Loading...
ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE 2020/06/10 PacketENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE MEETING Wednesday, June 10, 2020 – 6:30 P.M. REMOTE ACCESS MEETING AGENDA Please be advised that all of the Environmental Sustainability Committee members will be remotely attending this Committee meeting by electronic means, in compliance with Governor’s Executive Order 2020-39, issued on May 29, 2020, that extended the suspension of certain Open Meetings Act provisions relating to in-person attendance by members of a public body. Specifically, the Governor’s Order: (1) suspends the requirement in Section 2.01 thfat “members of a public body must be physically present;” and (2) suspends the limitations in Section 7 on when remote participation is allowed. This Executive Order is effective the duration of the current Gubernatorial Disaster Proclamation. The City will be providing members of the public with various opportunities to watch or attend this meeting, as well as provide public comment at the meeting. For example, members of the public can participate remotely in the meeting by following the public audience link https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86427995054 which will provide both video and audio means to attend the meeting. The City of Lake Forest will update the website after the meeting with information about the meeting. I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL _____ Ald. Melanie Rummel, Chairman _____ Ald. Jed Morris _____ Ald. Jim Preschlack II. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS III. ACTION ITEMS (:05-:10 per item) a. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE CHARTER IV. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS (:10-:15 per item) a. UPDATE ON CITY’S SUSTAINABILITY PLAN – Presented by Chuck Myers & Jim Lockefeer b. PRESENTATION ON RECYCLING PROGRAM, COSTS AND MARKETING CAMPAIGN – Presented by Dan Martin & Marcus Norman, Norman Design c. UPDATE ON COMMUNITY SOLAR OPPORTUNITIES – Presented by Mike Strong d. COMMITTEE WORK PLANNING with MIST Environmental – Presented by Mike Stopka, MIST Environmental V. REVIEW OF FUTURE AGENDA TOPICS (:05-:10) a. COAL TAR SEALANT b. PLASTIC BAG ORDINANCE c. GAS POWERED LEAF BLOWERS d. STORMWATER/ENGINEERING STANDARDS & POLICIES VI. PUBLIC COMMENT (:05) VII. NEXT MEETING DATE(S) – JULY AND AUGUST VIII. ADJOURNMENT 1 City Council Environmental Sustainability Committee Charter Proposal DRAFT – 3/5/2020 BACKGROUND & HISTORICAL CONTEXT Lake Forest has long been in the forefront of preserving the environment through protecting, in perpetuity, hundreds of acres of open space and, being at the cutting edge of encouraging, facilitating and approving conservation easements and conservation developments. In August, 2016, the City Council approved the City’s first Sustainability Plan and incorporated that document into the Environmental Chapter of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Importantly, this plan was developed through the Lake Forest Collaborative for Environmental Leadership, a group including representatives from educational institutions, property owners, local not-for- profit groups and City representatives, and sets forth an overall vision, goals, action items, and measurements to help make Lake Forest more eco-conscious for the benefit of future generations. On January 21, 2020, Mayor George Pandaleon created the City Council Committee on Environmental Sustainability (the ‘Committee”) as a new standing City Council Committee to serve as an advisory body to the City Council and charged with reviewing background materials, discussing recommendations relating to environmental sustainability and presenting them to the City Council for consideration. WHY WE EXIST The Environmental Sustainability Committee exists to encourage education, stewardship, and policy leadership on projects and initiatives that seek to maintain balance between economic, social, and ecological needs of Lake Forest residents and businesses for today and future generations. The aim of our Committee is to institutionalize a culture of sustainability and commit to enhancing the quality of life for Lake Foresters characterized by mindful and sustainable living, high personal standards, and concern for the welfare of others. It is important for The City of Lake Forest to follow and innovate sustainable practices in order to reduce waste, carbon emissions, and its overall environmental footprint in order to preserve the natural and historic environment while setting an example for others. OUR PURPOSE & FUNCTIONS 1.Advise the City Council in regard to sustainability goals, progress, opportunities, and initiatives; 2.Monitor the progress of the City’s environmental and sustainability action plans; 3.Provide routine reporting and communication about key sustainability indicators and initiatives to the Lake Forest community; 4.Establish and monitor annual performance measures by which to drive continuous improvement of sustainability across the community; 2 5.Review and recommend policies and procedures that affect the sustainability efforts, integration, and achievements of the City’s various operations; 6.Promote, support, and provide a means for promoting the discussion and education of issues related to the environment and sustainability; 7.Other matters as may be determined appropriate by the City Council. OUR ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES 1.The Environmental Sustainability Committee shall meet no less than four (4) times annually, or as determined appropriate by the Committee; 2.Administrative and meeting procedures shall be in accordance with this Charter; 3.The City Council delegates the power to direct City staff and/or contractual support to prepare reports to this Committee provided that: a.The topic of the report is consistent with the priorities and purposes set forth above; and b.The topic of the report is consistent with the City Council’s approved strategic priorities, budgets and policies. 4.All meetings of the Environment and Sustainability Committee will be subject to the Illinois Open Meetings Act POLICY DOCUMENTS THAT WILL GUIDE OUR WORK The following documents shall guide the Committee’s identification of key issues and priorities outlined with its annual work plan: •The City of Lake Forest Comprehensive Plan (including Relevant Appendices) o The City of Lake Forest Sustainability Plan •The City of Lake Forest Strategic Plan •Other Reports or Recommendations provided by the City Council and/or Boards/Commissions and Community Groups (e.g. LFCEL, Civic Beautification, Public Works) OUR GENERAL POLICY AREAS OF FOCUS Building on the categories identified by the City’s Sustainability Plan, and in an effort to maximize the City’s sustainability efforts and impact within the region, we will focus on the following general policy areas: •Municipal Operations and Leadership o Operating a safe, clean and efficient fleet o Advancing energy efficiency programs and reduce energy consumption for City buildings and facilities and the community o Collecting and managing data to advance sustainability (e.g. Performance Management/Benchmarking) o Investigating “Smart” technologies to manage City resources o Engaging local and regional institutions to promote and/or align with the City’s sustainability initiatives (e.g. regionalism, consortiums, etc.) 3 o Advocating for regional, state, federal policies and investments or policies that promote the City’s sustainability goals • Sustainable Resource Management (e.g. energy, land, waste/recycling, water, etc.) o Advancing renewable energy and enact policies that support clean energy o Encouraging strategic development that upholds sustainability principles o Conserving, restoring and enhancing natural features and ecosystems o Sustaining landscapes that provide ecosystem and storm water management services o Enacting policies that cause and/or promote sustainable material management (e.g. waste reduction goals, adopt reuse policies, plastic bag ban, etc.) o Optimizing the use of natural and built systems to manage stormwater o Enacting policies to protect water resources • Transportation and Air Quality o Exploring Carbon Footprint/greenhouse gas emission reduction strategies o Evaluating policies that seek to maintain clean and healthful air (e.g. regulate burning, reduce VOC emissions for operations, anti-idling policies, discourage high-emitting small engines, etc.) o Promoting public and sustainable transportation services (e.g. shared-use mobility) choices o Evaluating policies that promote active transportation (e.g. street sanctions to require bicycle facilities and sidewalks) o Promoting the implementation of City Bike Plan o Supporting efficient transportation that uses resources wisely (e.g. regional transportation innovation, coordinated multi-modal infrastructure investment, etc.) • Sustainable Communities and Economic Development o Investigating Engineering Standards and/or Building Code (Energy Code) enhancements to promote sustainability o Promoting beauty and livability through community design, stewardship and community partnerships o Exploring local and regional collaborations to offer active and healthy lifestyle programs for residents o Considering economic incentives (e.g. permit fee reductions, license credits, etc.) for implementing eco-friendly practices • Intergovernmental/Inter-Agency Collaborations that we will focus on o Lake County (Lake County Environmental Committee) o Solid Waste Agency of Lake County (SWALCO) o Metropolitan Mayors Caucus (Greenest Regions Compact) o Community Organizations (See Community Liaison List) o Adjacent Communities 4 HOW WE WILL MEASURE OUR PERFORMANCE The Committee will seek to utilize a framework to assist with evaluating, prioritizing, and implementing its community-wide sustainability, encompassing economic, environmental, and social performance indicators. There exist several frameworks that may inform this process, such as, the STAR Community Rating System, ISO/TC 268: Sustainable Cities and Communities, and Green City Index Program. COMMITTEE COMPOSITION City Council: •Melanie Rummel, Chairman and Alderman, Ward #2 •Jed Morris, Alderman, Ward #1 •Jim Preschlack, Alderman, Ward #3 Key City Staff: •Mike Strong, Office of the City Manager (Lead City Liaison) •Michael Thomas, Public Works •Catherine Czerniak, Community Development •Sally Swarthout, Parks, Recreation & Forestry •Dan Martin, Public Works •Bob Ells, Public Works •Chuck Myers, Parks & Forestry •Jim Lockefeer, Public Works Potential Community Liaisons: •Green Minds •Civic Beautification Committee Members (Garden Clubs) •Lake Forest Open Lands •Lake Forest College •Other Lake Forest Educational Institutions •League of Women Voter’s Climate Change Group •Chamber of Commerce •Lake Forest Collaborative for Environmental Leadership POTENTIAL MEETING CALENDAR Timeframe Meeting Goals/Activities Early-April 2020 1.Review Committee Charter/Purpose 2.Review of City’s Sustainability Plan and/or Strategic Plan (Review of Past/Current Sustainability Initiatives Planned) 3.Introduction to Goal Setting/Strategic Sustainability Planning 5 4.Identification of Specific Projects/Interest Areas by Committee Members Mid-May 2020 1.Strategic Sustainability Planning (Annual Work Plan Development) a.Identification of Goals b.Identification of Potential Policies/Initiatives c.Identification of Performance Measurements/Indicators June 2020 1.Report on Priority Areas (SWOT Analysis) 2.Development of Work Plan and Priorities (Focus on Opportunities) 3.Recommendations for Projects/Initiatives (“Top 5”) a.Direct Staff/Consultant to Research “Top 5” July/August 2020 1. LAKE FOREST SUSTAINABILITY PLAN JULY 2016 Created by the City of Lake Forest with support from the Lake Forest Collaborative for Environmental Leadership 2 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION _____________________________________________________________ 4 CREATING LAKE FOREST’S SUSTAINABILITY PLAN __________________________________ 6 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT & WATER USAGE __________________________________ 8 ECOSYSTEM VITALITY & RAVINE CONSERVATION _________________________________ 11 WASTE MANAGEMENT ______________________________________________________ 13 ENERGY EFFICIENCY & RENEWABLE ENERGY _____________________________________ 15 TRANSPORTATION & AIR QUALITY _____________________________________________ 17 3 American Legion, McKinlock Post #264 City of Lake Forest Deerpath Middle School Dickinson Hall Elawa Farm Foundation Gorton Community Center GreenMinds of Lake Forest and Lake Bluff Lake County Sustainability Office Lake Forest Academy Lake Forest City Council Lake Forest Civic Beautification Committee Lake Forest College Lake Forest Country Day School Lake Forest Library Lake Forest Open Lands Association League of Women Voters LF/LB School District 67 School District 115, Lake Forest High School Village of Lake Bluff Woodlands Academy SPECIAL THANKS TO THE RESIDENTS OF LAKE FOREST AND THE FOLLOWING ORGANIZATIONS FOR THEIR INPUT… 4 INTRODUCTION The 2013-2018 Lake Forest Strategic Plan includes a goal to “develop a Lake Forest Sustainability Plan to identify priorities and guide future initiatives.” The Strategic Plan further recommends that the community take a “leadership role in modeling best practices in environmental sustainability” in collaboration with educational institutions, property owners, neighboring communities, garden clubs, and land management associations 1. These recommendations reflect the intent of the City’s original 1861 motto “Love of Nature and Science”, the desire to protect Lake Forest’s unique ecosystems, and desire to nurture pride in the community’s conservation ethic for generations to come. In 2015, the City requested the assistance of the Lake Forest Collaborative for Environmental Leadership (“LFCEL”) to develop the Sustainability Plan. With representatives from Lake Forest School Districts 67 and 115, Lake Forest Open Lands Association, Lake Forest College, and the City of Lake Forest, the LFCEL is a volunteer organization formed to educate and engage the community in environmental action and to promote sustainable practices within the City. The mission of the LFCEL is to combine the collective resources of its member institutions to recognize and address existing issues while identifying new programs and approaches that encourage environmental awareness and action. LFCEL’s goals include protecting Lake Forest’s unique natural heritage; enhancing residents’ quality of life; making meaningful contributions to creating a healthier community and local ecosystems; and expanding the conservation ethic and residential pride. The purpose of the Sustainability Plan (“Plan”) is to identify the issues and opportunities most relevant to Lake Forest and its natural resources, particularly land, water and air. Building on the City’s current successes and strengths, the Plan identifies specific actions City staff, residents, and businesses should consider when addressing the issues and opportunities. 1 http://www.cityoflakeforest.com/assets/1/7/SPS_Report_2012_final.pdf CURRENT LAKE FOREST SUCCESSES •Named a Tree City USA for 36 years•Finalist for “Top Transit Suburb” with high walkability•LEED Gold certification for new Municipal Services Building•Purchased 100% renewable electricity for 2 years through municipal aggregation saving residents >$4 million•Replaced streetlights with LEDs•43% recycling rate in 2015 5 As stated in the Strategic Plan, “we must strive to sustain our natural resources and environment for future generations by ensuring that policies, activities, and operations are environmentally-responsible, efficient, and fiscally-minded.” Lake Forest’s residents, businesses, and City staff can make significant contributions by following the recommendations of the Plan and by actively participating in its implementation. Lake Forest has a natural beauty and unique local ecosystems that first attracted our forefathers and continue to attract people to the community today. While our natural landscapes are certainly beautiful and provide wonderfully unique recreational opportunities for residents, many also support a valuable and rare biodiversity that receives the highest level of recognition in our State. It is important to preserve this natural beauty for current residents and for future generations, ensuring the community remains a highly desirable place to live, work, and raise families. 6 CREATING LAKE FOREST’S SUSTAINABILITY PLAN Lake Forest joins many other organizations in creating a Sustainability Plan, as the concept of sustainability has become a strategic priority for businesses and governments around the world in the last 5-10 years. The City, together with the Lake Forest Collaborative for Environmental Leadership (“LFCEL”), began its plan development by reviewing Sustainability Plans from other Illinois communities and government organizations including the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning, Lake County, City of Chicago, Highland Park, Northbrook, Evanston, Oak Park/River Forest, and Normal. From this research, the LFCEL identified five categories and associated potential actions that are most relevant to Lake Forest, specifically: •Stormwater Management and Water Use •Ecosystem Vitality and Ravine Conservation •Waste Management •Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency •Transportation and Air Quality Requesting Community input was a critical step in developing the plan. The City and LFCEL conducted an on-line survey in the summer of 2015, which included a series of questions and a request for action steps related to the five categories. Over 400 residents responded to the survey, and key results include: •80% of respondents agree or strongly agree that Lake Forest should create a Sustainability Plan. •82% of respondents agree or strongly agree with the statement “I have an opportunity to reduce energy usage in my home”. •More than 60% of respondents are concerned about the health of our natural areas, air and water quality, and Lake Forest’s waste stream. •3 out of 5 respondents want to be more engaged in the City’s sustainability efforts. •Critical issues identified by respondents include pesticide use reduction, replanting trees in our community, preserving ravines, educating residents on the impact of non-biodegradable materials and toxins on our stormwater, polystyrene/Styrofoam elimination, bike friendly streets, and making homes more energy efficient. 7 To continue gathering resident input, the LFCEL hosted a Community Engagement Forum in October 2015, student forums at Lake Forest High School and Lake Forest College in February 2016, and a second Community Engagement Forum in April 2016. At each of these forums, participants shared ideas and voted on what they considered to be the highest priority and secondary priority actions in each of the five categories. From an initial list of 66 potential actions, the participants identified 14 high priority and 12 secondary priority actions reflecting the consensus view from the various community forums. 8 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT & WATER USAGE Lake Michigan and the Great Lakes are the world’s largest source of fresh water with 20% of the earth's available supply. In addition to providing abundant recreational opportunities for residents, Lake Michigan is the source of Lake Forest’s potable or drinking water. The City cleans and purifies its potable water at the Lake Forest water treatment plant, originally constructed by private residents in 1890 as the Lake Forest Water Company, and later purchased by the City in 1921. In 2004, the City converted from a sand filtration system to an ultrafiltration or membrane system, the first of its kind in Illinois. Two water intake pipes (one ¾ mile and the second ½ mile into the lake) supply the treatment plant, which can process 12-14 million gallons of water per day. In recent years, the water plant has nearly exceeded its capacity during the hot summer months when irrigation and lawn watering are at its peak. The City subsequently adopted watering restrictions from May 15 through September 15 to defer the need for costly upgrades to the plant and water system. Lake Forest’s wastewater – that is water flushed down the toilets, sinks and drains of City homes and businesses - flows through the City’s sanitary sewer system to a large collector pipe under Highway 41 and to the North Shore Sanitary District plant on Clavey Road in Highland Park. At this plant, a series of processes separate the solid and liquid waste while cleaning and sanitizing the water to meet all applicable state and federal water standards. Ultimately, the treated wastewater empties into the Skokie River and lagoons just south of the Chicago Botanic Gardens, flowing to the Chicago River, connecting to the Illinois River, to the Mississippi River, and eventually to the Gulf of Mexico. Lake Forest’s stormwater system is completely separate from its wastewater sewer system, and two unique features distinguish stormwater flow in Lake Forest. First, the sub-continental divide between the Great Lakes and Mississippi River watersheds bisects Lake Forest with Green Bay Road as the natural divider. This means that rainfall landing on the east side of Green Bay Road will, with assistance from the City’s storm sewer system, naturally make its way to Lake Michigan. Rainfall on the west side of Green Bay Road will naturally flow through the storm sewer system to the Skokie River or the Middlefork of the North Branch of the Chicago River. LAKE FOREST’S WATER PLANT 9 The thirteen miles of ravines in eastern Lake Forest, which serve as natural channels into Lake Michigan, are the second distinguishing feature of the City’s stormwater flow. Most of the City’s stormwater runoff east of Green Bay Road flows through the stormwater sewer system into the ravines before emptying into Lake Michigan. Many of Lake Forest’s buildings, streets, driveways, and parking lots are impermeable and stormwater washes over these surfaces collecting sediment, oil, chemical pollutants, and other dirt and debris. East of Green Bay Road, this polluted runoff flows directly through the ravines and directly into Lake Michigan, the source of Lake Forest’s drinking water. Increasing volumes of rain from severe storms, exacerbated by residents connecting their downspouts and draining their swimming pools directly into the storm sewer system, increase ravine and land erosion, degrade wildlife habitat, and degrade water quality. Green infrastructure—such as trees, native plants, bioswales, rain gardens, rain barrels, permeable surfaces and green roofs— absorbs rainwater, reduces stormwater runoff, protects ravine stability and habitat health, and improves Lake Michigan water quality. The following goals and actions reflect Lake Forest’s priorities for conserving and protecting the unique water resources of our community. While Lake Michigan and the Great Lakes may currently offer an abundant supply of fresh water, we recognize that they are not infinite resources and, as a lakeshore community, must treat them responsibly. The goals and actions also reflect the importance of minimizing the downstream effects of what enters Lake Forest’s wastewater and stormwater systems. 10 Goals •Reduce the volume of stormwater entering the ravines, Skokie River, and Middlefork of the Chicago River North Branch using stormwater infrastructure best management practices •Improve the quality of water entering Lake Michigan through the ravines •Increase water conservation •Educate residents on the importance of Lake Forest-specific water issues Measurements of Success •Decreased water usage per household and business per year •Increased number of households with downspout disconnection and/or rain barrels •Increased square footage/number of bioswales and rain gardens •Increased square footage of permeable surfaces •Increased public awareness of water issues 11 ECOSYSTEM VITALITY & RAVINE CONSERVATION Lake Forest has a natural beauty with abundant trees, wetlands, prairies, savannas, ravines, gardens, and parks. The City is home to 3.5 miles of lakefront, over 11 miles of bike trails, 446 acres of public parks, over 800 acres of protected open space, and 13 miles of nature preserve trails. Lake Forest’s thirteen miles of ravines, the majority of which are on private property, are a unique and beautiful natural landform that helps to define our City’s character. The ravines function as natural drainage systems for stormwater runoff flowing towards Lake Michigan, habitat for many rare plants and animals, and as physical support for many homes. 12 Unfortunately, accelerated erosion is occurring along ravine slopes as a result of excessive stormwater runoff, residential and commercial development, and invasive species compromising the resilience of ravines to maintain their structure. The erosion from stormwater and private drainage results in slumping of ravine slopes, poor water quality, and destroyed natural habitat. Residents can help conserve and protect our ravines by reducing the volume of water entering the City’s stormwater sewer system, limiting the watering of lawns, using organic fertilizers, planting native plants, minimizing land paving and irrigation, addressing direct drainage of pools and other stormwater, and by properly disposing of yard waste. Lake Forest also faces a significant threat from the devastating Emerald Ash Borer, in addition to increasing threats to other tree species. Our community expects to lose over 100,000 ash trees in the next 5-10 years. Reforesting the community with diverse, native species for the future has become a critical priority for the City. Finally, in recognition of the environmental and health benefits of locally grown food, the City has expanded its Open Air Market and increased the development of school and community gardens. The following goals and actions reflect the City’s commitment to ecosystem vitality and preservation of our unique natural spaces. Goals •Preserve, protect, and when possible, expand open spaces and parks, particularly ravines •Use sustainable land management practices throughout the community •Increase native plantings •Preserve existing trees and increase native tree canopy coverage, particularly oak varieties. Measurements of Success •Enacted Ravine Conservation/Steep Slope Ordinance, Pesticide Protocol, Landscaper Certification Program, and Noise Pollution Ordinance •Increased linear feet of restored ravines •Increased square footage of lawns converted to native plantings •Increased number of school and community gardens 13 WASTE MANAGEMENT Waste management includes the collection, transportation and disposal of garbage and other unwanted materials. Unless diverted through recycling, reuse, composting or other means, Lake Forest’s waste ends up in a landfill where it is buried and left to decompose, a process that can take hundreds of years. Waste items made from plastic and polystyrene can take millions of years to decompose. According to a 2014 Illinois Environmental Protection Agency report, the six active landfills serving the Chicago metropolitan region have only 13 years of capacity remaining at current disposal rates 2. Therefore, the continuation and expansion of recycling, composting, and hazardous and electronic waste management programs are critical to reduce the strain on existing facilities. Lake County officials have recognized the need to significantly reduce the volume of material sent to landfills and established a goal of increasing the county-wide recycling rate to 60% by 2020. A recent local survey reported that Lake Forest residents create 702 pounds of household waste per person annually, the second highest of seven North Shore communities analyzed 3. Lake Forest currently operates a comprehensive waste management program. City staff collects refuse from residents twice weekly and disposes it at the Advanced Disposal Services Landfill in Zion. Yard waste is also collected twice weekly, transported to Lake Forest’s Compost and Recycling Center on Route 60 (“Recycling Center”), and composted on site. Recycled items are collected once per week, trucked to the Recycling Center and re-loaded into transfer trailers. The trailers are transported to the Resource Management facility in Chicago Ridge, where the material is separated and sold to other businesses worldwide. The Recycling Center is open on weekends for residents to drop off refuse, yard waste, recyclables, metal, electronics, clothing, shoes and textiles. Residents can also pick up mulch, compost and wood chips at the center for free. Lake Forest residents can drop off hazardous household waste - including household chemicals, oil-based paint, medications, and electronics - at the Solid Waste Agency of Lake County (SWALCO) permanent facility in Gurnee. SWALCO also holds a collection event at Lake Forest Municipal Services Building every September. 2 http://www.epa.illinois.gov/Assets/iepa/waste-management/landfills/landfill-capacity/landfill-capacity- report-2015.pdf, p. 11 3 http://jwcdaily.com/2015/05/07/garbage-in-garbage-out/ 14 The Lake Forest Police Department collects unwanted medications and prescription drugs at the Lake Forest Police Station in secure drop boxes seven days a week. The Public Works Department provides residents with the opportunity to purchase compost containers (also termed earth machines) from the City at a below market rate. Sanitation employees deliver the compost containers to residents. In addition to backyard composting, Lake Forest residents interested in composting food waste can have it picked up weekly or bi-weekly by Collective Resource, Inc., a food scrap pickup service based in Evanston. This company provides residents with a bucket to fill with food waste and leave at the door, reducing household garbage volume by at least 30%. Collected waste is delivered to a commercial composting site to become useful compost. Unlike backyard composting, Collective Resource has no dairy, meat, animal waste, or food-soiled paper restrictions. The following goals and actions reflect Lake Forest’s commitment to expand its existing waste management programs and to further reduce the volume of material sent to the landfill. Goals •Reduce the amount of landfilled waste •Improve recycling rates and increase awareness of recycling and responsible disposal alternatives •Increase composting •Increase material reuse Measurements of Success •Recycling rate of 60% by 2020, consistent with the Lake County goal •Increased residential and commercial composting •Decreased use of plastic bags and polystyrene 15 ENERGY EFFICIENCY & RENEWABLE ENERGY Energy is something taken for granted in our daily lives - we switch on the lights, turn on the stove, or watch television without even thinking about where the energy comes from to run them. Yet the negative air, water and climate impacts from conventional energy production are significant. Recent technology advances now provide opportunities to reduce the harmful impacts of conventional energy by decreasing our energy usage and increasing the amount of renewable energy we consume. The primary forms of energy used in Lake Forest’s homes and businesses are electricity and natural gas. Electricity powers lighting, air conditioning, appliances, electronics, computers, and phones. Lake Forest’s electricity is currently supplied and delivered by Commonwealth Edison (“ComEd”) and usage is measured in kilowatt hours (kWh). Natural gas is the primary fuel for furnaces or space heating in Lake Forest and is also commonly used for hot water heaters, clothes dryers, and cooking in the residential sector. Our natural gas is supplied and delivered by North Shore Gas, and usage is measured in therms. A 2010 study by CNT Energy found that Lake Forest households use significantly more energy than the typical Lake County home, and our residents have some of the highest energy bills in the region. The average electricity usage per household in Lake Forest is 87% higher than a typical home in Lake County, and the average natural gas usage per household in Lake Forest is 120% higher than the County average. Factors that affect electricity usage include square footage; efficiency of air conditioning, lighting, appliances and electronics; and occupant behavior. Factors that affect natural gas usage include building size and age, building envelope efficiency, efficiency of the furnace and water heater, and occupant behavior. Average Annual Energy Consumption Lake Forest Lake County Average electricity usage per household (kWh) 21,571 11,524 Average natural gas usage per household (therms) 2,708 1,229 Source: CNT Energy 2010 Municipal Energy Profile Project Lake Forest residents are aware of an energy and cost savings potential, as 82% of the 2015 Sustainability Survey respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the statement, “I have an opportunity to reduce my household’s energy consumption.” ComEd began installing advanced digital “smart meters” in Lake Forest in 2016, which will create additional opportunities to obtain real-time energy usage information and more easily reduce household electricity consumption and peak demand. 16 ComEd’s 2015 Environmental Disclosure Statement reveals that the fuel sources for electricity supplied to its customers in 2015 were 37% coal, 36% nuclear, 23% natural gas, and 3% wind and hydroelectric 4. Declining costs for solar panels and installation, together with creative financing options from developers, make solar photovoltaic (PV) an increasingly viable alternative for homes, businesses and institutions in Illinois who wish to reduce their consumption of electricity from conventional sources and increase their renewable supply. The following goals and actions reflect Lake Forest’s commitment to expanded energy efficiency and renewable energy. Goals •Reduce energy consumption in homes and businesses •Expand the use of renewable energy throughout the community Measurements of Success •Increased number of homes and businesses with renewable energy installations •Increased participation in ComEd’s energy efficiency and demand response programs •Installed community (shared) solar project and/or model renewable energy system at a municipal facility •Enacted Sustainable Development Incentive Program 4 https://www.comed.com/documents/about-us/environmental- commitment/environmental_disclosure_12mons_ending_20151231.pdf 17 TRANSPORTATION & AIR QUALITY Transportation is the largest source of air pollution in the U.S., leading to significant risks for human health and the environment. Major pollutants from the burning of gasoline and diesel fuel in motor vehicles and other equipment include: •Particulate matter (PM). These particles of soot and metals give smog its murky color. Fine particles - less than one-tenth the diameter of a human hair - pose the most serious threat to human health, as they can penetrate deep into lungs. •Nitrogen oxides (NOx). These pollutants cause lung irritation and weaken the body's defenses against respiratory infections such as pneumonia and influenza. •Hydrocarbons (HC). These pollutants react with nitrogen oxides in the presence of sunlight to form ground level ozone, a primary ingredient in smog. •Carbon monoxide (CO). This odorless and poisonous gas is formed by the combustion of gasoline and diesel and is emitted primarily from cars and trucks. •Sulfur dioxide (SO2). Power plants and motor vehicles create this pollutant by burning sulfur- containing fuels, especially diesel fuel. SO2 can react in the atmosphere to form fine particles and poses the largest health risk to young children and asthmatics. •Greenhouse gases. Motor vehicles also emit carbon dioxide, a potent greenhouse gas. The 2015 Urban Mobility Scorecard ranked Chicago as having the third worst automotive travel delays among very large urban areas (behind only New York and Los Angeles), with 303 million extra hours of travel time each year due to congestion 5. This translates to 61 hours of travel delay per commuter each year and results in 147 million gallons of excess gasoline consumed. Lake Forest experiences its own congestion, particularly on weekday mornings and afternoons during the school year. The drop off and pickup of Deerpath Middle School students leads to significant traffic bottlenecks on Deerpath Road twice each weekday. Similarly, traffic flow on McKinley Road is impaired each school day due to the arrival and departure of the high school students. 5 5 http://d2dtl5nnlpfr0r.cloudfront.net/tti.tamu.edu/documents/mobility-scorecard-2015-wappx.pdf 18 Local air pollution also comes from idling vehicles and gas-powered landscaping equipment. Idling occurs at schools, train stations, parking lots and roadways throughout the City. With over 300 professional landscaping companies licensed to work in Lake Forest, emissions from lawn care and snowplowing are significant. The following goals and actions reflect Lake Forest’s commitment to reduce negative air quality impacts from transportation. Goals •Reduce traffic congestion •Reduce idling •Reduce air pollution from the City’s fleet and equipment •Increase bicycling and utilization of other non-automotive forms of transportation Measurements of Success •Enacted Anti-Idling policy •Increased percentage of City fleet that is hybrid or electric vehicles •Reduced traffic counts on Deerpath and McKinley during school days •Achievement of the Bicycle Master Plan goals Implementation Plan Stormwater Management & Water Usage Action Plan Priority Level Primary Responsible Party Accomplishments Implement stormwater best management practices locally and regionally 1 City • City SMPP adopted • LFCEL community engagement forum September 2018 • New illustrative stormwater catch basin grates Encourage and expand the use of permeable surfaces 1 City • Elawa parking lot expansion (gravel) • LFCEL community engagement forum September 2018 • Educational materials on City website Develop water pollution educational materials 1 College • Developed stormwater brochure • Developed pool drainage brochure • Developed coal tar brochure • Developed rodenticide brochure • Developing City pesticide use guidelines Reduce de-icing salt usage in snow removal programs 2 City • Currently researching Beet Heet alternative (pilot program 2019) • Decreased salt usage through revised City Salting Policy Increase the tiered water rate to reflect the true value of water and to encourage conservation 2 City • Currently being researched by City staff Implementation Plan Ecosystem Vitality & Ravine Conservation Action Plan Priority Level Primary Responsible Party Accomplishments Utilize sustainable landscaping practices city- wide 1 City • All City projects currently emphasize the use of sustainable maintenance o McClory Bike Path planting beds o West Train Station pond planting o N. Western Ave planting beds o City Hall plantings o Multiple ravine restoration projects (Cemetery ravine restoration, NBAR road ravine, McCormick Ravine) • Forest Park and median landscaping contracts now include the use of battery powered equipment • LFC utilizes electric and battery powered landscape equipment to maintain campus Engage residents in ravine and bluff conservation efforts 1 LFOLA • City website educational materials (ravine brochures) • City staff developing ravine management policy • LFOLA ravine education brochure through ICMP • LFOLA conducts presentations and consultations with homeowners and HOAs to review landscape management, BMPs, and natural area enhancements • LFOLA secured funding through NFW's Strike Team Project to do restoration on private property adjacent to McCormick Ravine • LFOLA hosted the Great Lakes, Great Issues Lecture Series at Gorton • Both City & LFOLA participate and support the Lake Michigan Watershed Plan workgroup Encourage residential native planting, discourage the use of non- natives and reduce the size of lawns 1 LFOLA • LFCEL community engagement forum September 2018 • City and LFOLA annual plant sale • LFOLA hosts annual native plant and tree sale • LFOLA hosts native plant demonstration garden at LFOLA Conservation Campus • LFOLA held monthly public programs about native plants, habitats through the Nature and Nibbles Series (2018) Encourage local food production and consumption 2 Schools Consider a Noise Pollution Public Nuisance Ordinance 2 City • Under consideration by City Council (January 2019) Consider a butterfly garden in the park on the corner of Deerpath and Green Bay Roads or other City properties 2 City • City plantings now emphasize pollinator friendly plant material Implementation Plan Waste Management Action Plan Priority Level Primary Responsible Party Accomplishments Encourage composting at homes and initiate composting in City buildings and schools 1 City • City sells and delivers composting machines to residents at a reduced rate Increase the recycling rate and encourage responsible disposal of non-recyclable waste 1 City • City educational materials on the website • City hosts annual SWALCO hazardous waste event • City hosts annual shredding event • City hosts Lake Forest School District #67 refuse and recycling education • Initiated textile and shoe program • Improved recycling receptacles at City special events • Initiated recycling in Market Square • Initiated recycling in parks • City supported & helped Green Minds create the “Recycle with Green Minds LFLB” mobile app Decrease the use of plastic bags in the City 1 LFCEL • LFCEL supports the Green Minds “Bring Your Own Bag” initiative Decrease the use of Styrofoam/polystyrene in the City 2 LFCEL Implementation Plan Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Action Plan Priority Level Primary Responsible Party Accomplishments Incentivize businesses and residents to install solar panels or other renewable energy systems (wind, geothermal) 1 City Improve the efficiency of homes and businesses through an intensive energy efficiency campaign (system upgrades retrofits, behavioral changes) 1 LFCEL • City SolSmart initiative • Solar community engagement forum February 2019 Increase the sustainable development and green building methods throughout the community 1 City • Completed ComEd energy assessments at City buildings • City LED building light conversions • City LED street light conversions • City LED gas light conversions • Promote ComEd residential assessments • LFC solar lighting at Science Center Investigate purchasing energy from renewable sources for municipal facilities 2 City • City staff researching municipal solar subscriptions Consider an environmentally preferable procurement policy/code 2 City Implementation Plan Transportation & Air Quality Action Plan Priority Level Primary Responsible Party Accomplishments Adopt an Anti-Idling Policy 1 Schools • City employee anti-idling policy • School anti-idling signage • Anti-idling Dialogue article Commit to “greening” of the City’s fleet 1 City • Purchased electric Community Service Officer vehicle • Parks & Forestry battery powered blowers and chainsaw Reduce weekday morning and afternoon traffic on Deerpath and McKinley during the school year by encouraging and changing the costs of school buses relative to driving kids to school 1 LFCEL Increase the bicycling rate 2 LFCEL • City master bicycle plan • Middlefork bridge project and City spur provided important bicycle route connection, including Townline park Reduce emissions from City maintenance operations (i.e. garbage collection and lawn mowing) 2 City • Forest Park and median landscaping contracts now include the use of battery powered equipment • Purchased electric Community Service Officer vehicle • Parks & Forestry battery powered blowers and chainsaw • Explore options for low emissions vehicles before purchasing • LFC utilizes electric & battery powered landscape equipment Provide registration incentives for fuel- efficient and electric vehicles 2 City SPONSORED COMMUNITY SOLAR: RESIDENTIAL OPTION Municipalities helping Residents secure Community Solar Subscriptions THE FUTURE ENERGY JOBS ACT The Future Energy Jobs Act (‘FEJA’) became law in December 2016. Among its many provisions, FEJA restructured the state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard to incentivize more solar PV project development in Illinois. In addition to supporting small rooftop and large utility-scale solar PV projects, FEJA also supports Community Solar. WHAT IS COMMUNITY SOLAR? Community Solar means a solar PV array that:  Has a maximum size of 2 MWAC, (10 to 20 acres of land);  Is connected to the local utility system; and,  Assigns a portion of the output to consumers. With Community Solar, a consumer’s account is credited with a portion of generation by the Community Solar resource - resulting in lower charges on the consumer’s utility bill. COMMUNITY SOLAR BENEFITS FOR ILLINOIS Community Solar provide multiple benefits to all Illinois energy consumers through:  Consumer Cost Savings. Community Solar can provide residential consumers a guaranteed savings of as much as 20% off the ComEd energy supply rate;  New Jobs. The first phase of Community Solar projects in the ComEd region is projected to support over 2,250 new skilled labor and technology jobs; and,  More Clean Energy Options. Expanding solar PV generation with Community Solar will move Illinois towards a sustainable energy future. VILLAGE OF OAK PARK PILOT PROGRAM The Village of Oak Park (VOP) was the first Illinois municipality to secure Community Solar subscription options for its residents. Through a partnership with MC2 Energy Services (program administrator) and The Power Bureau (program consultant), the VOP has delivered an integrated community solar experience for its residents that provides:  Fair Subscription Terms. Through the program, VOP residents receive a guaranteed 20% discount from the ComEd energy supply price for fifteen years (roughly $82/year for the average VOP residential account); can terminate their Subscription at no cost; and may transfer their subscription to another account if they move anywhere within the ComEd service region.  Multiple Vendors. Any community solar developer that can honor the general terms set by the VOP can participate in the program – so VOP residents are assured that they will have access to community solar subscriptions at the soonest possible time.  Resident Outreach. The cost of mailings and online resources for VOP residents was paid for by fees from the program administrator.  Waitlist Approach. VOP residents that want Subscriptions are invited to sign up on an online waitlist. Once community solar projects are energized by ComEd, those residents are invited to execute their Subscription Agreements and start receiving their monthly credits.  Program Management. VOP residents have a single point of contact for requesting information, registering Subscriptions with ComEd and the Illinois Power Agency, paying their monthly Subscription fee, and ensuring compliance with all the requirements for community solar in Illinois SPONSORED COMMUNITY SOLAR IN YOUR COMMUNITY The Sponsored Community Solar model can work for every community served by ComEd, but the number of community solar projects being built in Illinois is limited. Municipalities interested in securing safe and cost-saving subscriptions from responsible proven developers can contact Mark Pruitt for more information at 219/921-3828 or markjpruitt@thepowerbureau.com. COMMUNITY SOLAR:  Allows consumers to directly support solar development in northern Illinois.  Subscribers receive monthly on-bill credits for their share of the energy generated by a shared solar array. SPONSORED COMMUNITY SOLAR:  Municipalities can connect residents with approved community solar providers to secure a guaranteed 20% discount off the ComEd energy supply price.  Requires no funding, capital investment, or other costs for the municipality. FEATURES AND BENEFITS OF SPONSORED COMMUNITY SOLAR: RESIDENTIAL OPTION FEATURE BENEFIT Opt-In Program Design  Operates within or in place of municipal aggregation programs  Can be implemented within weeks  Residents get early access to very limited supply of community solar projects Fair Contract Terms  Guaranteed 20% cost savings to residents  Residents protected from enrollment or termination fees  Subscriptions can be transferred at any time Multiple Suppliers  Municipality is not responsible for choosing winners and losers  Consumers get access to subscriptions to the first community solar projects that get built  Consumers not exposed to risk of specific community solar projects not being built Developer-Paid Outreach  No cost to municipality  Provides equal access to all residents Waitlist Approach  Gets the community solar developers to commit projects to your community today  Allows subscription agreements to occur at the earliest possible time Ongoing Program Management  Compliance with ComEd and IPA is ensured by experienced professionals  Reporting for the municipality to demonstrate progress towards sustainability goals PROCESS STAGES FOR PURSUING SPONSORED COMMUNITY SOLAR: RESIDENTIAL OPTION Program Management Monitoring monthly bill credits and reporting Monthly billing (consumers), monthly reporting (muni) Subscription Management Subscription Agreements Notifications to ComEd and IPA Resident Outreach Direct Mail, Municipal channels Sign ups placed on Waitlist Data and Plan Customer list, collateral materials Compliance plan for IPA Discussion Does the program help residents?Does the program meet policy objectives? Des Plaines River Watershed Workgroup Newsletter May 2020 2 2019 Annual Monitoring Report The DRWW 2019 Annual Monitoring Report was submitted to the Illinois EPA on March 26, 2020 to meet the DRWW Mem- ber Agencies Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) requirement for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Special Condition related to monitoring of receiving streams and to meet the monitoring component for its Member Agencies Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) Permits. Midwest Biodiversity Institute (MBI), Suburban Laboratories and North Shore Water Reclamation District (NSWRD) have started the 2020 water quality monitoring efforts. Annual Monitoring Updates DRWW 2020 Monitoring Strategy Water Column Sampling »73 Monitoring locations x5 collections, x4 summer collections for nutrients »Add dissolved reactive phosphorus & ammonia nitrogen parameters »Remove metals & organics »Reduce E.coli, conductivity, chloride, sulfate to x2 collections Sediment Sampling (6-year rotation) »Tier 1 & 2 Sites - focusing on metals and organic chemical analysis Bioassessment Monitoring Program (6-year rotation) »Starting in 2020 - Biannual collection on 14 core sites & 6 Des Plaines River main stem sites Continuous Monitoring & Chlorophyll a Sampling »Data sondes at 3 sites (13-6, 13-1, 16-4) for year round collection of dissolved oxygen (DO), water temperature, total suspended solids (TSS), pH, chlorophyll a and conductivity »14 core sites: annual collection of benthic chlorophyll a, and 4 sum- mer samples of sestonic chlorophyll Year 2 Biological & Water Quality Assessment of Upper Des Plaines River In 2018, the DRWW contracted with the MBI to conduct chemical, physical and biological monitoring at 19 locations on the Des Plaines River and tributaries (Figure 1). This is part of an ongoing yearly monitoring effort which focuses on identifying the presence, extent and severity of aquatic life impairments, and identifying stressors for identified impairments and limita- tions to general use attainment. The report identified 13 causes of non-attainment; the most common causes were organic enrichment/low dissolved oxygen, siltation and embeddedness, macroinvertebrate habitat, and PAH/metals/toxicity. Five of the 19 sites were identified as fully supporting aquatic life. This is the first time full support of aquatic life has been observed in the Des Plaines River study area! The monitoring data indicates that biological impairments in the upper 10 miles of the study area are primarily influenced by legacy hydraulic and habitat alterations from agricultural land uses causing slow flows, excessive siltation, and nuisance algal/aquatic plant growth. The four uppermost monitoring sites will likely never achieve attainment of the Aquatic Life General Use through water quality improve- ments alone; habitat improvements would also be needed. The effects of the hy- draulic and habitat alterations in the upper main stem are mitigated by the addition of large volumes of treated wastewater downstream of Mill Creek, as shown by the attainment of the aquatic life general use for four consecutive sites downstream of the NSWRD Gurnee Water Reclamation Facility and the improvement of multiple chemical, habitat, and biological indicators. The biological impairments in the lower portions of the study area are primarily influenced by suburban and urban land uses resulting in high concentrations of PAHs/metals/toxicity in sediment . Water quality has substantially improved since the 1980’s and the new attainment of aquatic life general use indicates conditions are continuing to improve. IPS Model & NARP The Integrated Prioritization System (IPS) model version 1.2 was released by the Midwest Biodiversity Institute (MBI) in February 2020. IPS model future users (including the DRWW) are currently reviewing the model and user manual and providing feedback. MBI is currently compiling additional regional monitoring data to add into the model. The IPS model is anticipated to be released to the local workgroups in 2020. In April 2020, Geosyntec completed a Preliminary Nutrient Assessment Reduction Plan (NARP) Workplan to assist the DRWW in identifying the scope, schedule and budget for the significant effort that will be required to develop the NARP. DRWW submitted a copy of the Preliminary NARP Workplan to the Illinois EPA, with a request to consider ex- tending the NARP submittal by one year, to December 31, 2024, or alternately for the Illinois EPA to assist in defining methods and resulting products that could allow for a less costly approach to achieve the same result. Figure 1 2019 Lake Monitoring Summary Lake Charles LCHD monitored 3 lake inlets on Lake Charles, one on north side and two on the central east and west boundary, as well as an south end outlet structure (Figure 2). Inlet 1 had the highest concentration of total suspended solids (TSS). During major precipitation events murky brown stormwater was observed entering the lake and carp found stirring up sediment in that inlet area. Inlet 2 had the highest total phosphorus (TP). Upstream of this inlet is an intermittent flashy stream, which flows through a golf course property prior to discharging into the inlet, which may be a major contributor of total phosphorus to this inlet. Big Bear Lake LCHD monitored 7 inlets including Seavey Ditch (Inlet) on Big Bear Lake (Fig- ure 3). The surrounding inlets in the Bear Lakes have an intermittent flow that can only be sampled after a significant rain event. Seavey Ditch (flows out of Lake Charles) sampling had the highest flow rate and largest range for pollut- ant concentrations. For example, TSS (4.7 mg/L) and TP (0.038 mg/L) concen- trations were relatively low in the June samples; whereas, TSS (28 mg/L) and TP (0.148 mg/L) concentrations in the July post storm event samples were substantially higher. Comparatively, the Lake Charles outlet has a lower TP (.067 mg/L), TSS (9.0 mg/L), and chloride (Cl¯) (100.0 mg/L) than the concen- trations at Big Bear Inlet. There are several detention basins that flow into Seavey Ditch before it reaches Big Bear Lake where there are slight increases in TP (0.072 mg/L), TSS (10.9 mg/L), and Cl¯ (99.4 mg/L). Little Bear Lake LCHD monitored 4 inlets on Little Bear Lake (Figure 3). Inlet 5 on the south- east side of the lake was only sampled twice after storm events but had the highest TSS concentration (avg. 19.3 mg/L) and TP concentration (avg. 0.109 mg/L). During major precipitation events murky brown stormwater was ob- served entering the lake in that inlet area. Since the focus of these lakes were on shallow impoundment lakes, the only lake that was stratified, and there- fore was able to run a WiLMs model for TP loading was Little Bear Lake. The DRWW contracted with the Lake County Health Department (LCHD) to conduct monitoring of the lakes and respective inlets/outlets to assess the current state of water quality and to determine inlet sources of nutrients and pollutants. This monitoring effort focused on man-made/impoundment lakes (Big Bear, Little Bear and Charles Lake) and was a continua- tion of the 2018 lake monitoring which focused on glacial stratified lakes (Gages, Druce and Third Lake). The two-year study provides a good representation of lakes within the Des Plaines River watershed. The lakes monitored in 2019 are all hydrologically connected. Lake Charles is at the top of the watershed and flows into Big Bear, which subsequently flows into Little Bear. The water then flows into the Seavy Drainage Ditch – Indian Creek and ultimately the Des Plaines River. Monthly water samples (May – Sept.), and three additional storm event samples, were col- lected at each monitoring site during 2019. If feasible, flow rates were measured during sampling. Inlet/outlet samples were analyzed for 7 water quality parameters. Additionally, in-lake epilimnetic and when applicable hypolimnetic water samples were collected, along with a depth profile analysis during each monthly visit which were then used to calculate anoxic volumes. Additional water chemis- try parameters were analyzed for the in-lake samples. The complete dataset and full report for the lake monitoring will be available on DRWW’s website in June 2020. 3 Figure 2 Figure 3 Charles Brown Detention Basin Enhancements & Sediment Forebays The Village of Libertyville was awarded an Illinois EPA Section 319 project grant in January 2019 for Charles Brown Detention Basin En- hancements and Sediment Forebays. Prior to project implementation, the site conditions were extremely poor with sediment accumulation, degraded habitat, and deteriorated shoreline along the basin edges. Lake Charles is currently identified as an impaired water body on the Illinois EPA’s 2018 303(d) list for TSS, TP and Aquatic Plants (Macro- phytes). The DRWW provided a letter of support with education and outreach cost-share match towards that grant, including newsletter project up- dates and providing project information at DRWW General Member- ship meetings. Currently, the earthwork has been completed, three sediments forebays totaling 0.8 acres (2 at inlet points and 1 near the outlet) and storm sewers have been installed and the urban stormwater restoration (7.32 acres) is underway (See Figure 4). The wetland enhancement and sediment forebays will provide substantial water quality benefits to downstream waters such as: Lake Charles, Big Bear Lake, Little Bear lake, Indian Creek and the Des Plaines River. The estimated project completion is Summer 2020. DRWW Encourages Municipalities to Adopt Coal-Tar -Sealant Ban The DRWW has found elevated concentrations of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) within Des Plaines River and oth- er tributary sediment samples. Concentrations of total PAH compounds up to 70,000 mg/kg (dry wt. basis) were found in both the highly pop- ulated Indian Creek and Bull Creek subwatersheds. Common sources of these chemical compounds are the use of coal-tar-sealants on drive - ways and parking lots, where precipitation runs off these surfaces car- rying PAHs into the waterways. Studies conducted by the USGS indicate that PAH’s found in coal-tar sealants increase the risk of multiple types of cancers (lung, skin, bladder, and respiratory) for humans and cause DNA damage or death to fish. In response to the increasing PAH concentrations in the Des Plaines Riv- er, communities are passing coal-tar-sealant bans. In Lake County, High- land Park, Deerfield, North Barrington, Third Lake and Vernon Hills have passed such bans, joining other Illinois communities such as Glenview, Winnetka, Wilmette, Evanston, South Barrington, and Port Barrington. The Lake County Board’s newly adopted Legislative Agenda for Fiscal Year 2020 supports state legislation that bans the use and sale of toxic pavement sealants. In addition to enacting community bans, there is broad support among local governments for state legislation that bans the use and sale of toxic pavement sealants in support of safer, effective alternatives, like asphalt, which have fewer toxic chemicals. On average, PAH levels in asphalt-based sealants are 1,000 times lower than in coal tar sealant. 4 Education & Outreach The DRWW urges municipalities to adopt a coal-tar-sealant ban! To see a sample of what other communities have implemented, the Deerfield ordinance, a vendor license application, and supplemental information can be found on the website of The Village of Deerfield here: https://www.deerfield. il.us/708/Coal-Tar-Sealant-Ban. Figure 5: USGS Coal-Tar-Based Pavement Seal- coat and PAHs (2012) DRWW Executive Board Members • President: Al Giertych, LCDOT • Vice President: Vacant • Treasurer: Michael Talbett, Village of Kildeer • Secretary: Paul Kendzior, Village of Libertyville • Member at Large: Jim Anderson, LCFPD • Member at Large: Dave Miller, NSWRD • Monitoring/Water Quality Improvements Committee Chair: Joe Robinson, NSWRD • Lakes Committee Chair: Mike Adam, LCHD Figure 4 Donnie R. Dann CONSERVATION ALERT January 2020,Volume 24 Number 1 Single Use Plastic, on the Way Out? My May, 2019 and prior Alerts described the serious environmental contamination in our oceans and lands from discarded plastics. Especially troubling is that so much of this waste arises from plastic containers or other products employed just once and then thrown out. Shoppers use 500 billion single-use plastic bags worldwide every year. But there’s hope as awareness of the problem by business, consumers and government grows. •Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently announced that by 2021 Canada will ban single use plastics. •In less than 3 years Peru will outlaw single-use plastic bags. Straws, plastic utensils and the like that cannot be recycled will also be banned. •Seattle is the first major city to enact a complete prohibition on single-use plastic utensils. •A good summary of the many cities and states throughout the country banning plastics is in this recent Wall Street Journal article. •Internationally, the long list of countries that ban, tax or otherwise regulate plastics is in this article. •It may be challenging for many but Bill McCallum’s book, “How to Give Up Plastics”, has excellent suggestions. •Yet the plastic industry remains powerful and some states have passed laws against regulating plastic bags! We don’t have to wait for various national, state or local governments to legislate against plastic. As good environmental citizens we can avoid using these one-time materials in the first place. And we can do a lot. •Avoid using plastic bags by bringing your own cloth bag for groceries. •Encourage restauranteurs to use compostable containers for take-out or take-home food. •Better yet, bring your own reusable plastic box for your orders/leftovers. •Try to confine your supermarket purchases to the perimeter of a store, i.e. the outside aisles. In many such areas you can buy unpackaged produce. •There is no certainty they will comply but here is one approach to Amazon for packaging and plastic reduction. This Newsletter may be excerpted, reproduced or circulated without limitation. Environmental Thinking Jan 7th 2019 Green Minds LFLB has received numerous requests from residents to look into increasing problems with leaf blowers spewing out noise and environmental pollution. Especially, the use of gas leaf blowers is viewed to be a serious noise and pollution concern. Gas leaf blowers are primarily used by landscaping companies for cleaning leaves from yards during the fall leaf drop season and during spring clean-up. Residents have noted that this equipment is increasingly being used year-round. This use in the “off season” causes more harm (noise, pollution) than good (landscaping clean-up). The negative impacts of unnecessary use of gas leaf blowers can easily be mitigated, by limiting leaf blower use seasonally. Green Minds LFLB suggest that our communities; Lake Forest and Lake Bluff address the problem by following the example of other North Shore communities, such as Highland Park, Glencoe, Winnetka, Wilmette, Evanston and Lincolnwood. These towns prohibit use of gas-powered leaf blowers between May 15 and October 1 (Exhibit A). During the months when restrictions apply, rakes, brooms and electric blowers can perform leaf and debris cleanup tasks more efficiently than a gas-blower would do (Exhibit C). The first two have been in use since antiquity and have been proven performers since that time. Rakes and brooms are quiet and consume no resources. They produce minimal dust and little debris into the atmosphere and no pollutants from the power source. Electric blowers minimize engine pollution and lessen noise, but don’t eliminate the hazards associated with airborne particulate matter. Leaf blowers are noisy and destroy the peaceful enjoyment of our community, and the noise and environmental pollution can have deleterious effects on our health. Gas leaf blowers operate at levels exceeding 80dBA, often reaching 90-115 dBA, according to Consumer Reports. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends general outdoor noise levels for all powered machines to be 55 dBA or less. Sustained exposure to blower noise can impair hearing abilities, stress levels and general health. Exhibit B shows that levels often associated with leaf blowers in our community are beyond medically safe standards according to WHO. Green Minds LFLB members have recorded noise from neighboring leaf blowers to be up to 104.7 dBA – that is inside their own homes. Obviously, such high readings preclude residents from enjoying their backyards, and make it hard to work from home, not to mention rest. Environmental Thinking Pollution from two-cycle engines such as leaf blowers is a large contributor of carbon monoxide (CO), nitrous oxides (NOx), hydrocarbons (HC), and particulate matter (PM). Exhaust pollution per leaf blower per hour is the equivalent to the amount of smog from 17 cars driven one hour. Leaf blower exhaust pollution remains localized in the neighborhood in which it is generated. Combustion exhaust PM remains suspended in the air for hours and is easily accumulated in the lungs. The City of Lake Forest and The Village of Lake Bluff leaf blower policies govern hours of use, but do not address noise levels and environmental concerns. Green Minds LFLB suggests a seasonal restriction on use of gas leaf blowers from May 15th - October 1st. Additionally, we suggest placing limits on maximum decibel levels and on the number of leaf blowers which can be used concurrently on each lot. Green Minds LFLB encourages Lake Forest and Lake Bluff to act now so that landscaping companies are informed of the restriction and can plan ahead for this Summer 2019. Kind regards, Green Minds LFLB Leaf Blower Committee Marion Cartwright Nancy Delveaux Jones Hesam Ghodsi Eva Heilman Pam Russell Lee Sachnoff Dr. Marcus Schabacker Yuh M M Schabacker-Koppel Amy Schuetz Environmental Thinking Exhibit A Leaf blower noise ordinances City Type of equipment When Prohibited Exceptions Evanston 9-5-20. - NOISES PROHIBITED Backpack mounted or handheld gasoline powered leaf blower (private or commercial use) May 15 to September 15, and From first Thursday in December to March 30 Highland Park Sec. 95.001. Public nuisances enumerated Any leaf blower type of machine other than one that is electrically powered May 15 to October 1 Golf Course maintenance and gutter/downspout cleaning Glencoe Gas-powered leaf blowers May 15 to September 15, and December 15 to March 15 Golf Course maintenance and in storm or emergency situation when waived by Village Manager Lincolnwood Backpack mounted, wheel mounted or handheld gasoline powered leaf blowers and electric leaf blowers powered by a gasoline powered generator May 15 - September 30 Golf Course maintenance and in storm or emergency situation when waived by Village Manager Wilmette Gas-powered leaf blowers including electric leaf blowers powered by a gasoline powered generator May 15 to September 15 When allowed, use is limited to 30 minutes within a 3-hour period on lots of ½ acre or less Golf Course maintenance and gutter/downspout cleaning, paving (street) repair work Winnetka Backpack mounted, wheel mounted or handheld gasoline powered leaf blowers and electric leaf blowers powered by a gasoline powered generator June 1 - September 30 Golf Course maintenance and in storm or emergency situation when waived by Village Manager Environmental Thinking Exhibit B WHO noise harzard levels and dB readings inside Environmental Thinking Exhibit C Further Resources http://www.euro.who.int/en/media-centre/sections/press-releases/2018/press-information- note-on-the-launch-of-the-who-environmental-noise-guidelines-for-the-european-region https://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/hearingloss/index.html https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article152515714.html https://www.quietcommunities.org/gas-leaf-blower-noise-impact/ http://www.nonoise.org/quietnet/cqs/leafblow.htm https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/17/realestate/on-banning-on-leaf-blowers.html https://www.wfmynews2.com/article/news/local/2-wants-to-know/what-i-cant-hear-you-over- the-leaf-blower-protect-your-hearing/83-590886531 https://www.lawnsite.com/threads/grandmother-proves-rake-and-broom-as-fast-as-leaf- blowers.109395/ https://www.quietcommunities.org/cdc-work-noise-exposure-can-raise-blood- pressure-cholesterol-levels/ P O L I T I C S Get Off My Lawn     I thought the problem was all in my head. When I was growing up, I knew that a certain kind of noise was one I needed to avoid. Food blenders in How a small group of activists (our correspondent among them) got leaf blowers banned in the nation’s capital F O the kitchen, hair dryers in the bathroom, a vacuum cleaner whooshing around—all produced an intense whining sound that, given the specic wiring connections between my ears and my brain, kept me from thinking about anything but the sound itself while it was going on. Over the years I lived by this code: I used high-performance earplugs if I needed to write or otherwise concentrate while sitting in some place that was unusually loud. I added noise- canceling headphones on top of the earplugs in really tough cases. As time went on, the earplugs-plus-headphones protection rig became standard writing gear. at was because the use of gas-powered leaf blowers in my Washington, D.C., neighborhood evolved from a few hours a week during the leaest stretch of autumn to most days of the week, most weeks of the year, thanks to the advent of the “groomed” look that modern lawn crews are expected to achieve. One of my longest-running themes as a journalist has been how changes in technology force people to adapt their habits and livelihoods. I thought I was doing my part, with gear that let me attend to my work while others attended to theirs. ere even turned out to be a bonus: As other parts of my body went into a predictable age-related descent, my hearing remained sharp. en I learned several things that changed my thinking both about leaf blowers and, up to a point, about politics.   I learned has to do with the technology of leaf blowers. eir high volume, which I had long considered their most salient feature, is only their second-most-unusual aspect. e real marvel is the living-fossil nature of their technology. And because the technology is so crude and old, the level of pollution is off the charts. When people encounter engines these days, they’re generally seeing the outcome of decades of intense work toward higher efficiency. e latest models of jet-turbine engines are up to 80 percent more fuel-efficient than their 1950s counterparts. While power plants burning natural gas obviously emit more carbon than wind or solar facilities, they emit about half as much as coal-red plants. Today, the average car on America’s streets is almost 200 percent more efficient than in 1950, and smog-causing emissions from cars are about 99 percent lower. e great outlier here is a piece of obsolete machinery Americans encounter mainly in lawn-care equipment: the humble “two-stroke engine.” It’s simpler, cheaper, and I decibels of noisiness can affect up to 15 times as many households as a battery- powered blower with the same 75-decibel rating. Hearing damage is cumulative. When the tiny, sound-sensing hairlike cells, called stereocilia, in the inner ear are damaged—usually by extended exposure to sounds of 85 decibels or above—they are generally gone for good. For the landscapers (and homeowners) who use gas-powered blowers—a foot away from their ears—the most powerful can produce sounds of 100 decibels or more. Meyers told me, “Each time I see these crews, I think to myself: 10 years from now, they’ll be on the path to premature deafness.”     since backpack blowers from Echo, Stihl, and other companies became popular, at least 100 U.S. cities have banned or restricted their use. Most of those cities are in California, because California is the only state whose jurisdictions have the authority to set their own air-pollution standards. With air-quality standards that were more aggressive than those in other states, California received special treatment under the Clean Air Act when it was passed in 1970. In the rest of the country, the law gives standard-setting authority to the federal government, which in practice means the Environmental Protection Agency. Considering the current condition of the EPA, people wanting to regulate leaf blowers could be forgiven for throwing up their hands. But as it happens, there is another legally and scientically legitimate line of attack: going after gas-powered blowers not because they pollute but because they make so much noise. Starting in 2013, my wife, Deb, and I traveled around the country to report on local-improvement narratives, which always seemed to begin with “I wondered why my town didn’t do _______, so I decided to get involved.” We’d long been active at our kids’ schools and with their sports teams. But we wondered why our town— Washington, D.C.—wasn’t doing something about the leaf-blower menace, given that an obvious solution was at hand. We joined a small neighborhood group— barely 10 people at its peak—to try to get a regulatory or legislative change, using noise, not pollution, as the rationale. [Read: James Fallows’s Notes on the leaf-blower battle in D.C.] In November 2015, we had our rst success, when our Advisory Neighborhood Commission—the most local governmental unit in the District—voted 8–1 to A support phasing out gas-powered leaf blowers. (e one no vote came from a libertarian who didn’t like regulation of anything.) In retrospect, the resulting request was amazingly timid. We simply asked that our city-council member, Mar y Cheh, introduce legislation for a ban. She did so; the measure got nowhere by the end of the council’s term in 2016; she introduced a new measure in 2017. Over the next 18 months, we successfully encouraged more than a third of all ANCs in D.C., representing seven of the District’s eight wards, to endorse council action on the bill. Anyone aware of the racial, economic, and other dividing lines within Washington can imagine the level of organizing and explanation necessary to achieve such broad support. In July 2018, the chair of the city council, Phil Mendelson, convened a hearing to consider the bill. Nearly 20 witnesses spoke in favor. ey included members of our group as well as scientists, a former regulator, an acoustic engineer, representatives of the Sierra Club and the Audubon Society, ordinary citizens and residents, and landscapers who had switched to all-battery operation. On the other side were two industry lobbyists, who said that market innovation and “courteous” leaf-blower use were the answer. Council members listened to them with visible incredulity. In the fall, the full council approved the bill unanimously. In December, Washington’s mayor, Muriel Bowser, signed it into law. On January 1, 2022, the use of gas- powered leaf blowers will be illegal within city limits.    writing about national politics, I’ve come away from this experience having learned some lessons about local politics— obvious lessons, maybe, but also vivid ones. To begin with: Showing up matters. Our group met in person every two or three weeks over more than three and a half years. Perhaps our most indefatigable member, a lawyer, made presentations at dozens of ANC meetings. We got to know the legislative directors and schedulers for many of the District’s 13 council members. Having facts also matters—yes, even in today’s America. At the beginning of the process, it felt as if 99 percent of the press coverage and online commentary was in the sneering “First World problem!” vein. at has changed. e Washington Post, e New York Times, e Wall Street Journal, the Washington Monthly, and other publications have called attention to the leaf-blower problem, often arguing that gas-powered blowers should be banned. Reexive sneering is down to about 5 percent among people who have made time to hear the facts. Noise, they have come to understand, is the secondhand smoke of this era. Technological momentum and timing matter. We worried all along that the lawn- care industry would mount a major lobbying effort against the bill. It never did. Nearly everyone in the industry knows that 10 years from now, practically all leaf blowers will be batter y-powered. One of our arguments was that we were simply accelerating the inevitable. Having a champion matters. At a “meet the council member” session on a rainy Saturday morning in the fall of 2015, Mary Cheh said she’d stay with the bill—if she could rely on us to keep showing up. We did our part, and she did hers—she stayed with it to the end. Luck matters as well. In its rst journey through the council, starting in 2016, Cheh’s bill was assigned to a committee whose chair was a council member whose approach to many bills seemed to boil down to: What’s in it for me? To widespread surprise, apparently including his own, a long-shot challenger upset him in the primaries for the 2016 election. e nal lesson is: Don’t get hung up on the conventional wisdom—it’s only wise until it isn’t. Everyone says nothing gets done in Washington. is one time, ever yone was wrong. is article appears in the April 2019 print edition with the headline “Get Off My Lawn.” We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com. lighter than the four-stroke engines of most modern cars, and has a better power- to-weight ratio. But it is vastly dirtier and less fuel-efficient, because by design it sloshes together a mixture of gasoline and oil in the combustion chamber and then spews out as much as one-third of that fuel as an unburned aerosol. If you’ve seen a tuk‐tuk, one of the noisy tricycle-style taxis in places such as Bangkok and Jakarta, with purple smoke wafting out of its tailpipe, you’ve seen a two-stroke engine in action. But you won’t see as many of them in those cities anymore, because governments in Asia and elsewhere have been banning and phasing out two-stroke engines on antipollution grounds. In 2014 a study published in Nature Communications found that VOC emissions (a variety of carbon gases that can produce smog and harm human beings) were on average 124 times higher from an idling two-stroke scooter than from a truck or a car. With respect to benzene, a carcinogenic pollutant, the group found that each cubic meter of exhaust from an idling two-stroke scooter contained 60,000 times the safe level of exposure. Two-stroke engines have largely disappeared from the scooter, moped, and trail-bike markets in America. Regulators around the world are pushing older two-stroke engines toward extinction. Yet they remain the propulsive force behind the 200-mph winds coming out of many backpack leaf blowers. As a product category, this is a narrow one. But the impact of these little machines is signicant. In 2017, the California Air Resources Board issued a warning that may seem incredible but has not been seriously challenged: By 2020, gas-powered leaf blowers, lawn mowers, and similar equipment in the state could produce more ozone pollution than all the millions of cars in California combined. Two-stroke engines are that dirty. Cars have become that clean. Video: e ‘Public Health Menace’ of Fall in America S  ’   I learned about gas-powered blowers. A second thing I discovered is the damage leaf blowers do to people’s hearing. e biggest worry of today’s public-health community is not, of course, leaf blowers—it’s the opioid disaster, plus addictions of other forms. e next-biggest worry is obesity, plus diabetes and the other ills that ow from it. But coming up fast on the list is hearing loss. According to a 2017 report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, one-quarter of Americans ages 20 to 69 who reported good to excellent hearing actually had diminished hearing. is is largely caused by rising levels of ambient urban noise—sirens, traffic, construction, leaf blowers— which can lead to a range of disorders, from high blood pressure to depression to heart disease. “When I started out, I’d see people in their 60s with hearing problems,” says Robert Meyers, an ENT specialist at the University of Illinois at Chicago. “Now I’m seeing them in their 40s.” Leaf blowers are especially insidious. Something about their sound had long attracted my attention. A study organized by Jamie Banks, a scientist and the founder of Quiet Communities, a Boston-area nonprot, quantied what it was. Acoustic engineers from a rm called Arup compared gas- and battery-powered blowers with equal manufacturer-rated noise levels. eir analysis showed that gas- powered blowers produce far more “sound energy” in the low-frequency range. is may seem benign—who doesn’t like a nice basso profundo?—but it has a surprising consequence. High-frequency sound—a mosquito’s buzz, a dental drill—gets your attention, but it does not travel. It falls off rapidly with distance and struggles to penetrate barriers. If you’re in the next room, you may not hear it at all. By contrast, low-frequency noise has great penetrating power: It goes through walls, cement barriers, and many kinds of hearing-protection devices. e acoustic study found that in a densely settled neighborhood, a gas-powered blower rated at, say, 75