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 speci c
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
lea est 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 scienti cally 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. Re exive 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 signi cant. 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 nonpro t, quanti ed 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