final loan requirement for the Hatlen Heights Project has been estimated.
(4) Estimated Bond issues of $1.5 million in 1996, 1998, and 2001 are included to complete phases VI, VII, and VIII. The interest rate is assumed to be 6.5 % with a
ten year term for each issue. Interest is capitalized for the year of issue and the first year after issue.
TAIN
Mount Prospect Public Works Department
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM IM CnV USA
TO: Village Manager
FROM: Director Public Works
DATE: April 6, 1995
SUBJECT: Weller Creek
Attached are excerpts from the preliminary storm water study
that was done by RJN in August 1990. The excerpts address
Weller Creek primarily as it flows through Mount Prospect south-
erly from Central Road to Mount Prospect Road. You will note,
in the packet of information, there are a couple maps that di-
vide Weller Creek into four different sections. The section
with the greatest erosion problems is that area between Elmhurst
Avenue and School Street- that is also the area that is most
inaccessible. Another area where we are starting to get com-
plaints on is from Central Road to Lincoln Street.
Also included in this submittal are two colored renditions of
different types of channel improvements that have been done over
the years, in particular, between School Street and Mount Pros-
pect Road. On the section from Mount Prospect Road to William
Street, The Village had an agreement, back in the early 701s,
with the Illinois Division of Waterways and the City of Des
Plaines. The area between School Street and William Street had
a different type of erosion control system, which was paid for
entirely by the Village.
Throughout the year, but especially in the summertime, there are
odors coming from Weller Creek. Currently, the MWRD has flood
gates at Central Road that discharge untreated wastewater into
the creek during periods when their interceptor sewers cannot
handle extra loads. Frequently, when the water in Weller Creek
recedes, there is debris left hanging on the vegetation, which
is a contributing factor to the odor problem. Also, throughout
the creek area, especially where homes border on the creek,
there is a tendency for residents to dump grass clippings,
branches, etc. on the banks in the mistaken belief that this
will curb erosion. What this does is create nesting places for
i
rodents, which, in many cases, is also a contributing factor to
the odor problem. Also, a considerable amount of erosion occurs
from residents' drain pipes ejecting water into Weller Creek.
The costs outlined in the RJN report were very preliminary and a
more in-depth study should be considered. To give you an idea
*f the number of agencies that i would have to gain
approval from before anything can be done at Weller Creek, thz
following agencies would be involved:
IDOT
Illinois Division of Waterways
Illinois Department of Conservatio
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Weller Creek Drainage District
MWRD I
Other areas that need to be addressed and that would impact the
costs involved are acquisition of property, either permanent or
for construction purposes; tree loss and reforestation; the soil
on the bottom of Weller Creek may be deemed hazardous and re-
quire special handling under today's laws; and, finally, contrpl
of running sand. I would project that there would have to be a
lot of good clay brought in after all the excavation is done in
an attempt to stabilize the banks prior to installation of any
z�rosion control material such as monoslabs, gabions, etc.
Concern about rear yard erosion is a problem and, along with
that, the foot bridge for pedestrian traffic at Main Street and
Weller Creek needs to •be replaced fairly soon or removed com-
pletely for safety sake. There has to be a•
greater, in-depth,
studv on what to do about the Emerson Street bridge over Weller
Creek. Preliminary indications are that it needs to be raised
approximately three feet so that the water during flood stage
can pass freely. Depending upon the design of the channel im-
provements, you may want to consider removal of the Emerson
Street bridge and lengthening it so that we would be able to
have a larger -diameter culvert or waterway underneath the bridge.
HLW/td
attach.
WELLERCR.195/FILES /CREEIKS
This is a short excerpt from the "Stormwater Management Study - Weller Creek Drainage
Area." Please note that the study was completed in the August of 1990 and is not an in
depth study of how to mediate the soil erosion which is occurring along Weller Creek.
Alk Alf
TIMEW MWAT
AN& ROL. 0 m
IN
I
TUDY
i �w illiq !III I -
=1
M-]Z� 1111171��Ill #CAI
immool E m
'VILLAGE OF
MOUNT PROSPECTo ILLINOIS
prepared by
e 9nc
RJN Environmental Assoc!"ar. , 1
is ing
Can ult;g Engineers
Wheat:lonj Illinowls
A,ugust:, 1990 DRAFT
I
Chapter I
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONSf AND RECOMMENDATION
The Village -of Mount Prospect is located approximately eight
miles northwest of the City of Chicago in Cook County, Illinois.
The Village provides the vital function of collecting and conveying
f low generated by storm events, and domestic, institutional,
commercial, and industrial water usage to various st'6rmwater
management and wastewater treatment facilities. The Village is
served by separate storm sewer systems which are tributary to
Weller Creek, Camp McDonald Creek, the Feehanville Ditch, and the
Des Plaines River and to combined sewer systems which convey storm
and sanitary flows to Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of
Greater Chicago (MWRDGC) interceptors and Tunnel and Reservoir
(TARP) facilities. Separate sanitary flows are transported to
MWRDGC interceptors and are treated at the O'Hare Wastewater
Reclamation Plant.
Residents of the Village of Mount Prospect have recently
experienced flooding of streets, yards, basements, garages, and the
first floor of residences caused by insufficient capacity of local
stormwater, combined, and sanitary drainage facilities to convey
flows to various receiving streams and treatment facilities. This
study, hereinafter referred to as the Weller Creek Drainage Area
Stormwater Management Study, was performed to evaluate and present
alternative solutions to reduce the severity and frequency of
flooding in selected areas of the Village of Mount Prospect that
are tributary to Weller Creek. These areas are referred to as See-
Gwun and Golf Flooding Area, the See-Gwun and Milburn Flooding
Area, the See-Gwun and Milburn Sanitary Area, the Catalpa and Birch
Flooding Area,, the Hatlen Heights Flooding Area, the Hatlen Heights
Sanitary Area, the Clearwater Flooding Area, and the Weller Creek
Study Area. Locations of these areas are shown on Exhibit 1.1
I-1
Existing drainage facilities in the Weller Creek Drainage Area
consist of separate and combined sewers. Surface runoff is
collected and diverted into the stormwater drainage system by curb
and gutter streets and drainage ditches. Stormwater generated in
the Weller Creek Drainage Area is conveyed to either MWRDGC
interceptors and TARP facilities or Weller Creek.
The Weller Creek Drainage Area is fully developed with the
exception of several parks and small parcels of private property.
Urban development has upset natural drainage patterns reducing the
amount of open land and thereby accelerating the rate and- volume of
stormwater runoff. Localized flooding occurs as a result of
moderate rainfall because of problems associated with topography
and inadequacy of the existing drainage system. Flooding in the
Weller Creek Drainage Area is evident from street ponding,
overflowing manholes, and residential damage which has resulted in
inconvenience to the Village residents and financial loss. In
addition, flooding is a potential health hazard.
To develop a recommended plan to reduce the magnitude and
frequency of flooding in the Weller Creek Drainage Area., the
hydraulic capacity of the existing system was evaluated by computer
modeling. Several methods for improved flood control were
evaluated and developed into alternative plans that are described
in the report. Alternatives were compared based on cost-
effectiveness and feasibility. Based on results of the comparison,
a recommended plan was formulated.
Data for the existing drainage system was collected from
previous reports , plans , sewer maps , interviews with Village staf f
and by conducting a limited field survey. Stormwater runoff
estimates and hydraulic evaluations of the existing system were
made using the Illinois Urban Drainage Area Simulator (ILLUDAS)
1-2
computer model. The selected areas in the WellerCreek Drainage
Area were evaluated for 2 -year, 5 -year 10 -year, 25 --year r and 50 -
year storm events.
The feasibility and appropriateness Of various flood
protection concepts were evaluated and used for •formulation of
alternative plans. The alternative plans selected for an in
each area are as follow:
geee!7�Gwuqn, and ap If r I noding _Are
A
Alternative A: Separate Relief Storm Sewer
Alternative B: Combined Relief Sewer
Alternative C: Combined Relief Sewer with Underground
Detention at Sunset Park
Al bu lin, Area
iAlternative A: Relief Storm Sewer w Alternative B: Relief Storm Sewer with Detention at
Lincoln Jr. High School
Alternative C:
Underground Detention and Pumping Facility
at Lincoln Jr. Heigh School
See-,Gwun
an M1111bur Sanitary Area
Recommended Plan: Sanitary Relief Sewer and
Sanitary Relief Station
Catalpg and Air -ch Flood*
ln�L.Are,!%,
Recommended,Plan: Relief Storm Sewer
Hatli
Hg
en
ights El—oodjag-Are
._a
Recommended Plan: Storm Sewer Improvements
Hatlen Heb gb, t Area
s
4 Recommended Plan:- S 11 anitary Relief Sewer
leatd'
a,
Are
Alternative A: Hatlen Avenue Relief Storm Sewer
Alternative B: Relief Storm Sewer Along Existing Storm
Sewer Outlet Pipe
Alternative C: Busse Road Relief Storm Sewer
1-3
Tnt!' t� V CI.L LL a LO J_ %j a L 4 A. V %W 6.F .9- A A.
comparison of capital costs at various levels of protection and the
feasibility of implementation. The effect of each alternative on
downstream conveyance was considered. Estimates of capital costs
for each alternative include construction costs plus 27 percent for
contingency, engineering, legal, fiscal, and administrative cost*
Conclusions
The hydraulic evaluations indicate that several, conclusions
can be made regarding existing flooding and the improvements needed
to reduce the magnitude and frequency of flooding in the Weller
Creek Drainage Area.
10 The existing combined sewer system in the See-Gwun and
Golf Flooding Area has insufficient capacity to convey
runoff generated by a 2 -year frequency, 60 -minute
duration storm event to the XWRDGC interceptor located at
the intersection of Can-Dota Avenue and Man-A-Wa Trail.
2 The existing 54 inch by 88 inch concrete arch storm sewer
at the intersection of Na-Wa-Ta Avenue and Lonnquist
Boulevard has sufficient capacity to convey stormwater
I
generated by a 25 -year frequency, 6o --minute duration
Now
storm in its current 81 acre tributary area south of Golf
P
Road and the See-Gwun and Golf Flooding Area.
3, The existing stormwater drainage system in the See-Gwun
and Milburn Flooding Area including the 36 inch diameter
sewer that conveys stormwater south along We -Go Trail to
Weller Creek, has insufficient capacity to convey runof-f
generated by a 2 -year frequency,? 60 -minute duration storm
event to Weller Creek.
1-4
10. The 66 inch diameter sewer conveying flow from the
Clearwater Detention Basin and runoff from 83 acres -in
the Clearwater Flooding Area has insufficient capacity to
convey f low generated by a 100 -year, 12 -hour duration
storm event to the two junction chambers east of Busse
Road at Estates Drive,
11.
The two junction chambers east of Busse Road at Estates
Drive in the Clearwater Flooding Area have insufficient
capacity to convey flow generated by a 100 -year, 12 -hour
storm event.
12.
The Clearwater Detention Basin overflowed in August,
1987 because of insufficient capacity of the 66 inch
diameter storm sewer and junction chambers to convey flow
out of the Clearwater Flooding Area and the Clearwater
Detention Basin generated by a storm event equal to the
August 13-14, 1987 storm to the, Mount Prospect Country
Club Golf Course.
13.
Weller Creek exhibits severe erosion between School
Street and Elmhurst Avenue and between Lincoln Street and
Central Road, moderate erosion between Elmhurst Avenue
and See -Gwen Avenue and minor erosion between See-Gwun
Avenue and Lincoln Avenue.
14,
The elevation of the Emerson Street bridge is below the
100 -year flood stage of Weller Creek.
15.
The elevation of the Main Street footbridge is below the
100 -year flood stage of Weller Creek.
1.6
The estimated capital costs to 'Implement the recommended plan
at a 25 -year level of protection in the Hatlen Heights Sanitary
Area is $0.85 million. The location of recommended improvements in
IP
the Hatlen Heights Sanitary Area are shown on Exhibit 20.
Clearwater Flooding Area Alternative C - Relief .,Sewer Alon Busse
Road Al
The recommended plan in the Clearwater Flooding Area consists
of providing an increased level of protection by constructing a new
relief storm sewer extending along Busse Road from the Clearwater
Detention Basin to the Mount Prospect Country Club Golf Course
AN
Creek and constructing a new junction chamber at the Country Club
Golf Course outfall. The recommended plan would provide protection
against overflowing of the Clearwater Detention Basin for a storm
event equal to the August 13-14, 1987 storm. The estimated capital
cost to implement the recommended plan is $0.60 million, The
location of improvements included in the recommended plan is shown
in Exhibit 23.
Area Recommendgd Pla
Weller _Qre,gk5tudy . p,
,
The recommended plan to improve conveyance characteristics and
provide erosion control in each of the four reaches of Weller Creek
evaluated in this study are presented below:
LE
School Street to Elmhurst Avenue:
Recommendations for improvements to creek channel between
School Street and Elmhurst Avenue include lining 3,000 feet of
creek channel with interlocking concrete blocks, realignment of
approximately 200 feet of channel east of the Elmhiirst Avenue
mom
bridge, raising the Emerson Street bridge deck approximately three
feet, replacement 'of the Emerson Street footbridge, and acquisition
of approximately 60,000 square feet of private property. The
I-10
estimated capital cost to implement the -,recommended I imp . rovements
between School Street and Elmhurst Avenue is $2.67 million,
Elmhurst Avenue to See-Gwun Avenue:
Recommendations for improvements to the creek channel from
Elmhurst Avenue to See -Gwen Avenue include lining 2r700 feet of
creek channel with interlocking -concrete blocks and construction of
an access ramp. The estimated capital cost to construct
recommended improvements from Elmhurst Avenue toSee-Gwen Avenue is
$1.65 million.
See-Gwun Avenue to Lincoln Street:
Recommendations for improvements to the creek channel between
See -Gwen Avenue and Lincoln Street include gabion stabilization and
rip rap erosion control at the outfall of the Mount Prospect
Country Club Golf Course drainage ditch and gabion stabilization at
the first footbridge west of See-Gwun Avenue. The estimated
capital cost to construct recommended improvements between See -Gwen
Avenue and Elmhurst Avenue is $0.01 million,
Lincoln Street to Central Road:
Recommendations for improvements to the creek channel between
Lincoln Street and Central Road include lining approxiamtely 2,800
feet of creek channel, and construction of an access ramp and rip
rap erosion control at the spillway of the Crumley Detention Basin.
The estimated capital cost to construct recommended improvements
between Lindoln Street and Central Road is$1,75 million, I
Locations Of Proposed improvements to Weller Creek between
School Street and Central Road are shown on Exhibit 24, The total
estimated capital cost to implement recommended -improvements
between School Street and Central Road is $6.08 million,
Projected Cost
All,
„mm,� I--13
,ire a
ions
See -Gwun and Golf Flooding Area
$ 0.69;
See -Gwen and Milburn Flooding Area
1.65
,See -Gwen and Milburn unitary Area'
0 : 3 8
Catalpa and Birch Flooding Area
0.24
Hatlen Heights Flooding Area
0.88
Hatlen Heights Sanitary Area
0.85
0.60
Clearwater Flooding Area
Weller Creep Study Area
6.08
Crumley and Melas Park Erasion Control
0.05
Central and Wa-Pella Flooding Area1..11.
TOTAL RECOMENDED PLAN COST
$12.53
T Projected plan costs. are capital costs. Capital
costs include
a 17 percent factor for engineering and administrative costs
and a 10 percent factor for contingency.
All,
„mm,� I--13
ele Creekstud Axea
The Weller Creek Study Area consists of approximately 11,500
feet of Weller Creek from Central Road to School Street. This
area was divided into four sections for evaluation at�on of existing
conditions including selected conveyance and erosion
characteristics. The four sections include approximately 2,800
feet of creek between Central Road and Lincoln Street, 3,000 feet
of creek between. Lincoln Street and See.Gwun
of creek between Se - Avenue, 2,700 feet
e Gwun Avenue and Main Street, and 31000 feet
of creek between Main Street and School Street. The Weller creek
Study Area is shown on Exhibit 9.
1 Jig Noma,
Topoaravhic Survey,
Existing topographic maps, records drawings, and Village
sewer atlases were reviewed to determine the boundary of each
flooding and sanitary area. Elisting records were also used in
conjunction with field surveys to verify high and low points in
the system and confirm areas prone to flooding* Sewer atlases
and record drawings were used as a basis for sizing the capacity
of the existing drainage system. Invert elevations and the
diameter of sewer segments critical to the analysis of the
flooding areas were acquired or verified through field survey.
Areas being considered for possible location of detention
facilities or placement of pumping facilities were investigated.
Cross sections of open channels, streets, and low points on
private property in areas affected by flooding were also
0
surveyed. This information was used for modeling the existing
system and in the analysis of various alternatives for reducing
the magnitude and frequency of flooding.
In addition, detailed survey of the Clearwater Detention
Basin and Weller Creek using an electronic distance measuring
device (EDM) was performed. This detailed survey, was performed
to develop cross sections and determine critical distances needed
to model the Clearwater Detention Basin and in the analysis of
various alternatives for flooding and erosion control in Weller
Creek.
Video Tat>ina of Wel l,izr
Cr ek
The Weller Creek channel from Central Road to Mount Prospect
Road was video taped to provide information for evaluation of
existing channel conditions and analysis of various alternatives
for erosion control of Weller Creeks Locations of storm sewer
111-3
outfalls, public and private bank stabilization projects,
existing creek bank conditions and bridge structures were
recorded. A copy of the video tapes is included as a separate
appendix,
.Interviews- with Village_Staff
Flooding complaints recorded by the Village staff were
reviewed. In addition, on-site interviews with members of the
Village staff including Mr. Melvyn L. Both, Street Ty
superintendent, and Mr. Jerry McIntosh, Water Superintendent,
were held to acquire background information about flooding
problems in the Weller Creek Drainage Area,
Discussion of
--Previous Flooding
Based on discussions with Village staff and review of
Village records, homeowners in the Weller Creek Drainage Area
have been subjected to flooding of streets, yards, basements,
garages, and the first floor of residences. Flooding has been
caused by insufficient capacity of local stormwater, combined,
and sanitary drainage facilities which significantly reduces
conveyance to Weller Creek, XWRDGC interceptors, and MWRDGC TARP
facilities. Severe flooding occurred following the heavy rains
of August, 1987. Detailed discussion of previous flooding
specific to each of the localized flooding areas evaluated in
this study is presented later in this chapter. Photographs of
flooding in the Weller Creek Drainage Area are presented in
Appendix A.
Computer Evaluation of Localized Floodina
determine
To improvements required to provide increased
flood protection, it is necessary to establish the level of
protection provided by existing facilities.
Estimating
111-4
the 83 acre area tributary'to the 66 inch diameter storm sewer
total 203 cfs for a 100 -ye I ar recurrence internal storm event and
238 cfs for the August 13--14, 1987 storm event* Comparison shows
that capacity of the 66 inch diameter storm sewer is insufficient
for conveyance of the total peak flow generated by the Clearwater
Detention Basin and 83 acre tributary area (203 cfs) for a 100-
year storm event. This is the most likely reason that the
Clearwater Det-ention Ba"sin overflowed and flooded the .sur
rounding
area following the August 13-14, 1987 storm event. Modeling
tlindicated that the 66 inch diameter storm sevier has sufficient
Emma= capacity to convey flows released by the Clearwater Detention
4 Basin for a 100 -year recurrence interval storm event, but not for
the August 13-14, 1987 storm event if the 83 acre area north of
IRLonnquist Boulevard tributary to the 66 inch diameter storm sewer
is not included.
Evaluation indicates that the two junction chambers east of
Busse Road have insufficient capacity to convey flows released by
the Clearwater Detention Basin in conjunction with flows
generated by the 150 acre Clearwater Flooding Area. Modeling
shows that these chambers act as "bottlenecks" in the conveyance
system contributing to the flooding problem in the Clearwater
Flooding Area. Based on the modeling, the Mount Prospect Country
Club Golf Course does not impact the Clearwater Flooding Area,
The Clearwater Flooding Area is shown on Exhibit 90
1ellgx C,Leek- Studv Are
The Weller Creek Study
Area consists of approximately 11,500
feet of Weller Creek from School Street to central Road. This
area was divided into four reaches for evaluation of existing
conditions* A brief discussion of each reach isgiven in the
following paragraphs
TTT-77
.... . . . .... .
w.
reach A ~.."-School Street to EIinb,u r S t '-Ave nu,'
Weller Creek shows signs o I f severe erosion between the
School Street footbridge and the Elmhurst Avenue bridge. The
length of the creek in Reach A is 3,000 feet. The erosion
problem in Reach A is compounded because Weller Creek passes
through the back yards of residental lots eroding private
property. Many trees along the banks of Weller Creek in Reach A
have fallen as a result of being undermined by the eroding banks.
Numerous trees along the banks of Weller Creek in Reach A exhibit
exposed roots and are partially undermined and in danger of
Jalling. Most of the banks are not vegitated by grass or ground
cover. The side slopes of the creek banks are 1 horizontal to 1
vertical or steeper in many cases and are unstable. This is
supported by observations of recent bank slump at several
locations along Reach A. Channel and bank erosion is further
compounded by sump pump and foundation drain pipes discharging
directly into Weller Creek. outlet pipes often extend
unsupported from the bank a distance of 5 feet and occasionally
as much as 10 feet. Outfall headwall and wingwall structures
have been undermined and have fallen into the creek channel. The
footings of the footbridge at Main Street are partially
undermined as a result of erosion.
At several locations in Reach A residents with back yards
that border the creek have installed bank protection and
stabilization measures such as brick and timber retaining walls
and rip rap. This effort to prevent erosion in Weller Creek
along Reach A has proven ineffective because the protection is
not continuous along the creek and because the methods of bank
protection are not uniform. At a location immediately downstream
of Elmhurst Avenue on the north bank of Weller Creek the erosion
is exceptionally severe as a result of
111-28
. . . .. ... ....... ... . . ........
I
flood water 'passing beneath 'the' bridge at - a high velocity and
striking the north bank as Weller Creek makes an angular turn to
the south. The Emeirson-Street bridge is at an elevation
approximately 3 feet below the 100 -year flood stage of We
Creek. 0 The Main Street footbridge is at an elevation
approximately 3.5 feet below the elevation of the 100 -year flood
stage of Weller Creek.
Pill 111=111irm
1 1! 1111! 111:111 V ; XIIIII
21 OF==
The length of the creek in Reach B is 2,700 feet* In
general, the erosion of the banks of Weller Creek in Reach B is
not as severe as the erosion in Reach A. The depth of the creek
channel is less in Reach B than in Reach A. In Reach B between
Council Terrace and Man-A-Wa Trail, Weller Creek flows through a
public parkway. The creek banks are generally stable and show no
evidence of recent slumping. Bank erosion is most evident by the
numerous exposed outfall pipes, exposed headwall and wingwall
structures, and exposed tree roots. The creek banks are sparsely
vegetated with grass or ground cover.
Reach C - See-nwun_Avenue to Lincol Street
.-
Reach C of Weller Creek flows through the Mount Prospect Park
District Country Club Golf Course. The length of the creek in
Reach C is approximately 3,000 feet* The degree of erosion in
Weller Creek along Reach C is generally less than the erosion in
Reach B. The banks are well vegitated with grass orground cover
and most sewer outfall structures and footbridge footings are
protected by gabions which were installed by the Mount Prospect
Park District. There is significant erosion at one 'location
where a 72 inch diameter storm sewer discharges into Weller Creek
southwest of the the Park District Maintenance Facility. At this
location, stormwater from the Clearwater Detention Basin outlet
storm sewer enters Weller Creek through a drainage ditch that
111-29
pN
the storm sewer outlet at Busse Road and to a small pond adjacent
to Weller Creek, The pond drains into Weller Creek through the
72 inch diameter storm sewer. High flow rates in the 72 inch
diameter storm sewer in conjunction with overland flow from the
pond have caused significant erosion at this location.
each Q - Lincoln, street, to Central Road
Reach D is experiencing severe erosion comparable to the
erosion in Reach A. The length of the creek in Reach D is
OWL
approximately 21800 feet. The erosion of Weller Creek in Reach D
poses no immediate direct danger to Weller Lane or private
properties on the west side of the creek because there is
sufficient right-of-way between the eroding creek banks and
Weller Lane and the Private properties. The creek channel is
approximately 13 feet deep and some banks in Reach D'show signs
of instability. These factors indicate that future bank failure
is likely and that slumps may Occur. Reach D is heavily wooded
and there are many exposed tree roots, partially undermined trees
and fallen trees. Sewer outfall pipes and headwall and win gwall
structures are also exposed and partially undermined* On the
east bank of Weller Creek immediately opposite of the Crumely
Detention Basin outlet pipes and overflow spillway there is
extensive erosion and undercutting which is caused by high rates
Of stOrmwater flowing out of the Crumley Basin following large
storms*
Exhibit 9 shows the locations of the four reaches discussed
above. A log of a video tape of Weller C ' reek which was taken by
RJN Environmental personnel is included in Appendix C. The video
tape clearly illustrates the extent and degree of erosion along
Weller Creek in the Village of Mount Prospect,
111-30
P
roposed relief storm sewer along Busse Road is $0.60 million. A
comparison of costs for all the alternatives evaluated for the
Clearwater Flooding Area is presented in Table IV -'9.
If I I
ler (Z—re-ek 5 t udZ, A r eq
Alternative methods of improving Weller Creek channel
i MW hydraulic characteristics including_erosion protection and bank
stabilization were considered for approximately 11,500 feet of
Weller Creek between School Street and Central Road. The creek
was divided into four reaches consisting of approximately 3,000
feet of channel from School Street to Elmhurst Avenu& (Reach A),
2,700 feet of channel from Elmhurst Avenue to See-Gwun Avenue
(Reach B), 3,000 feet of channel from See-Gwun Avenue to Lincoln
Street (Reach C)r and 2,800 feet of channel from Lincoln Street
to Central Road (Reach D). Each reach was evaluated for
hydraulic conveyance characteristics and degree of erosion.
Based on the evaluation, the 3,000 feet reach between School
Street and Elmhurst Avenue exhibits the most erosion prone
hydraulic characteristics and most severe erosion. The 3,000
feet reach between See-Gwun Avenue and Lincoln Street (Mount
Prospect Country Club Golf Course) exhibits the best hydraulic:
characteristics and least erosion of creek banks*
Alternatives evaluated to improve channel conveyance and
reduce erosion included realigning the creek channel and raising
bridges to improve the hydraulic characteristics of the channel,
lining of the channel with interlocking concrete blocks or gabion
mattresses, and placement of rip rap for erosion protection and
energy dissipation. Both interlocking concrete blocks and
gabions allow vegetation to become established on the lined banks
of the Creek eliminating hydrostatic pressure. Unsuitable
material would be removed from the channel banks and bottom and
replaced with granular backfill as necessary to provide an even
bedding for the- interconnecting con6rete blocks. A filter fabric
r.
IV,:.- 3 3
geotextile is placed between the bedding material and the
interconnecting concrete blocks. Comparison shows that gabion
mattresses are less expensive than, interlocking concrete blocks,
however, concrete blocks provide for easy'access •
ss and maintenance.
For this reason interlocking concrete blocks are recommended for
erosion control. A brief summary of recommendations,
in each
area
is included in the following paragraphs.
Reach, Sc ooh treet to Imhurst Avenu
n ��
'l Recomme •
ndatsons for-rovemnts to the creek channel
between School Street and Elm rst Avenue included lining 3,000
feet of creek channel with inti locking concrete blocks. The
lined channel would have a 12 foot bottom width and 1 horizontal
to 1 vertical side slopes. The channel would be lined to a
height of approximately 10 feet above the creek bottom from where
the side slope would change to 3 horizontal tol vertical until
they met the existing grade.
The Emerson street bridge would be raised approximately 3
feet and the Main Street footbridge will be replaced by a new
bridge approximately 3.5 feet higher than the existing foot
.bridge. The raising of these two bridges above the 100 -year
flood stage would improve the hydraulic conveyance of Weller
Creek between School street and Elmhurst Avenue, A 200 foot
length of Weller Creek immediately east of the Elmhurst Avenue
Bridge would be realigned to remove an existing abrupt
g' p angular
change in creek direction improving channel hydraulics.
�
Approximately 10 feet of additional right -of --way is required on
bath sides of the creek for implementation of channel
improvements in Reach A. Preliminary cost estimates for
e
implementing channel improvements to Weller Creek between School
Street and Emerson Avenue are presented in Table Iv -10.
Locations of proposed improvements to the Weller Creek Channel
between School Street and Emerson Avenue are shown on Exhibit zbit 24.
IV -34
Estimated costs presented in Table IV -1 are capital costs.
Capital costs include a 17 percent factor for engineering
and administrative costs and a ten percent factor for
contingency.
2/ Channel lining is not recommended in Reach C. The costs in
Reach C include gabion, protection of one foot bridge and one
outfall structure.
0
IV -35
.----.---Table -,IV-10-----
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
WELLER CREEK DRAINAGE AREA
WELLER CREEK STUDY AREA
SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVE COST ESTIXATESI/
Alternative A
Concrete Interlocking
Alternative B
Erosion Control System
Gabion Mattress
REACH
111 on
. ......... 411'$,,,.M;L1 lion)
School Street to
Elmhurst Avenue
2.67
1.53
Elmhurst Avenue to
See-Gwun Avenue
1.65
0.87
See --Gwen Avenue to
Lincoln Street
'1019/
019/
Lincoln Street to
Central Road
1.04
Total
6008
p.
3,45
Estimated costs presented in Table IV -1 are capital costs.
Capital costs include a 17 percent factor for engineering
and administrative costs and a ten percent factor for
contingency.
2/ Channel lining is not recommended in Reach C. The costs in
Reach C include gabion, protection of one foot bridge and one
outfall structure.
0
IV -35
Reach, 13 - F:Imhurlst Aventg- to Seei-(;wun..A'ven'Ue,
Recommendations for improvements to Weller Creek from
Elmhurst Avenue to See-Gwun Avenue include lining 217 00 feet of
creek channel with interlocking concrete blocks and construction
of one access ramp. The lined channel would have a 12 foot
bottom width and 1.S horizontal to 1.0 vertical side slopes. The
channel banks_wouldbe lined to a height of approximately 8 feet
above the channel bottom at which point the side slopes would tie
into the existing grade of the public parkway adjacent to the
creek. No additional right-of-way is required to construct
improvements to the creek channel between Elmhurst Avenue and
See -Gwen Avenue. Preliminary cost estimates for implementing
channel improvements to Weller Creek between Elmhurst Avenue and
See-Gwun Avenue are presented in Table IV -10- Locations of
proposed improvements to Weller Creek between Elmhurst Avenue and
See -Gwen Avenue are shown on Exhibit 24,
ee=2�mun A e, o
V rluet -Lincoln st ot
Recommendations for improvements to the creek channel
between See-Gwun Avenue and Lincoln Street include gabion
stabilition and riprap erosion control at the outfall of the
Mount Prospect Country Club Golf Course drainage ditch to Weller
Creek and gabion stabilitionlat first footbridge west of See-Gwun
Avenue. The estimated capital cost to improvements between See-
Gwun Avenue and Elmhurst Avenue is $0.01 million. Locations of
proposed improvements to Weller Creek between See-Gwun Avenue and
Lincoln Street are shown on Exhibit 24,
Recommendations for improvements to -the creek chAnnel
between Lincoln Street and Central Road include lining
approximately 2,804 feet of creek channel, construction of an
IV -36
access ramp and rip rap erosion control at the spillway of the
Crumley Detention Basin. The lfined *channel. would have a-12 foot'
bottom width and 1.5 horizontal to 1.0 vertical, side slopes. The
channel will be lined to a height of approximately 6 feet above -
the channel bottom at which point the side slopes would change to
a 3 horizontal to 1 vertical until they met the existing grade
adjacent to the creek. No additional right-of-way is required to
construct improvements to the creek channel between Lincoln
Street and Central Road. Preliminary cost estimates for
implementing channel improvements to Weller Creek between Lincoln
Street and Central Avenue are presented in Table IV -10.
Locations of proposed improvements to Weller Creek between
Lincoln Street and Central Avenue are shown on Exhibit 240
1ro 0, - 11
In addition to providing erosion control in Weller Creek,
erosion control of the inlet spillways in the Crumley Detention
Basin and the Melas Park Detention Basin is reco=nended. The
estimated capital to provide erosion control at the inlet
spillways of thes basins through placement of interlocking
pl.
concrete blocks is $0.05 million.
The primary purpose of a drainage system is to provide
control of stormwater and wastewater to eliminate or minimize
property damage and disruption of normal daily activities that
can occur as a result of street flooding, ponding, sewer
surcharge, overland flooding, and basement back-ups*
The magnitude of runoff generated by a storm event of a
given duration increases as the storm frequency expressed in
years increases*' Selection of a storm event to improve flood
protection involve's consideration of how much property damage is
IV -37
acceptable how often disruption of normal activities is
tolerable, and whether control of that storm i , s economically
justifiable. It also depends on intangible factors such as
aesthetic priorities and public willingness to pay for a desired
level of protection. The selection of storm protection level,
therefore, depends on a comparison of benefits desired for
protection against a particular storm to the cost to provide
protection for that storm. It is not possible, within the
context of this study, to assign a monetary benefit to reduction
in stormwater flooding.
Based on review of the difference in cost to increase the
level of protection in an area from one level'to the next, the
recommended level of protection in the See -Gwen and Golf Flooding
Area, the See-Gwun and Milburn Flooding Area, the Catalpa and
Birch Flooding Area, the Hatlen Heights Flooding Area and the
Hatlen Heights Sanitary Area is a 25 -year level of protection.
The recommended level of protection in the See-Gwun and Milburn
Sanitary Area is a 10 -year level of protection. The Clearwater
Flooding Area and the Weller Creek Study Area were not evaluated
on an incremental cost basis because proposed improvements in
these areas are not sensitive to storm events less than or equal
to a 100 -year recurrence interval. Preliminary estimated costs
to provide different levels of protection for recommended
alternatives in each area evaluated in the Weller Creek Drainage
A.rea Study are presented in Table IV -110
Table IV -11
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
YELLER. CREEK DRAINAGE AREA
COSTS FOR DIFFERENT LEVELS OF PROTECTION
($ Millions)
Level of Protection
5Year 1
- 0 -Year 25 -Year 50 -Year
Flooding or
Sanity Area �vLeve Lee
I, Level
See-Gvun and Golf
Flooding Area -
Separate Storm Suer (Alt.A) 0.57 0.62 0.69 1.31
See-Gvun and Milburn
Flooding Area
Above Ground Detention (Alt.A) 1.25 1.35 1.65 1.86
See-Gvun and Milburn
Sanitary Area - 1
System Improvements (Alt.A) 0.35 0.38 0.61
Catalpa and Birch
Flooding Area -
Relief Stora Sever 0.19 0.21 0.24 0.41
Hatlen Heights
Flooding Area -
Relief Stormy Sewer 0.73 0.86 0.88 0.93
Hatlen Heights
Sanitary Area -
Sanitary Relief Sever (Alt.A) 0.74 0.76 0.85
Clearwater Flooding Area
Busse Road Relief Sever (A1t.C) 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60
Yeller Creek Study AreaV 6.08 6.08 6.08 6.08
Crumley and Melas Park-/
Erosion Control O 05 0.05 0.. 5..
Total Capital Cost $
10.54 $ 10.91 $ 11.65 $ 12.70-Y
A 50 -year level of protection vas not evaluated in the See-Gvun and Milburn, and
Hatlen Heights Sanitary Area. Costs to implement a 25 -year level of protection in
these areas were included in the 50 -year total capital casts.
J The recommended alternative in the Clearwater Flooding Area, provides protection
against overflowing of the Clearwater Detention Basin for a storm event equal to the
August 13-14, 1987 storm.
V Reco=ended alternatives in the Veller Creek Study Area and to the Crumley and Melas
Park Detention Basins are not sensitive to less than 100 -year levels of protection*
IV -39
Detention Basin for a storm event equal to the August 13-14, 1987
storm. Components of the recommended plan are presented below:
11 Construction of approximately 1,,320 feet of 66 inch
diameter relief storm sewer, including manholes, east
Ur
along Lonnquist Boulevard from the existing 66 inch
diameter storm sewer to Busse Road, east beneath Busse
Road,
and north along Busse Road from Lonnquist Boulevard
to Estates Drive. The estimated capital cost to
construct approximately 1,320 feet of 66 inch diameter
relief storm sewer, including approximately 60 feet of
auguring beneath Busse Road is $ 0.51 million.
2. Construction of a new stormwater junction chamber on the
east side of Busse Road at an estimated capital cost of
$ 0.04 million.
3* Construction of approximately 65 feet of 84 inch diameter
storm sewer from the recommended junction chamber to the
drainage ditch at the Mount Prospect Country Club Golf
Course, including erosion control at the outfall to the
drainage ditch, at an estimated capital cost of $ 0.05
million.
Locations of recommended improvements In the Clearwater
Flooding Area are shown on Exhibit
23,
� .'er Crgek Study Area
The recommended plan to improve conveyance characteristics and
provide erosion control in each of the four reaches of Weller Creek
evaluated in this study are presented below:
LI
-V.6
School Street to Elmhurst Avenue:
Recommendations for improvements to creek channel between
School Street and Elmhurst Avenue include lining 3,000 feet of
creek channel with interlocking concrete blocks, realignment of
approximately 200 feet of channel east of the Elmhurst Avenue
bridge, raising the Emerson Street bridge deck approximately three
feet, replacement of the Emerson Street footbridge, and acquisition
of approximately 60,000 square feet of private property. The
estimated capital cost to implement the recommended improvements
between School Street and Elmhurst Avenue is $2.67 million,
Elmhurst Avenue to See-Gwun Avenue:
Recommendations for improvements to the creek channel from
Elmhurst Avenue to See-Gwun Avenue include lining 2,700 feet of
creek channel- with interlocking concrete blocks and construction of
an access ramp. The estimated capital cost to construct
recommended improvements from Elmhurst Avenue to See-Gwun Avenue is
$1.65 million,
See -Gwen Avenue to Lincoln Street:
.0
Recommendations for improvements to the creek channel between
See -Gwen Avenue and Lincoln Street include gabion stabilization and
rip rap erosion control at the outfall of the mount Prospect
Country Club Golf Course drainage ditch and gabion stabilization at
the first footbridge west of See-Gwun Avenue. The estimated
capital cost to construct improvements between See-Gwun Avenue and
Elmhurst Avenue is $0.01 million,
Lincoln Street to Central Road:
Recommendations for improvements to the creek channel between
Lincoln Street and Central Road include lining approximately 2,800
v-7
..........
feet of creek channel, and construction of an access ramp and rip
rap erosion control at the spillway of the Crumley Detention Basin.
The estimated capital cost to construct recommended improvements
between Lincoln Street and Central Road is $1.75 million-,
Locations of proposed improvements to Weller Creek between
School Street and Central Road are shown on Exhibit 24, The total
estimated capital cost to implement recommended improvements
between 8-choo"l Street and Central Road is $6.08 million.
r*o,mI,ey ,Let ention Basin and melas Park Detent'"on Basin
I I I
In addition to providing erosion control in the Weller Creek
channel, erosion control of the inlet spillways in the Crumley
Detention Basin and the Melas Park Detention Basin is recommended.
The estimated capital cost to provide erosion control through
placement of interlocking concrete blocks is $0.05 million.
Central- and . ...... . Wrg a Z,1,00,d,.J.ng Area
For purposes of completeness in addressing improvements to the
Weller Creek Watershed, recommendations resulting from the Central
Road and Wa-Pella Avenue November, 1989 Stormwater Study have been
incorporated into this report.
The recommended plan in the Central and Wa-Pella Flooding Area
consists of constructing approximately 4,400 feet of separate
relief storm sewer from Central to Weller Creek along Wa-Pella
Avenue and Hi-Lusi Avenue. The estimated capital cost to implement
the recommended plan in the Central and Wa-Pella Flooding Area is
$1.11 million. P1
A summary of the capital costs to implement the recommended
plan to reduce the magnitude and frequency of flooding in each of
the areas included in the Weller Creek Drainage Area Stormwater
Management Study is given in Table V-1.
V.8
IMplementation of the. Recommended Plan
Implementation of the recommended plan in the Weller Creek
Drainage Area will require submission of this report to the
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, the Illinois Department
of Transportation, and the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District
of Greater Chicago. If the Village of Mount Prospect elects to
proceed with implementation of the recommended plan, it is
anticipated that development of plans and specifications could
begin in Fall, 1990. Plans and specifications could be completed
by Spring, 1991 and construction started in Summer, 1991. It is
anticipated that the project could be substantially complete by
Fall, 1992. A preliminary phasing schedule, assuming the Village
decides to proceed with plans and specifications in Fall, 1990, is
given in Table V-2.
I
Environm,en_tal Effects of the deco mmended P an
Moderate disruptions will be caused by the installations of
relief sewers and construction of the lift station improvements.
Construction of the relief sewers would -create short-term traffic
disruption, dust, erosion, and noise. The effects of this
disruption would be minimized by careful planning.
The frequency of basement back-ups will be reduced. Health
hazards from wastewater exposure would be minimized following
implementation of the recommended plan. Improvement in water
quality and a decrease in health risks will outweigh any commitment
of resources or any short -'term disruptionwithinthe Weller Creek
Drainage Area,
V.9
Table V-1
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
WELLER CREEK DRAINAGE AREA
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED PLAN PROJECTED COSTS
Total Recommended Plan Projected Cost: $12-53
Projected plan costs are capital costs. Capital costs include
a 17 percent factor engineer and administrative costs and a 10
percent factor for contingency.
V-10
� -7
Recommended Plan
study
Projected Cost
Area
See-Gwun and Golf Flooding Area
$ 0.69
See-Gwun and Milburn Flooding Area
1.65
see -Gwen and Milburn Sanitary Area
0.38
Catalpa and Birch Flooding Area
0.24
Hatlen Heights Flooding Area
0.88
Hatlen Heights Sanitary Area
0.85
Clearwater Flooding Area
0.60
Weller Creek Study Area
6.08
Crumley and Melas Park Erosion Control
0105
Central and Wa-Pella Flooding Area
1.11
Total Recommended Plan Projected Cost: $12-53
Projected plan costs are capital costs. Capital costs include
a 17 percent factor engineer and administrative costs and a 10
percent factor for contingency.
V-10
� -7
WELLER CREEK DRAINAGE AREA
SEE-GWUN AND GOLF FLOODING AREA
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
Outfall of 54 Inch by 88 Inch Relief Storm Sewer along Na-Wa-Ta
Avenue into Weller Creek - See-Gwun and Golf Flooding Area
Outfall of 54 Inch by 88 Inch Relief Storm Sewer along Na-Wa-Ta
Avenue into Weller Creek - See-Gwun and Golf Flooding Area
RJN Environmental Associates, Inc.
Consulting Engineers
Weller Creek - Bank Erosion at Village Access Road East of
Elmhurst Avenue
TTr r rr BankErosion West of Main Street *ordgi
RJN Environmental Associates, Inc.
,,� r
Consulting Engineers
Weller Creek - Mount Prospect Country Club Golf Course
Weller Creek - Erosion at Main Street Footbridge
RJN Environmental Associates, Inca
Consulting Engineers
133333,
WELLER CREEK DRAINAGE AREA
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT ••
Weller Creek - Concrete Mono Slab Improvements From Williams
Street to School Street
Weller Creek - Gabion Improvements From Mount Prospect Road to
Williams Street
03RJN Environmental Associates, Inc.
�,
a-MIZZConsulting Engineers