Flood - Meeting of May 23rd - COD Continues Its Approach

On May 14th our association contacted Mr. Clayton Heffter, Stormwater Permitting Manager, DuPage County Dept. of Economic Development and Planning and requested an onsite meeting to review the recent flooding, the lakes and walk the property line of the college and discuss the situation at the south end of COD's Pond #7 and Wheaton's Lake #4. A series of correspondences ensued and the meeting grew in scope.

On May 23rd a meeting occurred which included representatives of the County of DuPage, City of  Wheaton, Community College of DuPage, Briarcliffe Lakes Manor Homes, the Foxcroft Association and neighbors on Brentwood Lane and to the south.

The meeting was coordinated by the County. In response to my request to clarify the purpose of the expanded meeting, Clayton Heffter stated "My involvement is to help facilitate a meeting with all the different interested parties and offer the County’s expertise and guidance. Additionally, I’ll be able to address some of your questions related to COD development over the years and how they’ve met the requirements of the Stormwater Ordinance, and help answer general stormwater and flood related questions."

A number of individuals were present. Here is a partial list. Clayton Heffter for the County, George Schober of V3 of Illinois an engineering consultant for COD, Bruce Schmeidl for COD, Paul Redman Wheaton's Director of Engineering, Dave Grill property manager for BLMH, the president of the Foxcroft association, a neighbor who has volunteered to coordinate communications with those living on Brentwood Lane and to the south, several others from the college and from the City of Wheaton and myself. I apologize because not everyone is listed.

The meeting commenced on BLMH property at the southernmost end of Wheaton's Lake #3, walked the length of the college property line and the berm erected by the college as part of its new Pond #9, walked part of the berm separating the College's Pond #7 from Lake #4, inspected the weir on that berm, and then walked or drove to the southern shore of Lake #4 and Pond #7.

Core Issue - Overtopping of Lakes #3, #4, Pond 7 and Flooding
The meeting began with a brief description of the overtopping of Lake #3 and flow from COD's campus which joined at BLMH's property line and then formed a fast flowing stream to the south and Pond #7/ Lake #4.

I made a brief statement that everyone who is present is aware that the issue involves the 1.5 square mile watershed which included portions of Wheaton, Glen Ellyn and the Community College of DuPage. We would tour the bottom of that watershed, which is where the runoff of these storms has to go.

I made the appeal to all present that each of the parties agree to actively participate and cooperate in a larger study that will include Wheaton, the Community College of DuPage and Glen Ellyn. I stated that we were dismayed by the recent flooding and that for the first time in the 35 year history of BLMH we experienced a situation in which about 48 residents were threatened by the largest flood stream ever to occur on our property.  Our association discussed sandbagging contingencies at our most recent association meeting and we have NEVER had to do that before.

What has changed for BLMH? In the past, overtopping of Lake #3 would naturally flow south and southeast, fill the 5 acres of soccer fields and then continue on to Pond #7. Today, because of changes in the topography of the campus and recent construction including parking lots, the CMC building and the regrading as part of the Pond #9 flood water now flows westerly from the campus and onto our property. That is a change and this never occurred before.

During the April 23rd meeting I presented a 5-page document with photos of the flood situation on the college campus in September 2008 and the retention/detention of the soccer fields north of the "B.J. Hoddinott Wildlife Sanctuary" which includes Pond #7. Photos of the sandbagging of the south berm of Pond 7 were included.

The document included comparison photos of the same areas taken on [April] 18, 2013. I asked if everyone had seen the videos, in particular the 4-1/2 minute composite. I had a laptop with me if that were necessary. Mr. Schmeidl suggested everyone had and wanted to move this along.

Mr. Schober stated again that most of the water was "bypass flow" and would not answer my question about how it is that the college constructed a berm that was to "shield" our association and which now traps outflow from the college on our property? That question was not answered. Schmeidl stated that the college is a "good neighbor" and expressed that for part of the morning of the 18th a portion of the campus was closed and that some equipment rooms had experienced flooding.

We continued south and viewed pond #9. I asked where and how much water was being conveyed from other portions of the campus and into the pond. There was no reply to that question.

We continued south to Pond #7 and Lake #4. It was suggested that we see the weir and walk the berm and then continue to the south shore. Schmeidl objected but we persisted and did so.

After walking to the weir separating Pond #7 from Lake #4 we then continued around the lake and re-convened on the south shore. We continued to discuss the situation, describe the events depicted in the photos given to Schmeidl and others, and then continued to the south shore of Pond #7 and college property. This is where the initial overtopping began, and flooding occurred with the overtopping of Pond #7 and Lake #4 south berms.

The discussions included proper berm maintenance, discussions of berm conditions, and so on.

Wheaton Will Proceed Alone With Step 1 of a Study
Redman stated that Wheaton has agreed to begin the process of a study. The College of DuPage has not, to my knowledge, agreed to cooperate or actively participate. There was no statement of acceptance of participation or a willingness to participate and cooperate in a joint study by Schmeidl or Schober. In other words, Wheaton for the present will have to go it alone, as it did in 1997.

Redman stated that Lakes #3 and #4 are part of a "City Managed System."

Step 1 is to lay the ground work for the study. It will take time and money. The Wheaton City Council will have to approve the funding for a study and has not yet done so. The numbers are not yet in.

To be successful a study will have to include the larger areas. At present, part of the water collected in the college flows into pond #9. It is joined by other water flow from other areas of the college. It all collects in Pond #7 and then flows into Wheaton's lake #4 and from there it will flow via Wheaton's storm sewers into larger depositories to the south.

There is no outflow from the south western portion of the college campus except via overtopping the berms of CODs pond #7 or into Wheaton's Lake #4.

What Would a Good Neighbor Do?
Schmeidl, the representative of COD stated that the college is a "good neighbor."

Good neighbors don't push the problems downhill. During the meeting, Schober said that the pond #7 area was not part of the College. It was quickly pointed out that to our knowledge that is untrue and in fact, his firm had engineered in 2012 a storm sewer from the area of Pond #9 to the wetlands and into Pond #7.

Good neighbors recognize their involvement and responsibilities and do something to help others.

Telling us that the problem was "bypass flows" which in other words is attempting to state that "the water is from upstream and is simply flowing around the college" ignores the fact that there is significant rainfall on the campus and most of it must flow from the campus to elsewhere. A significant amount does flow into Pond #7 and Lake #4.

It was stated at the opening of the meeting that we, the neighbors, are concerned with the apparent inadequacy of Lake #3, Lake #4 and Pond #7. In addition, there is simply insufficient storm sewer capacity to properly drain these large bodies of water. It all seems to flow into Lake #4 and that's what causes the flooding.

Schober made the observation that there is a 36 inch connection from Lake #3 into the campus and to a detention pond to the east. No one present could confirm that. Schober stated that this connection probably allowed water to flow from Lake #3 and into COD's pond during events such as occurred in 2013. However, it is also possible that connection allows water to flow from the campus and into Wheaton's Lake #3. Or, if water flows from Lake #3 to one of COD's ponds, it is also possible for it to continue from that pond only to be returned to Pond #9 and from there to Pond #7.

What is the Position of the Community College of DuPage?
Reading between the lines of the statements and explanations provided by Schober, it is apparent that the college has taken the position that the problem is due to "bypass flows" and the unusual circumstances of the 18th were a consequences of peak rainfalls and saturated soils. However, that doesn't explain the destination of the water that falls on COD's 273 acres, nor does it explain how much of COD runoff does reach Pond #7 and Lake #4.  We do know it travels off of their campus and continues downstream. We also know that on April 18th Lake #3 overtopped first, followed by Pond #7 and finally by Lake #4, because this was observed and documented by neighbors on Brentwood and by me. We also know that the capacity of the system is inadequate, and that the discharge of Pond #7 and Lake #4 is via a single, restricted storm sewer. When the system capacity is reached, flooding is inevitable. Finally, we also know that runoff from COD has to go somewhere and this includes Pond #7 and Lake #4. Schober raised a question when he stated that there is a large underground connection between Lake #3 and one of COD's ponds. What else don't we know?

Schober stated that the college had to deal with significant runoff from upstream Glen Ellyn, but later contradicted that by stating that GE contributes only about 20 acres of runoff.

The position of the college appears to be this; because flow originates upstream, they are not a part of the problem and so they don't need to be involved in an area wide solution. The college has met the stormwater requirements of the county and so the problem is someone else's. In his May 6th email to me about the flooding, Robert Breuder, the president of the college summed it up this way. "It goes without saying that if ever COD causes a valid problem for its neighbors, we will address the same quickly and responsibly."

The college apparently does not see that it is involved in a valid problem for its neighbors!

Is that the proper position for a body supported by public funds which is a member of the "community"?" It may not be an accident that the "Community College of DuPage" has installed signage and deleted the word "Community" not only in word, but apparently in deed.

Unless there is an area study and flows from the contributors including Wheaton's Lakes upstream as well the COD campus, we won't know how to solve this problem. For example, until we know how much water really enters Pond #7 and Lake #4 during these 2% and 1% rainfall events, it isn't possible to determine what improvements should be made to the underground discharge of Lake #4. Nor is it possible to determine exactly how much retention and detention is prudent for Lakes #3, #4, Pond #7 and the areas adjacent on college property.

Of course, expanding any retention/detention areas will cost money and will also absorb real estate. The college has plans for its campus and that real estate is finite and valuable. That is probably the real reason the college has not volunteered to participate. As a consequence any solution will have to occur off of the campus.

Thanks to All
Thanks to everyone who attended the meeting, to Wheaton for stepping up to the plate, to the College of DuPage for listening and to the County for assisting and getting this initial step to happen.  I realize that not everyone who attended was empowered to make any promises, and we don't know the instructions that were given to Messrs Schober and Schmeidl by the college. One positive development was that everyone did agree that a larger involvement is necessary. However, the college continues to disappoint as it feels that it is "not a part of the problem" and therefore does not need to be involved, to paraphrase Robert Breuder's comments in his May 6 email to me.

Notes: 

Oops! First posted with April 23 meeting date. Not correct. Actual meeting occurred on May 23rd and that has been corrected in the post.

1. The above is a summary and is not all inclusive. The duration of the walk and meeting was about two hours.
2. What's Changed since 2004? In 2004 COD began a series of construction programs to expand parking and adjust detention ponds and water storage. Detention Pond 3 (DP3) was eliminated by rerouting of storm water from Detention Pond 3 to Detention Pond 2. Parking Lot K was built over the vacated pond.
3. Construction has continued since 2004. Here's a graphic of the master plan of the college as it existed in 2004. It shows some of the ponds and detention areas which existed then.

A Pragmatic Approach

The flooding in Briarcliffe, its causes and solutions are currently under review. There are a number of  different positions and a range of stakeholders. Some are merely observers. Some will be expected to put something on the table to solve this. Some will expect someone else to pay to solve this. Some will expect to do little or nothing. 

I prefer to think of those who are involved as being in two groups. One is "the problem solvers" and the other is the "observers." However, it is possible to have both roles and switch from one to another. This happens frequently when observers realize that they are to be left behind or the outcome will be unacceptable. At that time they may switch roles. However, there is a dilemma. Becoming motivated at the end of the decision making process is usually far too late to have any real impact on the process. Arriving late is at best an attempt to exert influence on a decision that has already been made.

Arriving late is an approach that is being advocated by a few. 

A range of possibilities

There are a range of possible outcomes for the flooding problem. They include "no change" and various degrees of "improvement."

If you experienced the recent flooding, or if you were very, very close and did not simply because the waters receded, then you have one perspective. If you are one of those who is expected to pay for a solution, then you have another perspective.

What's the most likely outcome and what is a viable solution? Are they the same or are they different, and what are they? I do have an answer to the question. However, I am not revealing it at this time and this post serves to explain. 

Pragmatism
When approaching a problem and creating a solution, there are differing perspectives. Some problems invoke an emotional response. Flooding which is assumed to be preventable is one of those.

Individuals may prefer pessimism or optimism. A pragmatic approach recognizes a range of possible outcomes and includes pessimism and optimism. A pragmatic approach recognized the complexities and the differing positions of those involved. It also goes beneath the obvious to the motivations or possible motivations of the problem solvers.

Observers also have motivations and expectations. They can influence the problem solvers. In a situation of re-occurring flooding, it's essential that the observers become participants and make their expectations known to all of the problem solvers. It should be done openly and consistently. Coordination is useful. In this case of the flooding, I advocated a petition. That however, has been nixed and so yesterday I formally retracted that request. (Note 2).

People do have the right to choose their destiny and to take the actions to accomplish that future.

A range of outcomes
In complex problems which involve multiple players and money there are a range of possible outcomes. So too with the causes or possible causes of the flooding in this area. The outcomes include "no change," varying degrees of "reduced flooding" and "no future flooding."

Reality dictates that the actual solution that is implemented will be somewhere in that range. The likelihood of "no change" is small. The possibility of "no future flooding" is most likely unattainable. A reasonable solution will be somewhere between.

The outcome will vary from address to address because the flooding was not universal or consistent.

The success of the outcome will be subjectively assessed because of the impact on individual addresses. In the past, there was no problem a few blocks away. Whatever was in place prior to 2008 was completely successful for those who never previously experienced flooding. That changed in 2013 when some of the neighbors suddenly became aware of the existence of a "flood control district" in Wheaton and COD's pond #7. It wasn't hidden although Lake #4 is shielded behind a berm. Anyone who accesses Google maps would see the COD campus and several bodies of water. Some of the neighbors enjoy fishing on someone else's private property. No, it isn't a secret.

This is a complex problem
Coming to the conclusion that this really is a difficult problem is essential to having a solution. Let's see, we have COD to the north and east of the flood zone, which is Glen Ellyn only in name; a better descriptor would be "rogue college." Then to the north and west we have the City of Wheaton. The Village of Glen Ellyn is largely invisible when it comes to dealing with the problem, and the County of DuPage are the accomplices or enablers who say "All necessary code requirements have been met."

Now, none of these are the 'bad guys.' They are simply the players, and it is because of the interaction of these entities over decades that we have arrived where we are today. Or, to phrase it more accurately, where we were on April 18.

It's going to take the involvement and cooperation of each of these entities to come to a realistic and reasonable solution.

It hasn't happened before and so why should we expect that it can and will happen today?

Now you know why it's my opinion that this is a complex problem.

Negotiations
The first step in solving complex problems is to get those who have the authority and have a role in determining a solution to come together. They are the individuals who can cause a solution and should include those who may be required to give something at the table. They are those who are accountable and can make the decisions that are necessary. If they are unwilling to participate voluntarily, then it is necessary to enroll someone who can exert sufficient pressure to get everyone together. These individuals are sometimes called stakeholders.

Complex problems include complex, multi-part negotiations. For each problem that is identified there is a solution or solutions discussed. In each step it is decided what is to be done by whom, by when and who will pay for this. Or, what type of burden sharing is this to include?

In any negotiation there are three possible responses. Each of the following are acceptable if one takes the position that in a negotiation a request is made and there is then a response. Negotiations can be complex or simple. Here are the possible responses to each request :

• accept
• counteroffer
• decline

Each of the above is a perfectly valid response. There are consequences for each response and a decline can stop the action.

Here's a clarification. In the above, I said that "The first step...is to get those who have the authority and ...can cause a solution...They are those who are accountable and can make the decisions" In other words, these are the decision makers who are empowered to make those decisions. I consider this to be a very important distinction. It's easy to state opinions to spend someone else's money or to declare that "so and so" should do this or that. Such opinions seldom get the job done. It's essential to get "buy in" from the various decision makers. 

Halting negotiations

For negotiations to succeed there must be good faith among all of the problem solvers. Negotiations can halt and solutions can become impossible if any one of the problem solvers repeatedly says "No!" To further the action requires a process of accepting and counter-offering. As this continues, the problem solvers will discuss many differing solutions and the objections and obstacles will be revealed. Burden sharing can be a show stopper!

As any party can say "No" at any time, and as it is possible for one party to be intransigent, it's necessary to have someone at the table who can exert influence. Call it "pressure."

In the case of the flooding, this is absolutely necessary. Of course, we're unawares of the behind the scene discussions that have occurred in the past between the Village of Glen Ellyn, the City of Wheaton, the Community College of DuPage, and the County of DuPage.

For this round to succeed, a more open discussion is essential. 

Agendas, Beliefs and Expected Outcomes
Each individual participating in defining and developing has a different commitment. That commitment is their personal expectation and a desired outcome.

Some will base this on their personal belief system. "We'll negotiate honorably" is one example. It's not prudent to assume that anyone else is going to adhere to that or to any other personal belief or position, declared or otherwise.

Everyone who is involved to solve a problem which includes differing positions has a personal agenda. One of the aspects of that agenda is to "look good."

Unreasonable Expectations
Some expect that a solution can be achieved if only a few of the stakeholders take an active, committed role.  That's an unreasonable expectation.

Some of the observers expect that the outcome will assure that there will never again be flooding.  Some have the position that a good solution will spare them in the future and have little concern for anyone else. Some expect that a "class action" legal action will solve this.

It's useful for individuals to honestly appraise their expectations and openly declare them. That does not always occur.

Revealing and Unconcealing
To succeed in arriving at an acceptable solutions, it's essential to unconceal the motivations, agendas and commitments of the different problem solvers who are involved.

That is because human beings don't always operate in accordance with their stated intentions. Lawyers are experts at obfuscation and diversion. That's something to keep in mind. Each of us, to varying degrees has the same capability and will and do use them to accomplish our personal objectives. There are a lot of intelligent and educated people in this area. It would be unreasonable to expect that they haven't learned how to play the game and play it well.

Operating at cross purposes
If we recognize that each of the problem solvers has a personal agenda, an expected outcome, and a desired involvement, then it is easier to understand why there is unworkability present in communities and organizations.

The solution to the flooding will include dealing with such cross purposes. Everyone will immediately state that flooding is undesirable  However, when we ask "what will you do to solve this problem" is when these impediments will occur.

For example, the Community College of DuPage has steadfastly taken the position that they meet all codes. Their primary and overwhelming interest is in utilizing every yard of their 273 acres in a manner that benefits their goals. If flooding is a natural consequence and there are no codes to prevent it, well, then too bad for the neighbors!

Looking good is hardly likely when flooding is involved. However, everyone wants to look good. That can be used from time to time.

Holding the rope
That's an expression that is used in very dangerous situations involving mountain climbing. The person who is called upon to "hold the rope" is the one who has the life of the climber literally in his or her hands. If a mistake occurs or if under duress and pain should the rope be released, there can be serious consequences. It requires real commitment and integrity to agree to "hold the rope" and then do so. (Note 1).

In problem solving there will be times when the entire outcome is dependent upon one person. That will require literally "holding the rope." In the process of solving complex problems, there are at times multiple rope holders, and that task gets passed. If any "rope holder" should let go, there can be large setbacks or failure.

In successful negotiation each individual at the table is completely aware that they do in fact, "hold the rope." However, there is a willingness to compromise. There is also a shared commitment  If everyone wants some sort of successful conclusion, then the negotiations will succeed.

It is sometimes necessary to determine and reveal what that shared commitment is. If that does not occur, then negotiations may fail, particularly if there are intransigent parties at the table.

In the flooding situation which occurs south of the COD campus and in Briarcliffe from time to time, there appears to be no shared commitment. That is another reason I view this as a difficult problem.

I've found it interesting that if asked, many in our society will say "Oh, yes, you can count on me to "hold the rope."" A few years ago I got a a rude awaking when in an exercise. It was necessary to hold the rope and the guy who was holding the rope I was tethered to looked me in the eyes and said "I've got you." I could see he was physically struggling. A few seconds later, he let me go and I fell.

What I learned from that exercise is simply that what people say, and what they do, may not be aligned. Some people will say it this way "the road to hell is paved with good intentions." This is true even with the best of intentions and with lives in the balance.

I really don't know why he let go. Why don't I know? Shortly thereafter he told me why. But here's a question. If there was a lack of integrity involved, then how is it possible to believe what that individual told me? Perhaps he was being honest and straightforward and perhaps he wasn't.. Suffice it to say that he did let go. He professed a reason for doing so.

In the game of life, we either get results or we get reasons.

Conclusion
I'm a professional problem solver. Some are easy, some are very difficult, and a few have been declared to be impossible. Nevertheless, I approach all problems with the same dedication, passion and commitment. My success rate is extra-ordinary.

My "role" here is primarily that of a committed observer. However, I've been operating in accordance with what I have posted here.  I'm using my skills to direct and exert some pressure both publicly and behind the scenes. My association will be involved, like it or not. However, we too are at the bottom of that 1.5 square mile watershed. We have no control over the operation and maintenance of Wheaton's flood control district or project. To the Community College of DuPage, we exist in a cursory manner. So my personal involvement will be limited. It will take a much bigger crow bar to move this.

This problem is solvable. It's too early to say how it will be solved or if it will be.  Recognizing the agendas of some of the participants, those who will have the roles of "problem solvers" indicates this could be very difficult. When I say "very difficult" I literally mean that it will be far easier to fail than to succeed.

The observers also have an agenda. One owner has stated that the reason for the flood was because the berm on Lake #4 "was not properly maintained." Some are angling for a class action suit. Even the Chicago Tribune in a recent article stated that the leaking pipe on Lake #4 caused the flooding. That was apparently because others told the reporter that the pipe was the cause. I find that to be interesting!

In this situation everyone serves a purpose. Its interesting to unconceal that purpose or to have the individuals reveal it. We all serve a purpose and we can be used to accomplish and serve a larger purpose.

Notes:

1. In real world, modern climbing, mechanical contrivances are used to reduce the necessity to rely upon any one person to "hold the rope." The dangers are well recognized and steps are taken to avoid these situations. In training exercises, perceived danger is as useful for revealing actions and outcomes as would be real danger. To those participating in the training, perception is what matters. 
2. On May 21 I sent an email to the neighbors group, retracting my request for a petition. In that email I said this: "You can consider that request to be retracted. The May 19th email has served one of its purposes..."
3. How will this turn out? My crystal ball doesn't work at all. I can anticipate events, predict actions and likely outcomes. However, that is not the same as predicting the future. Politicians insist they can do that. I'm no politician. Nor do I think taking a "wait and see" attitude will be beneficial to the outcome. 
4. In situations of this type, it's possible to be used by others to accomplish their personal agenda. That's not necessarily a terrible thing. However, personal agendas which have nothing to do with the larger problem or the greater good are problematic. For example, I'm sure there are a few neighbors who see "job one" as protecting their personal property. That's a problem if such an achievement is their one and only goal and compromises the achievement of a larger solution. This is another example of individuals operating at cross purposes. 
5. The flood of April 18, 2013 occurred one month ago. In this age of sound bites and tweets, that's a lifetime ago! There are 400 million tweets in one single day!  My point? The flood of April 18 is so "ancient." We did discuss the necessity to keep this in momentum. One day was 400 million tweets ago. Oh well!

Flood - A Call to the Committed

Here is the question. Do YOU want to see this problem solved, or do you want to pass it to someone else to solve some day, or one day, in the future? Are you willing to take a stand or not? If you want to solve this, then continue reading.

Believe me, there are a lot of people who have no interest in solving this. For the stakeholders, who are those who will have to make the decision to expend hard cash to solve this, there are a lot of other things pulling at those dollars. So what would the popular decision be? Solve this problem, or avoid it and promote something with glitter, like a new statue on the COD campus, or downtown activities in Glen Ellyn and Wheaton?

If you were a politician, or an administrator or member of the board of the trustees of the "Community" College of DuPage, what would you do?  Frankly, the answer to that question is easy. Simply continue doing what has worked in the recent past, and avoid the difficult decision.

That is exactly the outcome to be expected after the flood of 2013. Why should you expect anything different? Left to their own devices, the decision makers will make exactly the same decision they have made in the past.

On April 19 4:49pm I made the formal request that this message be sent to everyone in the neighborhood network.  Here is that message:

A Personal Request
Hello, I’m the guy who filmed the flood, has the personal blog, and is advocating a solution.

The flood occurred four weeks ago. Most recently, including 1996, 2008 and 2013 this type of flooding has been experienced south of COD’s Glen Ellyn Pond 7 and Wheaton’s Lake 4, which is a part of that City’s “Special Flood Control” project.

Four weeks after the most recent flooding, a lot of us are returning to normal and the attention of the College, Glen Ellyn, Wheaton and the neighborhood is looking toward the end of the current school semester, summer and the Memorial Day Holiday.

However, it is up to each of us to keep this problem in front of the officials and decision makers who can do something about this. This is vitally important if we want to accomplish any positive change. In the past, there has been public concern but as some of the neighbors have said “nothing came of it.” The City of Wheaton did, in fact, do some things in 1997 to alleviate this problem but it was insufficient and they acted alone. That’s not going to get the job done. The watershed which flows into this neighborhood covers about 1-1/2 square miles and includes portions of the COD campus, Glen Ellyn and Wheaton.

Do you want this to be another one of those situations in which this difficult problem gets passed over to deal with more attractive, colorful and easier problems? If not, then we need your help. We need to keep this problem visible and we need to press a variety of officials at the college, nearby communities, the county and the state in order to assist them in making the difficult and expensive decisions required to reduce the flooding in our neighborhood.

To provide some insight, I’ll relate a statement that was made on May 8 during a neighborhood meeting at the College of DuPage. Robert Breuder, the president said to one of the neighbors that “The flooding is obviously not a serious situation; otherwise there would have been more people here tonight.” That’s the perspective and unless we each press this, I am convinced this is the position the politicians and administrators will take. Some mean well, some have more pressing concerns. We need this to be an important issue and we need to keep it in the forefront if it is to get the funding and attention it requires.

This is a legal, technical, financial and political problem. Legally, COD may be complying with all codes and ordinances. Legally, it may be proper to allow the “natural drainage pattern” to continue and these floods to continue. Technically, there are solutions which can reduce flooding. Financially, someone or someone’s must come up with the funds to fix this. Politically, sufficient exertion must be placed on Wheaton, Glen Ellyn and COD to work together to solve this problem, make the difficult decisions to do what will be necessary and come up with the funds to do so. If we expect the City of Wheaton can do this on their own, we are mistaken.

The decision makers include:

•  Anthony J. Charlton, P.E – Director and Jim Zay - Chairman, Stormwater Management Planning Committee
• Dan Cronin - County Board Chairman
• Clayton Heffter, Stormwater Permitting Manager, DuPage County Dept. of Economic Development and Planning
• JR McBride – District 4 Board Member
• Michael Gresk - Mayor of Wheaton
• Mark Franz – Village Manager, Glen Ellyn
• Robert L. Breuder – President, College of DuPage
• The Board of Trustees, College of DuPage
• Sandy Pihos, Illinois State Representative

You can send a letter to each of these, and the names of the board of trustees of the College of DuPage is on their website. In the past, I've sent individual letters to each of the individuals on the above list and to each and every member of the Board of Trustees of the College. I suggest you do likewise. You may also add your Village or City councilman or councilwoman.

I also suggest that [the communications leader for the neighborhood group] prepare a petition. I request that each of us provide our names and addresses and sign that petition. I suggest a copy be sent to all of the individuals on the above list.

This situation is being monitored by a reporter at the Chicago Tribune, who has been helpful in focusing attention on this problem. I’ll send a copy of any and all letters or emails I receive, as well as the petitions to that reporter, as I have agreed to stay in communications about this problem.

Here is a possible text for the petition:
“We, the residents of unincorporated Glen Ellyn and of Wheaton, who live at the southernmost extreme of the College of DuPage’s Pond 7 in Glen Ellyn and Wheaton’s Flood Control Lake #4 hereby petition the State, the County, the College, the Village of Glen Ellyn and the City of Wheaton to take coordinated steps to end the flooding of these neighborhoods in 50 year and 100 year flood events, which are sometimes called 1% and 2% rainfall events.

This is an unacceptable situation in these affluent communities, and in neighborhoods which are adjacent to a Community College which boasts “luxury hotel accommodations” and a “fine dining” restaurant. In recent years, alterations to the neighborhood has exacerbated flooding. Our neighborhood is now the repository of runoff during severe storms. It has been stated that this is the “natural pattern of drainage” and implied that flooding is to be expected and is acceptable.

We think that repetitive and reoccurring flooding of our homes and neighborhood is not to be expected or tolerated, and via this petition we are communicating our expectation that the County of DuPage, Community College of DuPage, City of Wheaton and Village of Glen Ellyn come together to do something about this. Each of you are an entity which is supported by tax dollars. You are public institutions and part of your role is to promote well-being.

We encourage you to solve this problem. We encourage you to cooperate and take the difficult steps to alleviate flooding in this area. We do understand that under extreme conditions flooding is unavoidable. However, the definition of “extreme” is subjective. The flood of April 18, 2013 occurred with 6.91 inches of rainfall in a 24 hour period. A ["100 year" or 1% event] will have between 7.35 and 8.68 inches of rainfall in 24 hours. On April 18 the rainfall was in the range for a “50 year event” which is between 6.66 and 7.24 inches.

Something has changed to contribute to the flooding. On September 12-13, 2008 the area received 5.27" rainfall according to DuPage County. At that time, with minor sandbagging behind COD’s Pond 7, neighbors were able to contain the overtopping of that pond and avoid flooding. In 2013 flooding was unavoidable and the interconnected pond #7 and Lake #4 overtopped. Several blocks of homes were flooded. Water was 3 feet deep behind and in front of homes on Brentwood, some homes had 8 feet of water and it ran for blocks down Briarcliffe Blvd. The recommendation for personal flood proofing may be futile in this situation.

We encourage action and expect accountability.“

To my neighbors, thank you for taking the time to read this and thank you for contacting the decision makers. It will make a difference. I've written about this situation in my personal blog http://briarcliffelakes.blogspot.com/ and I am convinced it will take each and every one of us to shift this.

Norman Retzke
LetMeThinkAboutThisBlog@gmail.com”



Notes:

1. "We are either a part of the solution or we are a part of the problem." That paraphrases the comment I made to Robert Breuder, the president of the College of DuPage in my email dated May 6. 
2. So where do you stand? Are you a part of the solution or a part of the problem? It's time to choose sides and there is no middle ground here. 

Flood - Photos 2008 and 2013 - Drainage vs Retention - Smoke and Mirrors?

If you want to jump to the chase, scroll down  to the photos. Otherwise, read on.

Retention, Detention, Wetlands and "Smoke and Mirrors"
Solving problems of this type requires looking at specifics, asking the right questions and getting specific answers to those questions.

There's more to the photos in this post than meets the eye. Here's a question to be answered. Were the 2011-2012 permits for pond 9 to be an increase in retention, or a replacement for other retention areas paved over by the college?  The photos of 2008 indicate a large existing area which provided service as a "retention/detention area" in 2008. With the construction changes on the campus how much detention/retention was actually added via the 2011-2012 construction? In particular, west of Lambert Road. If none or little was added then the "new" pond 9 may be "smoke and mirrors." It may be inadequate.

Some of the neighbors have noticed that some areas that were previously flooded were not on April 18. Other areas that weren't are now flooded or seem to be more flooded. What's going on?

Here's a third question to be answered. The most recent National Wetlands Inventory indicates that the area adjacent to the newly constructed COD pond 9 is a wetland. In 2008 it was a practice soccer field which provided both detention and retention; it was not a wetland. Is this a replacement for other wetland areas paved over or used by the college? Was this retention/detention area relabeled as "wetland" with no real or appreciable area gain and for the sole purpose of meeting some Federal "wetland" requirement? If a wetland label was applied to an area that formerly served as detention/retention that would imply that somewhere else on campus wetland was lost, and those areas usually retain water. That implies a reduction in detention/retention area. Looking at COD, it's apparent that these areas can't simply be moved without upsetting drainage patterns. After all, large areas to the south of the campus have flooded repeatedly.

Are these important questions? Yes, they are. Removing wetlands and detention/retention areas, replacing them with asphalt and sewers and then relabeling existing areas which previously served as retention/detention is a sham.

Reducing retention or detention areas will contribute to downstream flooding.

The final questions are these. Are the retention/detention areas of lakes 3 and 4 the same as they were in 1996? How much silt has been added to these lakes? Should Lake #3 be larger to relieve downstream flooding? If Lake #3 were substantially larger, could it alleviate the overtopping of that lake and would the flooding of areas south of COD be reduced? This and other questions will be looked at in an exploration of solutions in a future post.

What's Missing?
Before continuing to the photos, I will state the obvious. One of the things to be done to succeed is to determine what's missing and do that. I think residents in the area want a cohesive and broader look at the entire problem of flooding. One of the things that has been missing is a demand to solve the problem.

"Cohesive and broader" requires the involvement of all parties. It requires commitment and a willingness to get this done. What we have here is a classical turf war with a college which has grand plans but is geographically constrained and will use every taxpayer dollar it can raise to manicure or build on every available square inch of the property. It includes a Village which has ignored this problem for decades, a County which has only recently become involved and is a question mark, and the City of Wheaton which is now the center of attention. In the game of "duck and cover" having Wheaton take center stage works for everyone else.

Gee, this is the way it must have been in medieval Europe, with fiefdoms and duchies. Didn't that time include the period referred to as the "Dark Ages?"

The geography and measurements are easy. It includes the current capacity of lakes 3, 4 and the COD property west of Lambert, which includes the emerging wetland called pond 7 and pond 9. It includes the surface areas involved as well as an analysis of current retention and the necessary retention for the area in a "1%" and "2%" rainfall. Note that I said "for the area." That's what's been missing. A comprehensive study should include the entire COD campus and the Willoway Brook Drainage Basin; those portions that drain into Pond 7 and Lake 4 at the very least. That area includes portions of Wheaton, Glen Ellyn and the College of DuPage. As I said earlier, why shouldn't COD be retaining all of its runoff? The quick answer as to why it isn't doing so is this; periodic downstream flooding is acceptable for the college and is someone else's problem! Apparently that's the predominant theme for some of the other players in this drama.

I suspect this area is more susceptible to flooding today than it was in the recent past. What's changed since 2008? However, the ultimate question isn't what wasn't done in the past, but what should be done in the present. The codes apparently don't require this and so the water and the excuses keep rolling downhill.

What seems to be missing is cooperation and balance. Paul Redman, Wheaton's Director of Engineering has stated that there is a "cost - benefit" to this, and it must be weighed. It should also be shared.  I'd like COD, Glen Ellyn, Wheaton and the County to get together to sort this out. After all, the 1.5 square miles that drain into this area is within those communities and the college.

Is this too much to ask for? That's entirely up to us. We don't have to accept a future which is a continuation of the past.  We can create a different future. Will we? Will we take the necessary actions?

Photos of the Western area of COD, Lake #4 and Brentwood Lane Sept. 2008
This post includes a few photos taken during the flooding of 2008 and April 2013 so you may compare. At the end of the post is an aerial view of the southwest corner of the campus and its practice fields as they existed in 2008 and "dry." The area in that final photo is immediately north of COD's Pond #7 emergent wetland. The area of these practice fields was at a lower elevation than BLMH and sloped toward the 7.59 acres of COD's pond #7 "emergent wetland."  In 2008 COD had acres of grassy areas which have since been eliminated by the college. Some of this earlier retention was replaced by the new pond 9.

This post will look at a few of the retention/detention areas on the campus that existed in 2008 and how they aided in flood abatement.

Background for flooding in 2008
In September 2008 Wheaton experienced a downpour of 5.27 inches, and the area experienced flooding. Others were affected and the adjacent city of Warrenville published this statement:  "In September 2008, a large storm occurred that caused unprecedented flooding in the City of Warrenville."   (Note 1).

I don't want to underestimate the gravity of 2008 when sandbagging behind Brentwood Lane halted the overtopping of COD's Pond #7. However, what occurred on Brentwood in 2008 was a trickle as compared to the flooding of 2013!

A Return to 2008
These photos indicate the aftermath of a rainstorm of 5.27 inches. Compare these photos to the videos and photos of the same area with 6.91 inches on April 18 and after a modified campus.

The photos of 2008 show extensive standing water on the western portion of the campus. Some of the water of the storm of 2008 was detained and retained in large practice fields. Water did continue to flow south and homeowners south of COD's Nature Study Area and Pond #7 were sandbagging to protect their homes from the water exiting COD's nature area, which can be seen in the background in this photo looking to the southeast. Flooding was contained on Brentwood Lane!

The following photo depicts the way this same area looked in 2012 during COD's construction. This is before the addition of  the CMC building. If you compare the backgrounds in this photo to the one above you'll see why I consider the attitude of the College to be unacceptable. You may also gain some understanding of why some of those in Wheaton and unincorporated Glen Ellyn say that "The College of DuPage is a bad neighbor."

Back in 2008 this area was a "nature center" while today it has become, in the parlance of the College of DuPage, the "service area" of the college. Some people use the term "service area" as a euphemism for their "dump." The college has since cleaned up this area and installed a grassy berm, and continues to work on this. We were told it was to "shield" our association. However, the college has now admitted that it had another purpose; that's for another post.

Some owners who had these views or are adjacent have seen their home values plummet up to 50% from where they were. Gee, could our College be a part of the problem?

Here's a view in 2008 looking northeast toward the "M" building from BLMH and the water on the campus. It is inundated with standing water. The final photo in this post indicates where the photographer was standing:

Here's the conditions at the south berm of Lake #4 during the flood of 2008; no overflow:

Meanwhile COD's soccer practice fields were under water, and draining slowly into COD's pond #7 which was flowing into the yards behind Brentwood Lane. The neighbors on Brentwood Lane managed this by sandbagging:

With sandbagging by the neighbors, COD's Pond #7 was contained behind Brentwood Lane. There was no overtopping of Wheaton's Lake #4. The flooding was minor, as you can see by the standing water in the photo (image title corrected):

What a difference another 1.6 inches of rainfall makes! That, combined with the capacity of Lake #3 and alterations on the campus probably contributed to the flooding of 2013. Here's the same area behind COD's Pond #7 in 2013:

Here's a view looking toward the northwest from Brentwood Lane. Lake #4 is in the background and COD's pond 7 is on the right.

Here's the southwest area of the campus during the flooding of April 2013; The beginning of Pond #7 wetlands is on the right, and COD's new CMC building is in the background. The following photo was taken facing directly east:

Here's an aerial view of the "way it was" prior to the recent construction. The arrows in this photo indicate approximately where the photographer was standing for the 2008 photos which provide a view of the "nature study area" and the "M building practice fields":

Was past flooding considered when planning the construction of 2008-2012? 
I don't know. A resident told me that he did submit photos to the college. They were similar to the ones shown above and taken in 2008. He did this when they announced their expansion plans in this corner of the campus. He insists he told the college "This won't work; it will create problems."

I doubt if anyone at COD will say "Yes, you told us so!" unless we can document via certified letters, etc.

How has the drainage and retention changed?
The soccer fields south of the M building were about 2.9 acres in 2008 and during severe rain storms were covered with water and retained it. That's what's shown in the photos of 2008.

An additional area of soccer fields and green space extended from the area to the west of the M building and continued north. This area of about 6 acres also retained water in these storms, and detained the flow into Pond #7's emergent wetland. These grassy and low lying areas shielded BLMH and retained natural flow from higher elevations such as BLMH and COD, as well as Lake #3. This provided some protection for the Brentwood neighborhood.

The total area of this green space and emergent wetlands was about 16.5 acres; but no longer. Not only has the area been reduced, the elevation has been changed. Higher elevations cannot retain water unless by specific design. The new pond #9 meets that criteria.

Is it a coincidence that in 2008 the overtopping of Pond #7 was contained with minor sandbagging and Lake #4 didn't overtop, and yet in 2013 there was massive flooding south of the College? We did get less rainfall in the "flood" of 2008. In 2008 with 5.27 inches of rain the flooding was a "trickle" as compared to what occurred in April 2013.

Did COD alter the natural pattern of drainage?
Today the soccer fields have been removed and grassy areas have been replaced by parking, the CMC building, the "service area" of the college which includes "material storage" and the new "pond 9". A large berm extends for about 750 feet along the western property line of the campus. It sheds water onto the private property to the west, reversing the flow of stormwater which now is trapped to the west and no longer travels to the southeast.

The berm retains nothing and has created a channel or "swale" which directs rapidly flowing water south and into Pond #7 and Lake #4. It also directs it onto the private property west of the campus. Additional construction has raised the elevation of the campus east of the berm including added parking and the CMC building. Those constructs now carry water via new sewers in the direction of CODs pond 9. But not all water drains in that direction. Some leaves the pond 9 area, goes west toward Lake #3 and some, not trapped by the berm, goes south completely bypassing pond #9. All water flows downhill and it eventually finds its was to the Pond #7 emergent wetland and to Lake #4. From there, it may overflow and into Brentwood Lane and homes to the south and also into unincorporated Glen Ellyn.

Back in 2008, Glen Ellyn and the College of DuPage were cozy. When COD began it's expansion in this part of the campus in 2006, that seems to be when things spun out of control.

So how much water was retained in 2008 and how much is retained now? That's a question I'd like answered. To answer it would require access to earlier surveyor's drawings of the campus. However, simply matching the retention of 2008 guarantees flooding under certain conditions. What is required is more retention, not less! A larger solution will be presented in a future post. (Note 2)

I suspect the retention and detention areas of the southwest corner of the campus is less today than it was in 2008. In 2008 these lower lying soccer fields on the western property line of the campus totaled about 9.0 acres. That is equivalent to about 65% of the combined area  of emergent wetland Pond 7 and Lake 4. The subsequent reduction and replacement of those fields combined with the new, higher elevation construction in that part of the campus now sends water into the southwest corner and the Pond #7 wetland via sewers, and at a faster rate. That's the natural consequence of less detention; water flows more rapidly on asphalt and via sewers than it does via grassy fields. Less retention means that those shallow ponds no longer form as they did when the low lying soccer fields filled with water.

In his interview in the May 7 Chicago Tribune article, Robert Breuder, president of the College of DuPage said this:

"The retention pond that we just expanded on the west end of the campus far exceeds our current needs and the current expectations of the county,"

The highlights in the above quote are mine.  I plan on looking more closely into the alteration of the western portion of the campus in a future post.

Notes:

1. Clicking will open a  New Window> Warrenville Flood Investigation
2. Not everyone is happy to be involved in this problem, nor are they willing to find the answer and a solution. Solutions always take money and this problem is no different. I do realize that this is probably boring stuff for those who did not experience flooding in 1996, 2008 and 2013. However, when the next rain comes, there are new owners in the area, or should more extensive flooding occurs, there will probably be the complaint as there was in 2013. Someone may say "How could this happen? I didn't know!" Another will probably say "I didn't know there was a lake over there." (that's an actual quote of a neighbor about two blocks away). Well, no one can ever say someone wasn't putting this out here.
3. This is moving toward a conclusion, albeit slowly. I should be there in two or three more posts, but it may take a few more if I'm to keep these short. This particular post is about 3,000 words. Sorry for that. I realize that I do repeat some of the content of previous posts, but I'm assuming this might be the first time you read about this problem and I'm attempting to provide sufficiency in each post so each can stand alone and provide specific perspective. The next posts will include one on "what hasn't worked; bandaids versus solutions." I suppose that one which is a summary of the previous 20,000 words and photos is probably in order. The concluding post for this series will include specific possibilities and options. Of course, I'll also be providing updates. 
4. I'm no different than anyone else in this area and I too have a lot of other things to do with my time. However, I'm a long term planner and watching this has been like watching that proverbial slow motion train wreck. I decided to document this and to take a stand; that's the responsible thing to do, isn't it? As I recently wrote to Robert Breuder, the president of the College of DuPage, "You are either a part of the solution or the problem." As I see it, it's necessary to "walk the talk" and so it is with this blog. 
5. I will be moving on to other things here at BLMH, but I'll be coming back to this topic from time to time as requirements dictate.  Let's be honest, shall we. In this age of tweets, stream of consciousness news and "20 second" sound bites, most people have already moved on to something else. Is it any wonder that longer term and larger problems cannot be solved, such as the recurring flooding of this part of DuPage County?

Flood - What Really Caused Flooding

On May 7, an article appeared in the Chicago Tribune with this title:

"Wheaton will fix problem pipe that caused Briarcliffe flooding" (Article title revised May 17 - See Note 1)

That title is inaccurate and misleading. This prompted me to send an email with photos to the reporter who posted the story.

Here's the content of the email I sent on May 12:
"I read the May 7th article “Wheaton will fix problem pipe that caused Briarcliffe flooding” at the online Chicago Tribune. The title is grossly inaccurate.

Will the Tribune be running an article about how the overtopping of the berms on Pond #7 and Lake #4 caused Briarcliffe flooding on April 18 and how on April 20 the “leaking pipe” resulted in a reverse 9-1-1?

These were two distinct events separated by about 54 hours. The leak did not cause or result in any flooding. All water from the leak flowed a few feet and into two storm sewers. This is shown on the two attached photos of the “leak” from that pipe.

The residents who were quoted were describing the flooding of the 18th.

Also attached is a photo on April 18 of the flooding which began with the overflow (overtopping) of the berm on College of DuPage’s (Glen Ellyn) Pond #7. The flooding on April 18 was the result of the overtopping which began at COD’s pond 7 and then as the water level of Pond 7 increased, this overtopping expanded to the west and into Lake #4. Earlier studies by Wheaton indicated that the actual width of this overtopping was several hundred feet in width, and included Glen Ellyn’s College of Dupage as well as portions of Wheaton’s Lake #4.

The attached map may help you in visualizing this. You can go to Google Maps and it will show the area."

Here's two photos of the "leak" on April 20 which the article stated "caused Briarcliffe flooding":

Here's a photo of the beginning of the flooding on April 18:

Here is a link to the online article at the Chicago Tribune:

Clicking will open a New Window> Pipe that caused Briarcliffe Flooding


Notes:

1. On May 14, the title of the article in the Chicago Tribune was changed to "Wheaton will fix problem pipe that contributed to Briarcliffe flooding"  The reporter at the Tribune has defended the title of the article thusly: "Just to clarify, the main point of this article was to point out that the city of Wheaton will be paying for this pipe, which engineers believe “contributed” to the floods." However, the photos don't support anyone's position that the pipe contributed to the flooding, except in the most insignificant manner. Yes, there was an outflow of a few gallons per minute. How does that compare to the overtopping of COD's Pond #7 and Wheaton's Lake #4 which contributed thousands of gallons per minute? This is what the overtopping created:

Flood - Federal Assistance Available for Flood Recovery

PRESS RELEASE - City of Wheaton

Contact Information:
FEMA, 1-800-621-3362 or www.disasterassistance.gov

Wheaton residents who experienced flooding damage can now apply for federal grants and loans to assist with storm-related losses now that President Obama has issued a federal disaster declaration for 11 Illinois counties, including DuPage County.

5/13/2013

Federal Assistance Available for Flooding Recovery

WHEATON, Ill. – President Obama approved Illinois Governor Pat Quinn’s request for federal assistance to help people in 11 counties – including DuPage County – recover from historic flooding in mid-April. This means that Wheaton residents who experienced flooding damage can now apply for federal grants and loans to assist with storm-related losses.

The federal disaster declaration makes assistance available to flood victims, including grants to individuals and households to help with temporary housing, home repairs or replacement and other disaster-related expenses, as well as low-interest SBA loans to residents and businesses.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) administers this assistance program. To apply for assistance, visit www.disasterassistance.gov or call 1-800-621-FEMA (3362).

###

Note:
The above per the City of Wheaton. Their website is at http://www.wheaton.il.us/default.aspx

Flood - Wetlands, Lakes and COD Pond #7 Overtopping

The recent flood event redirected attention to the cause of flooding in South Wheaton and Glen Ellyn. In particular, the area south of the campus of the College of DuPage, and also to the southwest. Recent news publicity has focused on Wheaton's Lake #4, while Glen Ellyn - COD's overflowing ponds and wetlands have escaped scrutiny.


Here's an enlarged view of a portion of COD's designated wetlands and ponds, with Wheaton's Lakes #3 and 4, which are also "freshwater ponds" (PUBGx) in the National Wetlands Inventory (click on image to enlarge):

What Do the Codes Mean in the Above diagram?

PEMA = Wet Meadow. The Modifier "A" indicates it is "Temporarily Flooded" (Note 4).
PEMC = Wet Meadow. The Modifier "C" indicates it is "Seasonally Flooded".
PUBGx = Pond. The Special Modifier "x" indicates it is an "excavated" pond. (Note 5).

Is There a Significance to these Wetland Areas?
Yes. The Illinois Interagency Wetland Policy Act of 1989 states that:

830/1-2. Legislative declaration

º 1-2. Legislative declaration. The General Assembly finds and determines that:

(a) In 1818, Illinois contained an estimated 8.2 million acres of wetlands. Based upon preliminary results of the Illinois portion of the National Wetlands Inventory, less than nine percent of the original acres remain.
(b) With the significant loss in acreage, a corresponding loss in the functional values and benefits that wetlands provide has occurred.
(c) Continued loss of Illinois' wetlands may deprive the people of this State of some or all of the benefits which they provide, including:

(1) reducing flood damages by absorbing, storing and conveying peak flows from storms;
(2) improving water quality by serving as sedimentation and filtering basins and as natural biological treatment areas;
(3) providing breeding, nesting, forage and protective habitat for approximately 40 percent of the State's threatened and endangered plants and animals, in addition to other forms of fish, wildlife, waterfowl and shorebirds;
(4) protecting underground water resources and helping to recharge rivers, streams and local or regional underground water supplies;
(5) serving as recreational areas for hunting, fishing, boating, hiking, bird watching, photography and other uses;
(6) providing open space and aesthetic values, particularly in rapidly developing areas;
(7) providing unique educational and research opportunities because of their high diversity of plants and animals, their support for a high incidence of threatened and endangered species, and their function as a natural buffer for rivers, lakes and streams;
(8) supplying nutrients in freshwater food cycles and serving as nursery areas and sanctuaries for young fish; and
(9) helping to protect shorelines from the forces of water erosion.

Did Changes to the Nearby Wetlands Play a Role in the Recent Flooding?
The college comprises nearly 30% of the surface area of 1.5 square miles comprising Glen Ellyn and Wheaton which drains and floods. That area partially drains into Glen Ellyn - COD's Pond #7 (Note 3) and Wheaton's Lake #4. These two bodies of water are shown in the lower left hand corner of the above diagram. Other areas of Glen Ellyn's COD campus drain directly south and into the Foxcroft neighborhood. (Note 1).

COD's campus has large areas that are designated as wetlands and ponds. Yet, some of these areas have been converted to surface parking (asphalt) and additional construction is occurring in the southwest corner of the campus, most notably the CMC buildings and a very large berm running from the southern extreme of the campus and north to the southernmost tip of Lake #3 in Wheaton.

I suspect these constructions have placed additional stress on an area which periodically floods the neighborhoods to the south. In a recent post I documented the alteration of the natural path of water flow so that it now goes from the campus and westward into Lakes #3 and #4 in Wheaton. Is this "Failure by design?"

During the April 18 rainfall event Wheaton's Lake #3 overtopped. On the western portion of the campus, COD's Pond #7 overtopped; it's on College property and within the boundaries of Glen Ellyn. As water from the north and east inundated Pond #7 and Lake #4, these exceeded capacity as they always do in extreme rainfalls, and homes to the south were flooded, as they sometimes are during these types of rainfall events.

This year, the flooding seemed to be more extensive. On April 18 our association experienced a fast flowing stream along its eastern property line and bordering the College of DuPage. The southwest corner of the campus flooded areas to the south, and Wheaton's Lake #4 also overflowed (overtopped) it's berm. These events were overshadowed on April 20 by a leak in the berm on the south side Lake #4. All water from that leak drained into the storm sewer adjacent to the leak. The City of Wheaton has determined that the cause of the leak was a failed plug in a concrete drain pipe. There was no "sand boil." But, at the time, that could not be known, and prudence prevailed.

Here's what the videos, photographs and eyewitness accounts indicate. The April 18 flood on Brentwood Lane began with the overtopping of COD's Pond #7. As this was occurring additional water flowed into the south of the campus. Wheaton's Lake #3 overtopped and these streams (CODs and Lake #3 overflow) joined to flow south. As this combined stream continued south toward Lake #4 it was joined by the overflow of COD's Pond #9. The levels of both Pond #7 and Lake #4 continued to increase and the width of the overtopping of Pond #7 increased to include Lake #4. The overtopping was into the Brentwood neighborhood of Wheaton. This overtopping occurred because water flows downhill and because of the joining of overflow streams from COD south of the M building, COD's Pond #9, Wheaton's Lake #3, COD's Pond #7 and Lake #4. (Note 2).

The overtopping of Pond #7 was documented by an alert neighbor and a photo was posted on May 6. That photo is also included in this post. It shows the initial overtopping, which then grew and extended to the east and west. Wheaton's study of 1997 stated that this type of overtopping may be "200 to 400" feet in length.

COD's property retains so little water that as I remarked in a recent correspondence to Dr. Breuder, the President of COD, that the College is drilling one well on the campus to provide water for watering landscaping, decorative ponds and waterfalls. It is planning a second well and wants to install a large water tower! (Reference, 2012 DuPage County Zoning Commission Hearings).

I am unaware of any study prepared by the College of DuPage or the Village of Glen Ellyn which is as thorough as the one commissioned by Wheaton in 1997 and released to the public. That, and politics, may be why COD and Glen Ellyn have escaped scrutiny for this problem in recent years. That pattern seems to be repeating. I suspect the City of Wheaton, which authorized the preparation of the 1997 study, probably feels that "no good deed goes unpunished."

How Extensive are COD's the Wetlands?
There have been some questions raised in recent years about the wetlands and lakes in this immediate area.

So what areas are designated "wetlands" in our immediate vicinity?  You can go to the Fish and Wildlife Service, or to the USA National Wetlands Inventory to find out. I've included links at the end of this post.

Here is a current map overlayed with COD's Glen Ellyn campus; this shows the entire campus and Wheaton's Lakes #3 and 4. Not all recent campus construction is shown. For example, the CMC building is not shown. It is located immediately north of the "Freshwater emerging wetland" on the southwest corner of the campus. The light green areas "PEMA" and "PEMC" are "Freshwater Emergent Wetland" and the dark grey areas "PUBGx" are "freshwater ponds"  (clicking on the image will enlarge it):

As you can see in the above, Briarcliffe Lakes #3 and 4 are classified "freshwater ponds" while large areas within the COD campus are classified "freshwater emergent wetland." COD's newly constructed "pond 9" to the immediate north of the "pond 7" area is adjacent to the small "Freshwater Emergent Wetland."

Here are some of the areas of these ponds and wetlands:

• Lake 3 = 4.72 acres freshwater pond
• Lake 4 = 6.15 acres freshwater pond
• COD's Pond 7 area (Note 3) = 7.59 acres emergent wetland
• COD's area near Pond 9 = 0.83 acres emergent wetland
• COD Pond to the East of the M building =  2.92 acres freshwater pond
• COD Ponds immediately east of [Lambert] = 1.76 + 2.7 + 0.38 acres "freshwater ponds"
• COD Wetlands immediately east of [Lambert] and including parking = 10.65 acres "freshwater emergent wetlands"

There are additional wetlands and ponds in the overlay above, as per the USA National Wetlands Inventory.

Initial overtopping at Glen Ellyn - COD Pond #7 on April 18. The overflow in this photo expanded in width, became higher and larger (200 to 400 feet wide?) as it expanded  into Wheaton's Lake #4:

Here are some links for sources. Note that these may require the use of Internet Explorer:

Clicking will open a  New Window> US Fish and Wildlife Service

Clicking will open a  New Window> US National Wetlands Inventory

Clicking will open a  New Window> Illinois Wtlands Polid\cy Act - 1989

Clicking will open a  New Window> Illinois Department of Natural Resources - Wetlands

Clicking will open a  New Window> College of DuPage natural Areas





Notes:

1. The area which drains as well as other aspects of the flooding is described in the post of May 8, 2013. 
2. I read a May 7 article in the Chicago Tribune with the title "Wheaton will fix problem pipe that caused Briarcliffe flooding." I've sent an email to the reporter who authored the article because it contains serious inaccuracies. First, the leaking pipe is not what flooded Briarcliffe. Second, the overtopping of the berms on Pond #7 and Lake #4 is what caused the flooding. Third, the article collapses two separate events. The flooding occurred on April 18. The leak occurred on April 20. I sent photos and a chronology to the reporter. I'll publish that email, etc. here early the morning of April 14.   
3. The area of COD's Pond #7 once had a sign on it. It is the “B.J. Hoddinott Wildlife Sanctuary.” The college acknowledges its existence on its website. Mr. Hoddinott lived in Briarcliffe Lakes Manor Homes and donated funds to the college for the preservation of this area. According the college it is one of four natural areas on the campus “This nine-acre natural area is primarily a marsh and wetland that was dedicated as a preserve in 1983. There are no trails through this area.”


4. Wet meadows are "characterized by moist to saturated soils with standing water present for only brief to moderate periods during the growing season. Vegetation includes a wide variety of herbaceous species, from sedges and rushes to forbs and grasses. Woody vegetation, if present, accounts for less than 30% of the total area cover. Wet meadows were once common through Illinois, but now only small remnants remain. They were often found associated with wetland types, especially at the drier fringes of a lake, pond, or marsh. In some areas, wet meadows are often partially drained and farmed , and therefore lack the vegetation typical of this community. The soils in this community consist of silty and clayey materials in depressional areas. The reaction is typically neutral. The major soils are dominantly wet phases, or undrained phases of Peotone silty clay loam, Rantoul silty clay, Booker clay, Edinburg silty clay loam, Brooklyn silt loam, and Denny silt loam."   Reference: Illinois Department of Natural Resources Wetland Community Descriptions.
5. Ponds are "characterized by the presence of nearly permanent open water a minimum of one-half acre in size to a maximum of 20 acres(8 hectares). Although free of vegetation throughout the non-growing season, floating vascular plants and/or algae often comprise a majority of the vegetation mass during the mid-summer months. Rooted vegetation is generally restricted to the shallows. Bottom sediments consist of mud, sand, cobble, gravel, and organic debris. Many Illinois ponds are man-made and include farm ponds, borrow pits, and small reservoirs, as well as natural open water areas which may occur within a marsh or swamp. The soils of this community consist of silty and loamy materials. Reaction of the materials ranges from strongly acid to moderately alkaline. Typically, ponds are constructed in Ava silt loam, Hosmer silt loam, and Hickory loam in southern Illinois. Some of the larger ponds have Belknap silt loam in the bottom. In central and northern Illinois, the major sloping soils include Fayette silt loam, Miami silt loam, and Morley silt loam. Larger ponds would typically have Lawson silt loam in the bottom." Reference: Illinois Department of Natural Resources Wetland Community Descriptions.