chapter 110. village of westchester annex · 2015-04-16 · 110-1 chapter 110. village of...

110-1

CHAPTER 110. VILLAGE OF WESTCHESTER ANNEX

110.1 HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT

Primary Point of Contact Alternate Point of Contact

Melissa Headley, Hazard Mitigation Officer

Village of Westchester

10300 W Roosevelt Rd

Westchester, IL 60154

Telephone: 708-345-0200, ext. 291

Email Address: [email protected]

Janet Matthys, Village Manager

Village of Westchester

10300 W Roosevelt Rd

Westchester, IL 60154

Telephone: 708-223-3052

Email Address: [email protected]

110.2 JURISDICTION PROFILE

The following is a summary of key information about the jurisdiction and its history:

• Date of Incorporation: 1925

• Current Population: 16,718 as of the 2010 Federal Census

• Population Growth: Westchester’s largest gain in population occurred between 1950 and

1960 as the village grew from 4,308 to 18,092. The current population has been consistent

since the 2000 Federal Census of 16,824.

• Location and Description: The Village of Westchester is a west suburb of Chicago in Cook

County, located 14 miles directly west of Chicago. One of the most attractive features of the

Village is its location. Westchester has access to interstate highways that deem the Village

one of the region’s gateway suburbs to the northwestern Cook County communities. Road

networks provide the Village with easy access to major employment centers, hospitals,

universities, parks, and major airports such as Midway International Airport and O’Hare

International Airport. The Village is a bedroom community being primarily residential in

nature, with housing stock consisting of 5,724 detached single-family homes and 1,278 multi-

family dwelling units. Suburbs adjacent to Westchester include: Bellwood and Hillside to the

north, La Grange Park to the south, Broadview and Hines to the west, Oakbrook Terrace and

Oakbrook to the west. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Westchester has a total land

area of 3.69 square miles.

• Brief History: The 19th Century brought farmers of German heritage to Westchester’s

prairie soil. In 1852, a group of nine settlers purchased forty acres of land at the intersection

of Cermak and Wolf roads. By 1853, they constructed a school building with two rooms, one

of which served as a classroom and the other one a church. Westchester’s German beginnings

were later influenced by English culture when in 1924 the area enticed businessmen who saw

the community’s potential. This group of businessmen led by utilities tycoon Samuel Insull,

born in London, aspired to create a Chicago suburb that would emulate English life and

would become Chicago’s first planned suburb. Samuel Insull and associates purchased

approximately 2,200 acres of farmland in 1924. The planned extension of the Garfield Park

rapid transit line from Chicago made this location ideal for suburban development. They had

a vision for this western suburb situated just 13 miles from Chicago, and planned to have the

“L” (elevated train) to provide speedy service between Chicago’s downtown and the soon-to-

http://encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/500.html


Cook County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan; Volume 2: Planning Partner Annexes

110-2

be western suburb. Several real estate developers directed the construction of paved streets,

sidewalks, sewers, and street lamps, plus the laying of water mains and the planting of

parkway trees. Completion of the rapid transit line to 12th St. (Roosevelt Road) in 1926 and

to 22nd St. (Cermak Road) in 1930 enabled prospective buyers to view properties in

Westchester. By 1929 during the Depression, Westchester was home to less than 400 people

in small housing clusters divided by acres of untouched prairie. By 1940, the population of

Westchester had reached about 620 people housed in approximately 150 buildings. Homes in

Westchester later became occupied by World War II industry workers. Eventually war

veterans and their families settled in Westchester. By the 1950s, Westchester’s population

increased to more than 4,300 residents. With the removal of the rapid transit line and the

building of expressways in the 1950s, transportation in the postwar era shifted its focus.

Westchester’s proximity to the Eisenhower Expressway (Westchester’s northern boundary)

and to the Tri-State toll road (near the village’s western boundary) became increasingly

important to village residents.

• Climate: The climate of Westchester is classified as humid continental, with all four seasons

distinctly represented: wet springs; hot, and often humid summers; pleasant autumns; and

cold winters. The average high temperature is 81 degrees F in July and the average low

temperature is 32 degrees Fahrenheit in January. The average annual temperature is 49.65

degrees Fahrenheit. Annual precipitation is 33.2 inches on average, and reaches its lowest

points in the months of January and February, and peaks in the months of May and June.

• Governing Body Format: The Village operates under a council-manager form of

government as defined by the Illinois Municipal Code. The Village President, Village Clerk,

and six trustees are elected at large to serve four year terms, with three trustees elected every

second year. This body of Government will assume the responsibility for the adoption and

implementation of this plan. The Village Attorney is appointed by the Village President, with

the advice and consent of the Village Board. The Village Manager is hired by the Village

President and Board of Trustees. All Department managers are hired by the Village Manager.

Westchester operates with 5 village departments including: Administration & Finance

Department, Community Development/Building Department, Fire Department, Police

Department, and Public Works Department.

• Development Trends: Westchester is a built-out community with few parcels available for

development. Westchester is predominantly residential in character. Given that the Village

shares its boundaries with the Forest Preserve District of Cook County lands, cemeteries, and

a golf course, there are limited opportunities for annexation and new developments. As such,

the Village’s development focus is on infill development and redevelopment of existing

sites. Infill sites, like those in Westchester, require minimal infrastructure investments, do not

strain municipal services, and have much lower environmental footprint compared to

Greenfield sites, making their redevelopment economically and environmentally beneficial

for municipalities. The Village is currently in the process of updating our comprehensive

plan. The plan will outline the vision of what the community desires to become as well as the

necessary steps it will take to make that vision a reality. The Village has been approached by

developers that seek to develop a senior living facility in the vicinity of the high school and

have indicated that such development would include a request that the Village create a Tax

Increment Financing District to provide an incentive for such development. The Village is

currently reviewing the developer proposals/concepts for redevelopment, including a request

for Tax Increment Financing District incentives. In July 2013, Follett Corporation announced

that it would be relocating its corporate headquarters to Westchester. Follett Corporation was

founded in Wheaton, Illinois in 1873 and is presently a $2.7 billion, privately-held company

providing products services, and solutions to the educational marketplace.




VILLAGE OF WESTCHESTER ANNEX

110-3

110.3 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT

The assessment of the jurisdiction’s legal and regulatory capabilities is presented in Table 110-1. The

assessment of the jurisdiction’s fiscal capabilities is presented in Table 110-2. The assessment of the

jurisdiction’s administrative and technical capabilities is presented in Table 110-3. Information on the

community’s National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) compliance is presented in Table 110-4.

Classifications under various community mitigation programs are presented in Table 110-5.

TABLE 110-1. LEGAL AND REGULATORY CAPABILITY

Local

Authority

State or

Federal

Prohibitions

Other

Jurisdictional

Authority

State

Mandated Comments

Codes, Ordinances & Requirements

Building Code Yes No

No Yes In accordance with Public Act

096-0704, Illinois has adopted

the IBC as its state Building

Code

Ord. 79-942 1979

Please note: We will be

adopting the 2012 International

Codes in 2014

Zonings Yes No No Yes (65 ILCS 5/) Illinois Municipal

Code.

Ord. 64-682 1964

Please note: We will be

updating zoning code in 2014

Subdivisions Yes No No No Ord. 53-406 1953

Stormwater Management No No Yes Yes State regulates industrial activity

from Construction sites 1 acre or

larger under section 402 CWA.

(MWRD)

Post Disaster Recovery No No No No

Real Estate Disclosure No No No Yes (765 ILCS 77/) Residential Real

Property Disclosure Act.)

Growth Management No No No No

Site Plan Review Yes No No No WMC, Title 15, 1979

Public Health and Safety No No Yes No Cook County Board of Health.

Environmental Protection No No No No


110-4

TABLE 110-1. LEGAL AND REGULATORY CAPABILITY

Local

Authority

State or

Federal

Prohibitions

Other

Jurisdictional

Authority

State

Mandated Comments

Planning Documents

General or Comprehensive

Plan

Yes No No No Will adopt Comp Plan update in

January 2014

Is the plan equipped to provide linkage to this mitigation plan? Yes

Floodplain or Basin Plan No No Yes No MWRD

Stormwater Plan No No Yes Regional stormwater impacts

are managed by MWRD. The

Village lies within the Lower

Des Plaines watershed planning

area of MWRD’s

comprehensive Stormwater

Master Planning Program.

Capital Improvement Plan No No No No

What types of capital facilities does the plan address? N/A

How often is the plan revised/updated? N/A

Habitat Conservation Plan No No No No

Economic Development Plan Yes No No Yes Strategic Economic

Development Plan for

Commercial Corridors

(Camiros, 2006)

Shoreline Management Plan No No No No

Response/Recovery Planning

Comprehensive Emergency

Management Plan

Yes No No Yes Village of Westchester

Municipal Emergency

Operation Plan

Threat and Hazard

Identification and Risk

Assessment

No No Yes No Cook County DHSEM

Preparing THIRA

Terrorism Plan Yes No Yes Yes Village of Westchester

Municipal Emergency

Operation Plan

Post-Disaster Recovery Plan Yes No Yes Yes Village of Westchester

Municipal Emergency

Operation Plan

Continuity of Operations Plan Yes No Yes No Village of Westchester

Municipal Emergency

Operation Plan

Public Health Plans No No Yes No Village of Westchester

Municipal Code, Title 8 –

Public Health and Sanitation

Cook County DPH


110-5

TABLE 110-2. FISCAL CAPABILITY

Financial Resources

Accessible or Eligible to

Use?

Community Development Block Grants Yes

Capital Improvements Project Funding Yes

Authority to Levy Taxes for Specific Purposes Yes

User Fees for Water, Sewer, Gas or Electric Service Yes

Incur Debt through General Obligation Bonds Yes

Incur Debt through Special Tax Bonds Yes

Incur Debt through Private Activity Bonds Yes

Withhold Public Expenditures in Hazard-Prone Areas Yes

State Sponsored Grant Programs Yes

Development Impact Fees for Homebuyers or Developers Yes

Other Yes

TABLE 110-3. ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

Staff/Personnel Resources Available? Department/Agency/Position

Planners or engineers with knowledge of land

development and land management practices

Yes Community Development/Village of

Westchester/Director

Public Works/Village of Westchester/Director

Engineers or professionals trained in building or

infrastructure construction practices

Yes Public Works/Village of Westchester/Director

Planners or engineers with an understanding of

natural hazards

Yes Community Development/Village of



Staff with training in benefit/cost analysis Yes Community Development/Village of


Surveyors No

Personnel skilled or trained in GIS applications Yes Cook County GIS Consortium

Scientist familiar with natural hazards in local

area

No

Emergency manager Yes Administration/Village of Westchester/Village

Manager

Grant writers Yes Community Development/Village of



Administration/Village of Westchester/Village

Manager

Fire Department/Westchester Fire Department/Fire

Captain


110-6

TABLE 110-4. NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM COMPLIANCE

What department is responsible for floodplain management in your

jurisdiction?

Community Development

Who is your jurisdiction’s floodplain administrator? (department/position) Director of Community

Development

Are any certified floodplain managers on staff in your jurisdiction? Yes, Director of Public Works

What is the date of adoption of your flood damage prevention ordinance? 2005 (Ord. 05-1668)

When was the most recent Community Assistance Visit or Community

Assistance Contact?

2011

Does your jurisdiction have any outstanding NFIP compliance violations that

need to be addressed? If so, please state what they are.

No

Do your flood hazard maps adequately address the flood risk within your

jurisdiction? (If no, please state why)

Yes

Does your floodplain management staff need any assistance or training to

support its floodplain management program? If so, what type of

assistance/training is needed?

No

Does your jurisdiction participate in the Community Rating System (CRS)? If

so, is your jurisdiction seeking to improve its CRS Classification? If not, is

your jurisdiction interested in joining the CRS program?

Yes we participate. Yes, we’d

like to improve our

classification.

TABLE 110-5. COMMUNITY CLASSIFICATIONS

Participating? Classification Date Classified

Community Rating System Yes 8 October 2012

Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule Yes Unknown Unknown

Public Protection/ISO Yes Unknown --

StormReady Yes Gold (countywide) 2014

Tree City USA No N/A N/A


110-7

110.4 JURISDICTION-SPECIFIC NATURAL HAZARD EVENT HISTORY

Table 110-6 lists all past occurrences of natural hazards within the jurisdiction. Repetitive flood loss

records are as follows:

• Number of FEMA-Identified Repetitive Loss Properties: Approximately 97

• Number of FEMA-Identified Severe Repetitive Loss Properties: 1

• Number of Repetitive Flood Loss/Severe Repetitive Loss Properties That Have Been

Mitigated: 1

TABLE 110-6. NATURAL HAZARD EVENTS

Type of Event FEMA Disaster # (if applicable) Date Preliminary Damage Assessment

Flooding Federal 1935 July 23—24, 2010 Flooding in streets and homes

Flooding None June 18, 2010 House damage, trees uprooted

Flooding Federal 1800 October 2008 Flooding in streets and homes

Flooding Federal 1729 September 2007 Flooding in streets and homes

Flooding FEMA 1188 September 1997 Flooding and minor damage

Flooding FEMA 1129-DR July 1996 Flooding and minor damage

Flooding FEMA 997-DR July 1993 Flooding and minor damage

Flooding FEMA 776-DR August 1987 Flooding and minor damage

Flooding FEMA 643-DR October 1986 Flooding and minor damage

Flooding FDAA 3068-EM June 1981 Flooding and minor damage

Flooding FDAA 583-DR June 1976 Flooding and minor damage

Flooding OEP 373-DR April 1973 Flooding and minor damage

Flooding OEP 351-DR September 1972 Flooding and minor damage

Flooding OEP 227-DR April 1967 Flooding and minor damage

Severe Thunderstorm/

Microburst

None June 18, 2010 House damage, trees uprooted

Severe Thunderstorm Federal 1800 October 2008 Flooding in streets and homes

Severe Thunderstorm Federal 1729 September 2007 Flooding in streets and homes

Severe Thunderstorm FEMA 1188 September 1997 Flooding and minor damage

Severe Thunderstorm FEMA 1129-DR July 1996 Flooding and minor damage

Severe Thunderstorm FEMA 997-DR July 1993 Flooding and minor damage

Severe Thunderstorm FEMA 776-DR August 1987 Flooding and minor damage

Severe Thunderstorm FEMA 643-DR October 1986 Flooding and minor damage

Severe Thunderstorm FDAA 3068-EM June 1981 Flooding and minor damage

Severe Thunderstorm FDAA 583-DR June 1976 Flooding and minor damage


110-8

TABLE 110-6. NATURAL HAZARD EVENTS

Type of Event FEMA Disaster # (if applicable) Date Preliminary Damage Assessment

Severe Thunderstorm OEP 373-DR April 1973 Flooding and minor damage

Severe Thunderstorm OEP 351-DR September 1972 Flooding and minor damage

Severe Thunderstorm OEP 227-DR April 1967 Flooding and minor damage

Earthquake Town of Tamms, felt 10 miles

away

09/14/65 Minor—Cracks in chimneys and

pilaster

Earthquake Cottage Grove Fault in Southern

Illinois Basin. Felt in 23 states

and over 580,000 square miles.

11/09/68 Moderate—Windows broken,

Chimneys toppled, foundations

cracked, walls cracked.

Earthquake Amboy Illinois. Felt in seven

surrounding states.


pilaster

Earthquake Wabash County. Felt in nine

states.


pilaster

Earthquake Saline County in Southern

Illinois


pilaster

Earthquake McHenry county 01/31/12 Little or none

110.5 HAZARD RISK RANKING

Table 110-7 presents the ranking of the hazards of concern. Hazard area extent and location maps are

included at the end of this chapter. These maps are based on the best available data at the time of the

preparation of this plan, and are considered to be adequate for planning purposes.

TABLE 110-7. HAZARD RISK RANKING

Rank Hazard Type Risk Rating Score (Probability x Impact)

1 Flood 30

2 Severe Weather 21

3 Severe Winter Weather 15

4 Tornado 36

5 Earthquake 12

6 Drought 4

7 Dam Failure 0

Note: The ranking of hazards was subjectively changed based on past experience.


110-9

110.6 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN AND EVALUATION OF RECOMMENDED ACTIONS

Table 110-8 lists the actions that make up the jurisdiction’s hazard mitigation plan. Table 110-9 identifies

the priority for each action. Table 110-10 summarizes the mitigation actions by hazard of concern and the

six mitigation types. This community had a prior approved hazard mitigation plan, and Table 110-11

reviews the status of actions recommended in that previous plan.

TABLE 110-8. HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN MATRIX

Applies to

New or

Existing

Assets

Hazards

Mitigated

Objectives

Met

Lead

Agencies Estimated

Cost

Sources of

Funding Timelinea

Included

in

Previous

Plan?

Action W1.1—Improve capacity of village drainage system (i.e., Expand Mayfair reservoir)

Existing Flood, Severe

Weather

1,2,9 Community

Development

High General

Revenues,

Grants,

MWRD

Short-term,

Ongoing

Yes

Action W1.2—Continue the implementation of the Rain Barrel program in partnership with MWRD

New and

Existing

Flooding, Severe

Weather

2,7,9 Village of

Westchester,

MWRD

Low General

Revenues

Short-term,

Ongoing

Yes

Action W1.3—Continue the implementation of the Street sweeping and leaf bag programs

New and

Existing

Flooding, Severe

Weather, Severe

Winter Weather

1,2 Public Works,

Village Board

Low General

Revenues

Short-term,

Ongoing

Yes

Action W1.4—Maintain and active role in the Addison Creek Restoration Commission Act, the purpose of which

is to relocate a retention pond in the Village of Broadview. This retention pond will have water flows form the

member local governments, which include the Village of Westchester.

New and

Existing

Flooding, Severe

Weather

1,2,9 Village

President

Medium General

Revenues

Short-term,

Ongoing

Yes

Action W1.5—Implement, maintain and update programs for drainage systems including but not limited to:

• Drainage system investigation

• Preventative maintenance program for drainage systems

• New Storm drainage systems

• Drainage system retrofits

• Administration of an overhead sewer program

New and

Existing

Flooding, Severe

Weather

1,2,9 Public works Low General

Revenues

Short-term,

Ongoing

Yes

Action W1.6—Continue the ongoing implementation of training, education and outreach programs to reach all

citizens regarding potential risks from natural hazards and ways to mitigate their impacts.

New and

Existing

All hazards 6,8,11 Mitigation

Officer

Low General

Revenues,

Grants

Short-term,

ongoing

Yes


110-10


Applies to

New or

Existing

Assets

Hazards

Mitigated

Objectives

Met

Lead

Agencies Estimated

Cost

Sources of

Funding Timelinea

Included

in

Previous

Plan?

Action W1.7—Maintain good standing under the National Flood Insurance Program by implementing programs

that meet or exceed the minimum NFIP requirements. Such programs include enforcing an adopted flood damage

prevention ordinance, participating in floodplain mapping updates, and providing public assistance and information

on floodplain requirements and impacts.

New and

existing

Flooding 4, 6, 9 Community

Development

Low General

Revenues

Short-term

and

ongoing

No

Action W1.8—Protect properties and critical facilities and infrastructure from damage from natural hazards.

New and

Existing

All Hazards 1,2,7 Public Works High General

Revenues,

FEMA Grants

Long-Term No

Action W1.9—Create a center where residents can go in case of extreme heat or cold and not worry about power

outages.

New and

Existing

Severe Weather,

Severe Winter

Weather

8,12 Village

Board/

Finance Dept.

$200,000,

High

General

Revenues,

Grants

Long term No

Action W1.10—Integrate the hazard mitigation plan into other plans, programs, or resources that dictate land use

or redevelopment.

New and

existing

All 3, 4, 6, 10,

13

Community

Development

Low General

Revenues

Short-term No

Action W1.11—Where feasible, implement a program to record high water marks following high-water events.

New and

existing

Flooding, Severe

Weather

3, 6, 9 Village Medium General

Revenues;

FEMA Grant

Funds (Public

Assistance)

Long-term No

Action W1.12—Continue to maintain/enhance the Village’s classification under the Community Rating System

(CRS) program

New and

existing

Flood 3, 4, 5, 6,

7, 9,

10,11, 13

Village Low General

Revenues

Long-term No


110-11


Applies to

New or

Existing

Assets

Hazards

Mitigated

Objectives

Met

Lead

Agencies Estimated

Cost

Sources of

Funding Timelinea

Included

in

Previous

Plan?

Action W1.13—Continue to support the countywide actions identified in this plan.

New and

existing

All All Village Low General

Revenues

Short- and

long-term

No

Action W1.14—Actively participate in the plan maintenance strategy identified in this plan.

New and

existing

All 3, 4, 6 DHSEM,

Village

Low General

Revenues

Short-term No

a. Ongoing indicates continuation of an action that is already in place. Short-term indicates implementation

within five years. Long-term indicates implementation after five years.

TABLE 110-9. MITIGATION STRATEGY PRIORITY SCHEDULE

Action

# of

Objectives

Met Benefits Costs

Do Benefits

Equal or

Exceed Costs?

Is Project

Grant-

Eligible?

Can Project Be Funded

Under Existing

Programs/ Budgets? Prioritya

1 3 High High Yes Yes Yes High

2 3 Medium Low Yes No Yes High


4 3 Medium Medium Yes No Yes High

5 3 High Low Yes Yes Yes High

6 3 Low Low Yes No Yes High


8 3 High High Yes Yes No Medium

9 2 High High Yes Yes No Medium


11 3 Medium Medium Yes Yes No Medium



14 3 Low Low Yes Yes Yes High

a. See Chapter 1 for explanation of priorities.


110-12

TABLE 110-10. ANALYSIS OF MITIGATION ACTIONS

Action Addressing Hazard, by Mitigation Typea

Hazard Type 1. Prevention

2. Property

Protection

3. Public

Education and

Awareness

4. Natural

Resource

Protection

5.

Emergency

Services

6.

Structural

Projects

Dam Failure N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Drought 10, 15 8 6, 13 13

Earthquake 10, 15 8 6, 13 13

Flood 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 12, 14 7, 8, 12 6, 7, 12, 13 7, 13 7, 12, 13 1, 5, 12

Severe Weather 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, 14 8 6, 13 9, 13 1, 5

Severe Winter

Weather

3, 10, 14 8 6, 13 9, 13

Tornado 10, 14 8 6, 13 9, 13

a. See Chapter 1 for explanation of mitigation types.

TABLE 110-11. PREVIOUS ACTION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION STATUS

Action Status

Action Completed

Carry Over

to Plan

Update

Removed;

No Longer

Feasible Comments

A Expand Mayfair reservoir-Now W1.1

B Review Sanitation/Storm lines where streets are being replaced-

Now W1.5

C Rain Barrel program-Now W1.2

D Overhead Sewer program- Now W1.5

E Scope Sanitation Storm Lines-Now W1.5

F Preventive Maintenance (PM) program for Sewer/Sanitation lines-

Now W1.5

G Street Sweeping and Leaf Bag Program- Now W1.3

H Continue investing in sewer/sanitation line infrastructure- Now

W1.5

I Appoint a Mitigation Office-Completed

J Addison Creek restoration Commission Act- Now W1.4

K Public Outreach – Flood Mitigation Education- Now action W1.6

L Implement Homeowners Insurance Program

M Constructing/Renovation in the Flood Plain- This is now addressed

by actions: W1.6 and W1.7


110-13

110.7 FUTURE NEEDS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND RISK/ VULNERABILITY

No needs have been identified at this time.

110.8 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

The Village has not experienced damage from tornadoes, although the formula rates the risk of tornado

damage higher than flooding and severe weather. The Village has presented flooding as its highest risk

due to repetitive flooding and recurring damage to property. We have also incurred damage related to

severe weather and this has been ranked higher than tornadoes due to actual damage experience.

HAZUS-MH RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS FOR WESTCHESTER

Cook County Hazard Mitigation Plan; Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes

WESTCHESTER EXISTING CONDITIONS

2010 Population ......................................................................... 16,718

Total Assessed Value of Structures and Contents ..................... $4,982,137,262

Area in 100-Year Floodplain ..................................................... 279.45 acres

Area in 500-Year Floodplain ..................................................... 524.81 acres

Number of Critical Facilities ..................................................... 31

HAZARD EXPOSURE IN WESTCHESTER

Number Exposed Value Exposed to Hazard % of Total

Assessed Value

Population Buildings Structure Contents Total Exposed

Dam Failure

Buffalo Creek 0 0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

U. Salt Cr. #2 0 0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

Touhy 0 0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

U. Salt Cr. #3 0 0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

U. Salt Cr. #4 0 0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

Flood

100-Year 2,282 702 $423,740,116 $366,027,287 $789,767,403 15.85%

500-Year 5,103 1,570 $700,026,413 $541,663,462 $1,241,689,875 24.92%

Tornado

100-Year — — $866,779,071 $613,854,646 $1,480,633,718 29.72%

500-Year — — $1,415,032,874 $989,051,440 $2,404,084,314 48.25%

ESTIMATED PROPERTY DAMAGE VALUES IN WESTCHESTER

Estimated Damage Associated with Hazard % of Total

Assessed Value

Building Contents Total Damaged

Dam Failure

Buffalo Creek $0 $0 $0 0.00%

U. Salt Cr. #2 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

Touhy $0 $0 $0 0.00%

U. Salt Cr. #3 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

U. Salt Cr. #4 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

Earthquake

1909 Historical Event $36,298,082 $9,999,611 $46,297,692 0.93%

Flood

10-Year $12,314,622 $32,210,676 $44,525,297 0.89%

100-Year $59,841,011 $131,445,967 $191,286,978 3.84%

500-Year $84,435,343 $159,515,836 $243,951,180 4.90%

Tornado

100-Year $86,677,907 $61,385,465 $148,063,372 2.97%

500-Year $206,594,800 $144,401,510 $350,996,310 7.05%

HAZARD MAPPING FOR WESTCHESTER

^

kj

kj

kj

kj

kj

kj

kj

kj

kj

kj

kj

åÙ

åÙ

åÙ

åÙ

åÙ

åÙ

åÙ

åÙ

åÙ

åÙ

åÙ åÙåÙ

åÙ

åÙ

åÙ

åÙ

åÙ

åÙ

åÙ

po

po

po

po

c_

c_

c_

c_

c_

c_

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ"X

"X

ú

ú

ú

úú

ú

ú ú ú

ú

úú

úú

ú ú

úú

ú

ú

ú

ú

ú

ú

ú

ú

ú

úú

ú

úú

ú

ú

ú

ú

úú

úú

úú

úú

úú

úú

úú

ú

úúúú

úúú

ú

ú

ú

ú

%defgc%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc

%defgc%defgc

¬«

¬«

¬«

¬«

¬«

¬«

¬«

¬«¬«

¬«

¬«

"O$"O$

"O$

"O$

"O$

"O$

"O$

"O$

"O$

¥v¤

h

h

h

S A LTCREEK

ADDISON CREEK

£¤12

¬«38

§̈¦88

§̈¦290

MANNHEIM RD

ROOSEVELT RD

CERMAK RD

S 25TH AVE

WOLF RD

31ST ST

S WOLF RD

NLA GRANGERD

EISENHOWER EXPY

.

o Airport Facilityh Bus Facility

¥v¤ Dams

"O$ Emergency Operations Center

¬« Fire Station Facility

%defgc Hazardous Materialsú Highway Bridge

89:i Light Rail Bridge

"X Light Rail Facility

Ñ Medical Care Facility

¥K¢ Military

!5 Oil Facility

c_ Police Station Facility

Î Port Facility

po Potable Water Facility

"X Rail Facility

89:i Railway Bridge

åÙ School Facility

kj Other Facility

0 0.25 0.5Miles

VILLAGE OFWESTCHESTER

Base Map Data Sources:Cook County, U.S. Geological Survey

Critical Facililties

mlewis

Placed Image

mlewis

Placed Image

^

S A LTCREEK

ADDISON CREEK

£¤12

¬«38

§̈¦88 §̈¦290

MANNHEIM RD

E 31ST ST

ROOSEVELT RD

KEMMAN AVE

CERMAK RD

S 25TH AVE

WOLF RD

31ST ST

S WOLF RD

S MANNHEIM RD

NLA GRANGERD

EAST-WEST TLWY

EISENHOWER EXPY

.

I (Not Felt)II-III (Weak)IV (Light)V (Moderate)VI (Strong)VII (Very Strong)VIII (Severe)IX (Violent)X+ (Extreme)

0 0.25 0.5Miles



Modified Mercalli Intensity

Event Date of May 26, 1909. Originalmagnitude of 5.0; increased magnitude foranalysis of 6.0. Depth: 10 km. EpicenterLat/Long: 41.6N 88.1WAn Epicenter Map is derived from a databaseof historical earthquakes developed from threesources (Composite Earthquake Catalog,2002, Earthquake Data Base, 2002, andEarthquake Seismicity Catalog, 1996). Thedatabase has been sorted to remove historicalearthquakes with magnitudes less than 5.0.The Epicenter Map is based on a historicalearthquake epicenter, selected from thedatabase.

Illinois Historical1909 Earthquake

mlewis

Placed Image

mlewis

Placed Image

^

National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP)

Soil Classification

S A LTCREEK

ADDISON CREEK

¬«38

£¤12

MANNHEIM RD

E 31ST ST

ROOSEVELT RD

KEMMAN AVES 25TH AVE

WOLF RD

31ST ST

S WOLF RD

S MANNHEIM RD

NLA GRANGERD

EAST-WEST TLWYEISENHOWER EXPY

.

Soil classification data provided by the IllinoisState Geological Society.The procedures outlined in the NEHRPprovisions (Building Seismic Safety Council,2004) and the 2003 International BuildingCodes (International Code Council, 2002)were followed to produce the soil site classmaps. Central U.S. Earthquake Consortium(CUSEC) State Geologists used the entirecolumn of soil material down to bedrock anddid not include any bedrock in the calculationof the average shear wave velocity for thecolumn, since it is the soil column and thedifference in shear wave velocity of the soils incomparison to the bedrock which influencesmuch of the amplification.

Site ClassA - Hard RockB - RockC - Very Dense Soil, Soft RockD - Stiff SoilE - Soft SoilF - Site-Specifc Evaluation

0 0.25 0.5Miles



mlewis

Placed Image

mlewis

Placed Image

^SALTCREEK

ADDISON CREEK

£¤12

¬«38

§̈¦88

§̈¦290

MANNHEIM RD

ROOSEVELT RD

CERMAK RD

S 25TH AVE

WOLF RD

31ST ST

S WOLF RD

NLA GRANGERD

EISENHOWER EXPY

.0 0.25 0.5Miles



FEMA DFIRMFlood Hazard Areas

Flood hazard areas as depicted on FEMADigital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRM).The 1 percent annual flood hazard iscommonly referred to as the 100 yearfloodplain.

Floodway1 Percent Annual Flood HazardFlood Depth20 ft

-1 ft

mlewis

Placed Image

mlewis

Placed Image

^

Liquefaction Susceptibility

S A LTCREEK

ADDISON CREEK

§̈¦88§̈¦290

¬«38

£¤12

MANNHEIM RD

E 31ST ST

ROOSEVELT RD

KEMMAN AVE

CERMAK RD

S 25TH AVE

WOLF RD

31ST ST

S WOLF RD

S MANNHEIM RD

NLA GRANGERD

EAST-WEST TLWY

EISENHOWER EXPY

.

Liquefaction data provided by the Illinois StateGeological Society. Liquefaction data basedon the Youd and Perkins (1978) method.A liquefaction susceptibility map provides anestimate of the likelihood that soil will liquefyas a result of earthquake shaking. This type ofmap depicts the relative susceptibility in arange that varies from very low to high. Areasunderlain by bedrock or peat are mappedseparately as these earth materials are notliquefiable, although peat deposits may besubject to permanent ground deformationcaused by earthquake shaking.

SusceptibleHighModerate to HighModerateLow to ModerateLowVery Low to LowVery Low

Not SusceptibleBedrockPeatWaterIce

0 0.25 0.5Miles



mlewis

Placed Image

mlewis

Placed Image

^

S A LTCREEK

ADDISON CREEK

§̈¦88

§̈¦290

¬«38

£¤12

MANNHEIM RD

ROOSEVELT RD

CERMAK RD

S 25TH AVE

WOLF RD

31ST ST

S WOLF RD

.0 0.25 0.5Miles


100-Year Modeled Tornado Event (F4)

500-Year Modeled Tornado Event (F5)

The 100- and 500-year events have beenmodeled based on fifty-nine years of tornadodata for Cook County. The wind speeds,widths, lengths, and direction for each eventwere developed using existing historicaltornado data. The simulated storms and theircorresponding losses within this jurisdictionwere used to determine the 100- and 500-yeareconomic loss event.

100- and 500-YearTornado Events


mlewis

Placed Image

mlewis

Placed Image