Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE 2016/12/05 Packet
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MONDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2016 – 5:00 P.M. CITY HALL – UPSTAIRS CONFERENCE ROOM AGENDA I. ROLL CALL/CALL TO ORDER Cathy Waldeck, Chairman Stanford Tack Michelle Moreno Timothy Newman II. APPROVAL OF THE NOVEMBER 7, 2016 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES III. DISCUSSION OF HARDSHIP WAIVER PROCESS FOR THE SANITARY SEWER ORDINANCE – MIKE STRONG & MICHAEL THOMAS IV. REVIEW AND RECOMMEDNATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF AN AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE TO THE FOREST PARK BLUFF STABILITY EVALUATION – BOB ELLS V. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT F.Y.’18 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT PLAN – MICHAEL THOMAS & DAVE DEMARCO VI. REVIEW OF 2016/2017 SNOW & ICE CONTROL PLAN – DAN MARTIN VII. NEXT MEETING – JANUARY _, 2017 5:00 P.M. @ CITY HALL VIII. ADJOURNMENT PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2016 – 5:00 P.M. CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBER’S CONFERENCE ROOM MINUTES I. ROLL CALL/CALL TO ORDER Chairman Cathy Waldeck called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Aldermen Michelle Moreno and Timothy Newman were present. Not in Attendance: Alderman Stanford Tack Staff in attendance included Michael Thomas, Director of Public Works; Bob Kiely, City Manager; Bob Ells, Superintendent of Engineering; Dan Martin, Superintendent of Public Works; John Gulledge, Supervisor of Water & Sewer Utilities; Elizabeth Holleb, Director of Finance; Mike Strong, Assistant to the City Manager; Jim Lockefeer, Management Intern; and Eileen Timken, Management Analyst. Also in attendance was Dan Strahan, City Engineer – Gewalt Hamilton; Brian Hackman, Project Manager – Strand Associates, Inc.; Andrew Twyman of 1161 Winwood Drive; Tom Kaczmarski and Dorothy Bednarczyk of 1088 Winwood Drive; Zachary Eleveld of 1137 Winwood Drive; and Charlie Kohlmeyer. II. APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 10, 2016 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES Chairman Waldeck moved to approve the October 10, 2016 Public Works Committee meeting minutes. Alderman Moreno seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. III. WINWOOD SANITARY SEWER SSA DISCUSSION Director Thomas explained that staff met with residents of the Winwood Subdivision to review the design and estimated costs of the Winwood Sanitary Sewer Special Service Area (SSA) on July 20, 2016 and October 13, 2016. After the July 20, 2016 meeting, staff were able to further investigate and identify potential storm sewer connections by meeting with residents at their properties and assessing their septic systems. Staff assessed 27 of the 28 septic systems and found that a significant majority of the septic systems are not connected to the storm sewer. Initially, staff estimated that there were many more septic system and storm sewer connections. Director Thomas also stated that staff met with a representative of the Lake County Health Department regarding potential septic system and storm sewer connections. It was explained to staff that these connections are rather common in Lake County. Based on the data gathered by staff, it was determined that the residents of the Winwood Subdivision would not be required to connect to the sanitary sewer immediately. Rather, Winwood Subdivision residents would be expected to connect to the sanitary sewer when their septic system fails. This information was shared with the residents of the Winwood Subdivision at the October 13, 2016 meeting. City Engineer Dan Strahan provided residents with refined cost estimates at that meeting, as well. Director Thomas also explained that resident turnout at the aforementioned meetings was lower than expected; specifically, the October 13, 2016 meeting had a resident turnout rate of less than 50%. He then stated that four easements would need to be obtained for the Winwood Sanitary Sewer SSA. Staff met with three property owners as of early November regarding the easements. Half of the properties of the Winwood Subdivision are currently in the North Shore Water Reclamation District (NSWRD), and half are not; therefore, half of property owners have been paying to be a part of the NSWRD, and half have not. This has complicated financing logistics. Chairman Waldeck asked if those properties not a part of the NSWRD are a part of another water reclamation district. Director Thomas explained that they are not. A similar situation was experienced with the Regency Sanitary Sewer SSA. Residents of the Regency Subdivision chose to include NSWRD annexation and connection fees in the SSA, whereas residents of the Winwood Subdivision have indicated a preference of not including any such fees in the SSA. Mike Strong explained that the City has made a policy decision with its commitment to sanitary sewer connections for nearly all properties in the City, given the significant public health benefits of a sanitary sewer system. Mike Strong then explained that staff began this project by considering 28 properties, which would be serviced by an extension from Waukegan Road and an extension from Jensen Drive. At the October 13, 2016 meeting, residents inquired about the potential of multiple sanitary sewer SSAs, in which one sanitary sewer SSA included the extension from Waukegan Road and another separate sanitary sewer SSA included the extension of Jensen Drive. There was also a strong concern from some residents regarding subsidizing costs for other residents. Following the meeting, staff began researching an alternative financing option, which would consist of two separate sanitary sewer SSAs. It is estimated that 42% of total project costs are related to the eastern properties of the Winwood Subdivision and 58% of total project costs are related to western properties of the Winwood Subdivision. Some property owners of the western properties have been in communication with staff and have indicated a preference for a single comprehensive SSA, to include all fees. Chairman Waldeck asked if residents would be locked into current fee rates if a single comprehensive SSA were pursued. She stated that fee rates could increase with time. Mike Strong responded that the fees would be paid upfront; therefore, increased future fee rates would not apply. He then stated that there are static and variable costs to consider. He also stated that some residents may not be interested in paying connection fees at this time, as they may not be residing in the Winwood Subdivision when the property connects to the sanitary sewer. Alderman Moreno stated that it is imperative that sanitary sewer SSA balances are disclosed when a property is sold. Mike Strong stated that by pursuing two separate sanitary sewer SSAs, the perception of inequities may be dispelled. In response to that statement, property owner Andrew Twyman of 1161 Winwood Drive asked if the eastern property owners would vote separately from the western property owners. Chairman Waldeck confirmed that if two separate sanitary sewer SSAs were pursued, residents would vote on the SSA their property was included in. If eastern property owners and western property owners voted differently, an issue would be posed for City Council. City Manager Kiely stated that the matter would at that point, need to be reviewed by City Council. Also, if an SSA is not pursued, a recapture funding mechanism would be pursued as the alternative. Mike Strong stated that staff has reviewed four different cost options with the residents, and that minimum and maximum fees have been determined. The Annual Assessment per lot would range from $3,300 to $3,600. If the Winwood Subdivision is split into two separate SSAs, the Annual Assessment of the eastern properties is estimated at $2,500 and the Annual Assessment of the western properties is estimated at $3,900. The residents of the western properties have indicated support of a more comprehensive (including most fees) Annual Assessment. Mike Strong also stated that there would be additional private costs when a connection occurred. Alderman Newman asked if residents understand the difference between the SSA and the Recapture funding mechanisms. Andrew Twyman stated that he understands the difference; but, is unsure if all other residents in the Winwood area understand the difference. Chairman Waldeck stated that an SSA is less burdensome funding mechanism for homeowners than a Recapture funding mechanism. Andrew Twyman responded stating that the residents of the Winwood Subdivision currently share the sentiment that voting against the SSA indicates opposition to the sanitary sewer installation; rather than support of the Recapture funding mechanism. Property owner Dorothy Bednarczyk of 1088 Winwood Drive stated that residents did not receive mailings regarding the sanitary sewer SSA meetings. Andrew Twyman then stated that residents of the Winwood Subdivision are not supportive of the sanitary sewer SSA. City Manager Kiely responded stating that there is a contrary opinion. Also, staff made many attempts to notify residents of meetings. City Manager Kiely stated that some residents contacted staff directly to express their strong support of this project. Chairman Waldeck then inquired about the City’s options if 51% of residents abject to the SSA. City Manager Kiely responded that this occurred when the City pursued an SSA on South Waukegan Road, in which majority objected to the proposed SSA resulting in the City pursing the project through a Recapture financing mechanism. Chairman Waldeck stated that this reaffirmed her presumption that City Council can determine that a project can proceed through the Recapture financing mechanism. Andrew Twyman asked if City Council would proceed with the project if residents voted against the SSA. Chairman Waldeck responded stating that City Council empathizes with residents. She stated that some residents are in a different financial position than others. She also stated that some residents may be very supportive of the sanitary sewer installation. City Council and the Public Works Committee has discussed its pursuit of a citywide sanitary sewer system for many years now. Chairman Moreno explained that the City is implementing its recently developed Sustainability Plan, which is committed to clean water. There have been instances in the City in which septic systems have been illicitly connected to storm sewer systems, resulting in substantial pollution. Resident Zachary Eleveld of 1137 Winwood Drive stated that the City’s purpose of pursuing this project has not been clearly communicated to residents. He stated that the necessity of the conversion from septic systems to a sanitary sewer system has not been previously articulated. He also stated that residents share the sentiment that they are getting incorrect information, or not getting information at all. Moreover, residents do not feel that the City is working to minimize the financial impact on residents. Andrew Twyman then stated that a septic system can be as effective as a sanitary sewer. Alderman Moreno explained that septic systems are very ineffective when they fail. She also stated that there is a regional and national trend toward sanitary sewer conversions, as these systems can be managed centrally. Resident Tom Kaczmarski of 1088 Winwood Drive then explained that before moving to the City of Lake Forest, he thoroughly investigated septic system costs. According to his analysis, the cost of installing a complete septic system is a fraction of the cost of the proposed sanitary sewer installation. He stated that the cost is staggering and the necessity of the project has not been effectively communicated with residents. Andrew Twyman then stated that waiting to pursue the project until the market and economy improve should be considered by City Council. Chairman Waldeck stated that a property that has a sanitary sewer system is more appealing than a property with a septic system. Alderman Moreno agreed. Chairman Waldeck stated that City Council realizes the benefits of a citywide sanitary sewer system to the Lake Forest community as a whole. Andrew Twyman responded stating that all Lake Forest residents financed other sanitary sewer installations in Lake Forest through property taxes. City Manager Kiely responded explaining that the prior statement was factually incorrect. City Manager Kiely also stated the Public Works Committee will continue this discussion after residents vote. Zachary Eleveld asked if the City could coordinate multiple votes. Chairman Waldeck stated that she is unsure. City Manager Kiely stated that when the establishing ordinance is reviewed by City Council, a discussion regarding the coordination of multiple votes can be had. Chairman Waldeck stated that City Council will move forward with this process when there is a fuller representation of resident opinions. Andrew Twyman inquired about the significance of the City Council meeting on December 5, 2016. City Manager Kiely stated that at the 60-day objection Period will begin following that meeting. Mike Strong then explained that staff is seeking direction from the Public Works Committee regarding the SSA approach to pursue. He also explained that to fulfill the construction time period endorsed at the October, 2016 meeting, the Public Hearing will need to be on December 5, 2016. Bidding in February is ideal to get the most competitive pricing. Chairman Waldeck stated that it was necessary to maintain the initially agreed upon timeline. Through the public process, staff will have a more accurate understanding of the opinions of the Winwood Subdivision community as a whole regarding this project. Alderman Newman stated that he is not confident that all residents have a thorough understanding of this project. Alderman Moreno stated that residents of other subdivisions recognized the significance of a centralized sanitary system. She also stated that she supports the initially agreed upon timeline. Chairman Waldeck stated that delaying the project could still be an option; however, the Public Works Committee does not yet have enough information. Tom Kaczmarski stated that certain properties within the Winwood Subdivision are likely to be further subdivided. He then stated that the project cost would be reduced if there were more lots present. Zachary Eleveld then stated that there are inequities with the design of the sanitary sewer system. He asked if other options could be considered that would be more cost effective for more residents. Director Thomas then stated that having two separate SSAs may further complicate the launching of this project. Chairman Waldeck suggested pursuing a single SSA. Alderman Newman and Alderman Moreno agreed. Chairman Waldeck thanked the Winwood Subdivision residents for being present. IV. WATER PLANT DESIGN DISCUSSION Director Thomas stated that the design of the Water Plant is going well. Also, the pilot is going well. Superintendent Martin introduced Brian Hackman of Strand Associates, Inc. who then explained that the City will be bidding the project in late January, 2017. Bids are expected to be received at the end of February, 2017. Staff will present bids to the Public Works Committee in mid-March and to City Council in early April. Brian Hackman explained that portions of the facility have been relocated to allow necessary updates to be completed. He then explained that it is necessary for water processing to be slowed down for optimal disinfection. He also explained that water needs to be pushed in a meandering path through the clearwell so that Water Plant Operators can process the water out of the Water Plant in the most safe and sanitary manner. The project budget was initially estimated to total $9.75 million. Chairman Waldeck confirmed the project timeline. Alderman Moreno inquired about the contingency amount. Brian Hackman responded stating that the total contingency amount has not been reduced yet. Alderman Moreno inquired about the bond issuance including the contingency. Director Holleb confirmed that the contingency is included in the bond issuance. Brian Hackman stated that major unanticipated additional project costs have not surfaced. Alderman Moreno requested that cost estimates continue to be very conservative. Chairman Waldeck motioned to support the proposed minor improvements and modifications to the clearwell. Alderman Moreno seconded her motion, which carried unanimously. V. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT VI. NEXT MEETING – DECEMBER 5, 2016 – 5:00 P.M. AT CITY HALL VII. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Waldeck moved to adjourn the meeting of the Public Works Committee at 6:15 p.m. Alderman Newman seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Eileen Timken Management Analyst DISCUSSION OF HARDSHIP WAIVER PROCESS FOR THE SANITARY SEWER ORDINANCE MEMORANDUM THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER Page 1 TO: Public Works Committee CC: Michael Thomas, Director of Public Works FROM: Mike Strong, Assistant to the City Manager DATE: December 1, 2016 SUBJECT: Hardship Waiver Process to Sanitary Sewer Ordinance Background Currently, there are approximately 113 properties within The City of Lake Forest that utilize onsite wastewater treatment systems (“Septic System”) to manage wastewater. Unlike sewers, septic systems are self-contained and collect, treat, and dispose of wastewater within the property. This type of wastewater management system is not uncommon for properties within rural and suburban areas that do not have access to public sanitary sewers. Unlike public sewers, septic systems have limited life spans and can frequently fail if not maintained properly, impacting the environment and the community’s water quality. Until 1998, none of the residential areas in Lake Forest that currently use septic systems for wastewater management had access to sanitary sewers. Since this time, the City has either installed new sewer infrastructure or extended existing infrastructure to provide access to these properties. Of the properties that use septic systems, only seven (7) properties are located in an area beyond 500 feet from an existing sanitary sewer. An updated spreadsheet and map has been attached depicting the location of these properties. In March 2015, the Public Works Committee (“Committee”) held a discussion concerning the non-sanitary sewer areas within The City. At that time, recent requests had been made from residents within these areas to provide sanitary sewer to specific neighborhoods. Additionally, it was discussed that under the City’s current Ordinance, any property within 500 feet of a City sanitary sewer is required to connect if a new home is built or the existing septic system is in need of repair or replacement. The Committee recognized that providing access to sanitary sewers in these areas would provide both development benefit and affect the long term public health and welfare of these areas. Since this time, The City has worked with residents in the Regency Lane neighborhood, and currently, is working with neighbors in the Winwood Drive neighborhood to install sanitary sewer in the last remaining developments within The City through a special service area (“SSA”) process. Page 2 Discussion This past November, The City received a letter from a property owner in the Winwood Drive neighborhood expressing a request to be excluded from the SSA and, based on the current Ordinance, a requirement to connect to the eventual sanitary sewer due to their proximity to the future sewer. As the letter (attached) states, the property owner believes that due to their property’s unique conditions and circumstances there is a perceived hardship for complying with the spirit of the Ordinance. Currently, the Ordinance does not offer a variance or hardship request process, nor does it offer much guidance on other potential relief from the requirement for properties to connect under the aforementioned circumstances. Recognizing that there are over 60 additional properties that either have access to, or are within 500 feet of, an existing sanitary sewer, City Staff is seeking direction from the Committee on whether there is interest in establishing a hardship waiver process from the Ordinance, and if so, under what standards should these requests be made and considered. City staff has drafted potential amendments to the Ordinance, for Committee consideration, to help guide this conversation and provide a structure for how said requests could be heard in the future. Action Requested City staff is requesting direction from the Committee on whether an amendment to the Sanitary Sewer Ordinance should be pursued to incorporate a hardship waiver process from the requirement to connect to sewers for properties that lie within 500 feet of a sanitary sewer. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2016 – 5:00 P.M. CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBER’S CONFERENCE ROOM MINUTES I. ROLL CALL/CALL TO ORDER Chairman Cathy Waldeck called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Aldermen Michelle Moreno and Timothy Newman were present. Not in Attendance: Alderman Stanford Tack Staff in attendance included Michael Thomas, Director of Public Works; Bob Kiely, City Manager; Bob Ells, Superintendent of Engineering; Dan Martin, Superintendent of Public Works; John Gulledge, Supervisor of Water & Sewer Utilities; Elizabeth Holleb, Director of Finance; Mike Strong, Assistant to the City Manager; Jim Lockefeer, Management Intern; and Eileen Timken, Management Analyst. Also in attendance was Dan Strahan, City Engineer – Gewalt Hamilton; Brian Hackman, Project Manager – Strand Associates, Inc.; Andrew Twyman of 1161 Winwood Drive; Tom Kaczmarski and Dorothy Bednarczyk of 1088 Winwood Drive; Zachary Eleveld of 1137 Winwood Drive; and Charlie Kohlmeyer. II. APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 10, 2016 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES Chairman Waldeck moved to approve the October 10, 2016 Public Works Committee meeting minutes. Alderman Moreno seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. III. WINWOOD SANITARY SEWER SSA DISCUSSION Director Thomas explained that staff met with residents of the Winwood Subdivision to review the design and estimated costs of the Winwood Sanitary Sewer Special Service Area (SSA) on July 20, 2016 and October 13, 2016. After the July 20, 2016 meeting, staff were able to further investigate and identify potential storm sewer connections by meeting with residents at their properties and assessing their septic systems. Staff assessed 27 of the 28 septic systems and found that a significant majority of the septic systems are not connected to the storm sewer. Initially, staff estimated that there were many more septic system and storm sewer connections. Director Thomas also stated that staff met with a representative of the Lake County Health Department regarding potential septic system and storm sewer connections. It was explained to staff that these connections are rather common in Lake County. Based on the data gathered by staff, it was determined that the residents of the Winwood Subdivision would not be required to connect to the sanitary sewer immediately. Rather, Winwood Subdivision residents would be expected to connect to the sanitary sewer when their septic system fails. This information was shared with the residents of the Winwood Subdivision at the October 13, 2016 meeting. City Engineer Dan Strahan provided residents with refined cost estimates at that meeting, as well. Director Thomas also explained that resident turnout at the aforementioned meetings was lower than expected; specifically, the October 13, 2016 meeting had a resident turnout rate of less than 50%. He then stated that four easements would need to be obtained for the Winwood Sanitary Sewer SSA. Staff met with three property owners as of early November regarding the easements. Half of the properties of the Winwood Subdivision are currently in the North Shore Water Reclamation District (NSWRD), and half are not; therefore, half of property owners have been paying to be a part of the NSWRD, and half have not. This has complicated financing logistics. Chairman Waldeck asked if those properties not a part of the NSWRD are a part of another water reclamation district. Director Thomas explained that they are not. A similar situation was experienced with the Regency Sanitary Sewer SSA. Residents of the Regency Subdivision chose to include NSWRD annexation and connection fees in the SSA, whereas residents of the Winwood Subdivision have indicated a preference of not including any such fees in the SSA. Mike Strong explained that the City has made a policy decision with its commitment to sanitary sewer connections for nearly all properties in the City, given the significant public health benefits of a sanitary sewer system. Mike Strong then explained that staff began this project by considering 28 properties, which would be serviced by an extension from Waukegan Road and an extension from Jensen Drive. At the October 13, 2016 meeting, residents inquired about the potential of multiple sanitary sewer SSAs, in which one sanitary sewer SSA included the extension from Waukegan Road and another separate sanitary sewer SSA included the extension of Jensen Drive. There was also a strong concern from some residents regarding subsidizing costs for other residents. Following the meeting, staff began researching an alternative financing option, which would consist of two separate sanitary sewer SSAs. It is estimated that 42% of total project costs are related to the eastern properties of the Winwood Subdivision and 58% of total project costs are related to western properties of the Winwood Subdivision. Some property owners of the western properties have been in communication with staff and have indicated a preference for a single comprehensive SSA, to include all fees. Chairman Waldeck asked if residents would be locked into current fee rates if a single comprehensive SSA were pursued. She stated that fee rates could increase with time. Mike Strong responded that the fees would be paid upfront; therefore, increased future fee rates would not apply. He then stated that there are static and variable costs to consider. He also stated that some residents may not be interested in paying connection fees at this time, as they may not be residing in the Winwood Subdivision when the property connects to the sanitary sewer. Alderman Moreno stated that it is imperative that sanitary sewer SSA balances are disclosed when a property is sold. Mike Strong stated that by pursuing two separate sanitary sewer SSAs, the perception of inequities may be dispelled. In response to that statement, property owner Andrew Twyman of 1161 Winwood Drive asked if the eastern property owners would vote separately from the western property owners. Chairman Waldeck confirmed that if two separate sanitary sewer SSAs were pursued, residents would vote on the SSA their property was included in. If eastern property owners and western property owners voted differently, an issue would be posed for City Council. City Manager Kiely stated that the matter would at that point, need to be reviewed by City Council. Also, if an SSA is not pursued, a recapture funding mechanism would be pursued as the alternative. Mike Strong stated that staff has reviewed four different cost options with the residents, and that minimum and maximum fees have been determined. The Annual Assessment per lot would range from $3,300 to $3,600. If the Winwood Subdivision is split into two separate SSAs, the Annual Assessment of the eastern properties is estimated at $2,500 and the Annual Assessment of the western properties is estimated at $3,900. The residents of the western properties have indicated support of a more comprehensive (including most fees) Annual Assessment. Mike Strong also stated that there would be additional private costs when a connection occurred. Alderman Newman asked if residents understand the difference between the SSA and the Recapture funding mechanisms. Andrew Twyman stated that he understands the difference; but, is unsure if all other residents in the Winwood area understand the difference. Chairman Waldeck stated that an SSA is less burdensome funding mechanism for homeowners than a Recapture funding mechanism. Andrew Twyman responded stating that the residents of the Winwood Subdivision currently share the sentiment that voting against the SSA indicates opposition to the sanitary sewer installation; rather than support of the Recapture funding mechanism. Property owner Dorothy Bednarczyk of 1088 Winwood Drive stated that residents did not receive mailings regarding the sanitary sewer SSA meetings. Andrew Twyman then stated that residents of the Winwood Subdivision are not supportive of the sanitary sewer SSA. City Manager Kiely responded stating that there is a contrary opinion. Also, staff made many attempts to notify residents of meetings. City Manager Kiely stated that some residents contacted staff directly to express their strong support of this project. Chairman Waldeck then inquired about the City’s options if 51% of residents abject to the SSA. City Manager Kiely responded that this occurred when the City pursued an SSA on South Waukegan Road, in which majority objected to the proposed SSA resulting in the City pursing the project through a Recapture financing mechanism. Chairman Waldeck stated that this reaffirmed her presumption that City Council can determine that a project can proceed through the Recapture financing mechanism. Andrew Twyman asked if City Council would proceed with the project if residents voted against the SSA. Chairman Waldeck responded stating that City Council empathizes with residents. She stated that some residents are in a different financial position than others. She also stated that some residents may be very supportive of the sanitary sewer installation. City Council and the Public Works Committee has discussed its pursuit of a citywide sanitary sewer system for many years now. Chairman Moreno explained that the City is implementing its recently developed Sustainability Plan, which is committed to clean water. There have been instances in the City in which septic systems have been illicitly connected to storm sewer systems, resulting in substantial pollution. Resident Zachary Eleveld of 1137 Winwood Drive stated that the City’s purpose of pursuing this project has not been clearly communicated to residents. He stated that the necessity of the conversion from septic systems to a sanitary sewer system has not been previously articulated. He also stated that residents share the sentiment that they are getting incorrect information, or not getting information at all. Moreover, residents do not feel that the City is working to minimize the financial impact on residents. Andrew Twyman then stated that a septic system can be as effective as a sanitary sewer. Alderman Moreno explained that septic systems are very ineffective when they fail. She also stated that there is a regional and national trend toward sanitary sewer conversions, as these systems can be managed centrally. Resident Tom Kaczmarski of 1088 Winwood Drive then explained that before moving to the City of Lake Forest, he thoroughly investigated septic system costs. According to his analysis, the cost of installing a complete septic system is a fraction of the cost of the proposed sanitary sewer installation. He stated that the cost is staggering and the necessity of the project has not been effectively communicated with residents. Andrew Twyman then stated that waiting to pursue the project until the market and economy improve should be considered by City Council. Chairman Waldeck stated that a property that has a sanitary sewer system is more appealing than a property with a septic system. Alderman Moreno agreed. Chairman Waldeck stated that City Council realizes the benefits of a citywide sanitary sewer system to the Lake Forest community as a whole. Andrew Twyman responded stating that all Lake Forest residents financed other sanitary sewer installations in Lake Forest through property taxes. City Manager Kiely responded explaining that the prior statement was factually incorrect. City Manager Kiely also stated the Public Works Committee will continue this discussion after residents vote. Zachary Eleveld asked if the City could coordinate multiple votes. Chairman Waldeck stated that she is unsure. City Manager Kiely stated that when the establishing ordinance is reviewed by City Council, a discussion regarding the coordination of multiple votes can be had. Chairman Waldeck stated that City Council will move forward with this process when there is a fuller representation of resident opinions. Andrew Twyman inquired about the significance of the City Council meeting on December 5, 2016. City Manager Kiely stated that at the 60-day objection Period will begin following that meeting. Mike Strong then explained that staff is seeking direction from the Public Works Committee regarding the SSA approach to pursue. He also explained that to fulfill the construction time period endorsed at the October, 2016 meeting, the Public Hearing will need to be on December 5, 2016. Bidding in February is ideal to get the most competitive pricing. Chairman Waldeck stated that it was necessary to maintain the initially agreed upon timeline. Through the public process, staff will have a more accurate understanding of the opinions of the Winwood Subdivision community as a whole regarding this project. Alderman Newman stated that he is not confident that all residents have a thorough understanding of this project. Alderman Moreno stated that residents of other subdivisions recognized the significance of a centralized sanitary system. She also stated that she supports the initially agreed upon timeline. Chairman Waldeck stated that delaying the project could still be an option; however, the Public Works Committee does not yet have enough information. Tom Kaczmarski stated that certain properties within the Winwood Subdivision are likely to be further subdivided. He then stated that the project cost would be reduced if there were more lots present. Zachary Eleveld then stated that there are inequities with the design of the sanitary sewer system. He asked if other options could be considered that would be more cost effective for more residents. Director Thomas then stated that having two separate SSAs may further complicate the launching of this project. Chairman Waldeck suggested pursuing a single SSA. Alderman Newman and Alderman Moreno agreed. Chairman Waldeck thanked the Winwood Subdivision residents for being present. IV. WATER PLANT DESIGN DISCUSSION Director Thomas stated that the design of the Water Plant is going well. Also, the pilot is going well. Superintendent Martin introduced Brian Hackman of Strand Associates, Inc. who then explained that the City will be bidding the project in late January, 2017. Bids are expected to be received at the end of February, 2017. Staff will present bids to the Public Works Committee in mid-March and to City Council in early April. Brian Hackman explained that portions of the facility have been relocated to allow necessary updates to be completed. He then explained that it is necessary for water processing to be slowed down for optimal disinfection. He also explained that water needs to be pushed in a meandering path through the clearwell so that Water Plant Operators can process the water out of the Water Plant in the most safe and sanitary manner. The project budget was initially estimated to total $9.75 million. Chairman Waldeck confirmed the project timeline. Alderman Moreno inquired about the contingency amount. Brian Hackman responded stating that the total contingency amount has not been reduced yet. Alderman Moreno inquired about the bond issuance including the contingency. Director Holleb confirmed that the contingency is included in the bond issuance. Brian Hackman stated that major unanticipated additional project costs have not surfaced. Alderman Moreno requested that cost estimates continue to be very conservative. Chairman Waldeck motioned to support the proposed minor improvements and modifications to the clearwell. Alderman Moreno seconded her motion, which carried unanimously. V. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT VI. NEXT MEETING – DECEMBER 5, 2016 – 5:00 P.M. AT CITY HALL VII. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Waldeck moved to adjourn the meeting of the Public Works Committee at 6:15 p.m. Alderman Newman seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Eileen Timken Management Analyst #* #*#* #* #*#* #* ") ")") ") ")")") ") ")") ") ")")")")") ")") ") ") ") ") ") ") ^ ^^ ^ ^ ^ ^^^ ^^ ^ ^ ^ ^^ ^ ^^^ ^ ^ ^^ ^^ ^ ^ ^^^^ ^ ^^^^^^^^^ ^ ^^^ ^ ^ ^^^ !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( I 9 4 FI ELD DRKENNEDY RD (RT 60) G A G E L N WA U K E GA N R DWALDEN LN F O S T E R PLL A K E R D GREEN BAY RDILLINOIS RD O L D ELM RD A R B OR LN F ARM RD K UR TI S LNOLD MILL RD WESTMINSTER ESTATE LNR INGWOOD R D H U N T E R L N W E STMO RELAND RD M ELO D Y RD ONWENTSIA RD LAUREL AVE KATHRYNLNB UENARD LON G M E A D O W LN CARROLL RD LOCH LNSAUNDERS RDWINW OOD DR A C ORN T R ESTES AVELAKEWO O D D R TURICUMGA VINCT OAKKNOLLDREVERGREEN DRHARLANLNWILD ROSELN SYMP H ONYST COUNT R Y PL DOUGLASDRWESTFORK D R F AI R VIE W A V E STONE AVESTABLE LNTIMBERLNWESTLEIGH RD NORTHCROFT CT BARNSWALLOWFALLS CIR PL E D G EFIELD LN WESTMINSTER H IG H L A N D A V E ARCADY D RROSEM ARY RD NORTH AVE A L D E N L N F O O TBALL DR NOBLE AVE LOUIS AVEBURROAKRDWESTLEIGH RD ALEXIS CTWALDEN R D WALL ACERD GOLF LNW A V E L ANDRD E LM TREE R D MAYFLOWERRDH A CKBERRY LN FAIRWAYDR LOWELL LNOLD COLONY RDAHWAHNEELNHILLDALE PL FIOREDRSUMMERFIEL D D R C A M P USCIRVALLEY R D C H E R O K E E R DLELANDCT WASHI N GT O N CONWAY RD REGENCY LN WED G E W OOD DRB U T L ERDRPOLODRL O N G W O O D D RCAHILL LNWOODL AND RD SCOTT ST WI LSO N D R ATTERIDGE RD R U E FORET GLENWOOD RD SPRUCE AV ASHLEY PADDOCKLNBRIDLEPARK AVE LINDEN AVE B L UFFS EDGEDRSOUTHNORTH HAVENWOOD R D L NKEITH LNWISCONSINAVELYNETTE DRMAR-LANE DRSUM MIT W E S T E R N A VRDSPRING LN WA SH IN GT ONCIR AHWAHNEE RDJAMES CT NA BINGTO N CA M BSDR SOUTH M EADOWLNCRAB TREE L N HONEYSUCKL E RDPEMBRIDGED R MEADOW LNPEMBROKE D R FRANKLIN MCCORMICK DRQUAIL D RTARA LNFRANZDRW A LNUTRDOAKWOODAVEBRIAR LN ASH LAWN WILLOWSTAYNSLEYC H U R C H C O L L E G E R D S U F FOLKLNLARCHMONT BARATCT M ALLA R DLNV IN E A V E WOODBINEPLHERIT A GECTJENSEN DREDGEWOODRDCASTLEGATE CTOLMSTEDLANE KI MMERCTOA K D A LE A VEGRIFFITHRD RYAN PLCOVE N TRY DRCLOVERAVEHAWTHORNEPLGREENWOOD AVE NORTHMOOR RDROSE WOODHILL LNPINE OAKS CIR B R ID G E LN VIEW SAVANNA CTRIDGE RDWHITE OAKEXETER PLA S P E N D R JUNETERSANDPI P E R LN HIGHVIEW TERR GRANBY LEXINGTON DRSUNSET GARDNER LN TERR BROA D L AN D L N WHITMORE GREENVIEW PL BI G O A K SH ER O N R D MERRITTL A W R E N C E A V E SEQUOIACTPINE LN GREEN BRIAR LN NORTH POND LN MILLS CT PRAIRIE AVESHAWNEELNSUMMITAVSIRWILLIAMLNRED FOX LNHAWKWEED LNT H O M A S P L NEGAUNEELNRIDGEARMOUR WOODLAWN BRECKENRIDGE J E N N I F E R CT HOLLANDCTAS HL ANDFLETCHERHOLDEN CTFARLIN WESTERN AVEMT VERNON AVES TONELEIG H C T CASCA DE TIVERTONBURTONMEADOW LAKE LN LNCIRR DRD PL ANNALN M A R K E T S Q MICHGAMME LN BIRCHCT CONCORD DR J A C Q U L Y N L N VERDA HWY 41D E E R PATH GREEN BAY RDL A K E R D CIRCLELN D E E R P A T H TELEGRAPHRDWES T E RNA V E B E V E R L Y P L DEE R PATHMCKI NLEYRDTI MBERLNTALLGRA S SLNMCKI NLEYRDGR E E N B A Y R D GREEN BAY RDGLENWOOD R DSHERIDANRDWESTERNAVESHERIDANRDS H E R I DANRDWA UK E GA N R DOLD MILL RDWAUKEGAN RD (RTE 43)MARION AVE GRANDVIEW LN WOODED LNWINSTON RDMAYWOOD RDSTONEGATE LNWINTHROPLN GREENLEAF AVERAVINEPARKDR BROAD SMOO R E KAJER LNEAST MINTHAVEN RDFOX TRAIL CTSTABLEWOOD LNRDBUENAHIGHKNOLLWOODBARCLAYCIRKIRKHILL LNJAMESSTLN F A R N H A MLN OLD ELM RDSAUNDERSRD RIDGE RDESTATE LN RINGWOOD RD RI DGE RDOLD ELM RDHWY 41OAK KNOLL DRBUENA RDW E S T M INSTERCA MPUS CI R CARROLL RIDGERD LAUREL AVE FORESTHILLRDMELLODY R O S E M ARY RD H W Y 41I 94 SPRUCE A V M IL L B URNE RDOLD MILL RD D E ERPATH M A Y FL O WE RRDKENNEDY RD (RTE 60) M O R N IN G S I D E D R KNOLLWOO D R D NILES AVE OVERL O O KDR ST O N EHASTINGS RDDR MT VE R N O N AVEWOODSTREAMCT AVECTWILSHIRE RD KIMBERLY W IN D H A V E N C TCASCADE CT SOLDBARNLN S A D DLERUNHOLB ORN KING MUIR RDLN CONWAY FARMS DRACADEMY RDFORESTELMTREERDEVERETT RDI 94 FIELDDRWAUKEGAN RD (RTE 43)J AMES C T S TURICUMRDHWY 4 1 EVERETT RD EVERETT RDWA U K E GA N R D ( R T E 4 3 ) DEERPATH L AKERD H W Y 4 1 BANKLNILLIN O ISRD LINDEN AVEILLIN O IS R D FORESTHILLRDSHERIDANRDCHEROKEE R D S H E RID A N R DROCKE F E LLERRD GATERD CHERRY AVE M A P L E WOOD RD FROSTP LWIL D WOODRDWESTMINSTER W IS C O N S IN OAKWOOD AVEW O O D L A NDRDLNCHRISTIN ALNSURREY LNDOVER RDS H A WF O R D W A Y LARKSPUR CT CT N RI DGE RDSUSSEXL NKNOLL AVEI L L I NOISRDBARBE R R Y LNA V G O L D E N R O D L NOAKBOWLINGGREENDRWILSON DRLITTLEFIELDDRS T R A T F O R D C T WEDGEWOOD CTLNCTDEVONSHIR EPARLIAMENT CTWIMBLEDON CT OLD MILL RD S A L IS B U R Y L N TANGLEWOODCTSETTLERS' SQUARE S H E F FIE L D C TBARRY'S CTYORKTOW N E LN CAST L EDRNEW REILLY LNPINE C RO FT LNWAUKEGAN RD ( RTE 43)KNIGHTSBRIDGECTCONWAY F A R M SDR RID G E R D RD WESTLEIGH RD BASSWOOD RDBLACKTH ORNLNPO P L A R RDLNW A RWICKRDRDKENNINGTON TERR CHILTERN DREDGCOTE LN TIS B U RY RD 1 LN PARKMEADLN INVERLIETH R D HATHAWAYCIRMEADOWOODDRMONTICELLOCIRDR GREENVALERDHALLIGANCIRDRN O R T HCLIFFWAY KI NG MUI RTERRINVERLIETH DEERPATHSQMIDDLEFORK DR DRCTMCGLINNINCTKENNICOTT DR EMMONSCTA V EWOODROCKLAND RD (RTE 176) W OO D B IN E L N LNVALL E Y RDBUE N A R DKNOLLWOODRDCIR CT 2 34 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 56 7 8 9101112 13 SOUTH SHORELN 1 BERKSHIRE DR2 WOODWARD CT3 ANDOVER CT4 STOCKBRIDGE CT5 GREENWAY DR6 WHARTON DR7 BUCKINGHAM CT8 ST GEORGE CT9 BALMORAL CT10 WINDSOR CT11 BRISTOL CT12 EATON CT13 CAMELOT CT F I E L D C T PL RDAVE EVERETT SCHOOLRD GROVECT TRILLIUMLN KENNETTLNRANCHRD HARLANCTCRESTCT KENDLERCTIVYCT MAPLECTH E A T H E RLN THORNE LNOXFORDRD LORRAINE CIR LN RD 14 15 19161718 WINDRIDGE OAK GROVE LN KNOLLDRCT LN GLOUC E S T E RCRKESWICK LN AM BER L EYCT 1 2 3 CEDAR LN R O B I N SON D R CHALMERS CTCT1 MARQUETTE CT2 PRINCETON CT3 HARVARD CT4 STANFORD CT5 CORNELL CT6 ACADEMY WOODS DR7 ACADEMY RD8 YALE CT 14 ASBURY CT15 CANTERBURY CT16 NEWPORT CT17 DANBURY CT18 BRADFORD CT19 OLD BRIDGE RD 1 MAGNOLIA LN2 WESTBRIDGE CIR3 ELDERBERRY CT SARDPL Lake ForestSeptic System Locations /0 10.5 Miles 12/2/2016 !(Septic System on Proposed Sanitary Sewer ^Septic System Adjacent to Existing Sanitary Sewer ")Septic System within 500 feet of Existing Sanitary Sewer #*Septic System within 1,000 feet of Existing Sanitary Sewer Manhole 500 Foot Buffer Winwood Dr. Regency Ln. Total Septi c Properti e s 1122015 Regency SSA -15Proposed 2016 Wi nwood SSA -28Adjacent Properti e s -43 Remai ni ng Se ptic Properi te s 26 Address Type Distance Grouped Properties 113 1500 N Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing Regency SSA 1502 N Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing Regency SSA 1552 N Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing Regency SSA 0 N Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing Regency SSA 0 N Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing Regency SSA 0 N Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing Regency SSA 1500 N Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing Regency SSA 1504 N Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing Regency SSA 1540 N Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing Regency SSA 1566 N Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing Regency SSA 1570 N Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing Regency SSA 1590 N Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing Regency SSA 1100 W Regency Ln Septic Septic system adjacent to existing Regency SSA 1120 W Regency Ln Septic Septic system adjacent to existing Regency SSA 1200 W Regency Ln Septic Septic system adjacent to existing Regency SSA Total 15 1055 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1060 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1070 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1089 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1106 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1111 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1134 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1137 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1154 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1161 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1189 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1190 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1200 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1210 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1220 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1225 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1240 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1251 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1255 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1260 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1262 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1264 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1266 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1268 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1270 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1271 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1272 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA 1088 W Winwood Dr Septic Proposed Winwood SSA Total 28 1299 N Knollwood Cir Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 283 W Laurel Ave Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 287 W Laurel Ave Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 410 N Lexington Dr Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 2015 Regency SSA Proposed 2016 Winwood SSA Adjacent Properties Total Septic Properties Address Type Distance Grouped Properties 1050 N Melody Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1090 W Oak Grove Ln Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1026 N Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1309 W Conway Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1500 W Kennedy Rd M Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1500 W Kennedy Rd N Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1500 W Kennedy Rd Q Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1500 W Kennedy Rd R Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1500 W Kennedy Rd S Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1500 W Kennedy Rd T Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1500 W Kennedy Rd U Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1500 W Kennedy Rd X Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1701 W Kennedy Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 795 W Old Mill Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 704 S Ridge Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 740 S Ridge Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 260 S Saunders Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 300 S Saunders Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 488 S Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 750 S Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 600 W Westleigh Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 630 W Westleigh Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 960 W Westleigh Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 990 W Westleigh Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1396 Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1700 N Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1720 N Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1742 N Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1050 N Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1350 Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 684 N Monticello Cir Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 682 N Monticello Cir Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 681 N Monticello Cir Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1100 W Summerfield Dr Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 1381 E Kennedy Rd Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 787 W Gage Ln IR Septic system adjacent to existing 869 W Gage Ln Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 921 W Gage Ln Septic Septic system adjacent to existing 935 w Gage Ln Septic Septic system adjacent to existing Total 43 1400 Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system within 500 feet 1 1402 Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system within 500 feet 1 1340 Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system within 1000 feet 1 1298 Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system within 1000 feet 1 1300 A Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system within 1000 feet 1 1300 B Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system within 1000 feet 1 1300 C Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system within 1000 feet 1 1300 D Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system within 1000 feet 1 8 692 S Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system within 500 feet 2 694 S Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system within 500 feet 2 698 S Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system within 500 feet 2 700 S Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system within 500 feet 2 Remaining Septic Properties Address Type Distance Grouped Properties 650 S Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system within 1000 feet 2 5 1045 W Summerfield Dr Septic Septic system within 500 feet 3 1 1255 N Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system within 500 feet 4 1275 N Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system within 500 feet 4 2 1601 W Conway Rd Septic Septic system within 500 feet 5 1 255 S Ridge Rd Septic Septic system within 500 feet 6 281 s Ridge Rd Septic Septic system within 500 feet 6 301 s Ridge Rd Septic Septic system within 500 feet 6 3 694 S Ridge Rd Septic Septic system within 500 feet 7 1 800 S Ridge Rd Septic Septic system within 500 feet 8 808 S Ridge Rd Septic Septic system within 500 feet 8 2 490 S Waukegan Rd Septic Septic system within 500 feet 9 1 1111 W Westleigh Rd Septic Septic system within 500 feet 10 1 765 W Westleigh Rd Septic Septic system within 500 feet 11 770 W Westleigh Rd Septic Septic system within 500 feet 11 2 Total 27 2015 Regency SSA 15 Proposed 2016 Winwood SSA 28 Adjacent Properties 43 W/n 500 Feet 20 w/n 1000 Feet 7 Total Septic Properties 113 Potential Amendments to §150.384 (Sewage and Sewage Disposal) (A) Each premises requiring sanitary sewer service shall have a separate and independent connection to a public sanitary sewer where a public sanitary sewer is available or accessible. If a sanitary sewer is not available in the public street or alley abutting a property requiring sewer service, or there is no public sanitary sewer accessible within 500 feet from any of the property lines, a private sanitary sewer and sewage treatment system may be constructed and maintained within the property limits at the expense of the owner. Plans and specifications for private sanitary sewers and sewage treatment systems shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council or its duly authorized designee before construction is started. The owner of any property requiring sanitary sewer services, and dependent upon the use of private sewers and treatment systems shall within six months, after the completion of a public sanitary sewer in a public street, way or easement upon which such property abuts, connect the sanitary sewer from such property into the public sanitary sewer in the manner provided by ordinance and thereupon discontinue the use of any private sewage treatment system. (B) Waivers. In areas where new sanitary sewers are installed and existing dwellings are served by private sewage treatment systems, the existing buildings, upon request of the property owners, may be permitted to continue using a private sewage disposal system with the approval of the City Council. (1) Application for Waiver. (a) An application or written request for waiver shall be filed with the Administrative Officer. Such request shall be filed by or on behalf of the legal or beneficial owner of the property for which a waiver is sought. (2) Standards for Waiver. (a) The City Council, after hearing a request, may recommend a waiver from the regulations of this section in cases where there are practical difficulties or particular hardships in the way of carrying out the strict letter of any of these regulations, but only when such waiver is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this chapter. (b) In reviewing a case, the City Council shall require evidence to the effect that: a. The existing private sewage treatment system has been tested and certified by the City Health Officer, or his or her Deputy, to be in satisfactory working condition; b. The residence to be served would require a sanitary sewer service of more than 500 lineal feet; c. The conditions upon which a request for waiver are based are unique to the property for which the waiver is sought, and are not applicable, generally, to other property within the area and/or that have access to the sanitary sewer in question; d. The alleged difficulty or hardship in conforming with the requirements of this section is caused by this chapter and has not been created by the actions of any persons presently or formerly having an interest in the property; and e. The proposed waiver will not substantially impair the health and welfare, endanger public or personal safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. (C) Disposition of Waiver. (1) Recommendation by Public Works Committee. The Public Works Committee of the City Council shall transmit its recommendation and findings of fact to the City Council within 30 days after hearing a request on a proposed waiver. In its recommendation, the Public Works Committee may recommend that such conditions and restrictions be placed upon the premises benefitted by a waiver as may be necessary to comply with the objectives of this section. The concurring vote of three members of the Public Works Committee shall be necessary to recommend the authorization of any waiver from this section. (2) Disposition by City Council. Upon receipt of the recommendation of the Board, the City Council shall place such recommendation on its agenda within 30 days and may, by resolution without further hearing, grant waivers from the provisions of this chapter in accordance with the standards established in division (B)(2) above, or may refer it back to the Public Works Committee for further consideration. Every recommendation from the Public Works Committee shall be accompanied by written findings of fact specifying the reason for granting such variance. Those applications which fail to receive the approval of the Public Works Committee shall not be passed by the Council except by the favorable vote of two-third of the aldermen then holding office. (3) Duration of waiver. Upon the resolution of the City Council granting a waiver shall be valid from the date of such resolution until a time of a subdivision of the owned premises, or at any time that it is determined that a private sewage treatment system can no longer function in a manner satisfactory to the City Health Officer. A covenant between the City and the owner, to be recorded with the County Recorder of Deeds, agreeing to these terms shall be executed at that time. FOREST PARK BLUFF STABILITY EVALUATION SUBJECT: Approval of an Agreement to Provide an Update to the Forest Park Bluff Stability Evaluation PRESENTED BY: Robert Ells, Superintendent of Engineering (810-3555) PURPOSE AND ACTION REQUESTED: Staff is requesting City Council approval of an agreement with an engineering firm specializing in geotechnical analysis, to provide an update to the bluff restoration feasibility study for the bluff adjacent to Forest Park from Spring Lane to the North Beach Access Road. The original study looked at the area between Deerpath and Spring Lane with a focus on the Ring Road, and was completed in 2009. If the agreement is approved this evening, the report will be completed by early February, 2017. PROJECT REVIEW/RECOMMENDATIONS: Reviewed Date Comments Public Works Committee 12/5/2016 Reviewed Proposals from both Engineering Firms City Council 11/21/2016 Directed Staff to Obtain a Proposal from an Additional Engineering Firm Finance Committee 11/14/2016 Reviewed the Remaining Bluff Area to be Analyzed City Council 7/18/2016 Approval of an Agreement to Analyze the Bluff Adjacent to South Beach Access Road Public Works Committee 6/20/2016 Reviewed South Beach Access Road Bluff Movement BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: In mid-May, 2016 staff noticed that the bluff on the east side of the South Beach Access Road (SBAR hereafter) had begun to move and separate from the curb and roadway. In July, 2016, City Council approved an agreement with AECOM to further analyze the area from the lower end of the SBAR , north to Forest Park’s drive entrance (approximately at Spring Lane). AECOM completed all topographical and cross sectional surveys of the area and provided the City with their recommendation and cost estimates to repair specific points along the bluff. This issue was reviewed at the November 14, 2016 capital budget meeting. The Finance Committee was informed that a workgroup consisting of two Aldermen and various residents with related knowledge and interests in bluff and ravine repairs, will meet during the months of December, January, and February. This group will review engineering reports on the bluff’s condition and provide a recommendation on any possible future capital projects to the Finance Committee at the March 13, 2017 budget meeting. The request this evening is to provide an update to an analysis that was completed in 2009 for the remaining portion of the Forest Park bluff that was not evaluated this past summer (Spring Lane to the North Beach Access Road). While this is unrelated to the shallow slope failure on the SBAR, the intent is to provide a comprehensive look at the condition of the bluff in all of Forest Park prior to making decisions on the scope of repairs along the SBAR proposed to be completed in 2017. Beginning on page ___ of this agenda packet, is a copy of AECOM’s 2009 Subsurface Exploration and Bluff Stability Analysis for the Forest Park Beach Access Road, a letter from AECOM dated November 28, 2016 outlining the engineering history of the 2011 Forest Park Access Road Bluff Restoration Project, and maps designating multiple dates when Forest Park studies and repair projects were performed. Finally, the design to repair the SBAR’s bluff will be placed on hold until the workgroup’s recommendations are received by the Finance Committee. If AECOM’s proposal is approved this evening, similar to the access road’s repair project in 2011, staff will recommend AECOM not be used for the design of any bluff repairs and that a different engineering firm be hired to provide such services. BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT: The following two quotations were received by the City’s Engineering Section: Firm Amount AECOM $33,400 Ciorba $42,400 Per section 9.0-K of the City’s purchasing directive, staff is requesting waiving the formal request for proposals and evaluation process. Proposals from both AECOM and Ciorba were reviewed by the Public Works Committee prior to this evening’s City Council meeting. Both firms are very knowledgeable in the field of geotechnical analysis. Proposals from both engineering firms can be found on pages ___ of this agenda. Based upon the lower proposed price and baseline data previously obtained over multiple years, staff is recommending the update to the feasibility study be performed by AECOM. The non-budgeted feasibility study will be funded by advancing amounts to be budgeted in the FY2018 annual budget. Below is a summary of analysis budget: FY2017 Funding Source Amount Budgeted Amount Requested Budgeted? Y/N Capital Improvements Fund (Advance of FY18 Budget Allocation) $0 $33,400 N If necessary, a FY2017 supplemental appropriation will be submitted for City Council approval at the end of the year. COUNCIL ACTION: Acknowledge the exception noted in Section 9.0-K of the City’s Purchasing Directive and approve an agreement with AECOM to perform a Forest Park Bluff Restoration Feasibility Study for the area near Spring Lane to the North Beach Access Road in the amount of $33,400. 620 969 965 411 555 545547 540 780 549 700 650 810 970 985 1010 930 528 600 528 676 941 1015 9 0 0 830 840 490528681 6 7 6901940 840 533 925 701 620 LAKE RD FOREST PARK DR S P R IN G L N N MAY F L OWE R RDE D E E R P A T H CLIFF RDFOREST PARK DR Legend Slope Stability Analysis 1996 2009 2010 2016 μ 620 969 965 411 555 545547 540 780 549 700 650 810 970 985 1010 930 528 600 528 676 941 1015 9 0 0 830 840 490528681 6 7 6901940 840 533 925 701 620 LAKE RD FOREST PARK DR S P R IN G L N N MAY F L OWE R RDE D E E R P A T H CLIFF RDFOREST PARK DR Legend Slope Stability Projects 1999 2001 2012 2013 2017 (Proposed) μ AECOM 303 East Wacker Drive Chicago, IL 60601 www.aecom.com November 28, 2016 Sent via email (ThomasM@cityoflakeforest.com) Mr. Mike Thomas City of Lake Forest 800 N. Field Drive Lake Forest, Illinois 60045 RE: Forest Park Access Road Bluff Restoration Project Engineering History Dear Mike: This letter provides a summary history of the bluff along the South Beach Access Road. AECOM’s involvement with the project began during 2009 when the City of Lake Forest requested that we observe a bluff failure along the road, and perform slope stability analysis to evaluate the reasons for this problem. The following photograph illustrates the failure that affected approximately 70 to 90 feet of the bluff. This failure was caused by the following reasons: • The bluff slope exceeds a 2H:1V slope ratio. This degree of steepness is inherently unstable and slope movements will occur. At a slope of 2:1, the movements usually tend to be more characterized as a slow creep. Steeper slopes can experience landslide failures. The above road area was much steeper than 2:1 and a localized slope landside occurred. 2 • Fill soils were placed under the road when it was originally constructed during the 1980’s. These soils are less stable than natural glacially deposited clayey soils. This caused the slopes next to the road to be less stable. • Stormwater runoff was concentrated at the catch basins shown in the picture and as slope movements occurred, the storm system leaked allowing water to enter the soils next to and under the road. The addition of water into the soil exacerbates the slope stability problem. The location of the 2009 failure is illustrated on the following topographic map: The 2009 AECOM report provided the following conclusions: • Topographic analysis indicates that the failure zone has some of the steepest slopes in this area. Localized steep slopes were also observed elsewhere along the road in localized areas; however, failures had not occurred in those areas. The AECOM work scope for this project was limited to the area that had failed. • The road at this location had no shoulder with the steep slope extending right up to the edge of the road. A shoulder would have slowed the failure process or timing; however, it was likely to have occurred at some point either way. • Slope stability analysis was completed for the failure zone. This analysis was important to understand the nature of the landslide. The analysis indicated that the slide was a shallow South Beach Access Road 2009 Failure 3 failure and that a deeper more catastrophic slide was much less likely for the type of geology that comprises this bluff. The analysis indicates that this stretch of slope had a factor of safety against sliding of about 1.0. This result confirms that the failure of the slope was primarily induced by the steepness of the slope and exacerbated by the presence of fill soils under the road crest and storm water leakage into the slope during heavy rains. • The storm water catch basin construction was identified as a significant contributing factor. These structures acted as a pile foundation that tended to hold the road surface up. Thus, while these steep slopes tended to creep downslope over time, the lower portion of the slope separated from the road and the resulting imbalance accelerated the slope movement. The damaged and leaking catch basins were identified as a significant issue as water entered into the exposed soils and accelerated slope movements. • The report concluded that a comprehensive restoration that would eliminate all slope creep would require very large and expensive retaining walls on both sides of the road. The AECOM 2009 report work scope did not include design level input or analysis. During March 2011, the City of Lake Forest requested that AECOM visit the failure site and update our observation of field conditions noted in the AECOM 2009 report. The City had developed options for the restoration of this area that included the proposed flattening of the slopes by lowering the road profile and changing the road alignment to be farther from the slope edge. The drainage system was to be reconstructed to resolve the leaking storm sewer system. Lake Forest had prepared a power point summary with 5 slope restoration options. These options included the following features in various combinations: 1) lower the road profile in its current alignment and removal of the excavated soil from the site or regrading of the adjacent slope areas to flatten the slopes, 2) remediate the road in its current alignment and driving 200 feet of steel sheet pile, and 3) realignment of the road to move it farther from the slope. The option selected by Lake Forest as being that would provide slope stability benefits at reasonable cost, as well as safety benefits due to a better road alignment was called “Lake Forest Option 2”. AECOM updated the slope stability analysis for this option, that included a ten foot road lowering from elevation 644 to 634, and a 10 foot vertical cut to reduce fill on the crest of the slope. The option included flattening of the slopes adjacent to the road – but did not regrade steep slopes at lower elevations. The analysis indicated that this option would improve the slope stability in all areas where the slope is 2:1 or flatter. Areas that are steeper would still have reduced stability and localized shallow slope movements would likely be expected to occur in those areas. The report conclusions in the 2011 report indicate the following: • Global stability will be little affected by the proposed roadway improvement. However, in areas where the road is relocated away from the edge of the bluff and if the bluff is regraded to be greater than 2:1, shallow failure occurrences would decrease. This presumes that proper vegetation is maintained on the slopes. • The stability of the slope depends on an adequately functioning drainage system. We recommended that the new drainage system follow certain design standards to resist damage for minor future slope movements so that the system continues to operate properly. We recall that through the public participation process, the City refined the road realignment design and reduced the road profile cut to reduce tree impacts. The final design varied from that included in 4 the AECOM stability 2011 analysis in that the vertical road excavation was reduced from 10 feet to 3 feet and the road alignment was shifted a lesser amount from the bluff edge. The revised design required the construction of a retaining wall on the west side of the road where it was moved closer to the ravine slope. AECOM was asked to design this wall - we provided the design during the spring of 2011. Following is a 2015 aerial photo of the restored slope: This restoration has worked well. The new retaining wall on the west side of the road is also performing well. The recent significant failures occurred south of the restored slope. The only issues noted during recent observations are minor tension cracks in some areas approaching the failure zone to the south. Summary The South Beach access road was constructed on a peninsula shaped land mass that includes steep bluff slopes on both sides. The original road construction apparently also contained fill under the road Slope Restoration Area Localized steep lower slope zones 2011 Restoration Area 2011 Wall Construction West Side of Road 5 to form a surface that as wide enough to accommodate the road. The road performed reasonably well until in during its 23rd anniversary, the bluff failed along an 80 foot stretch of the road. The failure was a shallow slope slide caused by the naturally inherent instability that is common to these steep bluffs. The glacially deposited clay slopes that can contain sand seams can normally stand fairly steep without major deep seated failures. However, when they exist at slopes steeper than 2:1, they will always creep. The rate of creep depends on the geology of a given area and the degree of slope steepness. The 2011 slope restoration was necessary to restore a safe access road. The option that was selected and implemented by the City considered a wide range of solutions. The selected solution struck a balance between environmental impact, public input with respect to tree removals, future maintenance and cost. As with all Northshore Illinois glacially formed bluffs, slope creep is a common occurrence that requires periodic maintenance. The planned restoration of the new failure areas located south of the 2011 restoration area will take a different approach. There is little to no room for the relocation of the road to the west to create a buffer against future slope movements. Furthermore, the natural slopes on the east side of the road in those areas approach 1.5:1 in areas with the steepest areas near the upper 10 vertical feet of the slopes. These areas have a high potential for slope failures as evidenced by recent damages. As illustrated on the following map, the dark red colored portions of the slope are at a slope ratio of 1.25:1. The green and yellow areas are reasonably flat in the 2.0 to 2.5:1 range. 6 The proposed slope restoration will target the steep upper slopes by constructing a vertical retaining wall with deep foundations on the east side of the road. The slope adjacent to the wall can then be excavated to a much more stable 3:1 slope blending into the lower slope areas that are naturally flatter. The relative slope ratios can be easily seen in the field. The lower slopes are easy to traverse whereas the upper slopes are nearly impossible to climb. The bluffs along the lakefront at this site provide the extreme beauty that makes this such a special place. One downside is the natural tendency of the bluffs to creep and move. The planned improvements will make a big difference to the stability of these slopes. W hile maintenance issues will likely crop up from time to time, the restoration will resolve the recent failures that have occurred, provide safe access to the park and significantly reduce maintenance concerns in the future. Please let me know if you need additional information regarding the history of this site, the nature of steep slopes, and the planned program to address existing site failures and to reduce future maintenance. Sincerely, AECOM Technical Services, Inc. William J. Weaver, P.E., D.WRE Vice President – Senior Project Engineer AECOM 750 Corporate Woods Parkway, Vernon Hills, Illinois 60061 T 847.279.2500 F 847.279.2510 K:\PROJECTS\60101412\R60101412_Lake_Forest_Stability_110309.docx November 3, 2009 Sent via E-mail (magnusk@cityoflakeforest.com) and U.S. Mail Mr. Kenneth M. Magnus, P.E. City of Lake Forest 110 E. Laurel Avenue Lake Forest, IL 60045 RE:FINAL - Subsurface Exploration and Bluff Stability Analysis for the Forest Park Beach Access Road, Lake Forest, Illinois - AECOM Project No. 60101412 Dear Mr. Magnus: In accordance with your authorization, AECOM has completed the subsurface exploration, laboratory testing and bluff/ravine stability evaluation for Forest Park Beach Access Road where some settling of the curb and roadway has been noted. PROJECT DESCRIPTION From our conversations with you and our site visits, we understand that a portion of the Forest Park Beach Access Road is experiencing distress. This distress has manifested in settling and cracking of the roadways, washing out of the subbase materials from underneath the roadway and general shallow slips and failures of the adjacent ravine and bluff slopes. The area of distress is located around the catch basin inlet at an approximate elevation of 624 feet USGS. It is our understanding that the access roadway was regraded and repaved as part of an extensive shoreline restoration project that was performed in 1986. The road has undergone improvements over the years including installation of a small diameter water supply pipe a number of years ago on the east side of the road. The upper portion of the access roadway has experienced settling and apparent erosion at a saddle in the roadway which contains catch basins for runoff. This settlement has been addressed in the recent past by pumping grout under the road in an effort to maintain the road profile. This portion of the roadway is 16 ft wide and is the crest of land between the Lake Michigan bluff to the east and a ravine immediately to the west. The roadway has no shoulder and the land falls away from both curbs. Settlement of the road and curb has opened up cracks near the catch basin inlet that allow stormwater to have direct access to the road subgrade in places. This water appears to have direct access to the sub soils that are adjacent to the road. The catch basin structures are exposed and are partially supporting the roadbed possibly resulting in leakage at joints. SCOPE OF SERVICES AECOM has prepared this report to present the results of our field and laboratory testing programs, to present the results of the slope stability analyses performed, to provide our recommendations regarding ravine and bluff stability and to provide recommendations for options to address the apparent failing roadway. The options presented are conceptual in nature only. EXPLORATION PROCEDURES Subsurface Exploration Two (2) soil borings were performed near the existing catch basins where the most pavement distress was noted. One boring (B-101) was performed on the side slope of the bluff to a depth of 12 feet using hand augering Page 2 of 8 K:\PROJECTS\60101412\R60101412_Lake_Forest_Stability_110309.docx methods. The other boring (B-102) was performed on the roadway surface with a truck-mounted drilling rig to a depth of 61.5 feet. The borings were performed by Subsurface Exploration, Inc. (SEI), a subsidiary drilling company of AECOM. The boring locations were selected and marked in the field by AECOM. The boring locations are shown on the Soil Boring Location Diagram included in the Attachments to this report. Generally, representative soil samples were obtained at a 2.5 foot interval to a depth of 20 feet below existing grade and at a 5 foot interval thereafter. The samples were typically taken utilizing Shelby tube sampling procedures in general accordance with ASTM Standard D-1587 and with a split-barrel sampler in accordance with ASTM Standard D-1586. Three inch diameter Shelby tubes were utilized for selected samples to obtain better quality undisturbed samples for subsequent laboratory triaxial testing. Only relatively disturbed split-barrel samples were obtained from the hand auger soil boring. All recovered soil samples were logged in the field, labeled, sealed and returned to our Vernon Hills, Illinois laboratory for further examination and testing. During the field operations, the drill crew maintained a representative log of the subsurface conditions including changes in the stratigraphy and level of free groundwater. The deeper boring was backfilled with tremie placed cement-bentonite grout and the hand auger boring was backfilled with soil cuttings and bentonite chips upon completion for safety and environmental reasons. Laboratory Testing Program The laboratory testing program included visual classification and moisture content testing of all obtained samples. Samples of cohesive soil were also tested for unconfined compressive strength utilizing a hand penetrometer. Selected clay samples were also tested for dry density and unconfined compressive strength in general accordance with ASTM D-2217. All data obtained from the laboratory tests are shown on the attached boring logs. In addition to the routine laboratory index testing, an isotropically consolidated, undrained triaxial shear test with pore pressure measurements was conducted. The purpose of the triaxial testing was to determine the long term drained friction angle and drained cohesion of the bluff and ravine slope material. Complete results of the triaxial testing are included in the Attachments of this report. Each soil sample was classified on the basis of texture and plasticity in accordance with the AECOM Soil Classification System which is based on the Unified Soil Classification System. The estimated group symbol for each soil type is indicated in parentheses following the written soil descriptions on the boring log. A brief explanation of the AECOM Soil Classification System in addition to the sheet entitled “AECOM Standard Boring Log Procedures” are attached. All soil samples will be retained in our Vernon Hills, Illinois laboratory for a minimum period of 60 days after which they will be discarded unless other arrangements are made. EXPLORATION RESULTS Site Conditions An AECOM engineer visited the site to observe the condition of the bluff and ravine slopes. These observations included walking along the roadway surface, traversing portions of the bluff and ravine slope and walking along the base of the ravine. A view of the existing roadway is shown in Photo 1. This photo is looking approximately south or towards the downslope direction of the roadway from the bluff surface. A view of the exposed side face of the catch basins is visible as is the developing surficial slide of fill materials along the side of the roadway in the foreground of the surface. Page 3 of 8 K:\PROJECTS\60101412\R60101412_Lake_Forest_Stability_110309.docx The developing void space underneath the existing roadway surface between the catch basins on the east side of the roadway is shown in Photo 2. A view of the trees on the bluff surface adjacent to the catch basins on the east side are shown in Photo 3. Note the relatively severe lean towards downslope. Other aged trees showed severe downslope bowing which is an indicator of long-term slope creep. Surface erosion protection installed on the ravine side of the roadway is shown in Photo 4. The erosion protection consists of interlocking geo-webs with cellular space of approximately 9 to 12 inches square and 6 inches deep. The webs are secured to the ravine surface with stakes. Some areas showed that the material within the webs had been entirely eroded or the webs came up out of the ground surface. Additionally, the webs were stretched is some areas, likely beyond that from which they were installed. This is shown in Photo 5. Photo 6 shows the condition at the base of the ravine west of the roadway. Of note is the absence of scarps or developing scarps at the toe of the ravine, which is favorable to the overall stability of the ravine. However, the toe of the ravine is relatively clogged with fallen trees and apparently natural debris. Further downstream of the ravine is the existing 21-inch sanitary sewer which is apparently supported on a helical type foundation system. Further downstream of the area directly in question, erosion scarps have been rehabilitated with gabion retaining walls shown in Photo 7. Based on the topographic drawing provided to us, the bluff surface on the east side of the road is sloped at approximately 2 Horizontal : 1 Vertical adjacent to the area of pavement distress. Along the roadway surface, the bluff slope varies from approximately 1.5 to 2.1 Horizontal : 1 Vertical. The ravine surface is somewhat steeper at 1.7 to 1.8 Horizontal : 1 Vertical Soil Conditions The specific soil conditions encountered at the boring locations are indicated on the respective boring logs and are summarized below: Pavement Section – At boring B-102 performed within the roadway, the boring encountered approximately 11 inches of bituminous concrete asphalt pavement. This was underlain by a sand and gravel base course to approximately 2 feet below the ground surface. These layers were somewhat visible to observation due to the undermining of the pavement surface in between the catch basins on the east side of the roadway. Fill or Possible Fill Materials – Fill materials were encountered at the two boring locations to elevations of approximately 632 to 638. The deeper fill thickness was encountered at B-101 somewhat on the side slope of the roadway surface. This may be a result of previous grading for the existing roadway surface. The fills primarily consisted of silty clay with some occasional gravel and debris (i.e. wood, asphalt and concrete fragments) intermixed. The fill soils were generally brown to dark brown and stiff to very stiff in consistency. Brown Silty Clay Till – Underlying the pavement and fill deposits, the soil borings encountered native, brown, very stiff to hard silty clay. Gray Silty Clay Till – The brown clay till layer gradually transitioned from brownish gray to grayish brown to gray. This transition occurs at approximate elevation 625. In general, the consistency of the gray clay till ranged from stiff to very stiff with some zones of hard silty clay noted. Variations to the above general profile were noted. We refer you to the individual boring logs, attached, for specific information at the boring locations. It should be noted that the stratification lines indicated on the boring logs were selected on the basis of laboratory tests, field logs and visual observations of the recovered soil samples. Therefore, the stratification lines that occur on the boring logs are, in some cases, estimated; in-situ, the transition between soil types in both the horizontal and vertical directions may be gradual. Page 4 of 8 K:\PROJECTS\60101412\R60101412_Lake_Forest_Stability_110309.docx Groundwater Conditions Borings B-101 and B-102 were noted to be dry at least in the upper 15 feet prior to the introduction of drilling fluid to advance the soil boring. Based upon this information as well as the change in soil color from brown to gray at a depth of approximately 17 feet, we estimate that the water table level at the time the borings were performed was between El. 625 feet USGS. Since water was not observed leaching onto the slope surface, we estimate that the water table roughly parallels the slope surface until reaching the toe of the bluff and ravine. Fluctuations in the level of the groundwater table should be expected to occur throughout the years and seasons depending upon the amount of precipitation, evaporation and surface runoff. Soil Strength The results of the triaxial tests are included in the Appendix of this report. Three (3) tests were performed with confining pressures varying from 0.25 to 2.0 ton per square foot (tsf) to be representative of the 40 to 50 foot high slopes. The tests performed were combined to provide a Mohr envelope from which the drained friction angle and cohesion intercept were determined for long term conditions. The friction angle was measured to be 32.5 degrees and the cohesion was measured to be 460 pounds per square foot (psf). The moist density of the soil varied from approximately 136 to 147 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). Triaxial testing was performed on material considered to be representative of the upper native, brown, very stiff to hard silty clay layer. Parameters for the lower gray clay and fill were were estimated based upon similar triaxial test results which had been performed by AECOM at other additional North Shore ravine properties. Thus, the upper brown hard clay was modeled with no cohesion, (C=0 psf) and a drained friction angle of 32.5 degrees. No cohesion was taken into account, due to the possibility of weathering of the clay over time and the freeze/thaw effects. The stiff to hard gray silty clay encountered below a depth of 17.5 feet within the borings was modeled with a conservative cohesion of 300 psf and a drained friction angle of 30 degrees. The idealized soil profile and material properties selected for the slope stability analyses are shown on the attached Figure 2. ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Slope Stability Analysis Based upon the provided topography, the section shown on Figure 1 was selected for analysis. This section is generally the steepest in the vicinity of the pavement distress. However, there are localized steeper slopes at the site in general both to the north of the catch basins and to the south along the lower reaches of the roadway. Those sections were not analyzed. A Morgenstern-Price slope stability analysis was performed using the SLOPE/W computer program. The computer program analyzed circular sections with a search technique which allows the most critical failure section to be determined. These analyses were performed for the existing slope condition. Slope Stability Analysis The results of slope stability analyses for the existing condition are summarized in Table 1 and representative plots are included in the Appendix. The analysis was performed for both the ravine slope and the bluff slopes. The analyses were performed forcing the slip circle to minimum depths below the ground surface. In general, as can be seen below, the most critical case is where the slip circle is allowed to be nearest to the ground surface which allows for shallow slip circles. As the slip circles are progressively forced to be deeper the factor of safety increases. Since factors of safety below 1.0 indicate instability, shallow, erosive type stability failures are predicted for the slope under the current conditions. These failures were modeled based on the assumption that the upper surficial Page 5 of 8 K:\PROJECTS\60101412\R60101412_Lake_Forest_Stability_110309.docx ravine material has no cohesion. This is a realistic condition since even very stiff to hard cohesive clays lose their cohesion over a long period of time when exposed to weathering and the freeze-thaw cycle. For the existing conditions, deeper sliding circles were also investigated which show that the factor of safety against slope failure increases as the slip circles extend deeper into the ravine. Case 3 and 6 in the Appendix shows a factor of safety of 1.3 and 1.4 for a slip circle which should extend approximately 10 feet into the ravine and bluff, respectively. AECOM typically recommends a minimum factor of safety of 1.3 for deep-seated natural ravine slopes adjacent to buildings or structures which could be impacted by the slopes. In addition to the current condition, we also modeled the case where the water table in the bluff rises to near the base of the pavement as a result of water leakage through the pavement, over-topping of the curb or failure of the storm sewer. For this case, the existing factors of safety drop to as low as 0.6 and deep seated failures are likely. TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF SLOPE STABLITY ANALYSIS Number Case Factor of Safety 1 Ravine - Existing slope, Failure >= 1 ft. 1.0 2 Ravine - Existing slope, Failure >= 5 ft. 1.1 3 Ravine - Existing slope, Failure >= 10ft. 1.3 4 Bluff – Existing slope, Failure >= 1 ft. 1.1 5 Bluff – Existing slope, Failure >= 5 ft. 1.2 6 Bluff – Existing slope, Failure >= 10 ft. 1.4 Summary plots of the different failure cases are included in the Appendix. Discussion The slope stability analyses indicated that the bluff and ravine slopes are marginally stable for the existing condition with factors of safety as low as 1.0 at the location of distress. The lowest factors of safety are indicated for shallow sliding surfaces (infinite slope-type failures) which result in long-term creep of the bluff and ravine slopes as observed at the site. We believe the specific distress at the location of the catch basins is a result of the construction of the catch basins and piping in the saddle area. As the slopes creep and the bluff slumps, the roadway settles naturally with the bluff. However, at the location of the catch basins which extend to approximately eight feet below grade into the stable bluff material, the catch basins are actually supporting the road surface like foundation piles. This support at the catch basin location has prevented this small portion of the road from settling, while the adjacent roadway continues to settle with the bluff creep. This results in the pavement distress and cracking, possible catch basin or storm sewer cracking and the resulting inundation of the subgrade with water which has eroded the base material. The greater long-term danger in the condition at the saddle is that breaks in the pavement or piping could cause saturation of the bluff at this location. Stability analyses show that if the water level in the bluff material rises to the base of the roadway, the factor of safety of the marginally safe slope at 1.0 drops to 0.6 and much deeper and larger portions of the slope will be predicted to fail. Page 6 of 8 K:\PROJECTS\60101412\R60101412_Lake_Forest_Stability_110309.docx We have noted that other portions of the slope away from the catch basins are steeper and would result in lower factors of safety (presumably below 1.0). These areas south of the catch basins, however, do not appear distressed currently, but will continue to creep in the long term. North of the catch basins a scarp is present at a locally steep portion of the bluff. This scarp appears to be a manifestation of the accumulating creep but is far enough away from the catch basins that it is not affected by the catch basins or possible water inundation. Conceptual Design Recommendations Based on the previous discussion a number of remediation options are available to Lake Forest depending on the long-term goals, risk tolerance and available capital and maintenance budgets. We recommend several possible options for further study in ascending order of cost but descending order of risk. Revise Catch Basins and Maintain Existing Condition The cheapest short-term option with the greatest risk is to maintain the roadway in the existing condition with some revisions to the catch basin and piping system. In this option, we recommend removal of the deep catch basins and replacement with shallow structures which extend no more than 2 feet below grade. The catch basins could collect to a manhole placed down slope and outside the pavement. An HDPE manhole with flexible telescoping connections would be recommended. This manhole could connect to the existing down slope ravine discharge pipe. The intention of this repair is to remove the deeper catch basins and piping and create a system which could handle the storm water while essentially floating on the surface of the bluff. This system should be less susceptible to pavement cracking and possible storm sewer and catch basin distress since the system would be designed to settle with the bluff as the bluff continues to creep. As part of this remediation, two feet of the existing roadbed could be removed in the saddle area and be replaced with flowable fill (low strength concrete) which would not erode in the future if water still eventually penetrates the pavement. The continued risk in this system is that overtopping of the curb, failure of the piping system, or continued water inundation into the subgrade through pavement cracks could result in a future slide failure. Also, the pavement would continue to be subject to the creep movements occurring on the bluff which typically results in pavement splitting cracks over time. Rough estimated cost for this option would be on the order of $50,000. Regrading Roadway Long-term performance of the roadway would be improved greatly and the possibility of bluff failure would be reduced greatly if the catch basin system and the saddle in the roadway can be removed. This would eliminate the differential movement between the bluff and the catch basins and remove the possibility of water inundation in this area. In this alternative, the roadway would no longer include a dip at the inlet, but would instead slope down continuously from the inlets to match the existing grade. The down-slope grade should be at least a 0.75% slope but more preferably a 1% slope. This would result in a maximum cut of approximately 3.5 feet and would extend a distance of approximately 350 to 400 feet. Down-cutting the top of the bluff would have the added benefit of increasing the slope stability of the bluff in the area of the soil removal. While complete removal of the saddle and inlets would be preferable, additional studies would be necessary to determine whether this option would be feasible. It is also possible to combine the regrading option with the redesign of the catch basins as discussed above. In this way, more of the water could be sent down-road or the possibility of curb over-topping could be eliminated even if the saddle is partially maintained. This alternative would help to reduce the amount of water infiltration that could be affecting slope degradation at this particular location. However, the effects of continual slope creep and movement could still affect the roadway and drainage system at this location. Additional surface slope stabilization measures may be required to maintain the slopes to help reduce the effect of erosion. Page 7 of 8 K:\PROJECTS\60101412\R60101412_Lake_Forest_Stability_110309.docx Rough estimated costs for this option would be on the order of $100,000 to $150,000. Retaining Walls To provide for a more effective measure of protection against slope instability, retaining walls may be considered near the inlet location. These walls could serve to maintain the road and subgrade and to provide an increase in the stability of the roadway against shallow slope failures. These walls would need to be installed on both sides of the roadway and likely extend approximately 50 feet upslope and downslope from the existing catch basins. Typically we recommend that retaining walls such as these extend to at least below a line which extends from the toe of the bluff at a slope of 2.5 Horizontal : 1 Vertical. Based on the provided topographic map, assuming the toe of the bluff slope is at an elevation of 590 feet USGS, the retaining wall would need to extend to approximate elevation 628 feet USGS, which is currently approximately 14 feet below the existing ground surface. We believe the simplest and fastest wall to construct would be a driven interlocking steel sheet pile (SSP) type wall. The SSP wall could relatively easily be extended to the proposed depth and provide an effective means for stabilization of the roadway against further slope degradation in this area. The walls on opposite sides of the roadway would be tied together with anchor rods. The walls would eliminate the long-term creep effect in the area of the walls, prevent wash-out of subbase material and provide a redundant drainage path for water which might infiltrate through the pavement. With this solution, we would recommend up to 5 ft of existing material near the inlets be removed and be replaced with free-draining granular fill. This drainage provided along the interior of the wall would manage any water that may infiltrate through the pavement and would reduce hydrostatic pressures on the wall. The existing catch basins and piping would be replaced or be reused depending on its condition. Secondary drain lines would be placed behind the retaining walls to collect any seepage into the granular fill. These drain lines would be connected into the storm sewer. Any earth retention system should be designed based on appropriate loads by an Illinois licensed structural engineer. Based on our experience with typical North Shore retaining walls, such as these, a rough cost estimate, would be approximately $1,500 to $2,000 per foot of wall. Based on the estimated length, a total estimated cost could be on the order of $500,000. Slope Remediation and Maintenance The retention structures discussed above would support the upper surface of the bluff, ravine and roadway. However, the retention walls will not prevent shallow erosion failures occurring at the base of the retention wall or at the base of the slopes. Thus, as erosion and creep continues below the wall, small slides which propagate up from the toe of the slopes to the base of the wall could ultimately result in the loss of passive pressure in the long term. Thus, remediation of the slope below the proposed retaining walls may be required in the future to maintain an adequate factor of safety. Proper drainage of the proposed improvements is essential to ensure that retention walls and pavement surfaces are not undermined. For collection of the surface water at the current inlet, proper design and maintenance of the catch basins to ensure that they are not plugged and are adequate to handle to flow will be essential in this regard. If the area floods and the water overflows the bluff and ravine slopes in an unchecked manner, significant erosion could occur in a short period of time. Additional good management practices should be followed by the City of Lake Forest to minimize future erosion of the slope. These include planting bushes or grasses on areas where the slope is or becomes eroded. Also, any dumping leaves or other landscaping rubbish on the slope should be prohibited. Blanketing the slope in debris causes the existing vegetation to be choked off which can result in increased erosion. Any new site grading on the ravine slope should be immediately covered with a properly staked erosion control mat and seeding. 12.0 * 70 SS SS SS SS SS SS SS * Sample 2: Wood or roots noted. Petroleum odor noted. Fill: Sandy clay, little silt, fine to coarse gravel, trace concrete and brick fragments - brown - hard (CL) AECOM OFFICE * 54 22 11 13 68 * 12.0 8.0 4.5 4.0 ** Silty clay, trace fine gravel, fine to coarse sand and shale - brown - very stiff (CL) 6 5 4 3A 3 2 1 * ** * SURFACE ELEVATION +639.5 ARCHITECT-ENGINEER B-101 10 20 30 40 50 CLIENT 1 WL WL WL RECOVERYUNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TONS/FT.2 PROJECT NAME Fill: Fine to coarse gravel, little silt, clay and fine to coarse sand - gray - medium dense - moist (GP-GM) Note: Bituminous concrete, concrete and limestone fragments LJS ENTERED BY BORING STARTED 7/30/09 7/30/09Dry WD The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines between soil types: in situ, the transition may be gradual. 1 RIG/FOREMAN 60101412AECOM LOG 60101412.GPJ FS_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 11/3/09SHEET NO.BORING COMPLETED APP'D BY OF Hand Auger/McCarthy RCR Chicago Area - 01 AECOM JOB NO.SAMPLE DISTANCEDESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL WATER CONTENT % STANDARD PENETRATION BLOWS/(FT)ELEVATION(FT)12345 City of Lake Forest 5.0 10.0 SITE LOCATION End of Boring Borehole backfilled upon completion.DEPTH(FT)SAMPLE TYPELOG OF BORING NUMBER SAMPLE NO.PLASTIC LIMIT % LIQUID LIMIT %UNIT DRY WT.LBS./FT.3Fill: Silty clay, little fine to coarse sand, trace fine to coarse gravel - brown to dark brown - very stiff to stiff (CL) Beach Access Road, Lake Forest, Illinois Beach Access Road Stability 10 20 30 40 50 89 lb hammer falling 11 inches Calibrated Penetrometer 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1A PA SS SS SS PA SS PA 3 2 1 PA ST3 AECOM JOB NO. ST3 ST3 SS RB ST RB SS RB RB SS RB ST/SS * * ** * * ** * ** * * 0.9 2.0 5.0 17.5SAMPLE NO.LOG OF BORING NUMBER PROJECT NAME UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TONS/FT.2 Beach Access Road, Lake Forest, Illinois PLASTIC LIMIT %SAMPLE TYPELIQUID LIMIT % Beach Access Road Stability *RECOVERYOF 2 . . . continued The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines between soil types: in situ, the transition may be gradual.60101412 CLIENT B-102 ARCHITECT-ENGINEER SURFACE ELEVATION +642.9 AECOM LOG 60101412.GPJ FS_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 11/3/09SHEET NO. 1 10 20 30 40 50 No recovery from 20 to 21.5 feet after two attempts. 10 20 30 40 50 4 12345 11 inches bituminous concrete Fill: Gravelly fine to coarse sand, little silt - gray - loose - moist (SP-SM) Possible Fill: Silty clay, trace fine gravel, fine to coarse sand and shale - brown - stiff to very stiff (CL) Silty clay, trace fine gravel, fine to coarse sand and shale - brown to grayish brown - very stiff to hard (CL) 3 4 6 22 23 Sample 9: No recovery with Shelby tube. Recovered disturbed sample with split spoon. 21 16 120 119 123 115 Silty clay, trace fine gravel, fine to coarse sand and shale - brownish gray to gray - hard to stiff (CL)ELEVATION(FT)STANDARD PENETRATION BLOWS/(FT)DEPTH(FT)DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL UNIT DRY WT.LBS./FT.3WATER CONTENT % SITE LOCATION 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 City of Lake Forest SAMPLE DISTANCECalibrated Penetrometer SS SS RB ST RB SS RB RB RB ST3 16 15 14 13 12 11 * ST AECOM OFFICE 119 115 43 23 30 61.5 ** ** ** * ** 7.5 61.5 AECOM LOG 60101412.GPJ FS_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 11/3/09SURFACE ELEVATION +642.9 ARCHITECT-ENGINEER B-102 10 20 30 40 50 WL WL WL CLIENT RECOVERYUNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TONS/FT.2 PROJECT NAME SHEET NO. LJS ENTERED BY BORING STARTED 7/30/09 7/30/09Dry to 15 ft. WD 18 ft. BCR 14 ft. ACR The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines between soil types: in situ, the transition may be gradual. 2 RIG/FOREMAN 2 BORING COMPLETED APP'D BY OF Rotary Auger/ RCR Chicago Area - 01 AECOM JOB NO. 60101412UNIT DRY WT.LBS./FT.3DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL WATER CONTENT % (Continued) 12345 40.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 Silty clay, trace fine gravel, fine to coarse sand and shale - brownish gray to gray - hard to stiff (CL) End of Boring Borehole grouted upon completion. Casing used: 10 ft. of 4" Automatic-Dietrich hammer used for Standard Penetration Tests. SITE LOCATION City of Lake Forest SAMPLE DISTANCEDEPTH(FT)ELEVATION(FT)STANDARD PENETRATION BLOWS/(FT) PLASTIC LIMIT % LOG OF BORING NUMBER SAMPLE NO.SAMPLE TYPEBeach Access Road, Lake Forest, Illinois Beach Access Road Stability 10 20 30 40 50 LIQUID LIMIT % Calibrated Penetrometer Brown Silty Clay (CL) Clay Fill 300 psfGray Silty Clay (CL) Soil TypeLake Forest Beach Access RoadAECOM Project #60101412Analysis: RCRDate: 11/3/2009soil profile.gszFIGURE 2 - TYPICAL SOIL PROFILEUnit Weight (pcf)c (psf)Clay FillBrown Silty Clay (CL)Gray Silty Clay (CL)120 pcf 0 psf30 °135 pcf 0 psf32.5 °130 pcf 300 psf30 °Distance (ft.)0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200550560570580590600610620630640650660Elevation 550560570580590600610620630640650660 1.0Brown Silty Clay (CL) Clay Fill 300 psfGray Silty Clay (CL) Soil TypeLake Forest Beach Access RoadAECOM Project #60101412Analysis: RCRDate: 11/3/2009_1ft.gszRavine1 ft. Deep SlideCASE 1Unit Weight (pcf)c (psf)Clay FillBrown Silty Clay (CL)Gray Silty Clay (CL)120 pcf 0 psf30 °135 pcf 0 psf32.5 °130 pcf 300 psf30 °Distance (ft.)0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200550560570580590600610620630640650660Elevation 550560570580590600610620630640650660 1.1Brown Silty Clay (CL) Clay Fill 300 psfGray Silty Clay (CL) Soil TypeLake Forest Beach Access RoadAECOM Project #60101412Analysis: RCRDate: 10/14/2009_5ft.gszRavine5 ft. Deep Slide SurfaceCASE 2Unit Weight (pcf)c (psf)Clay FillBrown Silty Clay (CL)Gray Silty Clay (CL)120 pcf 0 psf30 °135 pcf 0 psf32.5 °130 pcf 300 psf30 °Distance (ft.)0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200550560570580590600610620630640650660Elevation 550560570580590600610620630640650660 1.3Brown Silty Clay (CL) Clay Fill 300 psfGray Silty Clay (CL) Soil TypeLake Forest Beach Access RoadAECOM Project #60101412Analysis: RCRDate: 11/3/2009_10ft.gszRavine10 ft. Deep Slide SurfaceCASE 3Unit Weight (pcf)c (psf)Clay FillBrown Silty Clay (CL)Gray Silty Clay (CL)120 pcf 0 psf30 °135 pcf 0 psf32.5 °130 pcf 300 psf30 °Distance (ft.)0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200550560570580590600610620630640650660Elevation 550560570580590600610620630640650660 1.1Brown Silty Clay (CL) Clay Fill 300 psfGray Silty Clay (CL) Soil TypeLake Forest Beach Access RoadAECOM Project #60101412Analysis: RCRDate: 11/3/2009_1ft_bluff.gszBluff1 ft. Deep Slide SurfaceCASE 4Unit Weight (pcf)c (psf)Clay FillBrown Silty Clay (CL)Gray Silty Clay (CL)120 pcf 0 psf30 °135 pcf 0 psf32.5 °130 pcf 300 psf30 °Distance (ft.)0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200550560570580590600610620630640650660Elevation 550560570580590600610620630640650660 1.2Brown Silty Clay (CL) Clay Fill 300 psfGray Silty Clay (CL) Soil TypeLake Forest Beach Access RoadAECOM Project #60101412Analysis: RCRDate: 11/3/2009_5ft_bluff.gszBluff5 ft. Deep Slide SurfaceCASE 5Unit Weight (pcf)c (psf)Clay FillBrown Silty Clay (CL)Gray Silty Clay (CL)120 pcf 0 psf30 °135 pcf 0 psf32.5 °130 pcf 300 psf30 °Distance (ft.)0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200550560570580590600610620630640650660Elevation 550560570580590600610620630640650660 1.4Brown Silty Clay (CL) Clay Fill 300 psfGray Silty Clay (CL) Soil TypeLake Forest Beach Access RoadAECOM Project #60101412Analysis: RCRDate: 11/3/2009_10ft_bluff.gszBluff10 ft. Deep Slide SurfaceCASE 6Unit Weight (pcf)c (psf)Clay FillBrown Silty Clay (CL)Gray Silty Clay (CL)120 pcf 0 psf30 °135 pcf 0 psf32.5 °130 pcf 300 psf30 °Distance (ft.)0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200550560570580590600610620630640650660Elevation 550560570580590600610620630640650660 0.6Brown Silty Clay (CL) Clay Fill 300 psfGray Silty Clay (CL) Soil TypeLake Forest Beach Access RoadAECOM Project #60101412Analysis: RCRDate: 10/12/2009LFBAR_LtoR_Existing_Shallow_High_Water.gszShallow Slip Surface - Saturated SurfaceCase 7Unit Weight (pcf)c (psf)Clay FillBrown Silty Clay (CL)Gray Silty Clay (CL)120 pcf 0 psf30 °135 pcf 0 psf32.5 °130 pcf 300 psf30 °Distance (ft.)0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200550560570580590600610620630640650660Elevation 550560570580590600610620630640650660 Photographs Photograph 1 – Distressed Pavement Surface from Bluff Slope Photograph 2 – Break in drain pipe at timber wall Developing Erosional Slides Undermined Pavement Undermined Pavement Photograph 3 – Bluff Surface – Note Leaning Trees Photograph 4 – Erosion Control Geowebs – Well-Embedded in Vegetation Photograph 5 – Erosion Control Geowebs – Stretched and Separating from Ground – Sparse Vegetation Erosion Control Geowebs Photograph 6 – Fallen Trees at Toe of Ravine Fallen Trees at Toe of Ravine Photograph 7 – Gabion Retaining Wall Downstream of Ravine AECOM 303 East Wacker Drive Chicago, IL 60601 www.aecom.com November 16, 2016 Mr. Mike Thomas City of Lake Forest 800 N. Field Drive Lake Forest, Illinois 60045 RE: Proposal for Engineering Services – South Beach Access Road Bluff and Ravine Slope Restoration -- Feasibility Study Lake Forest, IL --- Change Order #5 Dear Mike: AECOM is pleased to provide you with Change Order #5 to complete a condition evaluation for bluff and ravine slope restoration for the North Beach Access Road area. This feasibility study includes examination of the existing bluff conditions and development of schematic restoration concepts for 1400 feet of bluff and ravine slopes from Spring Lane to the North Beach Access Road. This feasibility study will include the development of restoration concepts, and preparation of planning level schematic design for the selected options. The analysis will include prioritization of slope restoration areas and recommended approaches for implementation. Preliminary opinions of probable construction cost for recommended solutions will be provided such that the City can develop an implementation plan. When the City has reviewed the recommended solutions and decides to move forward with implementation, AECOM will provide a proposal for the first implementation phase. Scope of Services 1. Spring Lane North to the North Beach Access Road and Ravine A feasibility study for slope restoration will be performed for the reach of bluff extending from Spring Lane to a point approximately 1400 feet to the north, including the North Beach Access Road and the ravine slopes adjacent to the road. This feasibility study will include the following tasks: • Task 1 – Data Collection and Review: We will request that the City provide us with information for this study reach that you may have on file including the following: o Original road plans for the road that is along the top of bluff and for the North Beach Access Road– and any road, bluff or land grading modifications that have occurred in recent years. o Construction as-built drawings for any recent slope and road work at, near or on the bluff including as-built plans and details. o Geotechnical information including boring logs or studies completed in the past for this study that we do not already have on file. o Survey, aerial photographs, topography and other base map information. • Task 2 – Bluff Survey: AECOM surveyors will complete a partial topographic survey and cross sections for the bluff to supplement upland information that is available for this study reach. The survey will focus on potentially problematic slope areas in this reach. We will prepare a base map and bluff cross sections that will serve as a base for the illustration of existing and alternative slope conditions. • Task 3 – Geotechnical & Slope Stability Review: Our geotechnical engineers will provide feasibility level guidance for slope restoration concepts based on information gathered and from our prior design work in the area in recent years. Based on their review of slope conditions and the geotechnical information and slope studies performed in the past, they will help guide the development of slope solutions. • Task 4 – Field Observation: Our geotechnical and slope restoration engineers will visit the site to observe existing slope conditions and begin the restoration concept development process. This visit will occur when the slope survey is completed so that a base map is available to assist in the field assessment of options that make sense from a stability perspective. • Task 4 – Slope Condition Evaluation: We will evaluate the existing slope condition based on our field observations, analysis of available geotechnical information in this and nearby bluff areas, assessment of reported bluff issues in the past, and interpretation of slope geometry. • Task 5 – Develop Restoration Concepts: We anticipate investigating the applicability of the following slope restoration approaches for portions of this study reach: o Soldier Pile and Lagging Wall o Reinforced Earth Slopes o Geogrid Lifts o Steel Sheet Pile Wall o Slope Regrading o Slope Drainage Improvements We will provide schematic design drawings and sections for feasible solutions to assess how these might fit in with the slope geometry for the study reach. It is possible that slope conditions will require changes to the existing pedestrian access. We will perform an observation of the pedestrian access and slope improvements in this study reach and will comment on expected slope issues that appear to affect this area. We will assign slope restoration priorities in case the City may want to implement the improvements in phases over time. A preliminary opinion of probable cost will be provided for each option that is considered feasible along with a summary of benefits and advantages and disadvantages for each option. If it is not possible to conclude if any slope restoration is necessary due to a lack of field or analysis evidence, we will provide a recommended monitoring program for those areas that have potential for causing problems. • Task 6 – Prepare a feasibility study report to present the study results and the recommended options. The report will include planning level schematic drawings, a summary of options considered, and details regarding recommended options. We will discuss slope restoration priorities that can be used to develop a capital improvement phasing plan where applicable. • Task 7 – Project Management and Meeting: In addition to the normal project coordination and quality control tasks, we will attend a meeting with your staff to discuss the study results. We will also meet with the advisory work group that will be working with the City Manager. The budget for the this Study area is as follows: TASK DESCRIPTION BUDGET ($) 1 Data Collection and Review $2,000 2 Bluff Survey & Evaluation $4,900 3 Field Observations & Analysis $4,500 4 Slope Condition Evaluation $5,000 5 Develop Restoration Concepts $8,500 6 Prepare Feasibility Report $5,000 7 Project Management and City Meeting $3,500 TOTAL COST $33,400 For purposes of invoice reporting, the budget for task nos. 1 thru 4 will be monitored together as one consolidated data collection and analysis task, and the budget for task nos. 5 thru 7 will be monitored together as one consolidated feasibility study task. Proposed Budget We propose to perform this study on a time and materials basis with a recommended initial budget cap of $33,400 for the North Spring Lane Area/North Beach Access Road Bluff study. The fee schedule will be a direct labor multiplier of 2.80. Contract Terms and Conditions The same Terms and Conditions of Service that apply to the first phase study as provided in our May 18, 2016 contract will apply to Change Order #5 and are an integral part of this proposal. If acceptable, please return one signed original to the attention of William J. Weaver. Should you have any questions with regard to this proposal, please call Bill at (847) 323-2171 or contact him by email at bill.weaver@aecom.com . We thank you for the opportunity to submit this change order proposal and look forward to continuing to work with you on this important assignment. Sincerely, Responsible for Payment and Accepted by: AECOM Technical Services, Inc. Signature: Name: (please print) William J. Weaver, P.E., D.WRE Title: (please print) Vice President – Senior Project Engineer Firm: Date: Patrick Clifford, P.E. Vice President © AECOM 2016, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Quality engineering solutions for the community 5507 N. Cumberland Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60656-1471 Tel 773.775.4009 Fax 773.775.4014 www.ciorba.com November 30, 2016 Mr. Robert Ells Superintendent of Engineering City of Lake Forest 800 N. Field Drive Lake Forest, IL 60045 Subject: Fee Proposal for Engineering Services Forest Park Bluff and Ravine Slope Restoration-Feasibility Study Dear Mr. Ells: Per your request, Ciorba Group, Inc. has prepared a proposal for the Engineering Services for the Forest Park Bluff Slope Restoration Feasibility Study. Our Scope of Services is outlined in Exhibit A, which we understand to include the following: Design Engineering Services: The scope of this proposal includes the data collection, bluff survey, slope stability review, site visit and slope condition evaluation, development of restoration concepts, preparation of a feasibility study report, and project management and meetings. Based on a scope of services and a geotechnical report prepared by AECOM received from the City, the existing bluff and ravine near the North Beach Access Road area will be evaluated to assess restoration concepts for 1,400 feet of the bluff and ravine. The study area will be the area between Spring Lane and North Beach Access Road. This study will include the development of restoration concepts and preparation of planning level schematic design for the selected option. The proposed engineering fee for the Design Engineering Services described above and in Exhibit A is $42,400. Fees will be billed monthly for services performed in the preceding month based on hours worked. Fees in this proposal shall remain fixed until December 31, 2017. No out of scope work will be performed without prior authorization from the City. A breakdown of the fee is provided in Exhibit B. Ciorba’s structural staff has extensive experience in structures planning, inspection, design and construction observation for various municipalities including Highland Park, Deerfield, Evanston, Winnetka, Waukegan, Mount Prospect, Morton Grove and Wheeling. In the event that the City requires performing services not included in the attached scope of work, we will bill our time as detailed in the General Conditions as provided in Exhibit C. Upon acceptance of this Agreement, please print two copies and have each copy executed by a duly authorized Mr. Robert Ells City of Lake Forest Page 2 representative of the City, retain one (1) copy for your files, and return one (1) copy to us for our files. Should you have any questions please contact me at 773-355-2936. We appreciate the opportunity of submitting this proposal to the City on this project. Sincerely, CIORBA GROUP, INC. Brett Sauter, PE, SE Structural Group Manager Enclosures: Exhibit A – Project Scope Exhibit B – Fee Breakdown Exhibit C – General Conditions City of Lake Forest Accepted By: Name: Title: Address: Date EXHIBIT A-PROJECT SCOPE The purpose of this project is to prepare a feasibility study for the evaluation of the Forest Park Bluff and Ravine Slope. We have performed a preliminary review of the geotechnical report and concurred with the scope anticipated by the City. This scope of work and fee is for the study and analysis based on a scope of work received from the City. The major work tasks for the project as described in the RFP are as follows: • Task 1-Data Collection and Review o Collect available data from City and review • Task 2-Bluff Survey o Partial topographic survey of bluff to supplement existing survey o Download and process survey; tie in with existing survey o Prepare a base map and cross sections of bluff • Task 3-Geotechnical and Slope Stability Review o Review existing AECOM geotechnical report and provide feasibility level guidance for slope restoration concepts based on report and field observation No additional soil borings will be obtained • Task 4-Field Observation and Slope Condition Evaluation o Site Visit (1 visit) to observe existing slope conditions using base map o Evaluate existing slope conditions based on available geotechnical information and compare them with what documented in the report • Task 5-Develop Restoration Concepts o Investigate slope restoration options: Soldier Pile and Lagging Wall Reinforced Earth Slopes Geogrid Lifts Steel Sheet Pile Wall Slope Regrading Slope Drainage Improvements o Prepare schematic plan view and cross sections of each option o Assess any changes required for pedestrian access due to the implementation of above options o Prepare cost estimate for each option, discuss and evaluate priorities for the City (see meetings below) o Advantages and Disadvantages of each option EXHIBIT A-PROJECT SCOPE • Task 6-Feasibility study report o Summary of options considered o Schematic planning drawings of selected options (2 options) o Recommended option with a capital improvement plan, the recommended option could consist of a combination of the six (6) identified countermeasures • Task 7-Project Management and Meetings o Project management and administration o QA/QC will be performed at each submittal by senior staff o Attend and participate in meetings with staff and elected officials (2 Meetings) B-1 Exhibit B – Fee Breakdown Project Component FEE Feasibility Study Task 1-Data Collection and Review $715 Task 2-Bluff Survey $6,040 Task 3-Geotechnical & Slope Stability Review $1,090 Task 4-Field Observation and Slope Condition Evaluation $1,395 Task 5-Develop Restoration Concepts $12,200 Task 6-Feasibility Study $13,760 Task 7-Project Management and Meetings $6,940 Direct Costs (Vehicle, copies, postage, etc.) $260 TOTAL $42,400 GENERAL CONDITIONS DELAYS – Ciorba Group, Inc. (Engineer) will not be liable for delays due to force majeure. DISPUTE RESOLUTION – any dispute under this contract shall be subject to mediation as a condition precedent to litigation. ENVIRONMENTAL – The Engineer assumes no responsibility for the detection or removal of any hazardous substances found at the job site. EXTRA WORK - The engineering fees are based on our doing the work as described in the proposal letter and attached scope. Extra Work includes furnishing any other services not specifically set forth in the proposal letter. The fee for all Extra Work would be computed on the basis of direct salaries of personnel actually assigned to the work multiplied by a factor of 2.9 to cover overhead, fringe benefits and profit. Direct costs would be billed at their actual rate. No Extra Work would be undertaken by us without prior written authorization from the City of Lake Forest (CLIENT). INSURANCE – Ciorba Group, Inc. has, and will maintain in effect throughout the duration of this contract, professional liability insurance in the amount of $2,000,000. LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY – The Client agrees, to the fullest extent possible, to limit the liability of the Engineer so that the total aggregate liability of the Engineer shall not exceed the Engineer’s fee for services rendered on the project. It is acknowledged that this limitation of liability applies to any cause of action, be it contract, tort, or any other theory. The Client agrees to bring any claims against the Engineer corporate entity, not any individual owners or employees of the Engineer firm. The Client and Engineer both agree to waive any claims for consequential damages against each other. CLIENT PROVIDED INFORMATION – The Engineer shall have the right to rely on the accuracy of any information provided by the CLIENT. The Engineer will not be responsible for reviewing this information for accuracy unless otherwise stated in the Scope of Services. OWNERSHIP OF INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE – The Engineer retains all intellectual property rights including common law, statutory, copyright and other reserved rights in the instruments of service. PAYMENT OF FEES – All fees are due and payable as specified herein. Fees will be billed monthly for services performed in the preceding month, and payment thereof is due within 30 days of the invoice date. Invoices not paid within 30 days are considered past due. PERMITS AND APPROVALS – It is the responsibility of the CLIENT to obtain all necessary permits and approvals. The Engineer will assist the CLIENT as mutually agreed in writing as part of the Scope of Services. REJECTION OF NONCONFORMING WORK – The Engineer shall have the authority, but not the responsibility, to reject nonconforming work. The Engineer shall bring any known non-conforming work to the attention of the CLIENT as soon as reasonably possible. RIGHT OF ACCESS – The Engineer shall have access to the job site whenever work is in preparation or in progress. SUSPENSION AND TERMINATION - In the event that this project should be suspended or abandoned for any reason whatsoever, the CLIENT shall be liable for payment of all services performed through the date Ciorba receives written notice of such suspension or abandonment; payment to be based on percentage of work complete in the case of lump sum fees, or hours of work completed in the case of salary times multiplier fees. In the event you reactivate the project, Ciorba would not resume work without the execution of a new agreement for the work. DELIVERY OF ELECTRONIC FILES - In accepting and utilizing any drawings, reports and data on any form of electronic media generated and furnished by the ENGINEER, the agrees that all such electronic files are instruments of service of the ENGINEER, who shall be deemed the author, and shall retain all common law, statutory law and other rights, including copyrights. The CLIENT agrees not to reuse these electronic files, in whole or in part, for any purpose other than for the Project. The CLIENT agrees not to transfer these electronic files to others without the prior written consent of the ENGINEER. The CLIENT further agrees to waive all claims against the ENGINEER resulting in any way from any unauthorized changes to or reuse of the electronic files for any other project by anyone other than the ENGINEER. Electronic files furnished by either party shall be subject to an acceptance period of 30 days during which the receiving party agrees to perform appropriate acceptance tests. Ciorba shall correct any discrepancies or errors detected and reported within the acceptance period. After the acceptance period, the electronic files shall be deemed to be accepted and Ciorba shall have no obligations to correct errors or maintain electronic files. The CLIENT is aware that differences may exist between the electronic files delivered and the printed hard-copy construction documents. In the event of a conflict between the signed construction documents prepared by the ENGINEER and electronic files, the signed or sealed hard-copy construction documents shall govern. In addition, the CLIENT agrees, to the fullest extent permitted by law, to indemnify and hold harmless the ENGINEER, its officers, directors, employees and subconsultants against all damages, liabilities or costs, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and defense costs, arising from any changes made by anyone other than the ENGINEER or from any unauthorized reuse of the electronic files without the prior written consent of the ENGINEER. Under no circumstances shall delivery of electronic files for use by the CLIENT be deemed a sale by the ENGINEER, and the ENGINEER makes no warranties, either express or implied, of merchantability and fitness for any particular purpose. In no event shall the ENGINEER be liable for indirect or consequential damages as a result of the CLIENT’s reuse of the electronic files. In the event any invoices are past due more than 60 days, Ciorba reserves the right to suspend all work and withhold all drawings, prints, specifications, estimates, and the like until the account is current. This agreement shall terminate upon the occurrence of the first of the following: A. Completion of and payment for, all of the work included herein. B. Suspension or abandonment of the project, and payment to us of all fees due and payable. C. Mutual written consent of the parties hereto. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT F.Y.’18 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT PLAN As of October 15, 2016 Proposed F.Y. 2018 Capital Equipment General Fund Department Unit #(s) New / Replace Item Budget Building Maint. 50 Replace 2WD Ext. Cab P.U. $ 30,000 Community Dev. 509 Replace Car $ 25,000 Fire 202 Replace SUV $ 35,000 Police 24 Replace Parking Scooter $ 25,000 Streets 126 Replace 4WD Ext. Cab P.U. $ 35,000 448 Replace Street Sweeper $300,000 TOTAL: $450,000 Parks & Recreation Fund Department Unit #(s) New / Replace Item Budget Parks 302 & 317 Replace Park Mower $ 88,000 Forestry 604 Replace Skid Steer $ 72,000 TOTAL: $160,000 Water Fund Department Unit #(s) New / Replace Item Budget Water & Sewer 970 Replace Vactor $440,000 TOTAL: $440,000 Golf Fund Department Unit #(s) New / Replace Item Budget There are no pieces of equipment being replaced by the Golf Course in F.Y. ‘18 Cemetery Fund Department Unit #(s) New / Replace Item Budget There are no pieces of equipment being replaced by the Cemetery in F.Y. ‘18 Unit #50 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FORM Department: Public Works Section: Building Maintenance Unit #: 50 Make: Chevrolet Model: Silverado 2WD Year: 2001 Class: Light Trucks & SUV < 12,500 GVWR In-Service Date: 06/14/2001 Life to Date Miles: 106,019 miles CLF Utilization Standard: 6,000 miles/year Average Annual Utilization, Life to Date: 6,839 miles/year Annual Utilization Last Fiscal Year: 4,782 miles Annual Maintenance Costs for Last 3 Fiscal Years: $3,176 – FY16 (Includes Parts, Labor, and Outside Services) $3,886 – FY15 $1,992 – FY14 Life to Date Maintenance Cost: $38,511 (Includes Parts, Labor, and Outside Services) This unit is used for: For over ten years, unit #50 was used by the Streets Section to haul barricades and various minor pieces of equipment. In December, 2011 the vehicle was transferred to Building Maintenance. A truck cap was installed to allow tools and materials to be hauled from building to building. Recent Mechanical Issues: The unit’s brake and transmission lines have rotted away, the door’s rocker panels and cab corners are rusted through, and there continues to be on-going issues with the truck’s electrical system. Additionally, the truck’s ABS controller needs to be replaced. FY2018 Budget Amount: $30,000 Proposed Replacement: Chevrolet or GMC 2WD pick-up truck. Can a similar piece of equipment be rented? If so, what is the cost? A ¾ ton pick-up truck could possibly be rented however Building Maintenance outfits each of their vehicles with the tools and equipment they require daily. With placing and removing material in and out of the pick-up bed as frequently as it occurs and the probable body repairs that would be required with a rental, staff believes a rental unit would not make financial sense. Can this piece of equipment be shared with another Department or other local agencies? Yes. Is this piece of equipment used on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis? Please explain. Daily. The truck is used all day by Building Maintenance personnel. For the replacement piece, are you requesting any enhancements that the unit already does not have? Please explain. No. Unit # 509 1CAPITAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FORM Department: Community Development Section: N/A Unit #: 509 Make: Chevrolet Model: Impala Year: 2011 Class: Passenger Vehicle In-Service Date: 12/01/2010 Life to Date Miles: 113,386 miles CLF Utilization Standard: 25,000 miles/year Average Annual Utilization, Life to Date: 22,677 miles/year Annual Utilization Last Fiscal Year: 12,827 miles Annual Maintenance Costs for Last 3 Fiscal Years: $ 3,983 – FY16 (Includes Parts, Labor, and Outside Services) $ 7,931 – FY15 $12,246 – FY14 Life to Date Maintenance Cost: $23,429 (Includes Parts, Labor, and Outside Services) These units are used for: Unit #509 is used by the Community Development Department for their daily permit inspection services and code enforcement activities. Recent Mechanical Issues: Unit #509 has mechanical problems with its wheel bearings, exhaust system, and motor mounts. Fleet Maintenance has determined that the Chevrolet Impala begins to cost significant dollars to maintain once they reach 100,000 miles. Additionally the transmission, alternator, water pump, radiator, and radiator cooling fan typically need to be replaced at or around 120,000 miles. FY2018 Budget Amount: $25,000 Proposed Replacement: Chevrolet Impala or an Electric Vehicle (depending on cost) Can a similar piece of equipment be rented? If so, what is the cost? Yes, but having no financial advantage (e.g. tax incentives to the City) and the low cost public sector operations pay for vehicles, staff believes renting or leasing would not make financial sense. Can this piece of equipment be shared with another Department or other local agencies? Yes. Is this piece of equipment used on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis? Please explain. Daily. The unit is used all day for various inspection services. For the replacement piece, are you requesting any enhancements that the unit already does not have? Please explain. No. Unit #202 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FORM Department: Fire Department Section: N/A Unit #: 202 Make: Chevrolet Model: Tahoe 4WD Year: 2009 Class: Light Trucks & SUV < 12,500 GVWR In-Service Date: 11/19/2008 Life to Date Miles: 135,887 miles CLF Utilization Standard: 6,000 miles per year Average Annual Utilization, Life to Date: 16,986 miles Annual Utilization Last Fiscal Year: 18,733 miles Annual Maintenance Costs for Last 3 Fiscal Years: $2,416 – FY16 (Includes Parts, Labor, and Outside Services) $5,731 – FY15 $2,610 – FY14 Life to Date Maintenance Cost: $20,971 (Includes Parts, Labor, and Outside Services) This unit is used for: Unit # 202 is a Fire Department administration vehicle typically used by the Deputy Fire Chief. Recent Mechanical Issues: Current unit # 202’s lower outer door frames are rusted through and the vehicle’s rocker panels, fenders, and quarter panels are all beginning to rust. Mechanically the alternator needs to be replaced, emission control work is needed, and the motor mounts, engine oil cooler lines, and transmission cooler lines all need to be replaced. FY2018 Budget Amount: $35,000 Proposed Replacement: Ford Explorer Can a similar piece of equipment be rented? If so, what is the cost? With the multiple permanent lighting requirements, there are no rental fire administrative vehicles available. Can this piece of equipment be shared with another Department or other local agencies? No. Is this piece of equipment used on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis? Please explain. Daily for emergency response 24/7/365. For the replacement piece, are you requesting any enhancements that the unit already does not have? Please explain. No. Staff is recommending the current Tahoe be down-sized to a Ford Explorer. Unit #24 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FORM Department: Police Department Section: N/A Unit #: 24 Make: GO-4 Model: Interceptor Year: 2006 Class: Tractors / Scooters In-Service Date: 12/30/2005 Life to Date Hours: 7,607 hours CLF Utilization Standard: 400 hours/year Average Annual Utilization, Life to Date: 692 hours/year Annual Utilization Last Fiscal Year: 219 hours Annual Maintenance Costs for Last 3 Fiscal Years: $1,239 – FY16 (Includes Parts, Labor, and Outside Services) $4,018 – FY15 $7,050 – FY14 Life to Date Maintenance Cost: $23,661 (Includes Parts, Labor, and Outside Services) This unit is used for: The Police Department’s CSO (Community Services Officers) use this vehicle for parking enforcement throughout downtown area and the multiple City-owned parking lots. It is also is used for traffic control during special events (e.g. 4th of July, Lake Forest Day, etc.). Recent Mechanical Issues: The scooter has had its accelerator cable, brake lines, radiator, and various exhaust mechanisms replaced recently. It currently has various electrical issues to include its alternator needing to be replaced and the heater is inoperable. FY2018 Budget Amount: $25,000 Proposed Replacement: Polaris GEM Electric Vehicle Can a similar piece of equipment be rented? If so, what is the cost? No. Can this piece of equipment be shared with another Department or other local agencies? Yes, it can assist with traffic control for neighboring communities during special events (e.g. Lake Bluff’s 4th of July parade). Is this piece of equipment used on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis? Please explain. Daily basis (except weekends) for traffic and parking enforcement. For the replacement piece, are you requesting any enhancements that the unit already does not have? Please explain. No. Staff is proposing a less expensive unit as compared to the purchase price of a new GO-4. Unit #126 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FORM Department: Public Works Section: Streets Unit #: 126 Make: Chevrolet Model: Silverado 4WD Year: 2007 Class: Light Trucks & SUV < 12,500 GVWR In-Service Date: 09/08/2006 Life to Date Section Miles: 101,972 miles CLF Utilization Standard: 6,000 miles /year Average Annual Utilization, Life to Date: 9,949 miles / year Annual Utilization Last Fiscal Year (Average): 9,551 miles Annual Maintenance Costs for Last 3 Fiscal Years: $1,284 – FY16 (Includes Parts, Labor, and Outside Services- $3,912 – FY15 Average) $2,991 – FY14 Life to Date Maintenance Cost (Average): $19,843 (Includes Parts, Labor, and Outside Services) This unit is used for: The Streets Supervisor utilizes this vehicle on a daily basis to visit various jobsites, meet with residents and contractors, and attend seminars and training sessions. The truck transports emergency signage, barricades and minor equipment as well. Recent Mechanical Issues: The existing truck has recently had significant issues with its steering components. Its wheel bearing hubs and torsion bar bushings need to be replaced. It has significant rust throughout the entire vehicle to include the wheel wells, pick-up bed, and rocker panels. FY2018 Budget Amount: $35,000 Proposed Replacement: Chevrolet/GMC ½-Ton 4WD Ext. Cab Pickup Truck Can a similar piece of equipment be rented? If so, what is the cost? Yes, however with this vehicle being used daily throughout the year, the rental cost over the life of the vehicle would far exceed the net purchase price. Can this piece of equipment be shared with another Department or other local agencies? Yes. Is this piece of equipment used on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis? Please explain. Daily. It is primarily used by the Streets Supervisor for daily various work site and resident visits. For the replacement piece, are you requesting any enhancements that the unit already does not have? Please explain. No. The pickup truck being replaced is a standard pickup used by all maintenance Supervisors. Unit #448 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FORM Department: Public Works Section: Streets Unit #: 448 Make: Sterling / Elgin Model: Eagle Year: 1999 Class: Heavy Trucks & General Purpose Vehicles In-Service Date: 04/16/1999 Life to Date Hours: 13,980 hours CLF Utilization Standard: 250 hours / year Average Annual Utilization, Life to Date: 788 hours / year Annual Utilization Last Fiscal Year: 792 hours Annual Maintenance Costs for Last 3 Fiscal Years: $16,641 – FY16 (Includes Parts, Labor, and Outside Services) $ 8,627 – FY15 $20,377 – FY14 Life to Date Maintenance Cost: $203,270 (Includes Parts, Labor, and Outside Services) This unit is used for: The City has only one street sweeper. The sweeper is used during the spring, summer and fall months to clean the City streets and parking lots. It is also used to sweep before and after special events and anytime throughout the year after accidents or when construction materials spill out onto a roadway. Recent Mechanical Issues: The unit was refurbished in F.Y. ’10 for $52,000. The refurbishment process included replacement of multiple body panels, the hopper mast and conveyor were rebuilt, the hopper actuator and water spray bar system were replaced, the auxiliary engine was overhauled, and repairs were made to the pneumatic side broom sweeping system. Currently the unit has significant rust issues in the rear sweeper section of the unit. Various sweeper components (e.g. trailing arm) are completely rotted through. The auxiliary engine needs its injector pump replaced. The steel for the hopper has worn through, body panels are rotting through, and multiple hydraulic lines are in need of replacement. FY2018 Budget Amount: $300,000 Proposed Replacement: Autocar Chassis with Elgin Eagle Sweeper Can a similar piece of equipment be rented? If so, what is the cost? No. Can this piece of equipment be shared with another Department or other local agencies? No. Is this piece of equipment used on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis? Please explain. Seasonally. For the replacement piece, are you requesting any enhancements that the unit already does not have? Please explain. No. Unit #302/317 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FORM Department: Parks & Recreation Section: Parks Unit #: 302 / 317 Make: John Deere / Land Pride Model: 5420 4WD / 14’ Mowing Deck Year: 2002 Class: Tractors / Scooters In-Service Date: 10/22/2001 & 06/01/2007 Life to Date Hours: 6,358 hours & N/A CLF Utilization Standard: 400 hours / year Average Annual Utilization, Life to Date: 419 hours / year & N/A Annual Utilization Last Fiscal Year: 107 hours Annual Maintenance Costs for Last 3 Fiscal Years: $ 1,925 – FY16 (Includes Parts, Labor, and Outside Services) $ 7,919 – FY15 $16,003 – FY14 Life to Date Maintenance Cost: $65,432 (Includes Parts, Labor, and Outside Services) This unit is used for: This tractor and mowing deck are used to mow various parks and play fields throughout the City. The tractor and mowing deck are also used during the fall months to mulch leaves throughout the City’s parks. The single unit replacement will mow the same area in half the time it currently takes with this tractor and mowing deck. Recent Mechanical Issues: The tractor’s fuel system has been completely overhauled; starting issues continue to exist. The axle seals and radiator need to be replaced. FY2018 Budget Amount: $88,000 Proposed Replacement: Toro 5910 Groundsmaster with 16’ mowing cut Can a similar piece of equipment be rented? If so, what is the cost? No. Can this piece of equipment be shared with another Department or other local agencies? Yes. Is this piece of equipment used on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis? Please explain. Used daily by Parks during times when the grass is growing and when leaves need to be mulched in the fall months. For the replacement piece, are you requesting any enhancements that the unit already does not have? Please explain. No. By purchasing a self-contained unit, the Parks Section will be eliminating one piece of equipment from its fleet. Unit #604 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FORM Department: Parks & Recreation Section: Forestry Unit #: 604 Make: Bobcat Model: Toolcat 5600 Year: 2006 Class: Tractors In-Service Date: 09/01/2006 Life to Date Hours: 3,483 hours CLF Utilization Standard: 400 hours / year Average Annual Utilization, Life to Date: 337 hours / year Annual Utilization Last Fiscal Year: 360 hours Annual Maintenance Costs for Last 3 Fiscal Years: $ 5,668 – FY16 (Includes Parts, Labor, and Outside Services) $ 5,850 – FY15 $15,717 – FY14 Life to Date Maintenance Cost: $67,553 (Includes Parts, Labor, and Outside Services) This unit is used for: This unit is used for multiple Forestry maintenance activities. It loads brush, logs, and new trees into dump trucks. It sweeps and plows sidewalks and loads snow during CBD clean-ups in the winter months. Being a track unit, the replacement unit will be much more conducive and less destructive for work on turf areas (parks, parkways, etc.) and maneuvering during the winter months. Recent Mechanical Issues: The entire unit has significant rust throughout it (cab, under carriage, hydraulic lines, dump body, frame, etc.). The front lifting arm assembly can easily be bent and has been replaced three times. FY2018 Budget Amount: $72,000 Proposed Replacement: Track Skid Steer Can a similar piece of equipment be rented? If so, what is the cost? Yes. At over $3,000 / month to rent, and the City utilizing a new track skid steer for over fifteen years, renting is cost prohibitive. Can this piece of equipment be shared with another Department or other local agencies? Yes. It is shared year round with Sections in both the Public Works and Parks & Recreation Departments. Is this piece of equipment used on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis? Please explain. Daily. For the replacement piece, are you requesting any enhancements that the unit already does not have? Please explain. No. Unit #970 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FORM Department: Public Works Section: Water & Sewer Utilities Unit #: 970 Make: International / Vactor Model: 2554 / 2112 Vactor Year: 1997 Class: Heavy Trucks & General Purpose Vehicles In-Service Date: 06/01/1997 Life to Date Hours: 8,233 hours CLF Utilization Standard: 250 hours / year Average Annual Utilization, Life to Date: 428 hours / year Annual Utilization Last Fiscal Year: 294 hours Annual Maintenance Costs for Last 3 Fiscal Years: $ 2,651 – FY16 (Includes Parts, Labor, and Outside Services) $ 9,786 – FY15 $32,160 – FY14 Life to Date Maintenance Cost: $231,306 (Includes Parts, Labor, and Outside Services) This unit is used for: The unit is used for catch basin cleaning, storm and sanitary cleaning, jetting sewers, catch basin repair, excavating storm and sanitary repairs, excavating for water main repairs, water valves and fire hydrant repairs, potholing for utilities, cleaning valve boxes of debris, meter pit repairs, and cleaning meter pits for meter installations. Secondary uses include: Gas light repairs, cable fault repairs, cleaning the salt brine tanks, vacuuming stump grindings, cleaning floor drains in City garages, exhume buried caskets for transportation, and trench rescue. Recent Mechanical Issues: The unit has served the City well and has exceeded its “serviceable” life. Major repairs and upgrades were made to the unit in 2007 for $30,000. These repairs and upgrades included significant welding and re-coating of the debris box, updating the boom controls, and replacing the overhead vacuum tube. With its age and the work it performs, it is no longer cost effective to repair or refurbish the unit. Currently, its steering gear and rear suspension need to be re-built. Hydraulic hoses are replaced on a regular basis and parts for the auxiliary Perkins engine are very difficult to obtain (the engine is no longer manufactured). FY2018 Budget Amount: $440,000 Proposed Replacement: Vactor or Vac-Con Combination Machine Can a similar piece of equipment be rented? If so, what is the cost? No. Can this piece of equipment be shared with another Department or other local agencies? It can be shared to assist in an emergency with a neighboring municipality. Is this piece of equipment used on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis? Please explain. Daily during the spring, summer, and fall months. Additionally, it used for hydro-excavating throughout the entire year. For the replacement piece, are you requesting any enhancements that the unit already does not have? Please explain. No. &: / v CfSWfWc? NJPA contracts have streamlined our purchasing process, saving our district thousands of dollars. -School District Member NJPA's expansive list of vendors filled in the gaps of our existing state contracts. -State Purchasing Officer Using NJPA was seamless and satisfied our need to conduct a formal bid! -University Member Get to know us. National Joint Powers Alliance® National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA) is a government agency that establishes an alliance between buyers and suppliers for use by education, government and non-profifs. WHAT IS NJPA'S COOPERATIVE PURCHASING? NJPA's cooperative contract purchasing leverages the national purchasing power of more than 50,000 member agencies white also streamlining the required purchasing process. As a municipal national contracting agency, NJPA establishes and provides nationally leveraged and competitively solicited purchasing contracts under the guidance of the Uniform Municipal Contracting Law. Joint Powers laws enables members to legally purchase through our contract. . NJPA has the legislative authority to establish contracts for government & education agencies nationally. NJPA solicits, evaluates and awards contracts through a competitive solicitation process on behalf of its members. . Members have a choice of these contracts and procurement processes, thereby satisfying local/state solicitation requirements and avoiding duplication of the process. NJPA members save time and money while also avoiding the unpleasant experience of low bid, low quality responses. WHAT PRODUCTS AND SERVICES DOES NJPA REPRESENT? NJPA's vendors are industry-leading. Product and service solutions range from office supplies to heavy equipment and everything in between. Find a complete list of our current vendors on the back of this flyer, or visit www.NJPAcoop.org/search to learn more about our vendors. HOW CAN MY AGENCY PARTICIPATE? The first step to accessing products and services through NJPA is to joinl * Learn more at www.NJPAcoop.org/join. . Membership is at no cost, liability or obligation. . Your NJPA member ID # arrives via e-mail and additional information follows in the mail. NJPAcoop.org . 888-896-3950 Competitively Solicited National Cooperative Contract Solutions MJPA National Joint Powers Alliance* Created By and For Public Agencies National IPA is a cooperative purchasing organization established for public agencies across the United States with the specifi c purpose of reducing procurement costs by leveraging group volume. National IPA aggregates the purchasing power of participating public agencies across the country in order to receive larger volume discounts from suppliers. Th is is an optional program with no fee to participate. Serving Public Agencies All cooperative agreements are competitively solicited and publicly awarded by a public agency/governmental entity (e.g. state, city, county, public university or school district), utilizing the best public procurement practices, processes and procedures. Th ese Principal Procurement Agencies are considered some of the best public procurement organizations in the nation and are available to answer questions or discuss the contracting process in detail. By utilizing these agreements, agencies eliminate duplication of eff ort and save valuable time, resources and money. Eligible public agencies include: State Government County Government City/Local Government Primary Education Systems Higher Education Systems Healthcare Other Public Agencies Nonprofi ts Agencies for Public Benefi t Our Team Th e National IPA team of certifi ed public procurement professionals, supply chain and cooperative purchasing experts is committed to bringing value to you and your teams. By acting as advocates to drive effi ciency, eff ectiveness and real savings within your agency, our team will work with you to enhance your procurement strategies. Recognized as respected leaders in the discipline by their peers and suppliers, this team of tenured professionals has held key public procurement positions in state government, local government and education. Cooperative Contracts Cooperative agreements available through National IPA are established with the following process: Th e lead public agency/governmental entity prepares a competitive solicitation, incorporating language that provides access by any agency in states that allow intergovernmental cooperative contract usage National IPA is named in the solicitation as the national cooperative purchasing organization Th e lead public agency issues the solicitation, any required amendments and notifi cations, and conducts pre-proposal conferences Aft er the suppliers respond to the solicitation, the lead public agency evaluates, negotiates fi nal terms and conditions, awards, administers, and utilizes the resulting master agreement All participating agencies are eligible to utilize the contracts through National IPA National IPA is committed to the integrity and transparency of the procurement process. Online access to solicitation and award documentation is always available in the documentation sections of each awarded agreement on the National IPA website. No FOIA, passwords or special requests are necessary. COOPERATIVE PURCHASING REGISTER TO PARTICIPATE BY VISITING WWW.NATIONALIPA.ORG 866-408-3077 info@nationalipa.org THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEGRAND TOTALSp('18pr19PC20FY21FY22FY23FY24Rl'25FY26FY27INVENTORYTOTAL - GENERAL FUNDBLD.MNT.30,00050,000150,000COM / ENG.25,0000000FIRE35,00075,000450,000275,00045,000315,00000POLICE25,000128,000297,00034,000210,000216,0000152,000312,00080,000SAN.360,000470,000108,000444,000370,000380,000770,000STREETS335,000220,000185,000190,00080,000200,00050,00000SEN./CROYA000000CABLE TV0000000a450,000423,000797,000854,000915,000554,000959,000572,000692,000850,000TOTAL. FLEET FUNDFLEETTOTAL-WATER FUNDW&S UTIL.440,00030,000185,000150,000200,000175,000TOTAL - CEMETERY FUNDGEM.70,00030,000TOTAL. GOLF COURSE FUNDGOLF482,000163,000TOTAL - PARKS & RECREATION FUNDPARKSREC.FOREST.USERGROUPS\PUBLICWKS\THOMAS\MEMOS\CAPEQPT\MIKECAP88,00072.000160,00085.00085,000150.000150,000280.000280,000130,00040,0000170,000 THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEBUILDING MAINTENANCE SECTIONCITEQUIP#50SECTIONBldg. Mnt.MAKEChevroletTYPESBODY STYLE3/4-ton, 2WD, ext cabYEAR2001FY1830,000FY19FY20FY21FY22pr23FY24Rl'25FY26FY27INVENTORY51Bldg. Mnt.Union City45 Walk-ln Van2003150,000Bldg. Mnt.IsuzuReach Van201253Bldg. Mnt.Morgan/Olsen45 Walk-ln Van200854Bldg. Mnt.IsuzuReach Van201255Bldg. Mnt.ChevroletImpala201159Bldg. Mnt.Tennant7400 Floor Scrubber200250,000Bldg. Maint. Total30,00050,000150,000 THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULECOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT £ ENGINEERINGCITEQUIP#501SECTIONInsp.MAKEChevroletTr'PE&BODY STYLEImpalaYEAR2011FY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23F\24FY25Pl'26FY27INVENTORY502Insp.ChevroletEquinox2011505507Eng.FordRanger Ext. Cab - 2WD1999Eng.ChevroletEquinox2007508Eng.ChevroletEquinox2006509510Insp.ChevroletImpala201125,000Insp.ChevroletImpala2011512Insp.ChevroletImpala2011Community Develop. Total25,000 THE CITi' OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEFIRE DEPARTMENTCITEQUIP#200SECTIONFireMAKEFordTYPESBODY STYLEExplorerYEAR2015FY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27INVENTORY'01202203212215FireFireFireFireFireChevrolet4WD Tahoe200935,000Chevrolet4WD Tahoe200935,000Chevrolet4WD Tahoe-Command200840,000PierceDash Squad2007100,000PierceLance Pumper1991216FirePierceSabre Pumper1994231FirePierceLance Aerial Tower1991241FireInternational4400 LP Ambulance2005275,000242FireInternational4300 LP Ambulance2004265,000243FireInternational4300 LP Ambulance2008315,000244FireInternational4400 LP Ambulance2015251FirePierceDash 8000 Squad1991276FireGMCSierra 4WD 3/4 ton200345,000280281290298FireFireFireFireGMCFordPolarisTritonSavanna VanExplorer4WD ATVATV TrailerFire Dept. Total200320082010201045,00040,00035,00075,000]450,000275,00045,000315,000 THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEPOLICE DEPARTMENTCITEQUIP#SECTIONPoliceMAKEChevroletTYPESBODYSFll-E4WD TahoeYEAR2013FY18Rl'1932,000FY20FY21FY2235,000FY23FY24FY2538,000FY26FY27INVENTORYPoliceFortExplorerPoliceChevrolet4WD Tahoe201633,00036,000201333,00036,00039,00039.001)PoliceFordExplorer201633,00036,00039.000PoliceChevrolet4WD Tahoe201332,00035,00038,000PoliceFordExplorer201533,00036,00039,000PoliceChevrolet4WD Tahoe2013PoliceFordExplorer201533,00036,00039,000PoliceFordExploer201410PoliceFordExplorer201533,00036,00039,00012PoliceFordExplorer201632,00035,00038,00013PoliceChevroletImpala201435,00040,00014PoliceChevroletImpala200832,00038,00015PoliceChevroletImpala201135,00016PoliceChevroletImpala200734,00040,00017PoliceFordFaurus201335,00019PoliceChevrolet4WD Tahoe201333,00039,00020PoliceChevrolet4WDTahoe201333,00039,00021PoliceAudlQ7200733,00023PoliceGO-4'arking Scooter201524PoliceSO-4Parking Scooter200625,000 THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEPOLICE DEPARTMENTCITI'EQUIP#SECTIONMAKETYPESBODY STYLEYEARFY18FY19FY20Pl'21FY22FY23Pl'24FY25FY26FY27INVENTORYPolice Department Total25,000128,000297,00034,000210,000216,000152,000312,00080,000 THE CITC OF LAKE FOREST10 \EAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULESANITATION SECTIONCITYEQUIP#SECTIONMAKETYPESBODYSFTLEYEARFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27INVENTORY160SanitationCushman4-whl Refuse Trkstr.201526,000161SanitationCushman4-whl Refuse Trkstr.201426,000162SanitationCushman4-whl Refuse Trkstr.201528,000163SanitationCushman4-whl Refuse Trksfr.201526,000164SanitationCushman4-whl Refuse Trkstr.201426,000165SanitationCushman4-whl Refuse Trkstr.201427,000166SanitationCushman4-whl Refuse Trkstr.201427,000167SanitationCushman4-whl Refuse Trkstr.201527,000168SanitationCushman4-whl Refuse Trkstr.200627,000169SanitationCushman4-whl Refuse Trkstr.200628,000170SanitationCushman4-whl Refuse Trkstr.200828,000171SanitationCushman4-whl Refuse Trkstr.200828,000172SanitationCushman4-whl Refuse Trksfr,2008173SanitationCushman4-wh\ Refuse Trkstr.2008174SanitationCushman4-whl Refuse Trkstr.2008175SanitationCushman4-whl Refuse Trkstr.2008181SanitationAuto carRefuse Truck2003360,000182SanitationVolvoFront Load Recy. Truck2002360,000183SanitationVolvoRefuse Truck2007380,000184SanitationAutocarFront Load Recy. Truck2012185SanitationVolvoRefuse Tmck1998340,000 THE CITf OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULESANITATION SECTIONCITEQUIP#SECTIONMAKETTPE&BODYSTfZEYEARFY18Pl'19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27INVENTORY186SanitationAutocarFront Load Recy. Truck201;187SanitationAutocarRefuse Truck200!380,000188SanitationAutocarRefuse Truck2003370.000189SanitationAutocarRefuse Truck2006390,000190SanitationChevrolet2500HD Crew Cab 4WD2009191SanitationChevrolet1/2 Ton 4WD Silverado2014194SanitationJohn Deere544K High Lift Leader2010195SanitationMaclanderElectronics Trailer2001196SanitationWellsCovered Trailer2016SanitationDymar9,17yd. containers1999Sanitation Section Total360,000470,000108,000444,000370,000380,00(1770,000 THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULESTREETS SECTIONCITEQUIP#SECTIONMAKETYPE &BODYSTTLEYEARFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27INVENTORY40:StreetsChevrolet1/2 ton 4WD Silverado2015403StreetsChevrolet1/2 ton 4WD Silverado200735,000404405StreetsChevrolet3/4 ton 4WD Sllverado200850,000StreetsSprayer Spec.1,200 gal. de-ice tank2002406407423425StreetsSprayer Spec.1,800 gal. de-ice tank2006StreetsDultmeir1,000 gal. de-ice tank2000StreetsHusqvamaConcrete Saw2008StreetsChevroletCabinet Truck2005430431432StreetsGMCCab-Over W-5500200680.000StreetsInternational4900 - Hooklift2001185,000StreetsIntemaUonal4900 - Hooklift2001190,000433StreetsInternational4300LP/Terex2016439StreetsFellingFT-14IT-I Trailer2010440StreetsCAT262C2010441StreetsBobcat'oolcat 5600200845,000442StreetsJohn Deere544-H Endloader2001200,000443StreetsBobcatroolcat56002008444StreetsBombardierSW-48-FA1979445StreetsBombard ierSW-48-FA1979446StreetsBombard ierSW-48-FA1979448StreetsElginSweeper-Eagle1999300,000 THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SfcHEDULESTREETS SECTIONCITYEQUIP»woSECTIONStreetsMAKEFellingTl'PE&BODY STYLEFT-6T Wood TrailerYEAR2003FY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27INVENTORY461StreetsingersollDD12S Roller2005489StreetsSide DumpSide Dump Trailer2012470StreetsCronkiteBobcat Trailer1995471StreetsNodineRoller Trailer1995472StreetsGold RTrailer1994473StreetsKaravPort. Welder Trailer1995474StreetsSpaldingCold / Hot Mix Mach.2014475StreetsWancoMobile Arrow Board2003476StreetsWells CargoTandem Covered Trailer1998477StreetsFracklessSnow Slower1999478StreetsSno-GoWK-SOOSnowBlower2011480StreetsFracklessSeries M'1999481StreetsInternational7400 - Hooklift2011482StreetsInternational7400 - Dump Truck2006483StreetsInternational7400 Tandem - Hooklift2011484StreetsInternational2654 Tandem1999175,000485StreetsInternational7400 - Dump Truck2005486StreetsInternational7400 - Dump Truck2011488StreetsInternational7400 - Dump Truck2011180VBStreetsMonroeStainless Steel V-Box1999 THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULESTREETS SECTIONCITEQUIP#SECTIONMAKETYPESBODYSTTLEYEARFY18Pl'19FY20FY21FY22Pl'23FY24w25FY26FY27INVENTORY431 VBStreetsMonroeStainless Steel V-Box2000432VBStreetsMonroeStainless Steel V-Box2000481VBStreetsMonroeStainless Steel V-Box1999483VBStreetsSwensonStainless Steel V-Box2011683VBStreetsMonroeStainless Steel V-Box1999684VBStreetsMonroeStainless Steel V-Box1999980VBStreetsMonroeStainless Steel V-Box2001981VBStreetsMonroeStainless Steel V-Box1999Streets Section Total335,000220,000185,000190,00080,000200,00050,000 THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULESENIOR CENTER / CROYAciri'EQUIP#SECTIONMAKETYPESBODY STYLEYEARFY18Pl'19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24Pl'25FY26FY27INVENTORY63SeniorChevrolet04500/ArbocBus201064CROYAChevroletExpress 15-Passenger201565SeniorToyotaAvalon Touring2008Senior Center Total THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULE] CABLE T.V.CITYEQUIP I#SECTIONMAKETYPESBODY STYLEYEARFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23Pl'24FY25FY26FY27INVENTORY90ICableT.V.I ChevroletTahoe - 4WD2008Cable Total THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEFLEET MAINTENANCE SECfJON^CITEQUIP#19SECTION:leetMAKEChevroletTYPES,BODYSrfLEImpalaYEAR2011FY18FY19PC20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27INVENTORYPOOL120FleetChevroletImpala2011POOL121FleetChevroletS-101996POOL122FleetGMCSonoma2003POOL123FleetChevroletImpala2011POOL124FleetFennant5700XP Floor Cleaner2010126FleetChevrolet1/2 Ton 4WD Silverado2008128FleetChevroletImpala2011129Fleet'oyotaFork Lift2004Fleet Mtn. Section Total THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEIWATER & SEWER UTILITIES SECTIONCITYI EQUIP I#901SECTIONw&sMAKEChevroletTYPESBODY STYLE2500 HD-4WDYEAR2016FY18FY19FY20FY21FY22RC23FY24FY25FY26FY27INVENTORY902w&sChevrolet2500 HD 4WD2011903wssChevroletI-Ton 4WD, Reg. Cab2014904Wtr. PlantChevrolet1/2-ton4WD,ext.cab2013906W8.SChevrolet1/2-ton 4WD. ext. cab200730,000908Wtr. PlantGMC3/4-Ton, 4WD Reg. Cab2015927w&sGMCSavannah-TV Truck1997928w&sGMCSavana Cutaway2003932w&sChevroletTopKick45002004940w&sJohn Deere410-GBackhoe2005175,000941w&sSulfairAir Compressor2001963w&sCH&E4" Water Pump1975964w&sCH&EWater Pump1975966w&sCH&EV Water Pump1975967w&sCH&EV Water Pump1975970w&sInternational2554 - Vactor1998440,000971w&sCH8.E6" Water Pump1975972w&sUnitedShoring Trailer1996973w&sFellingM4TI Tip Trailer2012979w&sSewer Eqpt.Jet Redder2001150,000980w&sInternational4900 - Jet Rodder2001185,000 THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEWATER & SEWER UTILITIES SECTFOKTCITYEQUIP#SECTIONMAKETYPESBODY STYLEYEARFY18FY19FY20FY21PC22FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27INVENTORY981w&sFreightlinerHeavy Dump Truck2003200,000999w&sWackerHammer1996W&S Section Total440,00030,000185,000150,000200,000175,000 THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULECEMETERY SECTIONCITEQUIP#701702SECTIONCemeteryCemeteryMAKEChevroletToroTYPE &BODY STYLECab-Over Dump TruckDingoYEAR20032003FY18FY19FY20FY21PC22FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27INVENTORY703CemeteryToroWorkman 3200199630,000704CemeteryBobcatFoolcat200470,000706CemeteryBravoTrailer2014707709CemeteryWellsCovered Trailer2016CemeteryKubotaMini Excavator2007723CemeteryWalkerRide Mower2001742CemeteryStowCement Mixer1989Cemetery Total70,00030,000 THE CITC OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEGOLF COURSECITEQUIP#SECTIONMAKEPi'PESBODY STr'LEYEARFY18FY19FY20Pl'21FY22FY23Rl'24FY25FY26FY27INVENTORY801GolfChevrolet1/2-ton ext. cab, 2WD2002802GolfJohn DeereAerocore200245,000803GolfJ. DeereTractor-1070199050,000804GolfJ, DeereTractor - 9701990805GolfKubotaTractor - 4900- -4WD2000806GolfBefcoOverseeder1998807GolfJ. DeereGreens Mower2000808GolfToroGroundsmaster-2WD2007809GolfToroGreensPro2015810GolfBush HogMower-TDM-112000811GolfBuff, TurbinePull Behind Blowers2007828GolfEZ-GOWorkhorse2001829GolfYamahaUtility Cart - Electric2007830GolfForoWorkman 32002000832GolfClub CarUtility Cart1993833GolfToroWorkman 32001998834GolfForoWorkman2008835GolfSolo RiderI-Person Golf Cart2006842GolfJohn Deere7500 Precision Cut2012S43GolfJacobsonGreens King - GK IV1994851Golfroro*ro Core Aerator201622,000853GolfMulticorGreens Aerator1979 THE CITl' OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEGOLF COURSECITYEQUIP#SECTIONMAKETYPES,BODYSTl'LEYEARFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25FY26Pl'27INVENTORY854GolfSDI100 Gallon Sprayer1986860GolfGiant VacTractor-Mount Blower1999862GolfToroGreens Master201623,000863GolfToroWorkman1999869GolfJacobsonGreensmower1992870GolfToreSandtrap Rake1985872GolforoSand Trap Rake2014873GolforoSand Trap Rake2016876GolfCushmanGA-601992877GolfToroGroundsmaster 4700D2016878GolfJ. DeereUtility Mower2000881GolfE-ZGOUtility Cart2001882GolfCushmanHaulster - Ball Picker2015883GolfToroWorkman199935,000884GolfJohn Deere2500B Greensmower2013885GolfJohn DeereGator - Sprayer2015886GolfJohn Deere2500 Greens Mower2002887GolfJohn Deere2500B Greens Mower200790,000888GolfJohn Deere2500A Greens Mower2003889GolfJohn DeereUwght. Frwy. Mwr.200450,000890GolfJohn Deere2653B Bank Mower2012891GolfToroGreensmaster 30502000 THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEGOLF COURSECITl'EQUIP#SECTIONMAKETYPESBODY STYLEYEARFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23PC24FY25Pl'28FY27INVENTORY893GolfJohn DeereFairway Mower200550,000GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GolfCar20085,000GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GoffCar20085,000GolfE-ZGOMedalist-Golf Car20085,000GolfE-ZGOMedallst-Golf Car20085,000GolfE-ZGOMedallst-Golf Car20085,000GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GolfCar20085,000GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GolfCar20085,000GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GolfCar20085,000GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GolfCar20085,00010GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GolfCar20085,00011GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GolfCar20085,00012GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GolfCar20085,00013GolfE-ZGOMedalist-Golf Car20085,00014GolfE-ZGOMedalist-Golf Car20085,00015GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GolfCar20085,00016GolfE-ZGOMedalist-Golf Car20085,00017GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GolfCar20085,00018GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GolfCar20085,00019GolfE-ZGOMedalist-Golf Car20085,00020GolfE-ZGOMedalist-Golf Car20085,000 THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEGOLF COURSECITEQUIP»SECTIONMAKETYPESBODY STYLEYEARFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27INVENTORY21GolfE-ZGOMedallst-Golf Car200S5,00022GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GolfCar20085,00023SolfE-ZGOMedalist-GolfCar20085,00024GolfE-ZSOMedalist-Golf Car20085,00025GolfE-ZGOMedalist-Golf Car20085,00026GolfE-ZGOMedalist-Golf Car20085,00027GolfE-ZGOMedalist-Golf Car20085,00028GolfE-ZGOMedalist-Golf Car20085,00029GolfE-ZGOMedaiist-GoffCar20085,00030GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GolfCar20085,00031GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GolfCar20085,00032GolfE-ZGOMedalist-Golf Car20085,00033GolfE-ZGOMedalist-Golf Car20085,00034GolfE-ZGOMedalist-Golf Car20085,00035GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GolfCar20085,00036GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GolfCar20085,00037GolfE-ZGOMedalist-Golf Car20085,00038GolfE-ZGOMedalist-Golf Car20085,00039GolfE-ZGOMedalist-Golf Car20085,00040GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GoIfCar20085,00041GolfE-ZGOMedallst-Golf Car20085,000 THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEGOLF COURSECITYEQUIP#SECTIONMAKETYPESBODY STTLEYEARFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27INVENTORY42GolfE-ZGOMedalist-Golf Car20085,00043GolfE-ZGOMedaiist-GolfCar20085,00044GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GolfCar20085,00045GolfE-ZGOMedalist-GolfCar20085,00046GolfE-ZGOMedalist-Golf Car20085,000GolfE-ZGO10 Extra Golf Cars50,000Golf Course Total482,000183,000 THE CIFl' OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEPARKS SECTIONCITYEQUIP#SECTIONMAKETl'PESBODY STYLEYEARFY18FY19pr20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25FY26FY.27INVENTORY301ParksGMC3/4-Ton, Ext. Cab - 4WD2015302ParksJohn Deere5420 - 4WD Tractor200288,000304ParksKubotaM6040HDC 4WD Tractor2008305ParksToroGroundsMaster-4WD2011306ParksToroGroundsMaster-328D200685,000307ParksoroGrou ndsmaster-328D2003308ParksoroPro Corel 298 Aerator2011309ParksToroGroundsmaster 4010-D2015310ParksChevrolet3/4-Ton, Reg. Cab 4WD2016311ParksInternational4400 Crew Cab2006314ParksBuffalo TurbinTow-Behind Leaf Blw2002315ParksChevrolet3/4-ton, Reg. Cab 4WD2016316ParksLand PrideTow-Behind Mower2013317ParksLand PrideTow-Behind Mower2007318ParksLand PrideTow-Behind Mower2008319ParksChevrolet3/4-Ton, Reg. Cab 4WD2015320ParksChevrolet1/2-Ton,Ext.Cab4WD2014321ParksChevrolet3500HD Crew Cab Dump2013322ParksGMCSierra 4WD 3/4 ton200345,000323ParksGMC3/4-Ton Ext. Cab 4WD2015324ParksChemngtonBeach Cleaner2008 THE CITl' OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEPARKS SECTIONCITYEQUIPifSECTIONMAKETYPESBODY SFTLEYEARFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24Pl'25FY26FY27INVENTORY325ParksCAT908HQ Compact Leader2011326ParksChevrolet3500HD Crew Cab Dump2011327ParksIsuzuW-4500 Reg. Cab2008328ParksChevrolet3500HD Reg. Cab Hooklift2013329ParksChevrolet3500HD Crew Cab Dump2013330ParksWells CargoTrailer1999331ParksBig TexTrailer: 35SA-12BK412010332ParksWellsCovered Trailer2016334ParksWells CargoCovered Trailer2015335ParksWells CargoTrailer2015336ParksBig TexTip Trailer2015x337ParksSureTracTip Trailer2010x338ParksBig TexTip Trailer2016x364ParksGiant VacLeaf Vacuum2008x365ParksGiant VacLeaf Vacuum2008367ParksCushmanBoom Sprayer2004368ParksTCFFlatbed Trailer2001369ParksIMSDredger Mod. #50122001370ParksNorthstarWater Tank w/ pump2000371372ParksParksToroKetchumWorkman 3200Hydroseeder19992000 THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEPARKS SECTIONCITYEQUIP#SECTIONMAKETYPESBODY STYLEYEARFY18FY19FY20Pl'21FY22FY23Pl'24FY25FY26FY27INVENTORY373ParksToroWorkman 42002001374ParksCushmanRefuse Truckster-4 Whl2005375ParksCushmanRefuse Truckster-4 Whl2004376ParksPolaris4WD ATV2008380ParksPower BossBeach Sweeper1988381ParksSmithooSand Pro2010382ParksSmithcoSand Pro2010383ParksoroSand Pro2001394ParksBakerMule (boat mover)1990Parks Section Total88,000130,000 THE CITl' OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULERECREATION DEPARTMIENTCITl'EQUIP#SECTIONMAKETYPESBODY STYLEYEARFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27180011800218003RecreationRecreationRecreationPerformanceAirboatTrailerTrailer2001INVENTORY18005RecreationPolarisSportsman 4WD ATV200918006RecreationCushman4-Whl. Faltbed Scooter200518007RecreationKawasaki4WDATV200918008RecreationKaravanTrailer200218009RecreationChevrolet2500HD 2WD pick-up200340,00018010RecreationTriadSunfish Trailer200318011RecreationDJ ProductsMule200618012RecreationDJ ProductsMule2015Recreation Total40,000 THE CITI' OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEFORESTRY SECTIONCITYEQUIP#SECTIONMAKET<PESBODY STl'LEYEARFY18FY19Pl'20FY21FY22FY23Pl'24FY25FY26Rl'27INVENTORY602ForestryGMCSierra 3500-4WD2007603ForestryGMCSierra 1/2 ton 4WD2015604ForestryBobcatToolcat5600T200672,000612ForestryInternational4400 Ext. Cab2004613ForestryTracklessBoom Flail Mower2008630ForestryGMCSierra 3500 4WD Dump200385,000631ForestryChevrolet1-Ton, reg. Cab, 4WD2014633ForestryChevrolet4WD 3500 Dump2016634ForestryLeco-ULVSprayer1989641ForestryMobarkM15RChipper2013642ForestryBandit1990XPChipper201085,000643ForestryRayooStumper200565,000644ForestryGrower Eqpt.Sprayer2006647ForestryBelsheTrailer1987648ForestryFellingFT-20-2 Trailer2005650ForestryNorthernLog Splitter1999669ForestryInternationalLog Leader1998280,000670ForestryNorth StarSprayer / Tank1999672ForestryInternational7400 - Tower Truck2003x683683FBForestryForestryInternationalMonroe7400 - HooklNlFlatted20111999 THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST10 YEAR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEFORESTRY SECTIONCITYEQUIP#SECTIONMAKETYPESBODY STYLEYEARFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27INVENTORY684ForestryInternational7400 - Hooklift2011684TForestryMonroe1800 gal. Water Tank1999Forestry Section Total72,00085,000150,000280,000-4- REVIEW OF 2016/2017 SNOW & ICE CONTROL PLAN Policies Expectations Route Maps Personnel Schedules Personnel Assignments SNOW & ICE CONTROL PLAN 2016 – 2017 1 Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 2 Standard Operating Procedures – Snow & Ice Control ................................................................................. 3 Department Policy for Availability of Snow & Ice Control Personnel ........................................................... 7 Expectations .................................................................................................................................................. 9 General Expectations ................................................................................................................................ 9 Pre-Season Planning ............................................................................................................................... 10 The Role of the Snow Commanders........................................................................................................ 11 The Role of the Snow Coordinators ........................................................................................................ 11 The Role of the Superintendent of Public Works ................................................................................... 11 Sectional Responsibilities ........................................................................................................................ 12 All Section Maintenance & Seasonal Personnel ..................................................................................... 12 Cemetery ................................................................................................................................................. 14 Fleet Maintenance .................................................................................................................................. 14 Parks and Forestry .................................................................................................................................. 14 Sanitation ................................................................................................................................................ 15 Streets ..................................................................................................................................................... 15 Water & Sewer Utilities .......................................................................................................................... 15 Building Maintenance ............................................................................................................................. 16 Engineering ............................................................................................................................................. 16 Community Development ....................................................................................................................... 16 Salting Policy ............................................................................................................................................... 16 Annual Salt Purchase / Storage Expectation ............................................................................................... 17 Storage and Loading of Salt for the Village of Mettawa and School Districts 67 & 115 ............................. 17 Pre-Season Planning & Winter Operations ................................................................................................. 19 Contact Information .................................................................................................................................... 20 Appendix A – Street Route Maps ................................................................................................................ 21 Appendix B – Sidewalk Route Maps............................................................................................................ 22 Appendix C – Personnel Assignments and Schedules ................................................................................. 23 Appendix D – Salting & Plowing Report Forms ........................................................................................... 24 Appendix E – Contractual “Snow Bird” Program Agreement ..................................................................... 25 Appendix F – Number of Employees Allowed Off December 1st-April 1st................................................... 26 Appendix G – Winter Night Crew Schedule ................................................................................................ 27 Appendix H – Hand Shoveling Agreements ................................................................................................ 28 December 2, 2016 2 Introduction The primary purpose of this document is to outline the snow and ice control procedures to be used by The City of Lake Forest. Each member of the Public Works Department, Parks, Forestry, and Cemetery Sections will be called on in some capacity to participate in the snow and ice control program during the winter season. A well organized, planned approach to our removal efforts will allow us to more efficiently handle the emergency. There will be times during the season when variations in temperature, humidity, wind, and time will require changes in the procedures outlined herein. It is intended that this document will enable all municipal personnel to become informed about the Department procedures and techniques. This plan will assist in ensuring that materials, equipment, and manpower are used as efficiently as possible. The Department is constantly striving to improve its techniques and procedures, minimize costs, and maximize services rendered to the citizens of Lake Forest. As we enter the snow season, I want to recognize all of the employees participating in this operation and thank them in advance for their commitment to the City and their efforts in making this a comprehensive and well run operation. The standard operating procedures outlined hereafter address the City’s response in managing snow and ice events throughout the winter. Each employee should be familiar with the contents of the procedures and be prepared to respond in his/her area of responsibility. Working as a team, we are confident that we will be able to meet the weather challenges of the coming winter season. Michael Thomas Director of Public Works 3 Standard Operating Procedures – Snow & Ice Control 1.0 Purpose: 1.1 Designate responsibilities and authorities pertaining to overtime callback among City Departments and officials during weather-related or other types of emergency situations to ensure an effective response to the public regarding conditions of thoroughfares, parking lots, sidewalks and other public facilities. 2.0 Scope: 2.1 Designation of emergency response by Department Heads, Superintendents, and Supervisors and assignment of these programs to a specific Department(s). These procedures may be augmented by the Department responsible for specific snow and ice control functions, provided that the procedures do not conflict with items described within this policy. 3.0 Employee Duties and Responsibilities: 3.1 Each employee of the Public Works Department and Parks, Forestry, and Cemetery Sections shall be subject to overtime activities, as assigned by the Department Head, Superintendent, or Supervisor, or as further described in these procedures. It is the responsibility of each employee to make themselves available for overtime duty when advised by their Supervisor. 3.2 An employee from a Department other than Public Works or Parks & Recreation may volunteer or consent to participate in emergency callback activities if released from regular duty by his/her respective Department Head. 3.3 Should insufficient personnel be available, the City Manager, or at his direction the Director of Public Works, may call upon any City employee of any Department to participate in callback situations for which he or she may be qualified. 4.0 Pre-Season Planning: 4.1 Prior to the winter season, a list of personnel which can be used for emergency callback will be compiled by the Snow Commanders. This list will include the current phone numbers of all personnel, including Supervisors. A "weekend call list" of personnel will then be prepared noting who may be called to respond to conditions as further described in these procedures. Sections which may be called back for non-weather related emergencies, shall maintain their own callback system for those types of callbacks (e.g. water main breaks, street light repair, emergency locates, etc.). 4.2 The Director of Public Works or his designee will be responsible for ensuring that all personnel utilized in emergency callback operations have received proper training and instruction in the safe use of equipment, proper operational practices, and procedures. To accomplish this training, the Department’s Management Analyst shall coordinate the necessary arrangements with the Department Supervisors or other Departments whose personnel may be used for snow and ice operations. 4 5.0 Weather Notification: The Snow Commanders or their designee will advise other Section Supervisors and maintenance personnel of upcoming weather conditions during the regular working day and/or off-hours. 6.0 Normal Snow and Ice Control Operations: 6.1 When it appears likely that roadway snow control operations will extend beyond sixteen (16) consecutive or closely intermittent hours, or when insufficient personnel respond to an initial shift call-out, the Superintendent of Public Works or an alternate, shall call upon relief shift personnel to assist with roadway snow control operations for a period of time not to exceed sixteen (16) consecutive hours. 7.0 Snow Emergency Operations: 7.1 The Director of Public Works may declare Snow Emergency Operations to be in effect if the Superintendent of Public Works has concluded that the required snow and ice control activities will not be completed by the relief shift, and that operations will continue for a minimum of twelve (12) additional hours. 7.2 When Snow Emergency Operations have been declared by the Director of Public Works, the Superintendent of Public Works and Department Supervisory personnel shall promptly be notified of said declaration. 7.3 A centralized Snow Command will immediately be established to direct all snow and ice control operations. Snow Command shall be under the general direction of the Superintendent of Public Works with additional assistance from personnel within and outside of the Department. All personnel from the Sections shall be under the direction and supervision of Snow Command, which shall determine specific snow and ice control priorities, assignment of personnel and equipment, and task responsibilities. All personnel and equipment from each Section shall be available for task assignments as determined by Snow Command. 7.4 If a snow emergency is declared, Snow Command may assign personnel to two (2) 12- hour shifts operated on a 24-hour basis. Employees are to be called to duty in accordance with the procedures established in the Snow & Ice Control Plan. 7.5 Snow Command shall exist until all streets are cleared, all public parking lots are open and cleared, all principal sidewalks and bikeways are passable, all parking lots and driveways at the core City facilities (i.e. Recreation Center, Library and Gorton Community Center, etc.) are cleared, West Park ice pond is cleared for use, and the business district area has been cleared of snow. 7.6 Manpower, equipment and other resources for snow and ice control shall be utilized in the following assignment of priorities during Snow Command: A. All City streets B. Municipal Services parking lot and sidewalks, City parking lots, and railroad station platforms 5 C. Power broom sidewalks along the bike patch adjacent to McKinley Road from Illinois to Westminster, sidewalks along all main roads, and sidewalks within ¼ mile of schools D. Plow all remaining sidewalks not defined in letter C E. CBD intersections and bridge decks F. Compost Center and recycling ramp G. West Park Ice Pond H. The hauling out of the Central Business District (CBD), snow from the multiple City- owned parking lots, and if necessary, the multiple cul-de-sacs Priority assignments may be modified depending upon prevailing weather conditions, day of the week, and time of the day. 7.7 During Snow Command, some or all regular Departmental activities may be curtailed or suspended for the duration of the emergency. 8.0 Special Personnel Policies and Practices: 8.1 An employee who has performed sixteen (16) consecutive hours of duty shall be directed to take a rest period of not less than eight (8) hours, providing the following criteria has been followed: “Employees required to be released during the normal working day for the purpose of relieving employees with sixteen (16) hours work or other snow removal work shall be directed to take a rest period of not less than eight (8) hours providing they are subject to callback for related work that same day”. Only under the most extreme circumstances may an employee on a directed rest period be ordered back to duty. Any employee who starts a directed rest period after the start of the normal working day or prior to the end of the normal working day, shall be eligible for an excused absence with pay for the remainder of the working day. An employee who meets the qualifications for a directed rest period (sixteen (16) hours of consecutive work and is subject to callback for additional emergency work that same day) shall be eligible for an excused absence with pay if released from duty prior to the end of the normal working day. For the purpose of administration of this section, normal working day is defined as the period from the regularly scheduled starting time in the morning to the end of the regularly scheduled day in the evening. 8.2 When a directed rest period begins after 1:00 A.M., the employee may receive an excused leave of absence with pay for the regularly scheduled hours of a normal working day which may overlap the directed rest period. The employee shall report for duty at the end of the directed rest period if that period expires before 1:00 P.M. of a normal working day. If the directed rest period expires after 1:00 P.M. of a normal working day, the employee may be eligible for an excused leave of absence with pay for the entire normal working day unless otherwise called back to duty by Snow Command. 8.3 Compensation for employees working during a twelve (12) hour emergency operations shift shall be based on eight (8) hours regular pay and four (4) hours overtime pay. 6 Sanitation employees will be compensated overtime pay after their normal ten hour shift is fulfilled. 8.4 Compensation for employees of any Department engaged in callback operations shall be calculated at the established pay grade of their respective regular job classification. 8.5 An employee called in for four (4) hours before or held for four (4) hours after a normal working day, shall be excused by Snow Command for a meal break with pay. Said employee shall receive a reimbursement of up to $7.00 per meal. In order to receive a meal reimbursement, a receipt must accompany the request. When an employee is called in for emergency duty during a non-regular work day, he/she shall receive a meal break with pay after completing a minimum of five (5) hours of duty, and up to two (2) meal breaks with pay after twelve hours of duty. Additionally, the employee shall receive a reimbursement of up to $7.00 per meal when a receipt is provided. For the safety of the employees, meals will be taken so that there is a rest break away from the assigned task and to provide needed nourishment for energy and alertness. 8.6 If an employee temporarily assigned under the supervision of another Department, or otherwise assigned or working under the supervision of a Supervisor other than the one to which he/she is regularly assigned (e.g. “Snow Command”), engages in an act or behavior requiring immediate disciplinary action, the Snow Commander in charge shall notify the employee's regular Department Supervisor of the nature of the offense at the earliest opportunity. The employee is to report to his regular Department Supervisor at the beginning of the next normal working day. All subsequent formal disciplinary actions shall be undertaken by the employee's regular Department Head in accordance with Administrative Directive 2-18. 9.0 Distribution: 9.1 All Department Heads, Supervisors, and staff members. Department Heads are responsible for disseminating the information to Department personnel. 7 Department Policy for Availability of Snow & Ice Control Personnel I. Supervisory Personnel A. One of the two primary Snow Commanders (Parks and Building Maintenance Supervisors), shall be the initial Supervisor called in for ice and snow responses. In addition to a Snow Commander, an additional Public Works or Parks & Recreation Department Supervisor will be assigned the role of a Snow Coordinator. The Superintendent of Public Works is responsible for the quality and effectiveness of the response to each snow event. The Director of Public Works shall be responsible for the overall operation. B. Following 12 hours of on-duty work, a schedule will be established whereby a backup Snow Commander and a backup Snow Coordinator will assume the snow and ice control duties and responsibilities. Snow Commanders and Snow Coordinators will alternate so that no single backup Snow Commander and Snow Coordinator work consecutive shifts. C. Snow Commanders and Snow Coordinators will be responsible for following and implementing all of the procedures outlined in this document. In case of other emergencies, such as water main breaks or severe ice storms, a Supervisor not on-duty may be called in to assist in handling that emergency. If needed, Snow Coordinators will be asked to be part of the response and tend to various routes as directed by the Snow Commander. D. Vacation schedules for both the Snow Commanders and Snow Coordinators shall be established in advance so plans can be made for backup duty by others. Unforeseen circumstances which require a Snow Commander and / or Snow Coordinator to find a substitute may be done with approval of the Superintendent of Public Works. E. The Supervisors serving in the capacity of Snow Commander and / or Snow Coordinator shall have the authority to call any personnel during snow removal operations for duty assignments. II. Line Personnel A. All Public Works, Parks, Forestry, and Cemetery personnel are responsible for making themselves available for all aspects of the snow removal operation and/or ice pond duty as directed by the Director of Public Works. B. In accordance with the Standard Operating Procedures for Snow & Ice Control, it is the responsibility of each employee to make themselves available for snow control duties and to advise their Supervisor of their availability during off-duty hours. III. Personnel Response A. Upon notification from Snow Command by City-issued phone, City personnel have 15 minutes to contact Snow Command. B. Upon contact with Snow Command, City personnel have one (1) hour to physically report to the Snow Command office for their assignment. 8 C. When snow conditions are forecasted or occurring, any employee who will be away from home for an extended period of time shall notify Snow Command of where he/she can be reached by their City-issued cell phone. All Public Works, Parks, Forestry, and Cemetery employees are required to carry their City-issued cell phone at all times, including those personnel off-duty. D. During regular working hours, employees will be assigned to various winter duties by the Snow Command. E. For weekend work, a preset “Crew A/Crew B” schedule shall be established by Snow Command. If priorities and/or emergencies require additional personnel, the opposite crew will be called in for overtime work. IV. Number of Employees Allowed Off A. Beginning December 1st through April 1st, the number of allowable fulltime personnel off from each Section is noted in Appendix F. The appendix specifically defines the number of personnel allowed off at any given time, as well as provides rules for granting time off. Supervisors’ allowable time off shall be restricted if the Superintendent of Public Works deems it necessary to meet Sectional obligations. Any exceptions to the number of personnel allowed off and the rules for granting time off, shall require approval of the Director of Public Works. V. Snow Bird Program A. With recent fulltime and seasonal employee reductions in Public Works, Parks, and Forestry, staff has developed a “snow bird” program that utilizes an outside contractor to provide temporary laborers and equipment operators. The “snow birds” are used to supplement the City’s snow operations on an as needed basis. The contracted temporary equipment operators will be paid a flat hourly rate per the hours worked (per the attached agreement as Appendix E). The “snow bird” program will operate from mid-November through April 1st. The “snow bird” contractor’s operators are required to adhere to all City Policies as outlined in the agreement. VI. Night Shift A. Work hours will be defined as midnight to 8:30 A.M., seven (7) days/week. B. The night shift will typically begin on or about December 15 of each year. The official begin date each year will be determined by the Director of Public Works. C. The night shift will conclude on or about March 15 of each year, or earlier as determined by the Director of Public Works. D. Employees from the Parks, Forestry, Water & Sewer, Building Maintenance, and Streets Sections will all work a five evening “night shift” during the winter season. Each employee will work five consecutive evenings within a seven day work week. E. Two (2) employees will work each night. Saturday nights there will be three (3) employees working the night shift. 9 F. The season’s schedule will be created by the Snow Commanders before November 1 of each year (attached via Appendix G) G. Night shift personnel’s primary responsibility will be to haul snow from the CBD and parking lots, address “hot spots”, and respond to complaints from the Police Department. In addition, night shift personnel are to address any other known areas that pose safety concerns during the day for motorists and/or pedestrians. Night shift personnel will also make the initial call to a Snow Commander if a snow event begins and roadway conditions warrant additional personnel. Expectations General Expectations 1. Employees of the Public Works Department and Parks, Forestry, and Cemetery Sections, are subject to routine and overtime activities during the winter snow season. It is the responsibility of each employee to make themselves available when advised by their Supervisor or Snow Command. 2. Physically respond to snow and ice conditions within 30 minutes during normal working hours and within 60 minutes outside normal working hours. 3. City snow and ice control operations will be completed by the priority established in this City policy. Snow removal and ice control operations are prioritized as follows: A. All City streets B. Municipal Services parking lot and sidewalks, City parking lots, and railroad station platforms C. Power broom sidewalks along the bike patch adjacent to McKinley Road from Illinois to Westminster, sidewalks along all main roads, and sidewalks within ¼ mile of schools D. Plow all remaining sidewalks not defined in letter C E. CBD intersections and bridge decks F. Compost Center and recycling ramp G. West Park Ice Pond H. The hauling out of the Central Business District (CBD), snow from the multiple City-owned parking lots, and if necessary, the multiple cul-de-sacs Priority assignments may be modified depending upon prevailing conditions, day of the week, and time of the day. 4. Whenever possible, the use of straight time hours will be observed. 5. Any Sectional obligations involving personnel or equipment that will impact City snow operations are to be communicated directly to Snow Command. 6. If mechanical assistance is required from Fleet Maintenance personnel during snow and ice operations, the Snow Commander requesting Fleet personnel will contact the Fleet Supervisor to advise him of the situation and to make the request. When approved by the Fleet Supervisor, Mechanics may be called in. 10 7. With the approval of the Director of Public Works, cleanup operations will begin after street, parking lot, and sidewalk operations are completed. Cleanup operations may include the following: Benching CBD cleanup and hauling snow to the Compost Center Opening of sidewalks at intersections and corner pushbacks Parking lot cleanup and hauling Stacking of snow at the Compost Center and West Campus Municipal Services Facility cleanup 8. If an impending rain event is forecasted to occur, the combination of rain water and melting snow may cause significant flooding. In such cases, all snow-related activities will be suspended and all Public Works, Parks, Forestry, and Cemetery personnel will focus on removing compacted snow and ice from the catch basins (i.e. street drains). Snow Command with assistance from the Water & Sewer Utilities Supervisor, will organize and manage the operation. The importance of having open and operational catch basins may dictate multiple shifts or overtime hours before the rain event begins. Pre-Season Planning 1. In preparation for the snow and ice season, pre-season planning must be completed every year. Pre-season planning includes the two Snow Commanders preparing updated information for the current year’s snow plan by November 15th and providing necessary training to staff. Additional required actions include: A. Updating emergency callback numbers, personnel assignments, and schedules. B. Updating contact information for the Union Pacific (East Side Train Station) and Canadian Pacific Railroads (West Side Train Station). C. Inspection of snow and ice vehicles and equipment, and submittal of service requests to Fleet Maintenance. D. Any pending equipment repairs shall be provided by the Fleet Maintenance Supervisor. E. Updating plowing and salting routes and maps. F. Training and training documentation. 1. Union Pacific and Canadian Pacific Railroad platform training. 2. Annual training on snow equipment: practices, procedures, and expectations. G. All sidewalks shall be inspected for intrusive limbs or bushes. Such obstructions shall be trimmed back by November 15 of each year. 2. Prior to November 1st of each year, the Public Works Administrative Assistant shall solicit proposals from private trucking firms for contractual hauling from the Central Business District (CBD) and parking lots, to the City’s Compost Center. 3. In the form of a letter, the Public Works Administrative Assistant will provide business owners in the CBD an option to pay for City snow removal services and remind business owners of the City Ordinance prohibiting the deposit of private snow onto City streets and sidewalks for removal. Notification to businesses shall occur prior to November 1st of each year. 4. The Public Works’ Management Analyst shall prepare an article for the winter Dialogue reviewing snow operations and policies. 11 5. The Streets Section will calibrate all salting v-box and tailgate spreaders prior to December 1st of each year. The Role of the Snow Commanders 1. Coordinate and facilitate pre-winter storm meetings and training. 2. Coordinate and oversee the overall quality of City snow removal and ice control operations. During a snow or ice storm, the primary Snow Commander may be reached at (224) 277-5250. The secondary Snow Commander may be reached at (224) 277-4889. 3. Adhere to the established Crew A/Crew B Personnel Weekend Schedule unless priorities and/or operational requirements dictate otherwise. 4. Incorporate the use of “snow birds” for snow removal operations during each event. 5. Notify the appropriate contractor if there is a need for salting and/or snow removal at the main City building sidewalks (i.e. City Hall, Gorton, Recreation Center, Elawa, Grove Cultural Campus, etc.). 6. Notify Supervisors of use of their personnel. 7. Create the season’s night shift schedule before November 1 of each year (attached via Appendix G). 8. Lead all pre and post snow meetings for all snow events. 9. Work with both the Public Works Management Analyst and the Administrative Assistant to ensure that all operations are correctly completing their timecards and route sheets The Role of the Snow Coordinators 1. Snow Coordinators are to assist in all planning, training, and execution of snow operations as noted by one or both Snow Commanders. 2. Snow Coordinators may also be asked to assist with any operation of the snow plan as deemed necessary by the Snow Commander (e.g. street / sidewalk / bike path plowing, hauling, loading trucks, etc.). The Role of the Superintendent of Public Works 1. Report directly to the Director of Public Works on snow/ice control operations. 2. Ensure effective use of personnel, equipment, and vehicles are communicated to and coordinated through Snow Command. 3. Performs “field inspections” during each event to ensure that expectations and goals are being met. 4. Review and evaluate Snow Commanders’ field reports to ensure that expectations and established timeframes are met. 12 Sectional Responsibilities All Section Maintenance & Seasonal Personnel 1. Upon notification of developing hazardous conditions, Snow Command will initiate all street plowing and salting as outlined in the employee’s route book. 2. The Streets Section will be responsible for plowing and salting streets and parking lots assigned in the snow plan. Parking lots are to be completed by 6:00 A.M., Monday—Friday; 8:00 A.M. on Saturdays; and 10:00 A.M. on Sundays. 3. Snow that has been pushed into parking stalls shall be removed within 48 hours after the snowfall has ended. This will be completed on straight time and via the overnight crews whenever possible. 4. Streets will assist with the plowing/salting of the Water Plant hill during overtime, weekends, and holiday hours. In emergency situations, Streets will assist with the plowing/salting of the outlying lift stations. During normal business hours, Water & Sewer Utilities personnel will be responsible for these activities. 5. The approximately 104 miles of City sidewalks will be plowed whenever there is an accumulation of 4 or more inches of snow on the ground. This may be a result of one or multiple storms. Whenever there is an accumulation of 2 or more inches of snow, City crews will mechanically broom and / or snow blow sidewalks within ¼ mile of all schools and all sidewalks along major streets. Only under extreme weather circumstances and with approval from the Director of Public Works, shall sidewalks be salted. Otherwise the approximately 104 miles of City sidewalks will not be salted. Whenever possible, the use of straight time hours will be used for snow removal of sidewalks. Sidewalk intersections with large piles of snow blocking the safe use of the sidewalk will be opened up after each storm. 6. The Compost Center and recycling ramp will be plowed and salted within 24 hours of the completion of a snow event. A vehicle operator report will be completed and returned to Snow Command. 7. Snow and ice control operations performed in the Municipal Services Parking Lot west of the gate (dependent upon the time of event) and all sidewalks and stairs shall be completed by 7:00 A.M., Monday – Friday; 8:00 A.M. on Saturday; and 10:00 A.M. on Sunday. The Snow Commander may elect to utilize the Parts Technician to perform snow removal activities at Municipal Services. 8. East and West Side Train Station Platform snow removal and/or ice control shall be completed prior to 5:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M. or (last rush hour arrival), Monday – Friday; 6:00 A.M. on Saturday; and 6:00 A.M. on Sunday. A second cleanup on Saturday and Sunday shall be completed by 4:00 P.M., if necessary. 13 9. Due to a reduction in the overall number of maintenance and seasonal personnel over recent years, City-owned buildings and property with public sidewalks will be shoveled, snow blown, and salted using a combination of both City and contractual crews. Agreements with private companies to provide such services will be negotiated and finalized by the Superintendent of Public Works before November 15th of each snow season. Snow Command will coordinate the use of both in-house and contractual crews. The following list of primary City-owned buildings will receive a consistent level of attention during and after a snow event simply due to the higher number of pedestrians: A. City Hall B. Deerpath & Oakwood intersection C. Bank Lane parking lot sidewalks D. Illinois Road stairs and sidewalks under the Illinois Railroad Bridge E. Gorton Community Center F. Triangle Park (along Deerpath, east of McKinley) G. Recreation Center H. Sidewalks under the Woodland Railroad Bridge I. Elawa Farms J. Everett Recreation Facility K. Sidewalk adjacent to the pond across from the West Side Train Station L. Grove Cultural Campus The following list is those facilities that will be shoveled, snow blown, and/or salted upwards of a day after the snow event or as personnel become available: A. West Park (while the ice pond has its snow removed) B. South Park C. Northcroft Park D. Waveland Park E. Townline Park 10. The following two (2) facilities will have their sidewalks shoveled, snow blown, and salted utilizing personnel from within those buildings: A. Municipal Services B. Public Safety Building 11. Any complaints or concerns regarding snow and ice removal are to be directed to Snow Command. Snow Command or his designee will investigate the issue and respond accordingly based on current priorities and equipment and manpower availability. 12. The City will utilize Di Tomasso excavating for hauling of snow from the CBD and City-owned parking lots. In addition, Di Tomasso Excavating will stack and manage the snow at the Compost Center that is deposited via the hauling operations. 13. Complete post-snow and plow damage repairs, to include the replacement of damaged parking lot concrete wheel stops and resetting those that have been displaced, by May 1st of each year. Assist 14 the Parks Section with parkway repairs as deemed necessary. Assist Sanitation with the comprehensive cleaning of all snow equipment prior to May 1st. Cemetery 1. The Cemetery Sexton will assist in the annual snow operations as an alternate to any of the Snow Coordinators in case of their absence. He will also assign personnel for snow removal for the driveway, sidewalks, and roads within the Cemetery. Concessions will be made in the event of funeral services and burials. Fleet Maintenance 1. The Fleet Mechanic and Mechanic’s Assistant will punch in and out, and report directly to Snow Command for instructions. Upon completion of their duties, a shift report sheet will be turned into Snow Command. The intent of the Mechanic’s Assistant position is to assist the Mechanic in any and all repairs and maintenance activities. 2. Snow Command may assign additional duties to Fleet personnel during snow operations as conditions warrant. 3. Requests for service of all snow-related vehicles and equipment shall be completed by Fleet Maintenance by December 1st of each year. 4. Fleet Maintenance will perform maintenance on all snow removal equipment as a top priority during snow operations. Exceptions can be made for repairs to Public Safety vehicles and other equipment that may be required for other high priorities (i.e. water main breaks, fallen trees, etc.). Secondary work during snow operations will include, but is not limited to weekly PM’s, repair of scheduled items, and/or pending list repairs. 5. The Parts Technician will primarily be utilized in Fleet Maintenance, and if determined by the Snow Commander, assist in snow removal operations at the Municipal Service Building. Parks and Forestry 1. Upon notification by Snow Command of a developing wind and/or ice event, the Parks and Forestry Supervisors will deploy their pre-assigned pool of personnel and vehicles. In the event that pre- assigned personnel or equipment are unavailable, the Parks Supervisor and / or Forestry Supervisor will communicate directly with the on-duty Snow Commander to organize sharing and deployment of available personnel and equipment. 2. Field reports, route sheets, and material totals are to be turned in to Snow Command within 24 hours after the conclusion of a snow plowing and/or salting operation. 3. Snow removal at Forest Park shall strictly be controlled by Parks personnel. There shall be no plowing of the walking path or the boardwalk. The ring road will be closed during a snow event and will only be re-opened after it is mechanically broomed. The south top parking lot will be plowed. Use of salt or sand on the south top parking lot is at the sole discretion of the Superintendent of Parks & Forestry or the Parks Supervisor. 15 4. Performing snow and ice control duties under the Intergovernmental Agreement between The City of Lake Forest and Lake Forest School District #115 (West Campus) is a shared responsibility between the Parks and Forestry Sections, and the Public Works Department. This includes plowing the back northwest parking lot of West Campus if snow is being stored in this area. 5. Coordinate all parkway repairs with the assistance of Public Works personnel, and complete such repairs by May 1st of each year. Sanitation 1. Refuse personnel may be assigned to snow removal duties during their periods of off-duty time. Refuse personnel assigned to snow duty will have at least 8 hours of time off prior to reporting for their regularly scheduled refuse shift. 2. Refuse personnel used for snow removal duty during their regular workday will be paid on the same basis as other maintenance or seasonal employees. Only after completion of their regular 10-hour day will they paid at an overtime rate. 3. Snow Command will work around the refuse and recycling collections, and will attempt to utilize refuse personnel during the daytime on Sundays, Tuesday nights, during the daytime on Wednesdays, Friday nights, and Saturdays. These times will allow Sanitation personnel to get rest prior to their work activities on Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday. Regardless of the weather conditions, a Sanitation employee is always assigned to be the Compost Center Attendant on Saturdays during the winter months. 4. Take the lead role with the Streets Section’s assistance, to clean all snow equipment by May 1st. Streets 1. Streets Section personnel perform similar snow season work to that of all other maintenance operations in Public Works and Parks & Forestry. 2. Load all salt deliveries received throughout the year into the salt bays. 3. Mix and load the salt brine or calcium chloride solution into all large trucks before a plowing and salting event. 4. Repair or replace all broken posts and / or mailboxes caused during plowing operations. The Public Works Administrative Assistant will maintain a running list of broken posts and / or mailboxes and update the list from input by the Streets Supervisor. All posts and mailboxes will be repaired or replaced by May 1st of each year. 5. Assist the Sanitation Section with the end-of-season cleaning of all snow equipment by May 1st. Water & Sewer Utilities 1. During normal business hours, Water Plant personnel will be responsible for plowing and salting their water and sanitary facilities. This includes the Water Plant Hill, parking lot, Spruce and 16 Sheridan Lift Station, Southwest Sewer Lift Station, the Booster Station, and Villa Turicum Lift Station. 2. The Water & Sewer Utilities Supervisor will assign the plowing and salting responsibility of the locations noted in number 1 above, to any of the Water Plant personnel. 3. It is the goal that all locations, except the Water Plant Hill and parking lot, be plowed and salted during regular hours. This can be modified by the Water & Sewer Utilities Supervisor if an emergency arises or if access is needed to one of the offsite locations before the workday begins. 4. All remaining Water & Sewer Utility personnel will take a lead role in the City’s snow removal program. Their participation will mirror those of the Streets, Parks, and Forestry Section personnel. Building Maintenance 1. All Building Maintenance personnel will participate in regular and overtime snow removal activities. Their participation will mirror those of the Streets, Parks, and Forestry Section personnel. 2. If a building emergency or immediate repair is required, Snow Command will release the needed personnel back to Building Maintenance. Engineering 1. All Engineering Assistants will participate in regular and overtime snow removal activities. 2. If an infrastructure emergency arises that requires Engineering assistance, Snow Command will release the needed personnel back to Engineering. 3. As the winter months progress, final design work is needed for the upcoming fiscal year’s Capital Improvement Program. During normal business hours, Snow Command will release the Engineering Assistants back to Engineering as soon as possible so that design work can proceed and deadlines can be met. Community Development 1. Building Inspectors from the Community Development Department will continue to receive annual training on plowing parking lots and cul-de-sacs. The training will occur during a mutually agreed upon time by the Directors of Community Development and Public Works. If throughout the winter season, an event occurs where Snow Command is unable to provide a response with enough personnel for all of the needed routes and removal activities, Building Inspectors may be asked to assist. 2. Similar to Engineering’s role, Snow Command will release the Building Inspectors back to Community Development as soon as possible so that deadlines for inspections and plan reviews can be met. Salting Policy As was approved by City Council at their March 16, 2015 City Council meeting, staff implemented the revised salting policy. Salt usage throughout the winter will follow the proceeding guidelines: 17 1. Flexibility will be given to the Snow Commander so that salt rates can be modified based upon the nature of the storm and the road conditions at any specific time. 2. A two period process will be implemented each winter designating approximate dates when regular and modified salt rates are to be used. The two-period process is as follows: Period # 1: December 1st – January 15th: With the holiday season and most residents in town, normal salting procedures will continue. This includes salting all streets and parking lots after they are plowed. Period # 2: January 16th – March 30th: As the holiday season has past and the sun begins to move higher in the sky, staff proposes to reduce salt usage to 50% of the typical 110 tons per storm by only salting all main streets, and the hills, curves, and intersections of all side streets. Parking lots will also be salted. Annual Salt Purchase / Storage Expectation With the salt bay modifications completed in 2015, the City is now able to store 2,400 tons of salt as compared to previous years. This represents 83% of the City’s average annual usage of 2,900 tons. Late spring or early summer of each year, staff will seek quotes and City Council approval to purchase salt for the upcoming winter season. The intent is to locate salt vendors interested in reducing their inventory at a competitive price per ton. The City each year will have the 2,400 tons on site before the winter season begins. Additionally, staff will also request City Council approval to purchase additional tonnage if necessary, during the winter months. This will typically be completed via the Lake County or similar bidding processes. This ensures that the City will have the ability to purchase additional salt during the winter months, if 2,400 tons on site proves not to be adequate for a specific winter. If the additional tonnage is not purchased during the winter, the City will still have a commitment with the vendor to purchase the committed quantity in the spring or summer months. This will simply offset the additional amount needing to be purchased to fill the bays to 2,400 tons. Storage and Loading of Salt for the Village of Mettawa and School Districts 67 & 115 The City of Lake Forest purchases, stores, and loads salt for both School Districts # 67 and # 115. Quantities given for both districts are tracked by Snow Command throughout the winter months. In the spring, the City issues an invoice to both school districts charging each for the total tons used at the price per ton paid during the summer when filling both bays to 2,400 tons. Additionally, the City stores and loads salt for the Village of Mettawa. The Village purchases its own salt and coordinates delivery with the City in late spring. In the spring, the Village is issued an invoice equating to $5 / ton for storing and loading salt during the winter months. Both School Districts and Mettawa’s private contractor contact Snow Command to coordinate the loading of their trucks at a mutually beneficial time. 18 Pre- and Post-Snow Meetings The purpose of the pre- and post-snow meeting is to allow the opportunity to discuss ways to improve snow removal operations. The Snow Commanders will use winter inspection forms, snow command reports, weather forecasts, and/or other internal documents to record snow removal operations. 1. Pre-Snow Meetings: The two Snow Commanders will facilitate the meeting covering operational requirements for labor, equipment, vehicles, and material. A tentative plan will also be discussed for post-storm cleanup (if needed) to include hauling from the CBD, parking lots, and push backs of intersections with sidewalk entrances. 2. Post-Snow Meetings: The two Snow Commanders will facilitate the post-snow meeting to review whether expectations were met and ways to improve overall snow operations. Pre-storm meetings will occur approximately midday of the snow event. Post-storm meetings will occur within 24 hours after the conclusion of the snowfall. Both meetings will be held at the Municipal Services Building in a location to be determined. All Supervisors and Superintendents of Public Works and Parks & Forestry who are involved in winter storm operations are expected to attend pre and post-snow meetings. The Director of Public Works shall also be in attendance. The Director of Parks & Recreation as well as a member of both the Police and Fire Department Management team will also be invited to attend. Any items identified in the discussion that cannot be handled at the operational level will be forwarded to the Director of Public Works for his final decision. A “post-season snow meeting” will occur shortly after the end of the snow season to discuss issues, improvements, and any modifications recommended to the annual program. 19 Pre-Season Planning & Winter Operations Item ............................................................................................................................... Completion Solicit proposals for sidewalk clearing of City-owned buildings (Supt. of Public Works)…. . October 1 Prepare article for Winter Dialogue (Public Works Management Analyst) .......................... October 15 Vehicle inspections and service requests to Fleet (All Sections) .......................................... October 15 Solicit proposals for CBD Hauling (Public Works Management Analyst) .............................. October 30 Mail snow removal letters to businesses in CBD (Public Works Management Analyst) ...... October 30 Snow Commanders to organize the following information for the Snow Plan: Callback numbers, personnel assignments and schedules (All Sections) ................ October 30 Contact information for Union and Canadian Pacific RR (Parks) ............................. October 30 Vehicle and equipment inventory (All Sections) ...................................................... October 30 Department policy manuals (Snow Command) ....................................................... October 30 Plowing and salting route maps (Snow Command) ................................................. October 30 Schedule for back-up duties (Snow Command) ....................................................... October 30 “Snow Bird” Agreement Finalized (Supt. of Public Works)………………………………………………. November 1 Training and training documentation: Union and Canadian Pacific RR platform training (Parks) ........................................ November 21 Annual training on snow equipment and procedures (Snow Command) ............... November 21 Vehicles and equipment prep for Snow Operations Complete (Fleet) ................................. December 1 Snow season begins .............................................................................................................. December 1 Start of night shift responsibilities (depending on snow accumulation) .............................. December 15 End of night shift responsibilities .......................................................................................... March 31 Snow season ends ................................................................................................................. March 31 Post-snow vehicle and equipment cleaning completed (All Sections) ................................. May 1 Parkway repairs and concrete wheel stops completed (Parks and Streets) ........................ May 1 20 Contact Information Any questions regarding any portion of the City’s Snow & Ice Plan shall be directed to any of the following: Bill Borzick, Building Maintenance Supervisor Michael Thomas, Director of Public Works 847-810-3562 – office 847-810-3540 – office 847-613-0211 – cell 847-363-3399 – cell borzickw@cityoflakeforest.com thomasm@cityoflakeforest.com Rich Paulsen, Parks Supervisor Dan Martin, Superintendent of Public Works 847-810-3567 – office 847-810-3561 – office 847-502-5255 – cell 847-702-6259 – cell paulsenr@cityoflakeforest.com martind@cityoflakeforest.com Any questions regarding snow removal and the overall condition of the West Park ice pond shall be directed to one of the following: Rich Paulsen, Parks Supervisor 847-810-3567 – office 847-502-5255 – cell paulsenr@cityoflakeforest.com Chuck Myers, Superintendent of Parks & Forestry 847-810-3565 – office 847-613-0651 – cell myersc@cityoflakeforest.com Any questions regarding maintenance of vehicles and equipment shall be directed to one of the following: Dave DeMarco, Fleet Maintenance Supervisor 847-810-3576 – office 847-613-0266 – cell demarcod@cityoflakeforest.com Dan Martin, Superintendent of Public Works 847-810-3561 – office 847-702-6259 – cell martind@cityoflakeforest.com Appendix A Street Route Maps 21 ("^E.L^nJ "E, |S?S |S. fsr-U S^ ^i' \*»" 11" sissSi" -mini;. ."»"< ^. Snow Plow Routes N THE C: 1 TT Of LAKE FOREST .rt~,i,^-^B5feo>w^*---r*^&Eqa .^rt,isnsgi?ff^n*j»*t*'»CV PARK AVE RD 3 i ^ PARK OR 1 (3 co co 3: m ;q 0 I. \ '~\, ^S PL WINTHROP ,LN '^I ^ FRANKLIN PL LAUREL AVE NOBLE AVE MILLS CT ^Rft^i SPRUCE AV I Q Q 0 § ^SPRUCE ^ i CRAB TREE \-^^ <>.'^ ^^ PINE LN ^pOlAND RD -§> FTERIDGE RD ^^ r"I ^ ^ oo^-F su.r^i i Q 0 0 ^SCOTT ST ^~ ^ co 2 Q (U-<?5?n ^ 0s ^s^£RR^^ GRANBY RD ys 3 m .%..^. >^ % m 3 § ya 0 <^>§ \ % tu"7£' ?>/' SUNSET PL ^sc^ <y WESTMINSTER tU I s I Mi 0008^ IN ^ m -u ~^1 WESTMINSTER ^^ I i \NES'V DfeERPATH ^s ^ S3 »?^ V?,I u- so ^ \N^^ ^ DEE^ .-^^.& u^o\s P.O 1^Is 6 \t\VS- 5 COLLEG6 e f^E. ^BROKE 0^ t"I^ ^ '% y^ s v.^ 5 ^ i s s oMW^ g?^G % ^ u* Q ^> CK^ 0«- ^\ § .>. ^ yjI i^.^RY RD ^ ^OSEM^?y RD § ^WOOD /to 0.1 0.2 I Mi N Snow Plow Route 1 ^ THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST 0Mco3Q.oQ?6c(DN-¥.-nri §'31^ay Ava vawsFOREST HILL RDiiTIMBERQX3/^1^^0000^^^^^^^JUNE TER T^\0^'^.^i4l0MAYWOOD RD -^ $070minzWINSTON ^00?^IM^c/>ms^-<xaysio^l0ay ° ^'000mRDi ^itgr~^CTQ;000v>^^%/. ^c^/? ^^^^0~~fS^RID.Fn ^ WOODED 36 ^LNt?%\',0^^'^m°OUGLAS DR ^000.JOa07;mCTirt//?/CUM gRD^^^vz0j00§A'^> s\.0073v0r^sMAPLE^if^l^Coa:$ ^V3?/63D0/<.r^.0enya&CTI00^^/^i'^y^^MAYFLQWEF(RD^'i^ ^^As-Jrnr^.l3=l^"^'^'-^/^r-^^c|~s\THORNELN.^'°^^>va-<a0 t & &GE --i"» v rviflWWr* 1^ ^T ypB'NSQi, OR PARK AVE OXFORD § Al.DEN LN £RD ^ ^ .^ iiesr^, sUi I <>.%t\ 5V- LAUREL AVE \"^ "^ ilNE CT !ONT WESTMINSTER I s ERPATH ^^^ '%a s i_Sg KENNINSTON zTERR ecvs Q 1" s I u QI ^ ^s>^ u oa^ ^ -.-(.'.' Ill s I s g LU z § CD I/<<? °i ?S.*'- WINTHROP MICHSAMME LN g REILLY LN 0 < 0 § & WCQUl.W .UL s .OPI-W R-'(SLN % I 8 PARK OR S s 05. .-po SPRUCE AV ' I SPRUCE M NOBLE AVE MILLS CT § 3 CRAB TREE I.'1 <?'^. FRANKUI) PL LAUREL AVE ^§TERR PINE LN ^UWO RD I ^ s ATTERIDGE RD .<fl fc B'"^S I SUNSET "^C^f* PL ^ scorrsT ^~ 3.If I. GRANBY ^ RD %A .s: 3 g <^> ,<ur ; ..*^ WESTMINSTER I ul J^ WSTMINSTSR 2^(atEt <? -lf^<^ & w u ^ \u \ Ut»0's SCl \N^ ^'S DEE«?"..<»%.% T-0 %"i a % MU& %COLLE6E ^'% ro I ffK- 'SI®ROKE Oft rnI^ u>> en \ ^OSEM/Wf fjo % %I wod % % ONWENTSIA RD 0.2 0.4 3 Mi Snow Plow Route 3 ay iMowa cno mIsa0'^.CH^ ^'<»-"/-<.<<-3AV S31S3BRECKENRIDGECTHARLANCT aa| AVE §OCTm ssaw (0V)I.oI?6ff^<hls=lNEGAUNEE LNSHAWNEE LNSEQUOIA CTCdf»^JUNE-^"^TER -?.^MAYWOOD RD _3 3sNOV^00?^IMA.^^WINSTON ^ERD_I '\L.§ IWOODEDi rw~QS Sis8s spgII5 S-I ^I?^2 ^^g ^0 ^AMAPLE'-cf"! <? ^I I I J^l -f5? §'05 r£0 fTf0 -< ^ 2a i^ G0w30&ss'^"'^.^ ^^^J?^'WFIOWER.As.RD REGENCY LN KESWICKLN WINWOOD OR ^u KIRKHILL^IDGE ^ CONCOR cPAKQBQVE LN . S 5 RAS 31.ca ARMOUFfe CIR § VERDA a LN £ ^ CC,I u <fr /k. {? ta KENNINGTON zTERR a: uice LU UJ I 0 0.1 0.2 iMi N Snow Plow Route 5 4-iiL UKE FOREST TFfl CITY OF ?ffl ffl DEERPATH ^ g LONGME OW LN S^VAN^ KENNEDY RD (RT60) y CA^BI? kWOOD SETTLE^ SQUARE ^ 0.15 0.3 I Ml Snow Plow Route 6 ^k TH I CITY OF LAKE FOREST g<siLUb3SIWHSto3NISfcl1:SI101FTqAV 5*°; I 1339QiyN3^I,piDGE ^'ui"I0co(i.woogg^g.-oi/g>-sN1^.'0.h-»01gI0I'w<pNI aiavis'f§JMA^^^^0^D3U80EVERGREEN OR ^%slRIDGE RDt>A.,<?'jf^\^H '%31^.s3Q±ba.6cwss0KATHRYN LNco'0100^V.U^'',^ [mpcwu, ."»"""'"* Pk. \ NOUe, ¥ s cr 8<c» , \ s ^ ^ FOS '^%, IW fr ^> WESTLEIGH RD sf5S oOD RO WESTLE1GH RD '% 1 BERKSHIRE OR 2 WOODWARD CT 3ANDCVERCT 4 STOCKBRIDGE CT 5 GREENWAY DR 6 WHARTON DR 7 BUCKINGHAM CT 8 ST GEORGECT 8 BALMORALCT ,10 WINDSOR CT |11 BRISTOL CT |12 BATON CT '13 CAMELOTCT L* bff TIU.BWS'' f ^^ tlMfsrow cw^s s.I6 "f CT '*"% KB" ^ fr CEOARLN <? DR N«iwwr CT »"' ^OSNOOffi" <6A \ .< c°» PINE OAKS CIR Wrw at»rB>-y^ S HERON "r l"""\^ ^ SltBplffiB'-* '^> ffa G^ G\i I LAKEWOO" w »,"^ % EVERETT RD S' BCmuNC WEE" °R F*"U DC fS <*<WA>^p ^ScPDi cr N SETTLERS' ^ ^ S^ SQUARE ^ KENNETT LN l"ws»-u< iT^'"" WILSOW Oft \ 1 \/ %g ESTATC LH_ EAST m§ '"'CADY°'L CASCTDE CT 3 U.WB'CE '.* 5 I, i?j s .. .PI si *^u WILD RO^ 3 -^aK' % JtBU*'18* s' " EVERETT SCHOOL RD EVERETT RD ~^ ^ A § = §_ i 3_ BKtlffi" t &'%, \\ \ ¥ S '"" g % EVERETT RD t s, * 8 gJ^WILSHIRE 5 a S RDi SB VA\t D?. NORTH STONE LOUIS A AVE AVE AVE \ LINOEN^ AVE .& MARION .%.^ CT <&»/ % <r ^ ^ms OLD MILL RD STOIEISOH 5, y"^. \ a'e- BIG 0^ CT ARBOR LM WNDP'DGE OLD MILL RD OLD MILL RD ANNA LN LARKSPUR C7 ^\ &* JAMES^ ^ST .'<.,¥s ci "t^ ^ ,? .1",«'.'.' -I*'.<^ 'C OLD MILL RD "ae !~^i flPW"'* ^ 3. B AVE MILES AV OLD ELM R! \ i is snatforo w' 0.25 u.s 3 Mi Snow Plow Route 8 <h THE CITY Of LAKE FOREST LANE 3' LORRAINE CASTLEGATE CT cPAK GROVE LN 1 MARQUETTECT ^LARCHMONT e LNg "' i B PRINCETON CT HARVARD CT 4 STANFORD CT 5 CORNELL CT 6 ACADEMY WOODS DR ACADEMY RD ^ASH LAWNS' I Is jg p wstf^ Sl PARKffiAD$TN"! ARMOUR CIR g VERDA s LN £ 30 ONSWEWOW LN 1 MA6NOLIALN S. 2 WESTBRIDGECIR 3ELDERBERRYCT KENNEDY RD (RT60) 14 ASBURYCT 15 CANTERBURY CT 16 NEWPORT CT '17 DANBURYCT 18 BRADFORD CT 19 OLD BRIDGE RD ^^% 1 BERKSHIRE DR 2 WOODWARD CT 3 ANDOVERCT 4 STOCKBRIDGE CT 5 GREENWAY DR 6 WHARTONDR 7 BUCKINGHAM CT 8 ST GEORGE CT 9 BALMORALCT 10 WINDSOR CT 11 BRISTOL CT 12 EATONCT 13 CAMELOTCT Snow Plow Route 9 .I BbhtK.bHIKt UK 2 WOODWARD CT 3 ANDOVERCT 4 STOCKBRIDGECT 5 GREENWAY DR 6 WHARTON DR 7 BUCKINGHAM CT 8 ST GEORGE CT 9 BALMORALCT 10 WINDSOR CT 11 BRISTOL CT 12 EATONCT 13 CAMELOTCT ^BIAte^oN CA*B.S-'/-, <^ NEW m 8 ^.fy CT CEDAR LN <?» \ '<" 9 jENNffER LAKEWOOO CR A-ftttA^ S^SSVl^ ^I.I.GRAS'' STQIIELEIGH .^ " ^OON ^\ cr>^.o- OLD MILL RD ANNA LN LARKSPUR CT ARBOR LN GOV-0^00 ^ s \^ ^ % ^- \^CS® 'CEDGeNOOD WINDRIDGE i JAMES'1' -. ST r4fes ^ s 0.15 0.3 I Mi N Snow Plow Route 10 T H t CITY OF LAKE FOREST Appendix B - Sidewalk Route Maps 22 Snow Operations Sidewalks * Ts/!/- '\ ./ ^ 9 Vl^ BCTI :.!'SiP"t~ !ftlt»U8nr "I^I- n ..«.'" s S H ^~5~-xls' 1 is s rs ie' Plow Route 1 Plow Rairte 7 Plow RoutB 3 Snow Blowing Ptow Route 4 Snow Blowing Plow Route 5 Snow Blowinfl 0 BridaaDedi a f ^ R^ E)*\ r'v .-..^ =sK. ¥?y ;f" fe K^ '<" K*" .»-AS.IhC-lri:.-.TBWC-;--l--y<\£A 290 580 I Feet Sidewalk Route 1 Sidewalk Route 1 THE CITY 01. LAKER3MST KMAIT EK 0 III t --» ',<«,. sS-* (RCUW<* CMCIIOECT f 0.35 0.7 i Mi Sidewalk Route 2 THE CITY 01- LAKE FOREST consortium ~3~t«.1NTHJ._t:lTif ()|UKE FOREST '^fs~--'^;-.'&11-A.2606203 FeetN.^iMrtlum'Sidewalk Route 1THE CITY OfLAKE FOREST 'fl!K-I, 9»noy ^BMapis183 JC090'toesif..^^;.vV-).t"-^n H,.-* '.;'v^wrE^ '6.'.t'!;9S- ^ '.i.^s ^ p5S^ yy,'-v^^^^_^;'^ ^-.1-,^-ini-Tf 'f'f -''l\.-..l-^,^.^&'x.^^ciW-Ki"tff';_ ...*li^1 -LJS2L."w^^..'"i;'%: K".»*." -'U'L*f^'s-.^'^"w'rtig?;^i.SS.,' 'laaNSii^ .. T377.WK^\^.-.^^%)^-L-03757603 FeetN<f-THE f I T t OFLAKE FOREST -ST^~^Gf.^.:^410 320640I FeetNT H li C 1 T » (> fLAKE FOREST ^ , .,.i»»toq ~:tj,st»* S.J.''':5»l*°ii"'^'4< ; .1 , -t'ftfl » ' i . ..<i«t<W . . ^ .-^oiflriAi^;,; Ci? i, ,.^^W ' ,'i ;f:a«!»afrtW>.i ..i'-'ato-'nUr-iCTItf,? (WBWWt.t ^3- .^.i < '.WtfW: >'TW. «^i vyww; .s'ah^-sAite.' ^'^K's3fSti ' <-.,.t'l'/.w.. .^-.'.w ,1 330 660 S Feet ir~\r 11 1*-: i] ft '? jfc al .'w^yy^-\ Sidewalk Route 2 N THE CITY 01 LAKE FOREST tL3"3i--" ^'^... E'i"' ^ T-"-~-T".r*.'-. ;' ":1 , ".; ~< ^ .-t.Ajs-ni-T »T.y i F" e-_ &. E 310 620 l Feet Sidewalk Route 2 f',-..^ t aft»^a23£' N THE C 111 OF LAKEfOREST ^"^s"''1402803 FeetSidewalk Route 2^JlN^ t. ^;tl^v^*'\^_!J r ^y '%? . .Ss 310 620 I Feet N Sidewalk Route 2 ^ H t CITY Of LAKE FOREST ^^^m^^.,^r;£i?^iiiits^^ ^s-'^:'^.^^IT<3^yiaill,*w'^ I.~wf *;tf.:.'w .r» f.W \-yv"Al^-^3406803 FeetNT H f. CITY 01LAKE FOKST T-^-»*i"'v~"^s;,f.t^v -r~s, y-'?'- ?y]iirf I4408803 FeetNSidewalk Route 2<^THE (: IT f 01'LAKE FOREST , .^~vbi'i.l '.).^-^ .. 1w^.^x.TtrfW3306603 FeetjN^T H t CITY 01LAKE FOREST ..-*.'^L'-.-if &t---. ~''~<' 0*^1 ^- -'/ ,':/^ .w.^". * < ifc ,.}WKR.'-II ^.\ Vttrsl^ ^ wi-^4\ ~ i.'wi *, .. r*'<#j.n I i; L""w .t..It"--.i'" ii^b-"'; W--'SV\ I ^..^ ^ l^ iAri* g' ^ ^->- f^ff A !b ~s ^: ff 380 760 I Feet .luAUtU WON EEhWA "lUNrtM Sidewalk Route 2 30 60 I Feet f^Sd Page 1 of 21 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations N Route: 2 ^ LAKEPOREyrHE CIT< OF WOLDBRIDBERD 20 40 ; Feet ||BgE» Page 2 of 21 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations Route: 2 \ 25 50 1 Feet laagE) Page 3 of 21 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations Route: 2 AQOM 40 80 i Feet ^SS^ Page 4 of 21 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations N Route: 2 30 [Feet j^SB Page 5 of 21 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations Route: 2 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations Route: 2 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations N Route: 2 ^ H t CITV OF LAKE FOREST ^ itf I w 2 WRT60 3 0 u. u-§ w 30 60 I Feet pBSES Page 8 of 21 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations Route: 2 '&\ s 25 50 I Feet jiBgB Paae 9 of 21 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations N Route: 2 V lAKE'roROT WCASCAE 30 60 I Feet Page 10 of 21 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations N Route: 2 <t-SH t 1: ITt 01 Ifl'°oo ^^ ll'to,as<^ 20 40 l Feet Page 11 of 21 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations N Route: 2 [ W ESTATE LN E 0 I S£§ 10 20 I Feet Page 12 of 21 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations Route: 2 0I § W OLD MILL RD 10 20 I Feet fftgS^ Page 13 of 21 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations N Route: 2 T K E C tTY 01 LAKE FOREST ^ ^y 10 20 3 Feet Page 14 of 21 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations N Route: 2 ClTf OF LAKE FOREST 0 " ul§ (0 JAMES ST % % <1> ;^ 10 20 I Feet SBSS Page 15 of 21 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations Route: 2 a w I g § I UJI Feet Page 16 of 21 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations Route: 3 30 60 ; Feet BBSS Page 17 of 21 Dead-end Locations Route: 3 E WESTLEIGH RD 20 40 i Feet Page 18 of 21 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations Route: 5 1 25 50 I Feet Page 19 of 21 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations Route: 5 40 80 ; Feet ^3S^ Page 20 of 21 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations N Route: 5 THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST ;:>i 40 80 ! Feet Page 21 of 21 Sidewalk Dead-end Locations Route: 5 Snow Blowing Route 3 v THE CITY OT LAKE FOREST w 1^ 1 310 620 Feet Snow Blowing Route 3 CHAITEREB 18 L-04308603 FeetNSnow Blowing Route 3THE CITY titLAKE FOREST ;^.J ^'.'"- Snow Blowing Route 3 tansortium' CHARTIIED 1161 »^%5?**».f^';.iC£*iiM&^^^">^ :t ^e^3te> 'yA''. «.' ^<-" . .;:fc:;-h ' *;.'<*'. * 480 960 N i Feet Snow Blowing Route 3 wtiso'rtlum1 <h THE C 1 T V Of LAKE FOREST CHMITERED 1 t tt \ ^ -& \ %. ^ ..3~.---->.a-as 480 960 I Feet N Snow Blowing Route 3 ^ THE CITY Of LAMFOMST CHARTIIED 1 141 ^. It-r:' <->1 E->fr .V<~1 L 560 1,120 3 Feet N Snow Blowing Route 3 ^ wnsortlum' THE ciry OF LAHFORKT HARTI» i B >.!?! I K ^ ^''* 310 620 N i Feet Snow Blowing Route 3 consortluini <h THE C 1 Tl Of LAKE FOREST CHAI.T I* E 0 1 ttl ~f'fJ-s^..". .^ ~^."...'ilriSjW* w'l Wt-fV. \. ' ^Jl-.-J-.^ -It. "^w^!"»j.!.<.^.^^Vft»kllLlt-f~r-,3006003 FeetSnow Blowing Route 3T H li t: I T V <KLAKE FOREST "s^ MICHGAMME LN fCW» LM .& ,n<eiu< % »0«»"<"1- "(, f]>°' ,<" \ «* *<* WOODLAWNAVE CHU<RYAVEGA^Q ONWEMTSIA RD IVY aGREENBRIAR CT NORTMMOORS ^pSWXly, s '.ten /A/OIS RD ,ofLA" %>'^»°roaff" \ \I °-°°0 4 ">^. / A"^ ^ RINOWOQD^ 0.2 0.4 3 Mi Snow Blowing Route 4 h- ^ MM pp ^ IN-P' M 450 900 3 Feet .^w M I. f;V'''^fr'-yiC /': <» ^. .. '.." it ,'i Snow Blowing Route 4 N <h ^ 0 ' ffl, THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST CHklTCRED Itll ^KL. '!W.-V'.-.,11a3256503 Feet!ftt.a *.^vi.'^-t'.iS? ? .Snow Blowing Route 4NT H f C: 1 T T 0 tLAKE FOREST LUg-Qi^4008003 FeetNSnow Blowing Route 4T H t L IT If U tLAKE FOREST /^ I* ^ih bl c"» >: ^ 1^ .^y. .'«» «^^^ .^wsa.f-' .<.1 .^ 1',-* .- "^ <\^^ s< '>l^ .:..f ^\ B"""" ,?. f- f dla^_rtl- 220 440 3 Feet N Snow Blowing Route 4 cohaortlum' ^TH t C 1 TV OF LAKE FOREST CHARTIKED 1»t1 ^1*£!y^l'-.l3406803 FeetSnow Blowing Route 0M010Ul0)3QTO0^MB3(0?0ff01^1^1w°,\^.WM".3AV NONlBft in .ay ANOTOO (noawsaisa 3gRECKENmDGE ME °£I^NVIDW- <R) aooiyV....-wwanr"', j "Wm>,"°° 3 S Ss [» 1^ ,^f'/".?< " '^: -?i II ^ <u <-> 3 Q ± 0) s I m $ BUENA,_RD ®0)§fi I ^II.sycra^.^ l^'ISMft7"RY ~~"~~r^'^x»5T"T'^^-/i>(;^\"^"»'.^.^;;'v:..^.;*^-ls^^''^'-...ft^'--1""-A-ut tL'*-- *.'350700I FeetSnow Blowing Route 5N-4-^T H t C; I ft U tIAKE FORET ^....i-S;'y^^^^ss".^'^'^^ '.'^''^'^it.fvf5" <?»-".'\' n"\ i<. CT -.;)~^-s^ I? ^?.f- L 0.08 0.16 3 Mi rl '^ »UKfi't N Snow Blowing Route 5 -^THl CITY OF LAKE FOREST JA <] »»..-..« &:^" E*^ ^ ^ .»../.- /E 0.075 0.15 2 Mi N Snow Blowing Route 5 irowtlum' THt CITY OF LAKE FOREST 'fe.l.;.».'390780I FeetNSnow Blowing Route 5^kTH! CITY u tIAKE FOREST 0,5 IMi Sidewalk Dead-end Locations N Route:^ LAKE FOREST HI CITY OF r~T II- .L- Legend Snow Removal Snow Piles 0 210 420 3 Feet -i-p!^"". ^.^f.fi ..urf N Snow Removal ^ 'conaortlum' T M E C 1 T t Of LAKEFOMST Eftl B 1 I tt i'^ '(/ .'"a I . T~:~~ u-S- -t.,, Wd'": ' ?'i;' -<"b !l i .^^vii-jSoS^ ".' ^. ^1 '.lv"°. a;<;' ''^..\ I .<., . ^ < i3 "^l':v^ -"^ f1 *. .^ Legend 0 Snow Removal Snow Piles 310 620 l Feet consortium' Snow Removal N THE CITY Of LAKE FOREST CHAitT E K E C lit) i!f -^i»piry^ " -:» .-.'?-..-».-> <^t.1^.-> orfU^ i^-yyv";'. *1y,m ^ .. "iii'''y? .' "" "1;** ' -s Ta! .';(' 3 '\^\'^\'t.fi. fe ^ a,,'. St? ,. ,> ^ fi^ ...6.. i1't;'^-,.." .'.1" .-.;'^ ,r: '".i t .. --^..w81 A", .'"'"a^ ;ifi! ^ ^ f ^.,'* ,.. t'.' ' . '.- \, ^ Legend Snow Removal Snow Piles 0 130 SGRT 'consortium' 260 3 Feet A .> 'r"."-. ^.' Snow Removal .ft 'W' " ., ^ .w.ft N THE CITY OF LACTFOMST CHAflTE a E 0 ft! ^^-.1. "rt-.int.i ^ '.^ ^ v> .-^ & '<?; ^ y^ ^ t^ < ,\1f\ ^1 :t\-,^"wr^^rt , l.-'tf:^-..'.^.."\ ^ ^ ^:. 1<&''. 's<t ,)'.'! ..--.ef -,;A '.". '... 8. t1' " '..I Legend Snow Removal Snow Piles a£ 0 150 consortium' 300 l Feet i?.''A,- A r .f'\.. ' \- y^V" Snow Removal N THE CITY Of LAKE FOREST CHAItTEKEB lltl 03"pco0.Q06 "consortium' Data Source: City of Lake Forest Aerid: Color 2011 City of Lake Forest Author: MTF Date: 11/20/2014 "consortium' Data Source: Cily of Lake Forest Serial: Color 2011 City of Lake Forest author; MTF 3ate: IWWIOU 'consortium' Data Source: City of Lake Forest Aerial: Color 2011 City of Late Forest Author: MTF nate; 11/20/2014 Removal Everett Recreation Cen 'consortium1 Data Source: City ofLake Forest Aerial; Color 2011 City cf Lake Forest Author: MTF Date: 11/20/2014 consortium' lata Source: City of Lake Forest Serial: Color 2011 City of Lake Forest author: MTF late: 11/20/2014 now Removal Illinois Rd consortluml 3eta Source; City of Lake Forest Serial: Color 2011 City of Lake Forest author: MTF late: 11/20/2014 consortluml Data Source: City of Lake Forest Aerial: Color 2011 City of Lake Forest Author: MTF late: 11/20/2014 consortium^ Data Source: City of Lake Forest Aerial: Color 2011 City of Lake Forest Author: MTF Date: 11/20/2014 iow Removi " consortium' Data Source: City of Lake Forest Aerial: Color 2011 City of Lake Fofesl Author: MTF Date: 11/201/2014 IS" 'consortium i Data Source: City of Late Forest Aerial: Color 20)1 City of Lake Fores Author MTF Twte: 11/20/2014 Snow Removal An "consortium' Data Source: City of Lake Forest Aerial: Color 2011 City of Lake Forest Author; MTF Date; 11/20/2014 consortluml Data Source: Gty of Lake Forest Aerial: Color2011 City of Lake Forest Author MTF Date-11/20/2014 consortium' Data Source: City ofLake Forest Aerial: Color 2011 City of Lake Forest Author: MTF Oate; 11/20/2014 consortium' 3ata Source: City of Lake Forest \erial: Color 2011 City of Lake Forest author MTF Date: 1/19/2015 consortium' Data Source: City of Lake Forest Aerial: Color 2011 City ofLalEeFoiesi Author: MTF Date: 1/19/2015 IS" "consortium' Data Souroe: City of Lake Forest Aerial: Color 2011 City of Lake Forest Author: MTF Date: 11/201/2014 Appendix C - Personnel Assignments and Schedules 23 SNOW PLOW OPERATIONS2016 - 2017DATE:SNOW COMMAND:FLEET:STREETS<;ir>FWAiK<;EmployeeLoyd, BillySectionBMRoute ftVehicle i482EmployeeSectionRoute ftVehicle ffHuffhines, BrianPARKS980Coria, RigoFORMiklovic, Brianwsu432Abel, PetewsuSantostefano, JimBM4864Kreuger, EricPARKSDeBaets, BryanFOR684Rogalski, M itchSTREETSHoeft, Fredwsu481Tomasello, JoeSTREETS485PARKING LOTS8Roeder, Kylewsu488EmployeeSectionRoute ftVehicle*Volpe, Richwsu483Brown, RobertBM31110Snowbird10683January, RobPARKS32511Martinez, SalomonSTREETS11430Wert, MattPARKS32712Miller, LukeSTREETS12631Baldwin, JohnPARKS19413|Hooper, BillSTREETS139035 [Huston, EricBM315HAND AREAS - EAST ROUTEHAND AREAS - WEST ROUTEEmployeeSectionRoute #Vehicle ftEmployeeSectionRoute #Vehicle ffMaslon, Keithwsu329Luzar, LandonFOR321Knesley, BillyFOR310Mitchell, JasonFOR301 Appendix D Salting & Plowing Report Forms 24 DATE START:DATE FINISH:SALTINGPLOWINGINCHESNAMEyuI13zI0.VtsRT(fTR<tSNOW COMMAND SUBTOTALTOTALHOURSS.T.O.T.SALT(TONS)LIQUID(GALS)SALT MILESPLOWMILESSTREETS SUBTOTAL I0^w,sPARKING LOTS SUBTOTAL(rtQce10ItflSNOW BIRD SUBTOTALIUlQinBSIDEWALKS SUBTOTALfcAACrMAMirC; ClinTFtTAI DATE START: DATE FINISH: EMERGENCY CALLBACK SCHEDULED START TIME NAME ROUTE ft TOTAL HOURS S.T.O.T.SALT (BAGS)NAAC (BAGS) 3 ui§ 0I East J._.^-.. -i^ West I- DATE START: DATE FINISH: EMERGENCY CALLBACK SCHEDULED START TIME DATEblAKI: DATE FINISH: NAME TOTAL HOURS S.T.O.T. '-ll s g UJ 0 --- Appendix E Contractual "Snow Bird" Program Agreement 25 November 2016 AGREEMENT FOR SUPPLEMENTAL PLOWING PERSONNEL SERSflCES THIS AGREEMENT is entered Into this 16i!l day of November, 2016, by and between THE-CITY OFLAKE FORESTi an^lUinois home rule arid special charter municipal corporation (.Clty^, and SILVER STAR HONE SERVICES, CORP. (the "Silver Stai"}; collectively'referredto as'the "Parties." -.-----,-- -.."-." IN CONSIDERATION OF and reliance upon the mutual promises and covenants set forth in this Agreement, and other good and valuable consideration, the mceipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: Section 1. Recitals. A. The Crty provides a wide range of municipal services, including snow plowing and other public works related activities (the "Woi*"). Because the demancTfor Work often increases shaiply due to winter weather conditions, the City at times lacks sufHclent personnel to complete all the Work in the desires time period for doing so. B. Silver Star is in the business of providing supplemental staffing needs on a temporaiy basis (the "Semfces"). Silver Star's employees are capable of periomiing activities such as the Work, and some of its employees are qualified CDL drivers along with others who have experience operating equipment that the City has for performing the Work. C. In order to supplement the City's staffing needs from tima-to-time when Work demands are heaviest, the City seeks to utilize Silver Star's Home Services or providing temporary personnel who can assist the City in performing the Work, including in the operation of equipment that the City has available for performing the Work. D. The Parties desire to enter into this Agreement to have Silver Star provide Services to the CSty on an as-needed basis ta perform Work as dimcted by the City, ali as more fully set forth in this Agreement Section 2. Retaining Silver Star. The City hereby retains SBver Star as independent contractor to provide the Services to and on behalf of the City on an as-neaded basis for the period December, 2014 through April 30, 2016, which Services are more fully set forth on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Sanrfea Details"). Silver Star will provide the Services through personnel identified in Service Details, or such other personnel having the qualifications set forth in the Service Details and approved by the City (the "Swvlce Peisonnef). The City will provide the equipment needed to perform the Work, which equipment is identified as part of the Service Details (the "Equipment'). While providing the Services, Silver Star's Service Personnel shall take direction^ from the City's Director of Public Works or the Director's designees (the "DAwtof"). The City shall pay Silver Star for the Services in accordance with the tsnns'set forth in the Service Details, which payments shall be made within 35 days after Silver Star delivers an invoice to the City detailing the scope of Services covered by such invoice. Silver Star shall be solely responsible for compensating the Service Personnel who perfonn the Work for the City as part of the Services of Silver Star. Novwnber2016 Section 3. Insurance and Indemnification. A. ^ Insurance bv the City. The City is required to obtain and maintain comprehensive general iiabiiity Insurance In connection vw'th the use and condition of the Equipment; such insurance must be no iess than $2,000,000 per occurrence and $4,000,6bcI in aggregate. In addition, the^ City te required to obtain and maintain property damage insurance for the replacement value of the Equipment. B. Insurance bv Silver Star. Silver Star ;s rsquirad to obtain and maintain comprehensive general liability insurance in connection with its Services and its Seiwe ??-rB?r?!^1- u-"<;l?l-!t!S-^ff?e.n''ent; 8uch in81Jrance must be no less than $2,000,000 per occurrence and $4,000,000 in aggregate. In acUitton, Silver Star is required to obtain and maintain workers' compensation insurance and automobile insurance with respect to Ks Service Personnel in not less than the minimum statutory amounts. The insurance that the Silver Star must satisfy the following conditions: i. Be issued by a company licensed to do business in the State of Illinois and having an A.M. Best rating of not less than "A-"; ii. Identify the City and its officers, officials, employees, agents, attorneys, and representatives as additional insureds: and III.Contain the following endorsement: "The insurer is required to give The City of Lake Forest at least 30 days prior written notfce of anyTntentton not to renew such policy or to cancel, replace, or materially alter the same, such notice to be sent by certified first class mail through the United States Postal Service and addressed to; The City: City Manager Robert R. Kiely, Jr. TTie City of Lake Forest 220 East Deerpath Lake Forest IL 60045 C_ Indemnification bv the City. The City is required to indemnify Silver Star (and the Service Personnel) far any claims for liability, injury, damages, loss, awani, or judgment of any kind to the extent relating to or arising from the negligence or wrongful act or omission of the City, or its officere, officials, or employees. D. _ IndemnificaUon bv Silver Star. Silver Star is required to indemnify the CHy and its officers, officials, and employees for any claims for liability, injury, damages, loss, award, or judgment of any kind to the extent relating to or arising frwn the negligence or vwongful act or omission of the Silver Star or its Service Personnel or froni any Senrice provided" by them, notwithstanding the availability of insurance to the City, including indemnification for damage to the Equipment or other property belonging to the City or third parties. Section 5. General Conditions. A. Term. This Agreement will be in effect from and after the date first stated above to and through April 30, 2016, unless sooner tsrminated by either (i) the mutual written November 2016 agreement of the Parties; or (ii) at least 30-days notice from either Party to the other. renewal or extension of this Agreement must be in writing and signed by all the parties. Any 0.inaependeni Contractor Reiationship. Silver Star and its Service Personnel are not, and will not be deemed, employees of the City, but Silver Star is an independent contractor subject to the terms of this Agreement, and the Service Personnel are employees of Silver Star. C. Amendments and Modifications. No amendment or modification to this Agreement will be effective unless and until It is reduced to writing and approved and executed by all Parties to this Agreement in accordance with all applicable statutory'procedures. D. Binding Effect. The terms of this Agreement bind and inure to the benefit of the Parties and their agents, successors, and assigns. E. Notices. All notices required or permitted to be given under this Agreement must be in writing and are deemed received by the addresses thereof (i) when delivered in person on a business day at the address set forth below; or (ii) on the third business day after being deposited in any main or branch United States post office, for deNvery at the address set forth below by property addressed, postage prepaid, certified or registered mail, return receipt requested. Notices and communications to the Foundation shall be addressed to, and delivered at, the following address: Silver Star Home Services, Corp. C/0 Chief Executive Officer 16127 Arlington Drive Libertyville, Illinois 60048 Notice and communications to the City shall be addressed to, and delivered at, the following address: The City of Lake Forest C/0 Superintendent of Public Works 800 N. FieU Drive Lake Forest IL 60045 By notice complying whh the requirements of this Section, the Parties may change the address or addressee or both for all future notices to it, but no notice of a change of address or addressee is effective until actually received. F. Third Party Beneficiary. No daim as a third party beneTiciary under this Agreement by any individual, film, or corporation may be made or be valid against either the City or Silver Star. G. Severabilitv. If any term, covenant, condition, or provision of this Agreement is heU by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remainder of the provisions is intended to remain in full force and effect and not otherwise be affected, impaired, or invalid. H. Time. Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement, November 2016 betwneen the Parties and eupsresdes any and Entire Aareemant and Waivsr. This Agreement constitutes tha enfife agreement previous or contsmporanaous oral or written with respect to the Servtees. No waiver of any provision of this Agreemant will oa deemed to be, or constitute a, continuing waiver unless otherwise expressly provided in this Agreemant. J. _ Enforeament. Either party may bring an action to spaciRcally enforce the K. _ Exhibit?. ExhM A as attached is made a part of this Agreement as if fully set forth in this Section. L. Compiiance with Laws. Silver Star and its Service Personnel shall provide the Ssfvrees in accordance with all applicable federal, State, and local laws, ordinances, codss, and regulations. --,--...-.-,"- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be signed on or before the date first above. SILVE ERVICES, CORP. Its .S-s^sJ"City Manager *473t7«8_v3 November 201S EXHIBFTA Service Details Description & Scope of Work The work to be performed under this Agreement consists of providing supplements! personne! to plow snow and/or salt the City of Lake Forest streets, parking lots, sidewalks, depot platforms, stairwells, trails and paths when and where directed by the Public Works Snow Commander or his/her designated representative for a period of ona (1) year from December 7,2016 through March 31, 2017. The Contractor shall furnish operators and/or drivere as well as insurance, supervision with transportation, as required. It Is agreed upon that whenever the contractor receives a call-out to provida supplemental pereonnel for snow plowing / salting services, Fleet "helper" support or provide hand laborers, the requested number of personnel shall be ready to begin operations at the designated assembly area within sixty (60) minutes from the call-out The requested drivers and/or operators will be required to operate continuously until the roadway has been cleared sufficiently, in the opinion of the Superintendent of Public Works, Snow Commander or their designated representative. The contractor must be able to provide sufficient relief drivers to insure that all equipment called-out will be operational throughout the entire time the contractor remains activated (operating time) by the Public Works Snow Commander, which may include the dean-up operation following the actual storm. Driver/Operator Requirements The contractor is responsible for prowding sufficient drfvers/operators to work within the rules, regulations and requirements of the driver's license and CDL license. Sufficient drivers/operators must be available to operate the vehicles as outlined in the City's Policies and procedures. ContracSois must provide personnel who are able to speak and understand instructions given in English. A winter operations handbook outlining the rules and regulations will be provided to the contractor for distribution to all drivers/operators. Rotation of crews will be at the discretion of the City in providing continuous operation, which will insure the safety of its drivers/operators and the motoring public. Communication In order to permit contact wHh The City of Lake Forest Snow Commander at all times, the Contractor shall provide a cellular telephone number to the Superintendent of Public Works and the Snow Commander to be notified when to report for a plowing assignment An operational condition for this contract is the mandatory use of the City's municipal two-way radio during operational service hours. The radio shall remain on and audible at all times and remain in the vehicle during the plowing operation until dismissed by the Snow Command. The contractor will be provided instruction for use of the radio. Any failure to maintain radio operability during operational houre will be deemed a breech In contract. This breech in contract could result In those service hours where the radio Is not in use, being deducted from the invoice. November 2018 Snow Plow Season & Readiness The normal snow season for plowing senrices is the period starting December 1 of the contract year to March 30 of the following year. The period from April 30 to October 31, for each year of the contract period is for administrative purposes, and is not considered part of the snow season however there may be times outskie of this period that The City of Lake Forest will request this service if winter weather exists. The contractor shall be responsible, after receipt of notice, for assembling the requestsd personnel at the Snow Command Office and be prepared to commence winter operations within sixty (60) minutes with all necessary operating pereonnel. Pre.Notlflcation & Call-Out A pre-notrfication call will be made by telephone and/or email from the Public Works Snow Command Center to the contractor requesting the number and class of driver/operator or laborer that will be needed for the upcoming winter event. All call-outs will be issued by telephone from the Public Works Snow Command Center, located at the Municipal Seivices Building Streets and Sanitation Supervisors office, 800 North Field Drive, Lake Forest. No payment of charges will be allowed unless an official call-out is issued. Upon receipt of a call- out, the requested number of supplemental personnel will assemble at the Snow Command office within sixty (60) minutes and be prepared to commence snow plowing/salting/removal operations. Causes for Termination of Snow Plowina Contract The satisfactory performance mandated for this contract is directly related to the safety of all roadway users. Should the contractor's performance during the contract be deemed unsatisfactory by The City of Lake Forest Public Works Department for reasons which may include: late response for call-outs, unavailability of a full complement of drivers, poor plowing practices, or failure to respond to directions applicsbls to the plowing operation by tha designated Snow Command Representative, the contract will be terminated by the Director or Superintendent of Public Works. The Director or Superintendent of Public Works may also cancel the contract based upon the contractoi's failure to provkte a valid insurance certificate; cancellation of insurance; failure to renew insurance; failure to report ready, willing and able to plow snow, on the snow section(s) awarded within the sixty (60) minute call-out period; unsafe plowing practices; improper plowing practices; failure to follow the instructions of the Public Works Snow Commander or his representative; or for actions constituting a danger to the public, private property, public employees or public property. Driver/Ooerator Holiday Bonus The City of Lake Forest holidays affecting the farms of this agreement are as follows: Thanksgiving Day (4" Thursday in November), Thanksgiving Friday (Friday after TTianksghring), Christmas Eve Day (December 24), Christmas Day (December 25), and New Years Day (January 1). When a contracted driver/operator is scheduled to work a minimum eight-hour shift on a City holiday, that driver/operator will receive a holiday bonus of $140. This holiday bonus does not apply to contracted drivere/operatore who are called back for emergency work, but only those scheduled in order to maintain appropriate coverage. Novwnber2016 Seasonal Minimum Compensation Thecontactor Is guaranteed to receive a specific minimum compensation amount to offset the City's stipulated Insurance premiums that are above the contractors normal scope of insurance coverage costs due to lower than expected seivice demands from mild weather or no need for additional drivers/operatore, provided that the contractor performs in accordance with all the provisions of this contract throughout the entire snow season. For instance, if the contractor is non-responsive to call-outs or cannot provide sufRdent drivers/operatore In accordance with procedures described herein, the conbactorwill not be eligible for seasonal minimal compensation. At the end of each snow season, the sum of all hours worked by the contractor for snow seroices will be deducted from the specific minimum compensation and any balance due will be paid accordingly. If the total hours worked by the contractor exceeds the specified saason minimum compensation amount for the snow season, the seasonal minimum compensation does not apply. The minimum compensation is a total of 190 operating hours for the season. Additional City insurance offset amount Contractor hourly overhead cost Total minimum compensation Scene of Pavmant $1,900 SIO/hour $1,900-$10 =190 hours The contractor hereby agrees to accept the payment as specified herBin as full payment for the performance of allI work hereunder, for furnishing all labor, drivers and/or operators, insurance, supervision and all else necessary therefore, and for all incidental expenses in connection therewith. Novamber 2016 Payment for Operating Hour Payment will be made for the actual number of hours that hired supplemental drivers/ operators/laborers are used as authorized at the unit houhy rates and as provided herein. Payable operating time will begin when the contracted supplemental drivers/operatorBflaborers, after receiving a call-out from the Snow Commander or designated repressntativeto asssmbie at theSnow Command office located at the Municipal Services Building, 800 North Field Drive, Lake Forest, Illinois have reported to the Commander or representative and have "punched in" using the designated time clock !n the Command Offfce. Houriy rates will be caiculated on the quarter hour as outlined in the City's Policy. A minimum of two (2) hours of operating time will apply when the supplemental personnel is issued a call-out_and reports ready for work within sudy (60) minutesfroni the initial call-out from the office of the Snow Command. Commercial Driver's License Hourly Operating Rate: Non-Commercial Driver's License Hourly Operating Rate: Non-Driver/Laborer Houriy Operating Rate: Non-Driver/ Fleet Helper Hourly Operating Rate: $49.00 per Hour $38.00 per Hour $22.00 per Hour $22.00 per Hour 8 Appendix F Number of Employees Allowed Off December lst-April 1st 26 2016 - 2017 SNOW AND ICE CONTROL PLANNUMBER OF EMPLOYEES ALLOWED OFF(DECEMBER 1ST - APRIL 1ST)EFFEC-IVE AS OF NOVEMBER 3, 2016FULL-TIME EMPLOYEESSUPERVISORBUILD. MAINT.(not Included In count)CEMETERY1 - back-up(not included in count)ENGINEERINGFLEETFORESTRY[not included in count)PARKS[not Included In count)SANITATION(not included in "ourrt]STREETS[not included in count)WATER/SEWER(not included in count)TOTALSASSISTANT SUPERVISORMAINTENANCE WORKER II44FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES(INCLUDED IN COUNT)50FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES ALLOWEDOFF PER SECTION1it1. Two Snow Command Supervisors /Five Coordinators will utilize the "buddy" system. They are not included in the "number allowed off". The Fleet Supervisor backs-up Mechanics and is not included in the "number allowed off".. The Engineering Supervisor is not included in the "number allowed off".. Neither military time nor extended leave are included in the number of employees allowed off per section.. Full-time employees are not allowed to take more than two consecutive weeks off during the winter.. Full-time and seasonal employees are not allowed to take consecutive holidays off (year to year) in a row (for example, an employee will not be allowed to take Christmas 2015 and Christmas2016 off, unless no one else wants it). The intent of the policy is to give all Section employees an opportunity to have the Christmas and/or New Year's Holiday off, if it has not been taken.. If requested and approved within the number of full-time employees allowed off per section, an employee would only be allowed one holiday off per winter season (for example, if you takeChristmas Eve/Christmas Day you can't take New Years Eve/New Years Day off).. If no impending snow events are forecasted for an upcoming day(s), upon approval by the Director of Public Work, additional employees (full-time) may be allowed off.. Vacation requests will be accepted on May 1st. Each Section will develop their own process for selecting vacation requests..From Dec. 15th - Jan. 15th seasonal paid time off requests are to be approved by the Director of Public Works. Less than 10 seasonals total in Public Works and Parks/Forestry/Cemetery workingwilt equal one seasonal employee allowed off per day. 10 or more seasonals working will equal two seasonal employees allowed off per day.eSanitation is only allowed one employee off between Dec. 15 - Jan. 15th. Due to the number of holidays Sanitation employees accrue throughout the year, full-time Sanitation employees will beallowed to have two employees off between Dec. 1 - Dec. 14 and Jan. 16th - April 1st., to use this time. Appendix G - Winter Night Crew Schedule 27 December 2016December 2016Su Mo Tu We Th Fr SaJanuary 2017Su Mo Tu We Th ff Saii 612 131C 19 ZO 2125 26 27 28181S22 2329 3031016 17243122 2329 30SUNDAYMONDAYTUESDAYWEDNESDAYTHURSDAYFRIDAYSATURDAYNov 27282930Dec 11011StartsmidnighfSunday18\r121314151617Ends8:30 a.m,Friday192021PARKSKrueger, EricJanuary, RobWert. MattKrueger, EricJanuary, RobWert. MattKmeger, EricJanuary, RobWert. Matt22Krueger, EricJanuary, RobWprt Mntt2324M^Krueger, ErieJanuary, RobWtert, Mntt25262728293031^ FORESTRY/ +1 WATEF^& SEWER (ANTHONY C(;ARABALL0)Knesley, BillyCaraballo, A.Mitchell, JasonKnesley, BillyCaraballo, A.Knesley, BillyCaraballo, A.Mitchell, JasonCaraballo, A.Mitchell, JasonKnesley, BillyCaraballo, A.Mitchell, JasonKnesley, BillyMi+chell, JasonSnow Command10/28/2016 11:10 AM January 2017January 2017Su Mo Tu We Th FrFebruary 2017Su Mo Tu We ThFr SaSUNDAYJan 1,17MONDAYTUESDAYWEDNESDAYTHURSDAYFRIDAY6SATURDAYWATER & SEWERVolpe, RichMiklovic, BrianMaslon. KeithVolpe, RichMiklovic, BrianVolpe, RichMiklovic, BrianMaslon. KeithMiklovic, BrianMaslon, KeithVolpe, RichMiklovic, BrianMaslon. KeithVolpe, RichMaslon, Keith10BUI11.DING121314MAIiNTZalke, MarkSantostefano, J.Lovd, BillyZalke, MarkSantostefano, J.Zalke, MarkSantos+efano, J.Santostefano, J.Loyd, BillySantostefano, J.Loyd, BillyZalke, MarkLoyd, BillyZalke, MarkLoyd, Billy15161718192021STREETSMiller, LukeCaringello, T.1-fooper, BillMiller, LukeCaringello, T.Miller, LukeCaringello, T.Caringello, T.Hooper, BillCaringello, T.Hooper, BillMiller, LukeHooper, BillMiller, LukeHooper, Bill22232425262728PARKSBaldwin, JohnCamarena, M.Huffhines. BhanBaldwin, JohnCamarena, M.Baldwin, JohnCamarena, M.Camarena, M.Huffhines, BrianCamarena, M.Huffhines, BrianBaldwin, JohnHuffhines, BrianBaldwin, JohnHuffhines, Brian293031Feb 12 FORESTRY /1 STREETS (^IAMES SHEI^TON)Luzar, LondonShelton, JimCoria, RifloLuzar, LondonShelton, JimLuzar, LondonShelton, JimSnow Command10/28/2016 11:10 AM February 2017Februaiy 2017Su Mo Tu We ThMarch 2C17Su Mo Tu We Th Fr SaSUNDAYMONDAYTUESDAYWEDNESDAYTHURSDAYFRIDAYSATURDAYJan 293031Feb 1FQRESTRY/+1]STREETS (JAMES SHELT10N]Shelton, JimCoria, RigoShelton, JimCoria, RigoLuzar, LondonCoria, RigoLuzur, LondonCoria, Rigo81011WATER & SEWERRoeder, KyleHoeft, FredAbel, PeteRoeder, KyleHoeft, FredRoeder, KyleHoeft, FredHoeft, FredAbel, PeteHoeft, FredAbel, PeteRoeder, KyleAbel, PeteRoeder, KyleAbel, Pete12131415i161718BUILDING MAINTHuston, ErikCox, StuJirown. RobertHuston, ErikCox, StuHuston, ErikCox, StuCox, StuBrown, RobertCox,StuBrown, RobertHuston, ErikBrown, RobertHuston, ErikBrown, Robert19202122232425STREETSMartinez, S.Tomasello, JoeRoaalski. MitchMartinez, S.Tomasello, JoeMartinez, S.Tomasello, JoeTomasello, JoeRogalski, MitchTomasello, JoeRogalski, MitchMartinez, S.Rogalski, MitchMar+inez, S.Rogalski, Mitch262728Mart1 FORESfTRY, 1 WATER & SEWEI^, 1 PICK/VQLUNTEERVarner, JohnDeBaets, BryanMitchell, JasonVarner, JohnDeBaets, BryanVarner, JohnDeBaefs, BryanSnow Command10/28/2016 11:10 AM March 2017March 2017Su Mo Tu We Th Fr SaApril 2017Su Mo Tu We ThSUNDAYMONDAYTUESDAYWEDNESDAYTHURSDAYFRIDAYSATURDAYFeb 262728Mar 11 FOREST1RY, WATE|? & SEWER,1 PICK/VOLU NTEERDeBaets, BryanMitchell, JasonDeBaets, BryanMitchell, JasonVarner, JohnMitchell, JasonVarner, JohnMitchell, Jason10113 PICK$ / VOLUNTEERCaraballo, A.January, RobLoyd, BillyCaraballo, A.January, RobCaraballo, A.January, RobJanuary, RobLoyd, BillyJanuary, RobLoyd, BillyCaraballo, A.Loyd, BillyCaraballo, A.Loyd, Billy1213141516171819202122232425262728293031Apr 1Snow Command10/28/2016 11:10 AM Appendbc H - Hand Shoveling Agreements 28 I MANFREDIN E»T.iei7 aBNgiiBtiwuliLimo BfMnani City of Lake Forest c/o Dan Martin EIawaFana 1401 Middlefork Drive Lake Forest, IL 60045 November 14,2016 SNOW CLEAMNG PROPOSAL FOR ELAWA FARM - 2016/2017 Season Clear snow from courtyard and walkways, and salt aa needed: Price per visit will be $120 for 2" - 4" of mow Price per visit will be $195 for 4" - 6" of snow Price for salting only will be $60 City of Lake Forest will provide gait, stored at EIawa. ReapectfuUy submitted, Xnrico Manfrecdni MANTREDINI; Accepted Please gign and return one copy for acceptance .ING & DESIGN Date 11730/7^, Snow & Ice Control Proposal & Contract 3SasWwi»t»non»(t<(uiraw w»w.fc*E>Itn(>ovlBt.w»n flW)*^<»B<|filpe (847} Wt-ltMAx ICuupuy KOBI (The City of Lake Forest IBtBBB 847-810-3561 BanaAddnu MARTINDecmrOFLAKEFOREST.COM :Aua. Dan Martin Vss 847-615-4295 The City of Lake Forest IBffiigAridnn 1800 North Field Drive Pn>pKtyAddn*t SEE BELOW ^irapnrtyCItyStauaap Lake Forest, IL 60045 CBy St Zip Lake Forest, H. 60045 PmjWlyE) 0 frua 11/14/2016 SdnAunc LeeGreenberg Snow Removal for Winter Seasons 2016-2019 Description: Kaplan agrees to. move the accumulation of snow fro.tn all sidewalks agreed uppn an.cj herein accumulated after a snowtan of (D or'mbre >. Salt will be spread after shoveling and when ever else needed. NAME Rec Center ADDRESS 400 Hastings Rd Gorton Community Center 400 E Illinois City Hall 220EDeerpath Oakwood 221 E Deerpath Everett Rec Center 1111 EverettRec Center Grove Cultural Campus 60 E Old Mill Rd TRIGGER 1" 1" I" 1" 1" PER PUSH COST TO SPREAD SALT AND NOTES $277.32 $100.00 $80.00 $35.00 $96.00 $40.00 $50.00 $30.00 across from city hall $50.00 $30.00 $331.60 $150.00 large area-review map ftwnu'm" Terma; Terms net 30 days from service date. Ttonia not mcluded: .Relocation of snow pUes flnu the use of trucks to haul snow off site, or to areas away fiom existing piles, however we strongiy believe tha proper location of piles can be achieved dmmg Initial plowing openttions given die eqaqnnent we wUI be utilizing in this operation. Tbas, we beKeve feat relocation of piles ton use oftaiddng operations will be significantly minimized, to any eveu^ we can supply flus service if needed on a T&M basis if requested and anfiiorized in writing. i Hourly Pricing Plan For (T&M) ; Ax 4W/ Plow $95.00 Shoveler $50.00 SUd Steer $117.00 10'Blade $90.00 Loader $168.00 U- Blade $125.00 Salt Truck $95.00 Lowboy $150.00 DumpTruck $150.00 ".KsuriYPrKinali|»lUltoportal,<>tourMln«" This nroposal is for three 01 seasons and valid January 20.2016 (m suinntnre datel - Anril 15.2019. This contract may be cancelled by either paity with 60 days written notice and due came. Property nwaara, managers, Ptpnnrttobeufbllmu: We reserve the right to stop providing service, upon notification, if your account is 30 days past due. Teems: Net 10 days AU material is guaranftoed to be as specified. AUworktobe Kaplan ooaipte^ia a competent BaancCTBcoudicg to rtinufardpracticts. Signature Any ahiarfltton or dcriaticn flTocii abow specificaliioas, inroSviBg eaEtn costs wBl become an «xba diBBB ovu and above the cstfanate. AB agrccnicaia coBtuagestupoasteEtosSiBccideataor delaya beyond car osaiirol. Vs^StPwsssasaai&esnaw iBnrt i^poffiBiMeian-NAcl8afGo4,''aodassamesno]tsE»ifi^fin' CKeat Signature, Note TUB pupoad map hBwithAmnm hYna if not nTspfa)d wilhin 1Q dig^ Date rilcm na'nu'WR?