Good morning, everybody.

Welcome to our planning zoning and environment committee meeting on December 3rd, 2025, starting at 1030 a.m.

Um, in addition to being able to attend in person, remote attendance has been made available to the public via Zoom at the link on the agenda.

This meeting is being recorded through Zoom.

Per county board rules and the open meetings act.

Attendance via remote means is permitted for qualifying reasons as long as the majority of committee members are physically present.

We have been notified in advance by member Schlick that he requests to participate electronically due to employment reasons.

A physical quorum is present, so they may be marked as present and are eligible to vote on manners before the committee today.

As a reminder to members attending remotely, please ensure your camera is on at all times.

Okay.

Um member Wasick, can you lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance?

Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you.

Member Campos here.

Member Frank?

Member Kenisnik.

Not on yet.

Member Wasick.

Sure.

Okay.

Thank you.

Is there any addenda to the agenda?

No addenda to the agenda.

Do we have any public comment?

No public comment.

Okay.

No chairs remarks today.

Um unfinished business.

No unfinished business.

Okay.

New business.

We have the consent agenda.

Can I can I get a motion?

Motion by member compo, second by member Frank.

All in favor.

Aye.

Okay.

Motion passes.

Now we are going to 8.3 regular agenda.

We have a resolution to vacate an unimproved portion of Cherry Lane located in the Arthur T.

Macintosh and Company's Briggs Lake Subdivision in Ela Township.

And we are welcoming Christy.

Eric Wagner.

And Natalia Fick.

Okay.

Um sec.

I need a motion, please.

Motion by Member Knishnek, second by Member Frank.

Okay.

Take it away, Eric.

Good morning, Eric Wagner, Planning Building and Development Director.

With me this morning, it's Christopher Brown.

So the administrator of deputy director and Natalia Fick.

First appearance of the committee.

She's one of our uh new planners and is here for her first presentation on the street vacation this morning.

So welcome and good luck to you.

All right, good morning, our members of the committee.

So as I Eric Wagner said, my name is Natalia.

I'm a planner with PBD, and I'm here to present today petition to vacate an unimproved right-of-way of unimproved portion of Cherry Lane located in ELA Township and unincorporated Lake County, Illinois.

Okay.

This is uh plat-related case number 001101-2025 and the vacation of a 33.3 feet approximately wide unimproved right-of-way.

It's located west of the intersections of Cherry and Cedar lanes.

Um, and it is located in the Arthur T.

McIntosh and Company Briggs Lake Subdivision Ela Township.

As you can see, it's highlighted the portion of it.

Um advance to the next slide.

Um, the petitioners, they are the record owners of the property directly adjacent to the proposed right of way.

They are Thomas F.

Naples and Deanna J.

Naples record owners, and we have Thomas with us on the Zoom call today.

If there are any questions for the petitioner directly.22 acres.

There was a utility easement added to the plat.

You can see like the lightly dashed line towards the southern end of the unimproved right-of-way.

And that was something that um comed requested.

Um utilities and be added, and the applicant did provide that on the updated plot of vacation.

All right, now we have some photos just to give you a little bit more of a street view, kind of what we're looking at.

So this is looking east.

That is the improved portion of Cherry Lane that is currently maintained by ELA Township.

And then we have we're also looking east, but this is at the end of the portion that is to proposed to be vacated.

So the the white building, um, as you can see in the photo, that is currently the applicant's garage, and that is looking kind of at the farthest west end of the unimproved portion of Cherry Lane.

So again, it is approximately 289 feet long, the portion that will be vacated.

This is looking the opposite direction.

So this is again unimproved Cherry Lane.

You can see the applicant's driveway and their house um in the distance a little bit, and the portion that is like the unimproved gravel.

Um, that is the unimproved cherry lane that was just never paved, never maintained.

Again, has not been accepted by ELA Township.

It is currently essentially functioning as a driveway for the applicant and the owner.

All right, and then we have another view.

This is looking north.

So this is the intersection of Cherry and Cedar Lanes, the improved um right of way, right of ways, and there are um a few residences located along those two streets.

This is looking south, uh, directly to the south that is incorporated Lake Zurich, um, that is a different subdivision altogether, so that it was never um the right-of-way that was platted originally in the Arthur T McIntosh subdivision.

Um Lake Zurich was not, they're not a part of that process.

Yes.

Okay, and um on October 1st, there was the Board of Vacations hearing.

Um, and they identified that there's no current future a public need for the plated right-of-way.

We received no objections from the ELA Township highway commissioner, no adjacent no objections from any adjacent property owners or service utility companies.

As I mentioned earlier, Comed did request a utility easement for any potential new infrastructure in the future, and a 10-foot utility easement was provided by the applicant.

Um the recommendations and findings from that October 1st hearing from the Board of Vacations, they unanimously um recommended the approval three to zero for the right-of-way vacation.

Um, and their findings were that a vacation of the subject portion of Cherry Lane with the inclusion of a 10-foot utility easement for new infrastructure will have no negative impact on the public, on public infrastructure, and the vacation will also allow I'm sorry about that.

Um will also allow the property owners who are currently maintaining it to continue to do so legally with the proper permits through the county and to put the property onto the tax rolls as well.

That's the end of my presentation.

I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have at this moment in time.

Anyone have any questions?

Member Wasak.

So we approve the vacation.

Are the um owners who are adjacent to the property, do they have any obligation to either upgrade or maintain the unimproved section that we saw?

So once it becomes part of their property, once we kind of given that you um also would like to approve the street vacation, once it goes to county board, it becomes part of their property, and essentially all they would need to do to the county is they expressed a wish to upgrade the driveway and repave it because currently it has been maintained, so it's in pretty bad condition.

There's potholes again, it's not a very smooth surface.

So not that they have an obligation necessarily, but with the proper permitting process, they have expressed a desire to essentially redo their driveway, the road that hasn't functioning as a driveway for the past like 50 years when they've been um residing there.

So I I guess the better question is even though they would be uh maintaining it, they're not legally responsible for upgrading it or putting in asphalt or something like that.

No, okay.

Yeah, once once the assuming you know this moves forward and the county board were to grant approval of the uh to deed the pro the vacation, the right of way over to the property owner.

Um, we would actually require the property owner to consolidate this um strip of land with their so then it would just become part of his overall property.

Um, and then he is allowed to maintain it, um, improve it like any other property owner.

Okay, and the assumption is that they probably will upgrade it, right?

With I mean it's functioning, yeah.

I mean, it's not actually a road in the right-of-way, it's just his driveway.

Yes, okay.

Yeah, thank you.

Member Compost.

Thank you, Chair.

Is there any way to approve this vacation with condition to improve that uh driveway?

Are we too far in the process to start coming up with the those conditions?

So ultimately, the once the the property um is within the property owner's ownership, they can proceed with however they'd like to improve the property.

They could they could, you know, it's instead of doing any improvements whatsoever, they could put grass on it.

Right.

Um, we do require as a function of our ordinance that they maintain the property in a manner that is consistent with our zoning regulations and you know that doesn't violate our nuisance regulation.

So once when it becomes part of their property, like I get they can they can upgrade it or they don't have to upgrade it.

It's their choice, it's their property, got it.

Um is it up to code right now?

Like if it was part of their property, are they gonna have issues down the road?

Hey, you got potholes, hey, you you have to is that currently an issue right now?

Yeah, I mean, we'd we we don't have specific standards for for, I mean, this is it's it would essentially be their private driveway.

So I mean, it would be up to them again to maintain it.

No, I guess my question is the way that it's currently the way the driveway's condition is currently, is there any issues with codes?

No, no.

Okay.

So they can continue.

Yeah, it can continue to be a gravel surface.

So we can't vacate with condition to improve it already from what its current condition is.

The question before us right now is to vacate.

We it's going to happen.

I know that.

But I'm wondering if we can add a condition to it.

If the answer is no, then the answer is no.

So the the proposal is to vacate it so that they can own it.

If if we had a specific, if we had a specific um goal in mind of ensuring that something happened on the property, you know, we we we would look at the situation very differently.

That's probably something that we would consult the state's attorney's office about.

All I can say in this particular case is that um, you know, there is no there hasn't been any expressed desire to improve a driveway, the length of the of the property.

Um we're simply going to enforce the ordinance to ensure that once they own it, that they're maintaining it in a way that's consistent with our local regulations.

Which they're not in violation of, anyways.

Right.

Right.

And you know, that includes things like keeping the grass cut, etc.

Sure, sure.

Yeah, they're the only ones who are gonna use this property.

Right.

Yeah, nobody else is gonna be affected by it.

Right.

Okay.

All right.

Did you have any other questions?

Okay.

Anyone else have any questions?

Okay.

Um in favor?

Aye.

Okay.

Motion passes.

Thank you.

Okay, we're moving on to 8.4, stormwater management.

We welcome Kurt Wolford, head of SMC.

And um who did you bring with you today?

Jacob Jess Fowski.

Yes.

Okay.

Okay, we have a presentation of Indian Creek Stream Assessment and Community Outreach.

Okay.

Yeah, I'll just be given a quick present.

Oh, sorry.

Okay.

Good morning.

Uh Jacob Josefowski, our water resource professional.

Um, we're presenting a item that if you were at the stormwater management commission last month, you've seen it already.

So you're seeing the second episode.

Uh, but we also want to acknowledge um committee member Sarah Kneznick for all your um assistance and help.

And hopefully you'll have some words to share as well.

But um, we'll have Jacob present first and then okay.

Yeah, so Jacob, go ahead.

Uh just find a quick summary on the Indian Creek Buffalo Grove to Port Clinton study we did.

Uh the map on the left, that red pin shows the general area uh of the study area, and then the map on the right shows uh zoomed in.

So it starts at Buffalo Grove Road and extends down to Port Clinton, and it's interjurisdictional.

So there's uh portions of the study area are unincorporated, other portions are the village of Vernon Hills and other portions are the village of Buffalo Burrow, and then immediately downstream.

There's also uh the village of Lincolnshire.

And just to put the into context of the watershed, the red dot on the lower right hand side is the study area.

Um the entire watersheds approximately 38 square miles uh upstream of the study site, there's approximately 36 square miles.

Um of that about 20% of it's unincorporated Lake County.

Uh you can kind of see just to get the idea of the scale, parts of Lake Zurich are in it, parts of Mungaline and parts of Liberty Hill as well.

Uh just a quick timeline of how the study came to be in 2024.

We had a pre-application meeting for one of our grants called the leadership management board.

Uh they were not uh at a point, they didn't have match the match required to do a project, but we didn't want to just completely dismiss this resident's uh concerns.

Uh so we met with the property owner who was concerned in the field, went over what their concerns were.

Uh and then we did a drone flight to further look into some of the issues that were brought up.

Uh we were from that we determined there is a potential to do a larger study here.

Uh, but before moving forward, we wanted to get feedback from the entire community, not just that property owner.

Uh and board member Geniznik, sorry if pronounced that wrong.

Um set up a community meeting at the Vernon Township community center.

It was well attended and uh very uh I there was a lot of input, it was a great meeting to have.

We got a lot of information.

Um based on that information, we decided to do what's called a stream assessment, so walk the stream and kind of look into these issues a little closer.

Um we work with communications both for that community meeting and the notification of the assessment.

So communication sent out letters to each individual property owner, notifying of both of those actions, and then in October of this year, we uh visited the stream multiple times to assess the conditions.

Uh so kind of what we some of the things we found.

Uh this whole area has uh or parts of the study area have really impressive oak trees, so which very mature trees, uh, something worth preserving.

Uh the stream has a fairly high density of muscle shells.

So if any work is done here, I recommend doing a muscle survey to make sure we're not impacting uh sensitive species uh while we're trying to improve the area.

There's a lot of great habitat features such as pool uh and run sequences, riffles and run sequences, uh individual property, they're kind of being managed on a property owner basis.

So some property owners are not doing much, other property owners have done full restoration.

You can kind of see in the bottom left, that's a native restoration uh of a stream bank that one property owner did.

Uh and then the Illinois EPA also assessed this for water quality, and they found it does support the aquatic life uh and aesthetic quality designated uses.

Um that being said, there are some uh opportunities for improvement from the public meeting.

The input we got was um there's some aesthetic quality concerns as well as water quality improvement desire from the community, and so if they wanted to move forward with that, there's some stream bank stabilization opportunities, there's debris removal, both uh woody debris, uh, there's a lot of individual trees, um, as well as tires, just kind of anything that kind of flows down the stream, and then there's also vegetation management, so there's a lot of buckthorn around those oak trees, so it's preventing a new canopy, so you have the mature oak trees, but you don't have the secondary canopy that you would want to keep it a healthy forest into the future.

Uh, and then there's also fragmites and other invasive species that could be controlled.

Another uh major issue that was in the study area is there's a a dam within the study area, and as you can kind of see from the difference between 2018 and 2025, that structure is failing.

Um there is strong opposition or local opposition to removal.

Uh and since we're looking at this from like a maintenance perspective, SMC has decided not to consider removal as part of this.

Uh the property owner didn't want to remove it, and we didn't the maintenance program it doesn't really look at that uh damage.

Can I snap you for a second?

Yeah.

So when you so the the structure is failing, the structure, like can you explain that more?

Yeah.

So if you look at so how this was originally designed, uh it's a sheet pile that they drove in to the ground.

Okay.

Uh we don't know exactly why, but from what we can tell from aerial, it looks like it was a tree nursery at before it was developed.

A tree nursery?

Yes.

Okay.

And so what we think was happening is they made this so that they're in low flow so they could still irrigate those trees.

Um as you can kind of see in that bottom left corner, the stream has since moved around that sheet piling, and it's kind of digging into the pro the property owner, which there is village of Buffalo Grove.

And so it's actually eroding around that sheet pile dam.

And essentially what'll happen unmitigated is the river's just going to keep moving and sediment will accumulate by that dam and probably eventually buried it.

Um probably eventually buried this like sediment will eventually, and I'm talking on a scale of like decades to a hundred years, not like immediate, but it's starting to kind of pass that dam or go around it.

So what else?

Okay, is your presentation going to address solutions or so as part of this um we are not looking at dam removal for this study uh because we're looking at this through our maintenance program, and based on our interpretations of the authority and just how new this pilot program is.

We don't like the property owner was pretty clear that they don't want the dam removed, and so we would have to force essentially force them, and we don't know if that's maybe you want to step in on that one.

Sure.

Um when we had the community meeting, we wanted to gather input, and there was yeah, strong opposition from the community about removing the dam.

However, the dam's not completely on the property of the homeowner, half of it's in the village of Buffalo Grove.

And we presented this last month, and the commission meeting there were uh village officials at our meeting, and they did support the removal of the dam.

So there is support for that, but we are not initially looking at pursuing that aspect right now.

Um, we have a bigger concern we've identified.

Um, but this also is in our watershed-based plan to uh look at it.

Um so I'd say it's still potential, but um we've received feedback from the village of Buffalo Grove.

They uh feel it should be removed.

And um, Jacob, you if you want to explain what you know about dam removal and the best management practices, you can share that if you'd like.

Yeah, so from like a natural resource perspective, these low low these are called low head dams, so they're not like a big massive like infrastructure project, but they still do impact aquatic resources.

So if this was um a fully functioning dam, uh it would block this pack fish passage both upstream and downstream.

Uh, and then it'll also create deposition of sediment behind it, and then because of that, you have uh water with energy with no load, so downstream you get more erosion.

So removing these dams do have uh a good natural resource impact.

Uh it is good for the stream to remove these.

Um, especially since this I don't fully see the function of this dam.

I think the local property owners like the aesthetic value of it.

And so it's yeah, there are definitely benefits for removal.

Okay.

So what's the bigger problem?

It's coming up.

Oh, okay.

Any other questions on this before we move on?

Okay.

So the next bigger problem we found was uh a very large debris jam.

And it's a little hard to see on the screen, but if you look at the middle um aerial photograph there, there's an arrow showing where this is.

So it's actually interjurisdictional.

Uh right down the middle of the dam is the boundary between jam, sorry, uh the boundary between village of Vernon Hills and unincorporated Lake County.

Um, this is likely impacting drainage in the floodway.

Uh, and it's also through two parcels, but the same property owner.

To just get an idea of the scale of it, this is a cross section of the stream.

That bottom line is the stream bed.

The second line up is the water level during a 10-year flood event.

And then the line above that is the water level of the street during a hundred year flood event.

And then that red line is showing just how much of the flood weight is being blocked by this debris jam currently.

So this is the bigger issue that SMC is focusing on right now.

Uh, because we uh feel that this is negatively impacting drainage and as a flood risk.

So the next steps for this is we're gonna work with the individual property owner on how to get this removed.

Uh, we also have to talk to the DNR to make sure that any work that is done is um in compliance with their regulation.

And um, yeah, so that's the next step for this.

And then also if there is still community support for a larger project and we're able to find match funds, there are some grant opportunities, such as the Illinois 319.

Uh, and you don't have to go too far upstream to see an example of that.

So just upstream where that yellow arrow is.

There's a 319 project that SMC was involved in about uh over 10 years ago now, so 2013.

Uh so they have even larger erosional issues than what we saw here, but you can kind of see they've done this restoration work uh and you know, over 10 years down the line, it still looks really well is functioning as designed.

So there is a potential.

I'll hold the thought there.

So the uh photo there, you see these boulders that are sitting in the creek.

Well, those are rock riffles, J hooks, they are uh controlling water levels.

So the current dam of that sheet pile of metal, which is a hazard.

Um, if maintaining a pool of water is what the community would like, there are ways to do that, like just right upstream with these riffle type structures that are more natural looking.

Um, and so this is accessible through that um park that you can visit too.

It's a nice area, it's easily to walk down and check it out.

Um, but this is a bigger project, and we're meeting with the village of Buffalo Grove later this month because I think they are supportive and on board of doing something within the village side, which is the south uh stream bank side.

But normally when you restore a stream, you want to do both sides, and it's inner jurisdiction.

You got Buffalo Grove, you got unincorporated Lake County, you got Vernon Hills.

Um so maybe there'd be an opportunity to do a grant project like this, but our first focus is to get rid of that debris jam that's blocking the floodway.

And uh that's part of what that's your responsibility.

That's what we feel is uh needing to be removed to maintain the conveyance of the floodway.

Jacob showed that tributary area, there's 30 square miles of drainage coming from 10 municipalities coming from unincorporated Lake County, and um jammed up there, it's jammed up and it's on an individual's property.

Um you want to show the debris jam again?

Okay, yeah.

So I that person would like you to clear up well.

I don't we we need to, and I don't know if you've had any conversations with them yet.

Not yet, but it's all that debris is not from that property owner, it's coming from Lake Zurich and Mundaline and unincorporated Lake County.

Stock there.

So to kind of hammer the homeowner and say you you're in violation, you need to remove this.

Well, that's not their beach ball, that's not their styrofoam cooler, you know.

So I control it.

Right.

Um, so it's I would not say it's 100% the responsibility of the homeowner.

That's where we have an authority to go maintain this.

Uh we've talked with um our legal counsel, and their one recommendation was well, if you remove it, you need to remove it, don't just flip it to the side where it might be another liability.

You need to completely remove that, and we've done that in the past.

And did another neighbor come to you about this problem?

Or yeah.

Not this property, but somebody else approached you and says he's upstream, right?

Yes.

Uh and he was aware of this debris jam.

Or was it the dam?

I can't remember what he originally.

It's been a year and a half, but um he uh felt that well, there's been flooding that has not yet reached his house, but he's very concerned.

It sounds like in a 100 year flood event, it could and so he's walked to the stream, and even though this isn't his property, he can see that um you know this dam, this debris jam is a potential real disaster for him and his neighbors.

Okay, and so that's how he approached me, and that's how this whole ball got rolling.

Okay, and then do we have the jurisdiction to just go in and clean up the debris?

We do, and that was in the bullet point.

There's uh a two, there's two different state statutes that do allow us to do this work.

Um it is not um the responsibility of the homeowner, it would be us, right?

And we would go on to the property, we would issue another 30-day notice, and uh per the state's attorney's guidance, and I agree with it.

You need to get it all out of there.

Um, why would the homeowner not want the debris gone?

Any idea on that?

Yeah, we haven't had that.

I don't remember if that was that homeowner was there yet, because we we we found this after the community meeting.

Yeah, I mean, it sounds like first of all, just for the greater good of everybody else, uh and this serves many areas that that the debris needs to be removed just so that's functioning properly, yeah.

Yeah, I think I'm here a little bit of questions, maybe together with Jacob and Kurt.

Uh at the meeting, there was um a person who told us about this debris jam, and he seemed to think that it was his property.

Uh, we don't know that person's name.

There were a lot of people at the meeting, uh, but he seemed really open to wanting some help to to get rid of it.

But then when Kurt and uh Jacob did their you know investigating to find out who the property owner was, it's a woman's name.

Uh so I've tried to reach out to her.

I haven't connected with her yet.

Uh so we're not really sure if it's the same.

It possibly it could be this person's spouse, the property owner's spouse.

And so we're just not sure yet whether the property owner um will have any concerns or opposition to the idea of us helping.

Um, but please, Kurt or Jacob, if I said anything that sounded off to you just now, please correct me.

No, I can step in.

Um, so yeah, at the community meeting, kind of after the meeting, somebody uh member of the community pulled me aside and said they had a large debris jam on their property that they've known about for a while, but they were completely overwhelmed and they don't know how to address it.

And is that the person who's the homeowner or we're not?

We're not sure.

Yeah, and you don't know that person's name.

No, it was like there was there was a whole crowd of people kind of asking questions at the same time, but we're we're assuming that, but we don't want to say that for sure until we reach out to the actual property owner and make sure because there were other somebody else who also has debris, we should know about that too.

I think you've done a thorough investigation, yeah.

Yeah, there's no other debris jam.

No, so there's smaller, so what we're looking at is we're looking for things that are gonna impact flooding.

So there's smaller the trees across the stream that could, you know, down the line become an issue.

Um so for like example, oh sorry, we'll do this.

If you look at the picture on the top left, there's another location where there's a tree down, and that could in the future turn into a larger debris jam.

Yeah, um, but at this time it's not really impacting flooding, and to go through this whole stretch and remove all of that would be a huge expense.

Okay, and so that's why we're focusing on this larger debris jam.

Yeah, and then also just the other part of it.

I won't go too into the weeds, but it's just the morphology of the stream.

This is kind of at a place where the stream loses a lot of energy, so naturally it's going to drop.

That's why it's yeah, stuff.

And so that's why this one has risen to like such a substantial issue.

So once you remove all this debris, it's gonna flow better.

Yes, yes, and um, because this could back up things that are coming toward it, correct?

Yeah, and it can also like left in place, it can start causing other erosional issues, it can really start changing the dynamics of the entire stream.

Okay, so your plan so far is to go in and clean up this debris field there.

That's correct.

Yes.

Yeah.

And also not just the dam, but Buffalo Grove has interest in restoration.

So some buckthorn removal and stuff like that.

So they they own a pretty large chunk of property there.

Okay.

That's so they want to work with you on this.

Yes.

Okay.

And we have received um what is Jeff Weiss's role?

Who is he?

He's just a he's uh Buffalo he moves around a lot, but he's a local environmental activist.

He's he takes a lot of different roles.

Um I'm not sure what his current role is, but he's he's helped us with watershed plan, so he's knows what he's talking about.

And he he's looked at this area in the past and identified it as an important area to restore.

Um but they just didn't know if there were funding opportunities.

Okay.

So you're looking into that, you're looking into grants.

Uh not yet, but we want to make sure that because it's not our property, but seems like the village of Buffalo Grove wants to meet and is supportive.

Um the village of Vernon Hills, um, they were at the meeting, they were supportive as well.

Uh, I just don't think they have any funds programmed.

And the 319 grant is a great program, and it's uh 6040.

Yeah, so if they go individually, it's 5050.

But a lot of places partner with SC.

We charge an extra 10% for administrative costs.

And so that's a part of my job is working with these areas where there's potential project interest.

I kind of meet with them, kind of talk about what could be done, and then work to see if we can find that local match.

And if there's local match, then we help with the 319 application.

So we put in the grant application.

We have a good track record with the EPA, so we get awarded for most of the stuff we apply for.

So where does that money?

The 319 money come from.

It's EPA, Illinois.

And then what about our chunks of uh state grant money that we're getting as part of that 1220?

When are we getting that?

So could this qualify as one of those projects?

Probably not.

Oh, really?

Um the flood damage reduction benefit for this is it's more of a water quality improvement, which the community felt strongly that there's not a lot of flood damage occurring, but that debris jam saying it could.

It could, but if we get rid of that debris jam, the floodways now back open.

It's gonna reduce it.

But to restore a giant corridor for water quality, I'd say that that is not ineligible, but it's not gonna rank at the top of the list for flood damage reduction.

But that other photo we showed what was going on upstream is an amazing stream restoration project that has lots of water quality benefits, and it does have flood damage benefits too.

So um it's inner jurisdictional.

I'm not saying it couldn't.

So if you can make sure we get those funds, we'll uh you know we're gonna do everything in our power, and our legislators are gonna do everything in our power to get the next um the next chunk.

I mean, have you already uh do you have projects now that cover that second chunk fully?

The second 30 million?

We do.

Okay, so that's all spoken for.

Uh I would say we're working towards it.

We want to have shovel ready projects, so that's where we're using our uh engineering services and consultants to get these next phase and next rounds of projects to shovel ready status, because it doesn't take it takes uh you know, potentially 12 months to 18 months to go through permitting with all the other agencies, make sure we have all the right easements and intergovernmental agreements with the property owners, and most of these projects that we work on, they're complicated.

Water doesn't file political boundaries, and this is a perfect example of all the different jurisdictions involved that are receiving drainage from 10 upstream municipalities, right?

That's why I'm thinking maybe this would qualify, but it would fall maybe into that third chunk of the fourth chunk.

Which in the fourth round.

Okay, yeah, all right.

Um first member compost and then member Frank.

Thank you, Chair.

Uh, just a quick question because I'm interested in the process.

So, what does a cleanup job like this entail?

I'm assuming there's excavators, I'm assuming there is there's wood chippers, there's uh you're going on her property, things of that nature.

Like what wouldn't what goes into like a cleanup job like this?

So there's a few different ways to do it.

I think this one is large enough that uh we can attempt with our equipment to go in and move it out.

We have uh it's called a UTV, so it's a utility terrain vehicle, and it has a it's called a winch, it's just a wire that has a bunch of torque, and you can kind of pull things apart and pull them out.

Um, so we can go in and do what we can with that, and then the larger items that we don't have the capability to remove, we would uh put out a quote for consultants.

Um, and then they will propose their means and methods.

It really is site specific.

So this one has pretty good access.

So I would think an excavator would probably be how they take that out.

And then since we're doing disposal, there would also be uh they would bring that debris out to a dump truck and now assuming a a chipping, it's probably the right way to do it though.

Okay for the smaller stuff.

When you have there's like there's like full trees in there that yeah, I've cut down trees before, and I yeah, so um if we're gonna be going on this lady's property, an excavator is pretty damaging to like uh to to sod.

So would she obviously she would be re-incompensated from the county or from stormwater or whichever she'd be compensated in somehow?

Yep.

I my understanding is that would be part of the project.

So uh we have the authority to maintain or do the maintenance, but we also have the responsibility to uh keep what is the term.

So the statute, and that's the last paragraph in the statute that gives us the authority to go do all this, but then it says clearly that uh we're responsible for all damages.

So restoring the property storing the property.

So if the means and methods, if you're bringing in a heavy excavator, um whatever is mucked up and tracked out, we'd want to stabilize and restore.

Um don't go down a new driveway and tear it up.

Make sure you use um um timber timber mats if you need to if needed, but once they get into the creek, uh that's why we want to talk with DNR and make sure that we're following their regulations as well, and potentially even the core of engineers, if it's a waters of the US.

Um if you pull the debris out, well, maybe now that bare area needs to be stabilized, and what are we gonna put in there?

Um so yeah, that is on us to make sure it's not damaged.

And one last question, uh, and forgive my ignorance.

I've never removed a dam.

I know.

So um if we when you when you pull out that one piece that's making everything, you know, stick together, right?

Is what's to keep it from going downstream and then starting another dam down there just based on you uh you know, whatever's watered or whatever stuck.

You know what I'm saying?

Are you talking about like the sediment that's kind of in front of the sheet pile dam?

Or the trees or the or the leaves or the debris or whatever?

Look, what's to keep it?

I know you're going to be pull, you know, you're gonna be using some torque, and then you're gonna be pulling things out at some point, it's gonna start flowing downstream.

How do you how do you mitigate what was what was uh stuck here, not now being stuck downstream?

You're talking about the second part, like the woody debris, or you're talking about sediment.

Anything, yeah.

So the this the woody debris, we want to try to, and I'm sure we won't get every sure stick, but as much as we can possibly remove physically out of the stream, don't just kick it around and let it flow downstream, and then it's Lincolnshire's problem.

Are they also being included in this discussion?

Lincolnshire.

Yeah.

Uh the study area went to Portland.

Went to Port Clinton Road.

So that's why I was working with member Keniznik.

Um, I did let Ann Maine know about it because that's her district down there.

But the study areas.

Yeah, I would talk to Brad Burke and just check in with him.

There might be a stick floating down their way.

Not too many though.

Um but the sediment, um, that's a different thing.

That is I think natural sediment transport is part of good river morphology.

Go ahead.

Yeah, so debris uh transport is just part of a natural stream system.

Um so we would remove all of the large debris, like Kurt said, a few sticks might end up floating as we're moving stuff out.

Um and there could be some smaller debris, but typically debris jams, you know, they small form is a small debris jam.

You have a flood, it kind of breaks it up and sends it out.

You don't want to remove every last bit of debris because then that takes out all of the habitat for the fish and aquatic uh macro invertebrates.

Um, and so the sediment, it will continue to like slowly move down.

I don't think this stream gets enough flow that I that this all gonna move in one event and cause a dam downstream.

I I don't see that happening, and actually just walking through here, there's there's a large pool right in front of the dam.

So it's kind of scouring there.

So if anything, it would just kind of re-establish to where it is and slowly move downstream.

Yeah, interesting.

The Lake County Forest Preserve, when they removed Rasmussen Dam, it was a major impoundment, a major dam.

And they had to dewater it like six inches at a time.

So it's not just remove it all, and you know, that was a bigger pool of water.

And by letting that dewater very gradually, you know, this this new shoreline started emerging, which was bare muck.

But since they were gradually lowering it, the native plants would kind of grow in.

And then once it's dewatered, if there is sediment, they were able to kind of move it around and haul it out if they need to.

That was a major uh project on a big water body.

This I'd say is a very smaller size one.

Thank you.

Okay, member Frank.

Yeah, thank you, Chair.

I just want to briefly say uh congratulations to um member Knižnik for really digging in and uh, you know, getting the involvement of the commission, um, Jacob and Director Wolford, you guys uh this is a great example, as you just said, Director uh of the purpose and need for the agency that has interdisciplinary and intergovernmental authority to take a look at and and analyze a very complicated situation here, and the municipalities are never going to do it on their own, uh, especially when it's impacting a very small number of homeowners, but it's a significant waterway issue.

So just um great work um and good luck.

Thank you.

All right, thank you.

Um so do you have any more?

Or that's that covers it.

So um please keep us posted.

I I'd like to be keep me up to speed on what's happening.

I also live there, and I'm very curious about how this is going to play out.

I do think Buffalo Grove wants to partner with us, and I think we should, you know, do everything we can to try to figure this out.

Um are you planning for sure on uh doing something with the debris field?

Is that a certainty?

Yeah, if IDNR doesn't uh tell us don't do it, but I can't imagine they would say that uh it's it's the regulatory floodway, and part of uh managing floodplains is to make sure uh we're not you know, we're aware of this, and it will will cause flooding if we don't take care of it.

Yeah, um the DNR, they regulate these floodways, they delegate that to us, we delegate it to the communities.

It's part of being a good floodplain community and the community rating system that allows discounts for flood insurance.

It requires us to be good stewards and manage floodplains.

So I can't imagine DNR would block this, but um we want to at least run it by them, okay, and make sure that we're not doing anything that's out of compliance with their rules and regulations.

Okay, and do you anticipate doing something in the spring?

Um what would the best timing be, you think?

Uh we would want to avoid this.

Well if we can get in early spring, that that would work.

It kind of depends on how much snow accumulation we have and uh uh how much rain we get.

Spring would be good, but then I don't know what DNR's response time is going to be.

Right.

Um so yeah, timing would ideally be like late spring, early summer before the next flood.

Yeah, let's hope so.

I agree with what member Frank said.

This is what you're here for.

This is you know, the work we do, and that's why you're so valuable.

Um, you know, flood prevention.

That's that's the key.

And member Kenijnik, you know, went to the right people, of course.

And um, and she's being very responsive to her community that she covers.

And um, and you know, we want to do the best we can for all the residents who live there.

And I'm glad they brought somebody came forward and brought it to your attention because it's a really it could be such a larger issue that we do want to avoid.

So thank you for all your work on this.

Thank you.

And just to reiterate kind of what you just said, um it was more of a response reactionary.

Um, there was a resident, and we we're not just walking down streams or finding problems.

We were being responsive.

Um there are a lot of areas that these streams need to be protected and restored.

But yeah, when we're receiving concerns from the residents, that's what really initiated it.

Thank you.

Member Kenij.

Yeah, I just want to thank Kurt and Jacob.

I mean, they've been wonderful since day one of this entire experience.

I want to compliment them for how well they ran the community meeting.

I can't believe it was seven or eight months ago now, but uh, you know, it was I think everyone left feeling like they had learned something uh from Kevin and Kurt.

Sorry, Jacob and Kurt.

And um, you know, I I think they really appreciated just the way we were responding to the issues that had been raised.

And then I just want to say this is why I want that's why I'm this is why I'm excited about local office, local government, because um, this is the way it's supposed to work when a constituent raises a concern, and you know, we would not otherwise have known about it.

And I just love the idea that um the you know, lines of communication are open um the way they have been throughout this process that we can all, including our constituents work together with them in order to avoid you know possible disaster in the future.

So it's just uh really been a positive experience, and Jake and Kurt have been fantastic and just can't wait to get this done.

So thanks.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Keep us posted.

Okay.

Moving to 8.5.

And we welcome Robin Grooms.

Okay.

So you're going to be talking about a resolution adapting the urban and community forestry strategic plan.

So can I get a motion, please?

Motion by Member Keniznik, second by member Wasick.

Good morning, everyone.

My name is Robin Hallgrim, formerly grooms.

I am in the process of undergoing the name change after my wedding.

So this is my first presentation under the new name.

Very exciting.

I am the sustainability programs manager, and it's my pleasure to bring forward this final draft of the urban and community forestry strategic plan to this committee.

In January 2024, Lake County officially launched its tree initiative, beginning first with the tree planting program.

And then in October 2024, we began working with Davy Resource Group on preparing a long-term plan to direct the tree initiative's actions on making trees healthier, more abundant, more diverse, and more equitable distributed equitably across Lake County after those ARPA funds have been extended.

So today on Zoom, we have Matthew Erb and Eva Rodriguez from Davey Resource Group to present on the plan's development.

They will detail how our teams held stakeholder and public engagement opportunities, interviewed numerous stakeholders, developed a current state of our urban forest, and a strategic framework of solutions, and it completed a draft plan for your approval today.

So after the presentation, there'll be time for questions for the Davy team, and we'll be asking for a vote on that resolution to bring the plan to the next county board meeting for a full adoption.

So I will now turn it over to the Davey team online.

All right, good afternoon, everybody.

Uh or good morning, everybody.

Pleasure to be here.

Uh today I'm going to talk a little bit about the urban and community forestry strategic plan that we developed for Lake County.

And so the urban and forestry community, uh, the urban and community forestry strategic plan is uh to be an adaptive document and aligned with the Chicago Region Trees Initiative Master Plan 2050 that directs action on making trees healthier, more abundant, more diverse and distributed uh throughout Lake County as a regional and multi-county effort to advance urban and community forestry.

Lake County saw the opportunity to build upon the Morton's uh plan and program, momentum and regional urban forestry action by developing an aligned strategy of their own.

Um throughout this presentation, I'm going to touch on some of the outreach and the stakeholders involved throughout the process, as well as some of the uh strategic priorities and implementation uh of this plan moving forward.

So the Lake County acknowledges the fact that the health of its urban forest directly impacts the health of its communities.

Uh throughout the planning process, we validated challenges in the urban forests, such as high rates of invasive species, low canopy cover, and limited tree diversity.

Uh, this plan gives the county the opportunity to take a long-term proactive approach to addressing these concerns and creating a more resilient, equitable, and thriving urban forest for the future.

Through this uh planning process, we've used the adaptive management uh planning cycle, as you can see here on the screen.

And so um, this is an iterative planning process that starts with what do we have?

So we took a deep dive into the current state of Lake County's trees, urban forest and related programs, plans, and initiatives, followed by the what do we want, which we capture through community and stakeholder engagement.

That leads into how do we get there, the strategic and implementation roadmap, and concluding with how are we doing tracking tracking implementation through realistic benchmarking and metrics.

And then we're right back to the top again where we reassess what do we have and move through this cycle so that we can continue to adapt and improve uh Lake County's urban forest.

So we kicked off this project uh late last year.

Um through the winter we engaged stakeholders, we did a lot of program research.

Uh in the spring, we started a public survey.

Uh, we did a lot of data analysis on Lake County's uh tree population and urban forest.

We've uh done a program assessment of uh the many stakeholders involved in uh urban forestry in Lake County, and then through the summer we developed strategic objectives or priorities uh for this plan.

Uh got some feedback from stakeholders and uh through community presentations, and then uh culminating in this fall the completion of the uh plan itself.

We had an 11 member steering committee that met bi-monthly throughout the planning process to help us align community engagement activities, create buy-in on the plan, provide assistance and advise the project team, uh, as well as to help review, refine, and provide input on the plan goals and objectives.

And um, you can see there's a great diversity of uh steering committee members here.

It speaks to the uh abundance of stakeholders and engaged uh organizations and individuals within Lake County.

And so we really uh appreciate their support uh throughout this project, and uh look forward to seeing their uh participation and implementation of this plan uh in the future.

As part of our fact finding, we conducted uh a number of individual interviews as well as meetings with focus groups uh to identify um topics for further research, areas for improvement and possible recommendations.

Some of the themes uh from stakeholder focus groups range from tree equity, climate resilience, workforce development, expanded public awareness of trees and benefits of trees, uh funding and capacity constraints, and county level leadership and coordination.

And we had you know, again, really great uh participation from uh broad uh number of groups throughout Lake County, and really appreciate their support on this project.

So, what is a uh an urban forest?

And so we get this question quite frequently.

It's all the trees within an urbanized area, including streets, yards, parks, uh, that provide environmental services and benefits to human and wildlife communities.

And so, as part of our investigation and assessment of the urban forest, Davy Resource Group uh analyzed tree canopy data from uh Chicago Region Trees Initiative and completed a uh tree canopy change assessment, which I'll get into in just a minute.

Uh, but we have a better understanding of where tree canopy is and where tree canopy is changing throughout Lake County because of that assessment.

We've also looked at uh other land uses in Lake County, so or land types in Lake County that include impervious surfaces, roads, buildings, uh bare soil, and low-lying vegetation, which help inform uh where we can prioritize planting in the future.

And what we found is that uh in 2017, Lake County's tree canopy cover is at 33%, which is an increase of 3% since 2010.

And so some of this may be due to uh planting efforts, some of this may be due to uh growth of existing trees, uh, but it may also be natural regeneration of native as well as non-native species.

And I think it's uh probably uh the latter a little bit more than the former, and we'll get into that in just a moment.

And just to uh point out the map on the right here is uh the communities within Lake County uh ranked by their current uh canopy percentage.

And so we've uh noted that some communities in Lake County have a tree canopy cover of uh just 9%, whereas uh other communities have uh up to 62% uh tree canopy cover.

And you can see the communities uh that are more in the south uh eastern region of the county tend to have those higher canopy rates, and the communities in the central and western regions tend to have the uh the lower.

So sorry.

Are you looking at a map of communities right now?

My my apologies.

That was on the forward.

I'm sorry.

Am I able to bump it back?

Are you still here?

Yes.

There we go.

Okay.

Sorry about that.

So again, just the higher tree canopy is in the southeastern corner there, and Robin, we're ready to go to the next slide.

Okay.

And so uh, what do we know about Lake County's trees?

The highest percentage uh of uh canopy is found on vacant residential and natural area properties.

Uh we found that um using some tree census data that CRTI uh collected in 2020.

We were able to uh look at the species composition of the uh general urban forests in Lake County.

And you can see that uh European buckthorn, a non-native invasive species is the uh the highest uh percentage uh tree species found through that uh analysis.

Uh whereas uh typically the native vegetation in Lake County would consist of oaks uh and hickories, and we could see uh oaks, maples, native poplars, and sumac are present, but at much uh lower numbers than the European buckthorn.

Another interesting fact is that 80% of trees uh surveyed were less than five inches in diameter, and so that uh indicates that there's a uh a very large population of younger trees uh as well as uh likely representative of those European buckthorn, which are generally a smaller stature species and don't reach the size of uh those native oaks or maple trees.

And so using the U.S.

Forest Service uh developed eye tree program, we're able to take that tree canopy data and uh quantify the benefits, uh the environmental benefits that trees provide uh Lake County on an annual basis.

And so you can see there's a significant value in the uh urban forest uh with 76 million dollars in annual benefits.

Uh this includes uh over 5 million pounds of pollutants removed each year, air pollutants removed each year, over a billion gallons of stormwater uh intercepted, and uh almost a half a million tons of carbon captured from the atmosphere.

So uh clearly a resource that's providing a lot of benefits to Lake County and a resource that's worth investing in uh to help grow these benefits even larger as the urban forest resource resource is improved.

So we did identify a number of challenges uh with Lake County's urban forest.

Uh tree canopy, as I mentioned, is not evenly distributed with communities uh ranging from uh 9% all the way up to 62%.

Uh we have European buckthorn that makes up an estimated 53% of all trees in Lake County.

Um, you know, there's any number of reasons why uh this number has increased so much, but uh certainly the loss of ash trees due to emerald ash borer uh in the last uh few years has contributed to that.

Um and then we also identified that there's a great need to uh train the next generation of uh workforce that that works on invasive species management, uh pruning and removing trees, landscaping, uh all these uh green workforce industries are in need of uh new workers.

So we took uh the tree canopy uh assessment data.

We looked at again those uh bare soil and low vegetation areas, and we were able to develop a priority planting analysis for Lake County.

And so we uh were able to overlay a number of uh different variables to prioritize which areas should be uh planted first.

Um we did remove sports fields, agricultural areas, uh airports, things of that nature that are not suitable for tree planting.

Uh but looking at um the county as a whole, 85,000 acres of land could support additional tree plantings.

Obviously, there's a lot of on-the-ground work that needs to be done to determine uh which sites are truly suitable and which uh property owners are amenable to uh planting trees on those properties.

But the priority planting analysis utilizes uh stormwater uh runoff information.

Uh looks at the urban heat island uh throughout Lake County.

Obviously, the areas with uh more infrastructure, roads, buildings tend to have higher surface temperatures in the summer, and so that can lead to uh you know additional human uh health stress because of those higher temperatures.

sites are truly suitable and which uh property owners are amenable to uh planting trees on those properties but the priority planting analysis utilizes uh stormwater uh runoff information uh looks at the urban heat island uh throughout lake county obviously the areas with uh more infrastructure roads buildings tend to have higher surface temperatures in the summer and so that can lead to uh you know additional human uh health stress because of those higher temperatures um and so those factors are overlaid here to to help Lake County prioritize uh where their first trees should be planted and uh can be used for for many years to help prioritize plantings uh this spring we engaged in a uh online survey of lake county residents to gauge uh their view on trees uh what they felt were priorities uh what their concerns were with uh nonnative invasive species and uh we had could see almost 500 participants uh take the survey representing 43 zip codes throughout lake county and overwhelmingly uh lake county residents support uh having more trees and and feel that trees are are really an asset that should be invested in lake county so taking um you know all the information uh that we collected all the data all the uh interviews with focus groups uh use of steering committee members uh we work to develop uh and work with the lake county project team we're to develop a uh vision uh for this strategic plan so our vision is to support a thriving and connected tree canopy that brings lasting value and resilience to all in lake county and we have developed uh three goals uh for this plan to plant and care for trees to grow a healthier and accessible urban forest collaborate to protect the urban forest and support and inspire communities to value trees so how do we get there um these are the five strategic priorities that we've uh boiled down and so each one of these uh strategic priorities is composed of strategies as well as actions each action is uh supported by uh partner uh implementation uh organized implementation project partners as well as uh metrics to track success of implementation uh along with uh timelines and estimated uh project costs so that the lake county team can prioritize work and have a uh a guide to begin implementation so I'm gonna talk through uh some of these um strategic priorities and uh we will look at some strategies as well as um some actions related to them and just one second I have a pop-up window on my screen that I need to resolve are you having some technical issues Matt I am one one second sorry about this all right so um under collaborate we have a few example strategies that include uh lead and coordinate countywide collaboration on urban forestry and provide technical and policy support to partners and so uh some example actions would include for the uh county to establish uh to convene a countywide urban forestry coalition to bring together municipal staff nonprofits professional organizations and private sector partners so just having those conversations you know how can uh existing um projects be augmented by through collaboration um certainly can provide a lot of synergy to implementation of this uh this plan oh yes um uh I just had a thank you I just had a quick question so um the forest preserves is already I I think already established this collaboration on urban forestry and I assume you saw that right as when you were using that data right to create that map by zip code so are you just talking about um for Lake County government to participate in that uh I think we're trying to bring together a broader uh group of uh of practitioners uh so you know from my understanding Lake County Forest Preserve is more uh focused on their uh forest preserve properties and so we're looking at how can we better engage with municipalities how can we better engage with uh property owners uh you know there's a lot of uh priorities in this plan to grow tree canopy on on really all property types as well as manage invasive species on all property types so I think we're we're kind of um

Uh so you know, from my understanding, Lake County Forest Preserve is more uh focused on their uh forest preserve properties.

And so we're looking at how can we better engage with municipalities, how can we better engage with uh property owners?

Um, you know, there's a lot of uh priorities in this plan to grow tree canopy on on really all property types as well as manage invasive species on all property types.

So I think we're we're kind of um augmenting a little bit more what uh the forest preserve is currently working on.

Okay, all right.

I I just think it would make sense to perhaps check in with them uh more directly because I I think they are working on trying to go beyond just the forest preserves.

They work with um homeowners, I think, and others about removing buckthor and replacing with natives, and and they've done a lot of good work.

So just wanted to throw that out there if you hadn't had an opportunity to reach out yet.

Thank you.

Certainly, thank you.

And we did um just to clarify, we did engage with Lake County Forest Preserve.

We had uh um an interview with uh Ty as part of our uh process, as well as uh the forest preserve on our uh steering committee through this process.

Okay, that sounds good.

Um, member Frank also has a question.

Yeah.

Uh so uh thank you for the presentation.

Um, Robin, where does the implementation for the plan fall?

Is this we are going to get there?

We're not there yet.

Yeah, we are we are the few slides.

We will okay.

May I continue?

Thank you.

Okay, so we're um ready to jump to our next slide here.

So our second strategic priority is to plant.

And so uh some example strategies include realize county-wide canopy goals and planting priorities, uh, and incentivize tree planting and protection on private property.

So um, you know, there's a number of actions that support both of these, but uh realizing cany countywide canopy goals and planting priorities, uh, you know, working with uh municipalities throughout Lake County, assisting them with accessing uh the tree canopy data that we've uh created through this process, and um assisting them with with creation of their own uh tree canopy goals.

Um, you know, setting a tree canopy goal has kind of a trickle-down approach of um, you know, helping to improve tree protection uh practices, uh, increasing tree planting activities and incentivizing trees on on private property, all of those things help to grow tree canopy.

So um, you know, the simple act of of starting a goal uh helps those additional actions later.

The third strategic priority is regenerate.

And so this is to support long-term urban forests and ecosystem health and resilience by promoting non-native invasive plant management and increasing diversity of trees planted across Lake County.

And so we have two example strategies here to coordinate Lake County's response plan for non-native invasive uh plants and support homeowners with incentives for non-native invasive species management.

Um example action uh here would be to partner with nonprofits like the ancient Oaks Foundation and/or Openlands, support and promote citizen-level invasive species management programs countywide.

And the next uh strategic priority is to train um and so the this is to support the long-term growth of a skilled, diverse and well-equipped urban forestry workforce across Lake County.

Um, and so we have two example strategies here to establish inclusive workforce pipelines and urban forestry to support Lake County's municipal partners, as well as to support workforce development and elevate professional standards and private sector tree care.

And so we have an example action would be to collaborate with local landscaping tree care and ecological rehabilitation companies to develop structured career pathways for entry-level workers.

And then our final uh strategic priority is to educate.

And uh we want to increase and reinforce awareness of the benefits of trees and expand opportunities for meaningful participation in tree care and stewardship, especially in low canopy areas across the county through accessible outreach, community training and recognition of urban forestry success and progress.

The county can build a lasting local support and catalyze local leadership towards a more resilient and equitable urban forest.

And we have two strategies here to include that include grow public awareness of trees and tree benefits and build advocacy and local leadership for urban forestry.

And so an example action here would be develop and and host an annual community recognition program or award series for residents, businesses, and or community groups that model best practices and equitable tree community development using trees.

Okay.

So uh member Frank, did you want to ask your question now?

Okay.

And then and then chair okay.

Touched on implementation a little bit.

Um I just wanna also uh emphasize the public communication piece.

Uh you you showed uh some data from a survey.

So there's a lot of public interest in uh tree planting, and that's great.

It it tells us that we're aligned in terms of our goals here with the public's interests.

Um and I know that Chair Hart has talked a lot about public communication when it comes to investing infrastructure dollars to show the public, like, hey, this these are your dollars at action here.

Um, and some of the grantees have done that previously through the tree planning planning program.

I saw some trees planted in my district that had a sign from one of the grantees that said uh this tree made possible through a grant from the Lake County Tree Planning Initiative.

Um I'm not encouraging um excessive use of plastic bags on a stick, you know, when we don't need to, but if there are ways that we can promote that, uh, I think the the public would benefit from understanding that hey, this is where we're investing some of these resources to align with that.

So thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

All right, thank you.

Um member Wasik followed by Chair Hart.

Thanks for this presentation.

I wanted to drill down a little bit more on the training and education aspect.

I saw that you had uh somebody from College Lake County on your um focus group, and you also had somebody from open lands.

Um I know that there's some existing programs that are very good.

Open lands has an urban tree program where they're actually training people to become arborists uh in urban settings.

I think they've done some work in Waukegan, but I'm not sure what they've done lately.

Um CLC could certainly become a key partner in this and maybe creating an arborist uh pathway uh through a certificate program or something like that.

Um, and I just want to stress that it's one thing to plant a tree, but it's quite another to maintain that tree uh over a long period of time.

You have to learn how to trim it, you know, how to properly fertilize it.

Uh you know, the old technique of just throwing a tree with a burlap bag that had steel wire around it is just it doesn't work.

So uh, and you know, guys know that because you've been doing this for a century, but um I'm just wondering how we could better partner with some of the the groups that are already doing this um to create uh more of a pipeline, not only for us, but for the entire county and create more of an educational opportunity going forward.

If I may, Matt, I think that's a really big part of the entire purpose of this plan is not to reinvent or come up with brand new programs that you know, oh, we need to be the ones who are training arborists, right?

That's not, we know that that's not our expertise, but we know that there are organizations out there, and how can we better as the county be able to connect young people to those training opportunities?

Have those have those organizations had a conversation with one another together.

Is there a way we can facilitate those discussions?

Um, so that was one of the more exciting parts of even having this steering committee as a group together was being able to say, how can we, as Lake County be the facilitator uh in and bringing all of this together while at the same time having community programs that increase demand for those professions.

Um, so what are all the different pieces of the puzzle we can implement at the same time that will they will support one another?

And just one follow up comment, Sharon.

As you know, uh Youth Conservation Corps had been doing this work.

Their federal funding for this part of um their activity was cut off.

And if we could support them or perhaps see them as an active partner going forward with funding and part of this plan, I think there's there's plenty of groups out there who would say, yeah, we'd love to partner with you.

Um, and it's just it's just key to saying, okay, this is part of our strategic plan.

It's part of building green infrastructure.

Um, we could make a case for it, but it's it's another thing to implement it long term and say, look, this this is a training need we have too.

So thanks for this.

I could not agree more.

I I'm on YCC's board, and anything we can do to support them and to you know, help find them new types of funding and new partnerships.

I think that would be tremendous.

There's a big worry this year that they're gonna lose even more funding.

And whatever we can do, you know, it's such a great organization, and it does the work it does is incredible.

So we, you know, whatever we can find for them to help them.

Um how many trees are we planting new trees as part of this?

So part of the idea is to be incentivizing additional tree planting.

So this is separate from the ARPA program where we are paying for additional tree planting.

This is what do we do once those funds are gone, or what else can we be doing also in the meantime?

Okay, I got it.

Tear heart.

Thank you so much.

Uh, and I think that was a really good question.

And um, this is a really interesting report and canopy is so important.

Um, you know, I'm sure we've learned or I've learned over the years at the forest preserves, hey, this is what Lake County traditionally looked like, right?

It was oak savannahs, but it was also wetlands and prairie.

And and this is it appears to be solely focused on canopy.

Um, whereas there may be some areas where it's actually uh would make more sense to do prairie plantings or other kind of native plantings that aren't necessarily trees.

So is there uh I didn't see anything in there really about prairie or wetlands in this report.

So the idea it was to have the scope be more how can we support, like protect current trees that are here, address the tree like diversity problem that we do have with invasive species, training people that where there is the need, we can help meet it.

Um, but in terms of those priority planting areas, as you said, we want to be putting trees where it makes sense.

And so by doing that analysis, we were trying to find what are actually the places that would really truly benefit from more trees going in the ground or better protected and going up.

So there was not, you are correct that there is not an analysis of well, this would be better suited to be grassland territory, for example.

Um I I think tree, you know, canopy is important for for all of the things, but you know, there's some pieces in here about stormwater, and you know, we know that wetlands, you know, absorb much more stormwater than say you've got, I mean, a couple of oaks do that too.

I I think this is just for the board's consideration to think about how do we um even think beyond tree canopy, right?

To more of um, you know, bigger picture, right?

Not just the trees, but the the wetlands and and prairie and things like that.

So um just a thought.

So thank you.

Okay, any other questions?

Any questions for Matt or for Robin?

Okay.

Well, this was a really interesting report.

And um so next steps, you're gonna be uh partnering with certain people to accomplish some of these goals or yes.

So if you take a look inside the actual plan itself, we have our list of strategic priorities.

We have an action, there's an assigned time frame, a list of partners to work with, metrics to measure how we're doing, and then an estimated cost range so we can prioritize accordingly what should come first.

Okay, amazing.

And you need us to approve a resolution for that.

Correct.

Okay, and we have a motion on the floor.

Oh, member was it?

Yes.

Yes.

This will in all likelihood go on our sustainability page.

Okay.

Okay.

All right, great.

All in favor?

Aye.

Okay.

Motion passes 8.5.

Now we're moving on to 8.6.

Sustain.

Okay.

Discussion regarding a grant application for a proposed three new level two electric vehicle charging stations at 650 West Winchester Road and a proposed three new level two electric vehicle charging stations at 2400 Belvedere Road.

Can I get a oh, we don't need a motion, sorry.

Okay.

That's gonna take a minute.

That's gonna take a while.

Uh a notice of funding opportunity for driving a cleaner Illinois Climate and Equitable Jobs Act EV charging round three grant was posted to the Illinois EPA website on November 6th to fund a portion of eligible costs associated with new level two charging stations for electric vehicles to be located at publicly accessible charge uh locations in Illinois.

The chargers must be available to the public 24-7 and currently have zero stations already at that site address.

So additional funding will be awarded to projects that are located in equity investment eligible communities.

And so and projects will be scored as they come first come first serve basis, and they will be accepted until funding is depleted.

The grant is a reimbursement grant uh and it provides an 80% match with a funding cap on it as well.

And so the county would pay 100% and the state would reimburse 80% up of the cost up to that funding cap.

So up to for us, it would likely be around $51,000.

Okay.

The county uh is interested in applying for level two stations at these two addresses, Belvedere Medical Building in Joaquin and Lake County Public Works in Libertyville for a total of six chargers.

Uh, and so at this time we're looking for direction on whether or not to pursue this funding option.

Okay.

Okay.

I just wanted to say, um, I think this is a great idea.

I think more and more people are driving electric cars.

And sometimes it is hard to find, you know, when you're out on the road, you know, looking for charging stations.

So I think you know, the more we can contribute to that, the better and incentivize people to want to drive electric vehicles.

Um, member Frank.

Thank you, Chair.

So the number you said was 51,000.

That would be the county's cost after reimbursement from the grant.

That would be um estimated how much they would cover is 51,000 up to 51,000 is what the state would cover.

So do we have the project?

So our total eligible costs with both brand new, assuming that there's no current like electrical capacity for the sites would be around 200,000.

For each side.

Total.

Total.

So 100,000 per site.

Yeah.

And then so that 20% cost uh cost share would then leave the county at around 149.

Oh, because I thought they were giving the county 80%.

80% up to a funding cap of uh 4,000 per charging port uh in a non-equity uh how'd they phrase it?

Equity investment eligible community.

So the one in in Waukegan would get the extra boost.

The ones in Libertyville would not get that extra boost.

So Libertyville would be capped at 12,000 for the grant.

And while Keegan would be eligible for up to 80%.

Um so total complete the max we could get for these two sites in totality would be 51,000.

Because we are applying for three chargers at each site, 12 ports total.

So we we multiply 12 ports, not three.

Okay, yes.

12 ports, three chargers at each we have money in the book.

Two chargers at each.

Three chargers at each site.

Okay.

Uh six chargers total, 12 ports total.

Okay.

So to answer your question about the money in the budget.

At this point, we're just looking for the uh consensus to move forward with applying for the grant.

Okay.

We would have to determine at that time if we do receive the GANT if we can move forward with it.

Um it wasn't included in the budget, but it's a it's an opportunity.

We don't know if we'll be able to take care of take advantage of it, but to even think of that, we need to apply.

I see.

If I may, just one more follow-up.

So you said it was a reimbursement grant.

Do we have to go ahead and proceed and pay for it and build these and then apply?

Or no.

Ruth Ann just said like we're gonna find out.

We're gonna apply.

We're gonna apply first.

Okay.

We'll see if we get the grant, and then we'll have to look to see if we have the funding to proceed and accept the grant.

Okay, chair.

I'm I'm very supportive.

I just think we need uh firm details on the on the cost.

Agreed.

Okay.

Yeah, and to make sure, you know, before moving.

I think it's a good idea to apply for the grant and then look at our, you know, where we are at with funding.

Okay.

Member Wasick, followed by member Keniznik.

I'm fully supportive of this, but I'm just wondering.

So I know we have to target county-owned properties, right?

Yes.

Is there any way we could consider partnering with certain communities?

Because most of my communities, they don't have a single public charging station.

Um, is that something that we could consider in the future?

Okay.

I have not looked into whether or not uh communities are able to jointly apply.

For some state grants, you can, and for some you cannot.

I'm not sure about this one.

Okay, but I can I can like to know.

Okay, member Knishnik, because we can apply multiple times.

I will say that as well.

I'd just like to clarify.

Um, I'm not that familiar with the Belvedere address, but of course I know the 650 West Winchester, and I know that's county property where a lot of our facilities are.

Will these charging stations be available only for use by the county and our staff, or will they be available to the public?

These would have to be available to the public at all times in order to be eligible for the grant.

Okay, and but our staff could also use okay, great.

Thanks.

Any other questions?

Okay, give me a thumbs up if you're in favor of moving forward with the grant.

Okay, thank you.

All right, thanks so much.

Okay, is there a county administrators report?

No county administrators report.

Do we have executive session?

No need for executive session.

Any other members' remarks?

Member Frank.

Thank you, Chair.

Um I don't know.

Can you know consent from the committee to uh ask staff to do more than two hours of research?

I'm not sure if that's required now or not, but I think we need to think about having a discussion about um uh a zoning or related moratorium uh for the location of data centers in unincorporated Lake County.

Um I'm very concerned about the sort of unregulated energy use.

I think that um these centers that are in some cases being built without a specific economic purpose in mind, um, essentially driving up energy costs for people across the country and uh doing so without regard of the carbon footprint.

And we have taken such important steps forward in reducing our carbon footprint and and looking at and analyzing and understanding our energy usage as a county and as a community, and and and uh it's uh it's really um disturbing to me that these uh centers are popping up and um having such a huge impact on the energy usage uh nationally.

And so I I I would be interested in having a discussion about what a moratorium would look like and if it would be relevant for us.

Okay, I I'm so glad, member Frank, that you brought this up.

I think it's a really important subject.

It's um it's it's coming up all over the country.

They're talking about building data centers in our oceans, they're talking about building data centers, possibly in Lake Michigan, which concerns me because that's a big water source for our area.

And I do think that this is an important topic that we should have staff research a bit more.

It's um I'm going to a lot of different environmental forums these days.

Um the data center issue is coming up more and more, and Google is making some important plans right now to build humongous data centers around the country in spots that would be impacting the environment.

So I do think it's something we should look into.

Member Wasick.

And I would lovely add on what uh commissioner Frank is talking about.

We have a big complex coming in the Grays Lake that's 400 acres.

Wow.

And generally their only requirement is like a proximity to the grid to the grid and B proximity to Lake Michigan Water.

I mean, it's it's a huge, you know, drain on resources, no matter how you look at it.

I know we can't regulate what municipalities do.

We can certainly take the route of doing a model ordinance for ourselves and seeing you know, just starting the discussion, the dialogue, I think is just absolutely essential right now.

Well, I think it's also super informative to our communities to the municipalities we're working with because they might might not realize the ramifications, even though they might get great uh financials and it will boost their economics, but it can also be a negative in a lot of ways that maybe the municipalities aren't even considering or know about.

So I think it is an important topic for us to look into.

Is there a consensus for people to look to uh have the staff do a research on this?

Yeah, okay.

Oh, uh, planning building development director staff's actually already been conducting research on the data center land use category and impacts and applications throughout the country.

Um, we're in the early stages of doing that research.

And so we're still cobbling together um all of the information that is out there publicly about that specific uh land use and the the impacts of that land use.

Uh we could prepare for a discussion on a future agenda where we would lay out some of these parameters, some of these concerns, issues, approaches to regulation, and uh the process for going through the amendment process through the amendment exercise and what we would call a temporary administrative deferral to different from a moratorium.

We don't authorize moratoriums in our ordinance, but we we would allow um the ordinance does allow for a 120 day deferral on any any applications that would be materially affected by a pending amendment process.

So we could we could walk through that both of those elements with the committee, both the substantive issue and then the process to get there at a future committee meeting.

Okay.

Now we we would love that.

I I definitely would like to see this on a future agenda.

I think it's an important topic to talk about.

And if we end up getting some, you know, very impactful information, it might be something we want to think about presenting it, like the League of Municipalities or something like that to get you know, get the word out there on you know what what this means to you know to places in the county, but you know, good and bad.

So okay.

Thank you, Eric.

Um, any other member remarks?

Okay, we will adjourn until January 7th.

Thank you, everybody.