Back in July, inches of sewage built up in the basement of northeast Oak Parker Zerrin Bulut. The water backed up from the sewer — this after her family had just spent thousands to install a sump pump after heavy rains flooded her basement in 2010. Her insurance is loathe to make another payout to fix the damage, and Bulut said it may cost another $6,000 to install an overhead sewer system to prevent further damage.
She, along with a handful of Oak Parkers who started a Facebook group related to flooding, want the village to institute a cost-sharing program to help residents install such systems. Bulut thinks there will be “repercussions” if the village does nothing.
“People will leave, frankly,” she said. “Nobody is going to be able to afford to live here, and who would want to live in a city or a village where you’re not going to have any support from the government of city officials? I hope that’s not the case.”
Months after a “50-year storm” in July dropped 4.3 inches of rain on Oak Park, village trustees are set to discuss a possible cost-sharing program on March 1. Some $350,000 has been budgeted this year to go toward possible remedies, similar to ones offered by Elmhurst, River Forest and Elmwood Park.
The finance committee of the village board took a first look last week at a rough draft of Oak Park’s “sewer protection program.” According to the early version, village hall could split costs with residents, 50-50, for flood prevention devices up to $5,000 or 50 homes. An alternative option suggested would cover up to $1,500 and serve 166 homes.
At least 163 residences experienced basement flooding in July, according to village estimates, many in the northeast corner of Oak Park, where the ground level is lower.
Public Works Director John Wielebnicki told village trustees last week that some 50 homeowners went ahead last year and installed flood-prevention devices. Whether Oak Park wants to apply such a program to already-made upgrades is up for discussion in March, he added.
Oak Park is strongly urging overhead sewer systems, which elevate the sewer above the level of the basement floor, as the best solution, according to the draft program, but would also cover options such as backflow prevention valves. Other related repairs, such as removing and replacing basement walls, would not be eligible for coverage.
The additional $100,000 of the budgeted funds, meanwhile, would go toward starting to remodel the village’s sewers. Oak Park is also eyeing efforts to encourage residents to disconnect their downspouts to help avoid basement flooding.
At last week’s meeting, Village President David Pope and Trustee John Hedges expressed some hesitation about implementing such a program. They questioned whether all Oak Park taxpayers should pay for upgrades to the basements of a select few.
“I understand the need for it, but I just don’t know if it’s something that’s our responsibility,” Hedges said.
Oak Park sewers are only built to withstand a 10-year storm, according to Village Engineer Jim Budrick. But the area has seen the most rain since 1987 recently, including a 100-year storm in 2010, along with last year’s downpour.
It would be extraordinarily costly to build sewers to absorb such rare rain events, he said, and perhaps impossible because of the sheer space such a larger system might need.
For that reason, Village Trustee Bob Tucker said last week that he would support a cost-sharing program similar to the ones in Glen Ellyn or Wheaton, which cover $2,500 and $3,000 respectively. Spending $250,000 on it would be much cheaper than beefing up the sewers.
“When we’re talking about this in terms of saving money, compared to the more drastic measures, this is a cost savings. That’s where I’m leaning with this,” he said.
Jeff Danielski, 40, saw 8 inches of water accumulate in his basement last July. He installed an overhead sewer system last week, at a cost of $9,000, and his insurance is also unwilling to pay for it.
He thinks Oak Park would send a “terrible” message to residents by doing nothing and wonders if flood victims would pursue legal action to force the village to do something.
“The other villages and municipalities that have established cost-sharing programs do it out of goodwill toward their residents,” Danielski said. “And if that’s not the case in Oak Park, then we would need to find another motivator to get the village to help us out.”