The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About6. NEW BUSINESS 02/06/2007 MEMORANDUM Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: DIRECTOR OF COMMuNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: JANUARY 31, 2007 SUBJECT: PZ-O 1-07 - CONDITIONAL USE (CIRCULAR DRIVEWAY) 1429 WIGWAM TRAIL IHOR HUTNYK - APPLICANT The Planning & Zoning Commission transmits their recommendation to appJ:ove Case PZ-01-07, a to' construct a circular driveway in the front yard, as described in detail in the attached staff report. The Planning & Zoning Commission heard the request at their January 25,2007 meeting. The Subject Property is located on an interior lot between South Busse Road and Ojibwa Trail. The Subject Property is zoned RX Single Family Residence and is bordered by single-family zoning districts on all sides. This neighborhood does not have sidewalks or curb and gutter, and the street pavement width is 20-feet, which is 8- feet less than the current code requirement of 28 feet. The Petitioner is currently constructing a first and second floor addition and related site improvements that meet Village Code requirements. However, the proposed circular driveway requires Conditional Use approval (Sec. 14.2215.A.1). The proposed circular driveway measures 12-feet wide and would connect to a 'standard' 25' wide driveway. The attached site plan shows that the proposed driveway configuration will be constructed of asphalt and would cover 34.5% of the front yard. The Planning & Zoning Commission discussed the request at their January meeting. The Commission verified with Staff that the proposed circular driveway met the three conditions specified in the Zoning Ordinance for circular driveways (14.2215.A): 1) the circular drive portion of the driveway shall have a minimum turning radius of fifteen feet (15'); 2) the circular drive portion of the driveway shall have a minimum width of twelve feet (12'); and the lot width was seventy five feet (75') or greater. Staff confirmed that all minimum regulations were met. The Commission asked if the Petitioner had considered a turn-around versus the circular drive. The Petitioner stated that adding a turn around would require the removal of several mature trees. They selected the circular drive design to preserve the mature trees on the lot. The Commission indicated that they support the request, but that only with the condition prohibiting overnight parking on the circular drive. The Planning & Zoning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend that the Village Board approve the Conditional Use permit for a circular driveway for the residence at 1429 Wigwam Trail, Case No. PZ-01-07, with the condition that overnight parking is prohibited on the circular driveway. Please forward this memorandum and attachments to the Village Board for their review and consideration at their February 6, 2007 meeting. Staff will be present to answer any questions related to this matter. U ,(,. f ,f'J"'lC' . " ....' ~ '.' . ,11- ,l'j Iii' William ,Cooney, Jr. t MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-OI-07 Hearing Date: January 25,2007 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1429 Wigwam Trail PETITIONER: Thor Hutnyk PUBLICATION DATE: January 10,2007 PIN NUMBERS: 08-11-300-029-0000 REQUEST: Conditional Use - Circular Driveway MEMBERS PRESENT: Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Marlys Haaland Ronald Roberts Richard Rogers Keith Youngquist STAFF MEMBER PRESENT: Jason Zawila, Long Range Planner INTERESTED PARTIES: Thor and Zdyrana Hutnyk, Andrzej Zieba Chairperson Arlene Juracek called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Richard Rogers moved to approve the minutes of the December 14,2006 meeting and Joseph Donnelly seconded the motion. The motion was approved 7-0. Marlys Haaland made a motion to continue Cases PZ-30-06 and PZ-02-07 to the February 22,2007 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting. Keith Youngquist seconded the motion. The motion was approved 7-0. Chairperson Juracek introduced Case PZ-01-07, a request for a Conditional Use at 1429 Wigwam Trail, at 7:35 p.m. Jason Zawila, Long Range Planner, stated the Subject Property is located on an interior lot between South Busse Road and Ojibwa Trail. The Subject Property is zoned RX Single Family Residence and is bordered by single- family zoning districts on all sides. He said this neighborhood does not have sidewalks or curb and gutter, and the street pavement width is 20-feet, which is 8-feet less than the current code requirement of 28 feet. The Subject Property is drained by a ditch and culvert system. Mr. Zawila said the Petitioner is currently constructing a first and second floor addition and related site improvements that meet Village Code requirements. However, the proposed circular driveway requires Conditional Use approval. He stated that the proposed circular driveway measures 12-feet wide and would connect to a 'standard' 25-foot wide driveway. He showed a site plan showing that the proposed driveway configuration will be constructed of asphalt and would cover 34.5% of the front yard. He then showed a table comparing the Petitioner's proposal to the bulk requirements of the RX Single Family Residence district. Mr. Zawila stated the standards for Conditional Uses are listed in Section 14.203.F.8 of the Village Zoning Ordinance. He said the circular drive is listed as a Conditional Use in Section 14.803.A of the Zoning Ordinance. He then summarized the specific findings that must be made in order to approve a Conditional Use. Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting January 25,2007 PZ-O 1-07 Page 2 Mr. Zawila said it has been previous Village policy to support requests for circular driveways when the Subject Property fronts on an arterial street and/or the traffic volume is such that a circular driveway is necessary to resolve a safety conflict. However, recognizing that circular driveways are not always requested for a safety issue, but as part of a larger improvement project for a residential property, Ordinance 5547, passed on February ih, 2006, set forth minimum requirements for circular driveways. He stated that this ordinance limits consideration of Conditional Use approval for circular driveways to lots that measure seventy five feet or greater. He stated that applicable zoning and the additional minimum requirements of; the circular drive portion of the driveway shall have a minimum turning radius of fifteen feet; and the circular drive portion of the driveway shall have a minimum width of twelve feet must also be met in order for consideration of Conditional Use approval. Mr. Zawila stated that the Petitioner's submittal for the circular drive portion of the driveway measures twelve feet wide with a minimum turning radius of fifteen feet. The project scope results in 34.5% front yard lot coverage. He said a circular driveway is also located at 1403 Wigwam Trail, immediately across from the Subject Property. This driveway was installed when the property was originally developed, possibly under County regulations, or before the Village required Conditional Use approval. Mr. Zawila said the proposed circular driveway will not be harmful to the neighborhood character, does not violate the Conditional Use standards contained in Section l4.203.F.8 of the Zoning Ordinance, and will meet the minimum requirements listed for circular driveways. Based on this analysis, Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the following motion: "To approve a Conditional Use permit for a circular driveway for the residence at 1429 Wigwam Trail, Case Number PZ-Ol-07." Mr. Zawila stated that the Village Board's decision is final for this case. Chairperson Juracek verified the three conditions for approval are the 12-foot width, the IS-foot turn radius and the 75-foot lot width requirement. Mr. Zawila confinned that is true. Mr. Donnelly stated the home across the street, with the circular driveway, appears to be new construction. He asked if there had been a zoning case for that circular drive. Mr. Zawila stated if an existing circular drive was replaced, that is permitted by Village Code as long is it did not exceed lot coverage or create an additional non- conformity. Chairperson Juracek stated that she drove past the subject property today and it seems that the location map does not match existing conditions. She stated Wigwam Trail is a dead-end and the location map appears as if Ojibwa and Wigwam intersect. Mr. Zawila confirmed that Wigwam Trail does dead-end. Mr. Donnelly asked if there were any plans to widen Wigwam Trail from 20-feet to 28-feet. Mr. Zawila said he would have to defer to the Village Engineer, however there was no mention of road widening in the Engineering review. There was general discussion regarding on-street parking in the neighborhood. Chairperson Juracek asked if the Village Traffic Engineer reviewed this project. Mr. Zawila confirmed that the Traffic Engineer did review and sign-off on this project. There were no additional questions for Staff. Chairperson Juracek swore in Petitioner Zdryana Hutnyk, 1429 Wigwam Trail, Mount Prospect, Illinois and Contractor Andrzej Zieba, 8915 S. Normandy, Burbank, Illinois. Mr. Zieba stated the Petitioners are requesting the circular drive due to the narrow width of the street. He stated that Wigwam Trail is very narrow and the Subject Property is located close to the cul-de-sac, making vehicle movement difficult. He said that the addition Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting January 25,2007 PZ-OI-07 Page 3 of the circular drive will ease vehicle movement. Mrs. Hutnyk stated the home across the street has a circular drive and it appears to make vehicle turns and exiting the property much easier. Mr. Donnelly said the architectural drawings show a sidewalk, however the Staff report indicates there are no sidewalks in the neighborhood. Mr. Zieba stated there will not be a sidewalk. Mr. Donnelly asked if the Petitioner had considered a turn-around versus the circular drive. Mr. Zieba stated that adding a turn around would require the removal of several mature trees. They selected the circular drive design to preserve the mature trees on the lot. Mr. Donnelly asked that the Petitioner not allow overnight parking on the circular drive. Mr. Zieba said the circular drive will not be wide enough to provide parking and allow for vehicle movement, so there would not be any overnight parking. Chairperson Juracek called for additional questions. Hearing none, the public hearing was closed at 7:50 p.m. Joseph Donnelly made a motion to approve Case PZ-Ol-07 a Conditional Use for a circular driveway at 1429 Wigwam Trail, as presented by Staff, with the additional condition that no overnight parking be allowed on the circular portion of the driveway. Leo Floros seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Donnelly, Floros, Haaland, Roberts, Rogers, Youngquist, Juracek NAYS: None Motion was approved 7-0. Joseph Donnelly made a motion to adjourn at 7:52 p.m., seconded by Marlys Haaland. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Stacey Dunn, Community Development Administrative Assistant H:\PL.<\N\PJalllling & Zoning COMM\P&Z 2007\lvlilllllcs\PZ-Ol-07 1429 Wi.~'walll.doc Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department CASE SUMMARY - PZ-OI-07 LOCATION: PETITIONER: OWNERS: PARCEL#: LOT SIZE: ZONING: LAND USE: REQUEST: 1429 Wigwam Trail Thor Hutnyk Thor Hutnyk 08-11-300-029-0000 0.46 acres (19,906.92 square feet) RX Single Family Residence Single Family Residential Conditional Use - Circular Driveway LOCATION MAP '7 "9 WIGWAM TRL (fl o:i c: (II '" m ;0 .0 ,iZi MEMORANDUM Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department TO: MOUNT PROSPECT PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ARLENEJURACEK,CHAIRPERSON FROM: JASON R. ZA WILA, LONG RANGE PLANNER DATE: JANUARY 18, 2007 HEARING DATE: JANUARY 25,2007 SUBJECT: PZ-01-07 - CONDITIONAL USE (CIRCULAR DRIVE) 1429 WIGWAM TRAIL (HUTNYK RESIDENCE) BACKGROUND A public hearing has been scheduled for the January 25,2007 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting to review the application by Ihor Hutnyk (the "Petitioner") regarding the property located at 1429 Wigwam Trail (the "Subject Property"). The Petitioner has requested Conditional Use approval to allow the construction of a new circular driveway. The P&Z hearing was properly noticed in the January 10, 2007 edition of the Journal Topics Newspaper. In addition, Staff has completed the required written notice to property owners within 250-feet and posted a Public Hearing sign on the Subject Property. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The Subject Property is located on an interior lot between South Busse Road and Ojibwa Trail. The Subject Property is zoned RX Single Family Residence and is bordered by single-family zoning districts on all sides. This neighborhood does not have sidewalks or curb and gutter, and the street pavement width is 20-feet, which is 8- feet less than the current code requirement of 28 feet. The Subject Property is drained by a ditch and culvert system. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL The Petitioner is currently constructing a first and second floor addition and related site improvements that meet Village Code requirements. However, the proposed circular driveway requires Conditional Use approval (Sec. 14.2215.A.I). The proposed circular driveway measures 12-feet wide and would connect to a 'standard' 25' wide driveway. The attached site plan shows that the proposed driveway configuration will be constructed of asphalt and would cover 34.5% of the front yard. GENERAL ZONING COMPLIANCE The Petitioner is in the process of constructing a first and second floor addition to the existing single-family residence. The proposed house and related improvements will comply with Village regulations. The table on the following page compares the Petitioner's proposal to the bulk requirements of the RX Single Family Residence district. PZ-01-07 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting January 25,2007 Page 3 RX Single Family District Requirements Subject Prooertv MINIMUM SETBACKS Front 40' 41.80' Interior (North) 10' or 10% oflot width 24.66' I Interior (South 10' or 10% oflot width 14.99' Rear 30' 73' FRONT YARD LOT COVERAGE 35.0% 34.5% OVERALL LOT COVERAGE 35% 28% MINIMUM LOT WIDTH 85' 125' CONDITIONAL USE STANDARDS The standards for Conditional Uses are listed in Section 14.203.F.8 of the Village Zoning Ordinance. The section contains seven specific findings that must be made in order to approve a Conditional Use. The circular drive is listed as a Conditional Use in Section 14.803.A of the Zoning Ordinance. The following list is a summary of these findings: · The Conditional Use will not have a detrimental effect on the public health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare; · The Conditional Use will not be injurious to the use, enjoyment, or value of other properties in the vicinity or impede the orderly development of those properties; · Adequate provision of utilities and drainage and design of access and egress to minimize congestion on Village streets; and · Compliance of the Conditional Use with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, and other Village Ordinances. It has been previous Village policy to support requests for circular driveways when the Subject Property fronts on an arterial street and/or the traffic volume is such that a circular driveway is necessary to resolve a safety conflict. However, recognizing that circular driveways are not always requested for a safety issue, but as part of a larger improvement project for a residential property, Ordinance 5547, passed on February ih, 2006, set forth minimum requirements for circular driveways. This ordinance limits consideration of Conditional Use approval for circular driveways to lots that measure seventy five feet (75') or greater. Applicable zoning and the additional minimum requirements (Sec. 14.2215) listed below must also be met in order for consideration of Conditional Use approval: · The circular drive portion of the driveway shall have a minimum turning radius of fifteen feet (15'); · The circular drive portion of the driveway shall have a minimum width of twelve feet (12'); and The Petitioner's submittal for the circular drive portion of the driveway measures twelve feet wide with a minimum turning radius of fifteen feet. The project scope results in 34.5% front yard lot coverage. A circular driveway is also located at 1403 Wigwam Trail, immediately across from the Subject Property. This driveway was installed when the property was originally developed, possibly under County regulations, or before the Village required Conditional Use approval. RECOMMENDA TION The proposed circular driveway will not be harmful to the neighborhood character, does not violate the Conditional Use standards contained in Section 14.203.F.8 of the Zoning Ordinance, and will meet the minimum requirements listed for circular driveways (Sec. 14.2215). PZ-Ol-07 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting January 25, 2007 Page 4 Based on the above analysis, Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the fOllowing motion: "To approve a Conditional Use permit for a circular driveway for the residence at 1429 Wigwam Trail, Case No. PZ-O 1-07." The Village Board's decision is final for this case. I concur: Ijc H:\PLAN\Plauuing & Zoning COMM\P&Z 2007\SI;JffMcmo\PZ_OI~07 MEMO (1429 Wigw-am _ CU circular drivc).doc VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT l\'lount Prospect COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT - Planning Division 50 S. Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 Phone 847.818.5328 FAX 847.818.5329 Application for Conditional Use Approval Z i Case Number ; C P&Z - - ..... E-< ~- Development Name/Address I ~.; ~C C <l.l Date of Submission ~ (...,l Z8 .....0 ~- r;.l Hearing Date Q I Z ..... ~-l Addre~s}es: (S!reet Num.... ber, S~e., et),. ".' ( / if .:< q (f) {ij f (;;'. tJ.j I) J I . I Site Area (Acres) Prope~ty Zoning I O. ~5' 7- 1::'1 Setbacks: Front "., . tI Lj / . .j' Building Height Ii. / .,.;1 /(;/ '-, Adjacent Land Uses: North Z c IE=: ~ ~ o ~ Z ..... ~ E-< ..... r/J 1;1 Z ..... E-< r/J ~ ~ z o ..... E-< ~ ~ ::::: I o~ .... c Z ~ ..... .~ Q"i3. z.3- ;..,.I -... 01 ::::: v ~ u ~ r:Q '//:J, Total Building Sq. Ft. (Site) .r) C:! -:/ q eX: (./"J C Rear 7{;; :' [ /1 7 '- '>.,J Lot Coverage (%) '0 Q " c"': t,' '" Side //.[17/ ./ H cY/../-. /-? Number of Parking Spaces f'1 c... Side / -j/,~~.y / )y/ " _. ;-, <:,...- ,. // South East West Tax LD. Number or County Assigned Pin Number(s) t7/]. i/ -,.-1 llc) .- tJd f'~' (7!t}OC:;] Legal Description (attach additional sheets if necessary) Name , Telephone (day) /]-ls ~(2(;2.f). 3 <},;l.,7 Telephone (evening) f..? t/?<7 h? f? /3, (: Fax ;')//"/ /..,' (J c-' /'<, .."-." .z.? 71'1 -,~ (? z:::'" _, Email / )-//) j:.:: Corporation /I'{...t: ;';Ciy 1:.' Street Address , {O. 'P'C A} jJIIG State r ;t/ .-;---,,-, -,' / /} ,> \fr.>,v /"''''_ Zip Code l;{J {)S-6 )1 tJ2:> I City : -I( ,-Y;{))PC (\1 I Interest in Property . Ii -:~ /;? (.J t,e ).. Cd t,-..' z Name Telephone (day) 0 . ...~- I I;.:: ~:'tJ l """ I i/ .IiI' Xu f Iv 5/L/- L/~~ B [) ~ 1ft J ' L/ '1 " 0 ... I """ '-' I Corporation Telephone (evening) i 0:: c.; C ~ (f/tIIJ ~ 3: 7 elf} ... /3 ,:56- z 0 ' (..J ..' .... >. '"' '-' Street Address FaX: Z c.; I ;:l Q. ///;) <I' /;/ /() i(j"'.{{/ J1;i1 f2/ijJ)- ~ I """" 'I 0 .-/.t( l' /-77 8 t..v, ",,- ,J "_) 0:: , . ! '-..I City State Zip Code Email ~ ,- U I il/ f'("/) 5/':) -s- , ! Ii "-,~ '-, " 'i -'v V/.( ~ /'U;;y::> L~:!1/;7J ~ {.'<f /1/ i.vt,: l.~/(/ 7 *,/--c,'B l:.-..-tC ,.:./ I~' ~ _~/'" . ;;...,;. ....-c. _" ; c:::: . I" /,.' '- .~ Developer _, " ;:1 {~~/l<;'7 Rt/ (?qlf..'J/vl T I h (d) 7')~' ,., c; 0 Name ~,r I~ 3/it:?! ,( t:' !; , e ep one ay f""';f., , :_ ....." ~'>....'" Address f) LII~;- C. /l-/[l:?/ZlfJ/vO V Fax -?t:' /' ~ /) 2" ;?tJ c..I_ .- ./' ./, //1:::' ~- /; .~.) ..--:) ....- /) ;;.,c/ pPJ , , 1': ,/ /t/ 6[-;(/~1;7 ~ .1'...-' - J, ,--..~ r/,1 YP~, Email i Attorney Name / {;1 j_) I:! f} tl ;:;;:IA/ /) /1/" Telephone (day) "{j) 99'2 {){) 2. ,r-' :.)1- . - f_" _ ,- f. . '.I ~J (,,, Address /-:;- ;: ~ . I /':/-:7 )(f,- lj+/c.~') Fax 31.2- c}' 'is " ." G,.. /~.. . ,- - C71.Y/t) ,- , I,. I /' i,( ./ {' VI'" ~' /? 6f)'6tf / /t .7 ,.J;. {,:[, :1 / Email Surveyor /f'II/,IJ 1;(:. z Name L,.7 [J /:c/ /7/,/)J Telephone (day) .;2?3 ..- .7,+0 '-.-- 5tJ2.7 0 ~.. .;' )' ! ..... I {i) E-i Vl Address // f}'~ Pll0 lJ! --t:' / Fax ;; 'l.? i_:~~ yc.18-- ~ C;; (;/ ,-I/<-. ,'- - - . ..':J =s lO: I .9 }II f},t.:t)S /-:1(:-: eSij Ii G?tJ iz; ~ Vl Vl 0 <3 Email ?;L.i/S''r:-!:{..-;-j'J YR. (1 f1;'Uc-:t2? ( ~ 0 Z .... ..... 0... ~ -;:: Engineer Z <U ;:l S Name Telephone (day) 0... 0 0 ~ d) Address Fax Co) ;> <U ~ Q U I ~ ~ Email Architect .:? 9;J -bS-:5~ C> I Name IJ /J /) ej' O:;:r'f]{-;1'/l7r~ Telephone (day): W . , .3a- 6~"5/ Address 2/ .,/) It/ !:'l~( [' Fax 4,;1':2. , {--iF .^ / (}Iil t~~JCDJ f (/ ,:' /./. 'J :') D"C/L~(XC"', ! Email i ! Landscape Architect Name Telephone (day): Address Fax Email f)p! Mount Prospect Department of Community Development 50 South Emerson Street, Mount Prospect Illinois www,mountprospecLorg 2 Phone 847,818.5328 Fax 847,818.5329 TDD 847.392.6064 Proposed Conditional Use (as listed in the zoning district) Describe in Detail the Buildings and Activities Proposed and How the Proposed L'se Meets the Attached Standards for Conditional Use Approval (attach additional sheets if necessary) ! ~ W i Eo-< 1[1 5 gj I ;;...~ IHO -r.1 ~~ '~[fJ I~z I ~ ~ I I ~ I I Hours of Operation I Address(es) (Street Number, Street) r.1z Co [fJ- QEo-< r.1~ ~~ ~o o~ I' ~ z ~- Site Area (Acres) t~ //--1 / ,?;, ), ,'" ~ '-. Setbacks: Front / .-'iT iT..- /J' ",'I" .-- n 7"_'-";") Building Height ;2 .'- / / /1 ,~):) - L/ Property Zoning [?f Total Building Sq. Ft. (Site) Xor;.?L., '_/'-->< /./ r Sq. Ft. Devoted to Proposed Use Rear -L ,'7/ --T .....<) -- II LO,t cov, 7eraae (%) .0'2' CV c_J .' // Side i';.f( ,.".1 // ,=:;-g/- C~ 1.,~ /oO' Side f!'~) ,_ /I ,.4/ .,- t1:;, Number of Parking Spaces ,~ Please note that the application will not be reviewed until this petition has been fully completed and all required plans and other materials have been satisfactorily submitted to the Planning Division. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. It is strongly suggested that the petitioner schedule an appointment with the appropriate Village staff so that materials can be reviewed for accuracy and completeness at the time of submittal. In consideration of the information contained in this petition as well as all supporting documentation, it is requested that approval be given to this request. The applicant is the owner or authorized representative of the owner of the property. The petitioner and the owner of the property grant employees of the Village of Mount Prospect and their agents permission to enter on the property during reasonable hours for visual inspection of the subject property. I hereby affirm that all information provided herein and in all materials submitted in association with this application are true and accurate to the best;:.~~m /' ,le~ge. c>-6/7, 7" _____- t'") /, /..,. ~/ . Applicant ,-. if ..-: - Date ;{x/ .:/6 /jf../{,Jt;:! Print Name /7C--:{),c /t~JL~~:;'-Jj V,,',., / / If applicant is not property owner: I hereby designate the applicant to act as my agent for the purpose of seeking the Variation(s) described in this ~Y'\n 1 i,....-:lt;"n ~111i thP I:)CC'Ar-; -:ufI~A C'l1'Y'\'Y'\r'\rt;n rr Yn ~t~r; 0"), 1 :::p.~:.;~~::.~ ~~:..'U6 'Uy""y. Mount Prospect Department of Community Development 50 South Emerson Street, Mount Prospect Illinois www.mountprospect.org 3 Date If?!t '~/;)" ~)' '-.(. ,/-.,:., .7"1'_'?- t. / / Phone 847.818.5328 Fax 847.818.5329 TDD 847.392.6064 II Affidavit of Ownership ]] COUNTY OF COOK ) ) STATE OF ILLINOIS ) I, I k LJ f:; !e t,,/-/iY,- y:;C , under oath, state that I am the sole - ~an an authorized officer of the ) ) owner of the property ) /r-/ tf) iC;ccJ lJtl( 7)'. I I/i. f?k:~;-;).Y,P L~ efi; 1ft f:~'()r6' commonly described as 1';;;2 'S? awJ 1{1.7/-~ that /(/c:-t:"'t M!J 'rye. lieh property IS 7t!.10'i'P/0/I-J !{lCI?-} /;(- owned by as ofthis date. /) (~-- Signature Subscribed and sworn to before me this ""{/ t) :!.~ day of OFFICIAL SEAL URSZULA NOT My PUBLIC ClYKIER MY COMMISSIoN ~~TE OF ILLINOIS JRES:08/1511D r )..., ,;l., ,~ c 1-{/( -f:.{A-' ,i{; '._ 20 ,;./} ,~. /); /" /:.{/;/ // /' /" yi' ~/~-r-A_"V--<-.Az:,/L , Notary Public / Mount Prospect Department of Community Development 50 South Emerson Street, Mount Prospect Illinois www.mountprospect.org 4 Phone 847.818.5328 Fax 847.818.5329 TDD 847.392.6064 3. The land referred to in this commitment is described as fo11<r\lS: LOT ONE (1) IN THREE HOMES SUBDIVISION OF .PART OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (1/4) OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 41 NORTH, RANGE II, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN ACCORDING TO TUE PLA T THEREOF REGISTERED IN THE OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF TITLES OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, ON OCTOBER 20, 1975 AS DOCUMENTNUMBER 2835U3. PROPOSED NEW ADDITION 1429 w.WIGWAM tr. MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS LOT O\lE(I) IN n.lE Tf.lREE I-lOMES SUBDIviSION OF PART OF TI-IE 6C1.1w.UEST GlUA TERW4J OF THE SECTION ii, TOUNSHIP 41 NORH, RANGE II, EAST OF THE TI-IIRD PRINSIPAL MARIDIAN ACCCRDING TO TI-IE PLAT TI-IEF<EOF F<EGISTRATED IN THE OFFICE OF TI-IE REGISTRAR OF TITLES OF c90K COllNTY, ILLINOIS, ON OCTOBER 21Z>, 1915 AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 283:'823. FOUND. IRON PIPE ~ ON LINE l0.04 w. 125.00 r------------------------- . 5 FT, Rl6LIC UTILITY EASEMENT ---1------------------------ i$ i 0.... . '" ! 24 I . I , I . I~ .ei lln , I , f 24'.&' EXI5T. . I . I LOT SIZE - 19,945 S.F. TAX I.D. number - 08-11-300-029-0000 OWNER: lGORHUTNYK / Cf.lAIN LiNK FENCE ,( FOUND. IRON _________--,~ PIPE . --------------1-- $! . I , I EXIST. FRAME NOTE: SHED PROviDE TEMPORAR:\" SAFETY FENCE AROJND WORK I AREA t TEMPORARY PORTABLE ",'-" "'''"' ,,,,."" ~ I.-~;~~.-.__._._.-.L._._. LINE OF EXIST. I l . ElIJILDING : I 14, . II -------~ -- C J - -~ ~- ~ - J .. . ::. .' . . .' ." .' ~~""~""~1 . .' .ii PROPOSED NEW ADDITIONS ii . .,,="'--=-.. :"1: RESIDENCE ~ fp~~~~:.....-=::-. H # 1429 . i~~J!l '. . . (J. ' ,:~:. tlc ..., ~. ~ .~, i1r,r.~r.. '. . x I I-R ! .1 .'1 WOCD FENCE :;! x I ! . II I SANITARY 5EU,ER i II , EXISTING~: II I III . , II I I III , -r-t:::i::iI I ! x "II -LJ-' . I I II · I I .1 L~-x-LLx . !I ~ 10'-0'l'1lN. i ! I~: . I I' ....j 2'-0' MIN.: I I !\ I ~. .1 ~~n:E "K" r f . $. i WATER SERvlCE' I I fe>LJ' !Y.IFJ · I EXIST.B-BOX :-L. I · TO BE REMOVED: ,. L__ . ____-:-+ 125.00 NEUJ~ I EXiST. B-BOX: I WATER SERviCE . i TO BE ABANDON~ ! EXIST.MAIN _._._....:-:_~::::::! WATER SERVICE...../" LINE OF NEw B/;'-1il" LINE OF EXIST. ElIJILDINCir ~I i!!1 I I ! I I / Cf.lAIN LINK FENCE "'AW, I I . I >s)' U'll 0"1. lnl ..;:...~: L._ _\;~ x I x I I x 211).,1 EXl&T. -J--;-- ~I ~ , ~6 i ~~ I ~~ ...0 f ~t- I IU I ! r 2f()'.I1)' NElli A5FHAL T DRIVE SIDE WALK EDGE OF PAVEMENT 12'-011 r SITE PLAN I x IJ ....." ~ I ~I I "I, '--~t - - ~ - - - - - 2. / EXIS~ASPf.lALT DRIVEl TO E REMOVED . RE I TORE WISOD I ,- U --h-l' SIGlN LOCATION , -__--.J t LUll! z'" 2~ <J}_ w, 30 25'..9)11 125.00 !<EC. FOUND. IRON PIPE 0.03 N. 4 ON LINE r I I~ <> ----1 I II I II I I I I I I I I I V I I^' t I I I I I I I \ I I II --~ .,u.'.",," ~ <> ----"A \ /I \ I: I I I \ I I \ I I V I I^\ I I \ I J \ I J \ I I II ____J ~ <> ~1-l.'i:J o~~ CN'i:J Z\Oo I-j ~ C/1 'i:J <: tri ::0. t:l O~Z C/1~tri ~a~ (J~> ~I-j ~ t:l -~t:l t"-I~_ t"-I?I-j Z~O 9t"'"t--z C/11-t . ~ <> ir~..:::_-:_...) Ilr=-=-~o~"'="='="i! " :: " :: :: " " " :: Ii II II II r'==='='=T-'~ooo-~o-=o-='-,== n :: :: H " ! ~~~~I------H-----] ! I' r_m_m_________m__mm_' i 1:::::1 l.. :: : 'It II t 1:: H ! H: !! ! !!i !! ! :: jj! H j '::: ..=--========-==~ ~.__ ::: :: : '"~=... tl~============.?_____~_____!______c;::::::1J:-::) _::::r-c:::::::>-c::::JJ rr::::::::::>--e--c:::::::::::::::::~::::::::::1: c::::::~! 11 II I' : : I;:::::::::::::::::::: II I, ,I '1 .1 " " I, ~J L, ! C] ! " " , ..--------------------------, .----1 r-----------m-----11 'lr'='-e-~-~oo-=o~o-~ooo:"" ---------------------, u-----T~..::;::;-~:1 ! \. ,'~! ""'" (jj rr'""~"l: ---I::!: i! ii ; l..___________J ~-u--------______n________________n__::::=:::::=::~J 181. - 2523 ..---------, I " " " " Jgi~ill~~ -- Ii rill{~t:j iii .;j______m______________: : : i i i 'C~ III I!! L~~:::: :::::: ::::::::: ::::::::::::: ::::: :::::::::::::nJ ~;:;:HnHn!:~n.:;.nnnH:H;;~~HH 2nd. - 2188 " ! ~ -= -= -= ~ ::::::::~' :r:::::::::::::~~.-.---.--? ----------._.---.-- " , " " ~ ~: ::::: :1":~::"::"'_~:.:":.":"::~:'l[;::::::::::::::::; " " -.- "--: .-.-;J'-.......-...-~-.-.-........;r;::::::: :!.: ----...._.____.._._.r---- , ' , ~-'''' .-...., Itotal: I 4711 PLAT OF SURVEY OF THE WEST 185 FEET OF THE EAST 463 FEET OF THE NORTH 192.96 FEET OF THE SOUTH 445.58 FEET OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 41 NORTH, RANGE 11 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS. ADDRESS: 1429 WIGWAM TRAIL, MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS FOUND IRON PIPE ON UNE &: 0.04 If. co~ ItH .> m~ I.O~ .-- Professional Design Registration #184-002795 Field Work Completed 07/18/06 Land Area Surveyed 19.942.6 Sq. Ft. Drawing Revised A\ ',IN UNK FENCE N. & 0.3 E. 125.00 (Ree. &: Mcas.) 5 FT. PUBUC lITl~_~!.:_________________ l FRAME 'SHED J.27 ~ J :~ ..: 125.00 (Ree:. &. MeQs,) EDGE OF PAVEMENT N SCALE: 1 "=30' CHAm UNI( FENCE 0.8 N. &: 0.5 ft'. FOUND IRON PIPE 35.67 ~ I ~ c ~ ~ ~ WIGWAM TRAIL PREFERRED SURVEY, INC. 7845 W. 79TH STREET, BRIDGEV/EW, IL, 60455 Phone 708-458-7845 / Fax 708-458-7855 TO: MICHAEL T. BARRETT PROFESSIONAL NATIONAL TITLE NETWORK, INC. THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT WE, PREFERRED SURVEY, INC., ILLINOIS PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR CORPORATION NO. 116 HAVE SURVEYED THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREON AND THAT THE PLAT SHOWN HEREON IS A CORRECT REPRESENTATION OF THAT SURVEY, ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE IN FEET AND DECIMALS THEREOF. THIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CONFORMS TO THE CURRENT ILLINOIS MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR ZG~gg~~W ~~R~~~N::o:r~\~I/IlN .~~~R S~~, 02~~~T BY WENT GIVEN UNDER OUR HA ~ ~. .A. .IqDl!ij;VIEW. ILLINOIS, THIS 27TH DAY _~ Y '-;0' ~D. ~ ~*:' p "::~ ILLINOIS #116 TD/MB P.S.I. NO. P.N.T.N. FLD CREW rAn December 7,2006 To Whom It May Concern: This letter is an explanation regarding why we decided to have a circular driveway on our new residence. Our neighbors across the street have one and we thought it was a great idea. Since we there is no sidewalk the driveway would not be an'obstruction. Also the driveway would allow for more space that the cars could be parked in and therefore would not J?lock up the street. / ./ . ij~ ory~p.{~nd Ihor Hutnyk ,- ' ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1429 WIGWAM TRAIL WHEREAS, Ihor Hutnyk ("Petitioner") has filed a petition for a Conditional Use permit with respect to property located at 1429 WigwamTrail ("Subject Property") and legally described as follows: Lot one (1) in Three Homes Subdivision of Part of the Southwest Quarter (1/4) of Section 11, Township 41 North, Range 11, East of the Third Principal Meridian according to the plat the thereof registered in the Office of the Registrar of Titles of Cook County, Illinois, on October 20, 1975 Property Index Numbers: 08-11-300-029-0000; and WHEREAS, the Petitioner seeks a Conditional Use to construct a circular driveway; and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held on the request for the Conditional Use permit being the subject of PZ-01-07 before the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 25th day of January, 2007, pursuant to proper legal notice having been published in the Mount Prospect Journal & Topics on the 10th day of January, 2007; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has submitted its findings and recommendations to the President and Board of Trustees in support ofthe request being the subject of PZ-01-07; and WHEREAS, the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect have given consideration to the request herein and have determined that the same meets the standards of the Village and that the granting of the proposed Conditional Use permit would be in the best interest of the Village. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, ACTING IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR HOME RULE POWERS: SECTION ONE: The recitals set forth hereinabove are incorporated as findings of fact by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect. SECTION TWO: The President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect do hereby grant a Conditional Use permit, as provided for in Section 14.203.F.7 of the Village Code, to allow the construction of a circular driveway, as shown on the Site Plan, a copy of which is attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof as Exhibit "A". SECTION THREE: That the Village Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to record a certified copy of this Ordinance with the Recorder of Deeds of Cook County. D SECTION FOUR: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of February I 2007. Irvana K. Wilks Mayor ATTEST: M. Lisa Angell Village Clerk H:\CLKO\files\WIN\ORDINANC\C USE, circular drive1429 Wigwamfeb2007.doc Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department Mount Prospect MEMORANDUM TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: FEBRUARY 2, 2007 SUBJECT: PZ-14-06 - MAP AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE (TO 1040 W. NORTHWEST HIGHWAY JOHN CONRAD SCHIESS - APPLICANT The Planning & Zoning Commission transmits their recommendation to deny Case PZ-14-06, a request to rezone a property and build a planned unit townhome development, as described in detail in the attached staff report. The Planning & Zoning Commission heard the request at their December 14, 2006 meeting. The Subject Property is located on the north side of Northwest Highway, between Dale and Forest Avenues. The site currently contains the vacant State Farm office building with related improvements. The Subject Property is zoned B 1 Business Office and is bordered by the RX Single Family District to the north and east, railroad tracks to the south, and by an R2 Attached Single Family Planned Unit Development to the west, the Villas of Sevres. The Petitioner's proposal includes the demolition of the existing office building to construct a 17 -unit townhome development. The Comprehensive Land Use Map designates the subject properties as General Commercial - Office. However, an adjacent townhome development was approved by the Village Board in 2002, which was also designated for General Commercial - Office. The Planning & Zoning Commission discussed the development at length. Several Commissioners presented concerns that the project included too little guest parking, that the Petitioner's exhibits were inaccurate, and that the development would have an adverse impact on the school district. Several neighbors and a representative of the adjacent Northwest Meadows Homeowners Association addressed the Commission. They stated concerns with the number of units: they preferred 4 to 5 single family homes instead of the 17 townhomes proposed. In addition, they inquired whether approving this townhome development would make it easier to approve future townhome developments along Northwest Highway. Several residents presented concerns with the proposed stormwater detention design and questioned whether their property would receive additional water as a result of this development. The Planning & Zoning Commission voted 5-2 to recommend that the Village Board deny a request for: 1) a Map Amendment to rezone the property from B1 Business Office to R2 Attached Single Family Residence; 2) a Conditional Use permit for a 17-unit townhome Planned Unit Development subject to the following: A. Development of the site in general conformance with the site plan prepared by The Office of John Conrad Schiess, revision date November 28, 2006, but revised as noted: · Modify Building 2 so its footprint is similar to Building 5 and has a 3' off-set and balconies on the second floor; PZ-14-06 - MAP AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE (TOWNHOMES) February 2, 2007 Page 2 . The east setback is no less than 17'; o Add five (5) additional Guest parking spaces; . Grant a Variation so the site may exceed 50% lot coverage to accommodate the modified footprint of Building 2 and additional Guest Parking spaces. B. Development of the site in general conformance with the landscape plane prepared by The Office of John Conrad Schiess, revision date November 27,2006, but revised to include a wrought-iron style fence along the east and north lot lines; C. Development of the units in general conformance with the floor plans prepared by The Office of John Conrad Schiess, revision date November 8, 2006; D. Development of the elevations in general conformance with the site plan prepared by The Office of John Conrad Schiess, dated November 8, 2006; E. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the Petitioner shall submit a lighting plan that complies with the Village's lighting regulations for the lighting within the development; F. Prior to obtaining the first Certificate of Occupancy, the Petitioner must submit homeowner's association documents for Staff review and approval; and G. The Petitioner shall construct all units according to all Village Codes and regulations, including, but not limited to: the installation of automatic fire sprinklers, fire hydrants and roads must be located and constructed according to Development and Fire Code standards. Please forward this memorandum and attachments to the Village Board for their review and consideration at their February 6, 2007 meeting. Staff will be present to answer any questions related to this matter. ~E lit H:\PLAN\Planning & Zoning COMM\P&Z 2006\.'\1EJ Memos\PZ-14-06 MEJ MEMO (1040 W N\V HWY - townhomc projcct).doc MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-14-06 Hearing Date: December 14,2006 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1040 W. Northwest Highway PETITIONERS: John Conrad Schiess Mount Prospect Development Group PUBLICATION DATE: June 7, 2006 PIN NUMBERS: 03-33-407 -025-0000 REQUESTS: 1) Rezone from B 1 to R2 Attached Single Family 2) Conditional Use for a Planned Unit Development MEMBERS PRESENT: Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Marlys Haaland Ronald Roberts Richard Rogers Keith Youngquist Mary Johnson, Alternate STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Judith Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner Ellen Divita, Deputy Director of Community Development INTERESTED PARTIES: John Schiess, The Meyers, Mary Simon, Nancy Fritz, Donenico Saettone, Kurt Kaufhold, Rada Maksimovic, Paul Stowick, Rosemary Stowick, Jean Spejcher, Barbara Glombowski, Paul Glombowski, Gavin Meinschein. Chairperson Arlene Juracek called the meeting to order at 7:31 p.m. Richard Rogers moved to approve the minutes of the November 22, 2006 meeting and Keith Youngquist seconded the motion. The motion was approved 5-0, with Joseph Donnelly and Arlene Juracek abstaining. Richard Rogers made a motion to continue case PZ-30-06 to the January 25, 2007 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting. Keith Youngquist seconded the motion. The motion was approved 7-0. Chairperson Juracek introduced Case Number PZ-14-06 at 7:35 p.rn.; a request for rezoning and Conditional Use for a Planned Unit Development. Judith Connolly, Senior Planner, summarized the case. She stated that the Subject Property is located on the north side of Northwest Highway, between Dale and Forest Avenues. She said the site currently contains the vacant State Farm office building with related improvements. The Subject Property is zoned B 1 Business Office and is bordered by the RX Single Family District to the north and east, railroad tracks to the south, and by an R2 Attached Single Family Planned Unit Development to the west, the Villas of Sevres. She stated that the Villas development has 6.4 units/acre and received zoning approval in 2002. Ms. Connolly said the Petitioner's request to rezone the Subject Property and for approval of a Conditional Use permit for a Planned Unit Development was continued from the September 28th Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. The P&Z Commission recommended the Petitioner revise the submittal to address concerns presented at that meeting. Arlene Juracek, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting December 14,2006 PZ-14-06 (2) Page 2 Ms. Connolly stated that the Petitioner's proposal includes the demolition of the existing office building to construct a l7-unit townhome development, which is the same number of units requested in the original submittal. Ms. Connolly said there has been no change to the original rezoning request. She stated that the Subject Property is currently zoned B 1 Business Office and the Petitioner is requesting approval to rezone the Subject Property to R2 Attached Single Family. The R2 district allows a maximum density of 10 dwelling units per acre for multi- family developments. She said the Petitioner's proposal includes a density of 8.2 units per acre (17 units on 2.08 acres), which falls below the maximum density permitted within the R2 District. Ms. Connolly stated there has been no change to the original Conditional Use request. She said the Petitioner is also requesting approval of a Conditional Use permit for a Planned Unit Development for the townhome development. She stated this request is due to the Village Code's requirement that two or more multi-family residential buildings may be located on the same zoning lot only as part of an approved planned unit development (PUD). The PUD process also allows for unified zoning control over the entire development, which would require formal Village approval if any modifications to the development are proposed in the future. Ms. Connolly said the original site plan has been modified. She said the development would consist of 5 townhome buildings: three 3-unit buildings, and two 4-unit buildings. Each of the townhome units would have a separate entrance, a two-car garage, and a two-car driveway. The pavement width of the access aisle/driveway throughout the development is 24-feet and allows for two-way traffic throughout the development. She stated that the interior side yard setbacks were increased to create larger 'rear yards' for each unit. The design was changed to eliminate the interior landscape area that also accommodated nine centrally located Guest Parking spaces on the previous site plan. The revised plan calls for locating eight Guest Parking spaces in scattered clusters throughout the development. Ms. Connolly stated that the building design has also been modified. Although the front elevation was not changed from the September 18, 2006 elevations, the Side elevation was modified to include all brick/stone materials, and include larger windows. Also, the rear elevation was modified to include larger, more pronounced peaks over the windows, which helps to add architectural interest and break-up the elevation, and some units have a balcony on the second floor. Ms. Connolly said the revised site plan indicates that the development will be accessed from Northwest Highway and have one means of ingress/egress. She stated that the access aisle/driveway no longer loops throughout the development, and now includes a cul-de-sac. The access aisle and cul-de-sac would be privately owned and maintained, and would be designated as a Fire Lane. Therefore, parking would not be allowed; signs would be posted identifying the Fire Lane and stating the parking restrictions. She said the proposed cu-de-sac configuration was modified to ensure optimal ease of emergency vehicle maneuverability. The Fire Department verified the proposed turning radius will allow emergency vehicle movement, if vehicles are not parked in the Fire Lanes. The Petitioner's plansdocument that emergency vehicles will be able to safely enter and exit the site, and the Fire Department confirmed their previous concerns appear to have been addressed with the proposed design. Ms. Connolly stated that the Petitioner's proposal indicates that each unit would include at least two bedrooms plus an office, but no more than three bedrooms. The Village Code requires two and a half parking spaces per dwelling unit for multiple-family dwellings containing three bedrooms or more. She said the Petitioner's proposal contains a two-car garage plus two driveway parking spaces per unit. However, the Petitioner proposes eight Guest Parking Spaces to be shared by the development, which is one space less than the previous submittal. She stated that on-street parking is not currently allowed on Northwest Highway and the Petitioner would have to work with mOT to determine if creating parking on Northwest Highway is possible. Arlene Juracek, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting December 14,2006 PZ-14-06 (2) Page 3 Ms. Connolly said there has been no change to the proposed lot coverage. She stated that the Petitioner's site plan indicates that the project would have 50% lot coverage, which complies with the Village Code's R2 lot coverage limitation. However, expansion and modification to the patios would not be allowed; to do so would bring the project over lot coverage. Ms. Connolly stated that the revised plan indicates that a variety of new landscaping materials will be planted throughout the development. She said the plan indicates that shade, ornamental, and evergreen trees will be the primary screening material around the perimeter of the Subject Property. Also, the plan has been revised to include a berm along the Northwest Highway frontage. The number of shrubs, specifically 5-foot Arborvitae, has been increased to screen the property, but the plan calls for fewer trees than the previous submittal. Ms. Connolly said the revised landscape plan does not note the existing wrought iron fence along the west lot line. She stated that the plan also does not appear to indicate that a fence would be installed along the north and east lot lines, which is contrary to the Village's Crime Prevention Unit recommendation. The Police Department reviewed the revisions dated November 28, 2006 and reiterated their recommendation to install a fence along the north and east lot lines. The Planning Division confirmed that a wrought-iron style fence, similar to the existing fence along the west lot line, would meet the Police Department's requirements. Ms. Connolly stated that the Engineering Division reviewed the plans and found that the proposed development will be subject to all development requirements, as detailed in Section 15.402 of the Village Code. A detailed review of the site plans will be performed when the final plans are submitted for a Building Permit. She said the Petitioner has not requested relief from Village regulations and is required to meet all Village Code requirements. Ms. Connolly showed a table listing the zoning district requirements for the property's proposed zoning classification and summarizing the Petitioner's proposed setbacks. Ms. Connolly said the property is located along a state highway, on a commercial corridor. It is adjacent to a townhome development (Villas of Sevres), and single family residences. She stated that the Comprehensive Land Use Map designates the subject properties as General Commercial - Office. However, the development is consistent with a townhome development approved by the Village Board in 2002, which was also designated for General Commercial - Office. Ms. Connolly stated that the standards for Map Amendments are listed in Section l4.203.D.8.a of the Village Zoning Ordinance. She said the Subject Property is adjacent to an existing townhome development and single- family residences. It would be consistent with recent developments approved in the Village and it would be an appropriate use for the Subject Property. The proposed zoning district is compatible with existing properties within the general area of the Subject Property. Ms Connolly said the standards for approving a Planned Unit Development are listed in Section 14.504 of the Village Zoning Ordinance. She said the Petitioner's proposal is not consistent with the Village's Comprehensive Land Use Map. However, the townhomes are in keeping with previously approved redevelopment projects in this area of the Village and the proposal complies with the R2 Zoning District regulations. Ms. Connolly stated that the proposed Map Amendment and Conditional Use requests meet the standards for each request as listed in the Zoning Ordinance subject to the Map Amendment being tied to a specific townhome development proposal. Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission approve the following motion: "To approve: 1) A Map Amendment to rezone the property from Bl Business Office to R2 Attached Single Family Residence; Arlene Juracek, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting December 14,2006 PZ-14-06 (2) Page 4 2) A Conditional Use permit for a 17-unit townhome Planned Unit Development subject to the following: A. Development of the site in general conformance with the site plan prepared by The Office of John Conrad Schiess, revision date November 28, 2006; B. Development of the site in general conformance with the landscape plane prepared by The Office of John Conrad Schiess, revision date November 27, 2006, but revised to include a wrought-iron style fence along the east and north lot lines; C. Development of the units in general conformance with the floor plans prepared by The Office of John Conrad Schiess, revision date November 8, 2006; D. Development of the elevations in general conformance with the site plan prepared by The Office of John Conrad Schiess, dated November 8, 2006; E. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the Petitioner shall submit a lighting plan that complies with the Village's lighting regulations for the lighting within the development; F. Prior to obtaining the first Certificate of Occupancy, the Petitioner must submit homeowner's association documents for Staff review and approval; and G. The Petitioner shall construct all units according to all Village Codes and regulations, including, but not limited to: the installation of automatic fire sprinklers, fire hydrants and roads must be located and constructed according to Development and Fire Code standards." Ms. Connolly said the Village Board's decision is final for this case, 1040 W. Northwest Highway, Case Number PZ-14-06. Chairperson Juracek asked if there was any change in the height of the buildings. Ms. Connolly said that the height is code compliant and the height has not changed. Chairperson Juracek stated that John Schiess was sworn in at the September 28, 2006 meeting. Mr. Schiess stated that he is the architect for the project and is representing the developer. He summarized the case and noted the changes made from the last submittal. He showed a table summarizing the development data for the project. He confirmed that the building height has not been modified since the last submittal. Mr. Schiess showed site plans delineating the changes to the drive/fire aisles. He stated that the setbacks to the property lines have also been modified to increase the space between the townhomes and the residential neighborhood. He showed elevation drawings noting masonry materials and the architectural detail added to the rear elevations. Mr. Schiess summarized the floor plans, noting the dimensions of the garages as approximately 20-feet by 20-feet. Mr. Schiess stated that the revised plans have addressed the concerns raised at the September 28, 2006 meeting. He said the revised setbacks address the privacy concerns with the single-family neighborhood as well as the Villas of Sevres and the revised architecture adds interest to all elevations. He stated that the development will have little impact on the school system. Mr. Schiess said the project engineer will address the Commission's site drainage concerns. Chairperson Juracek swore in Gavin Meinschein of Terra Engineering, project engineer for the proposed development. Mr. Meinschein stated that with the existing conditions, the site is releasing 4.53 cubic feet of water per second into the storm sewer. He said with the proposed conditions, the site will release 0.42 cubic feet of water per second into the storm sewer, decreasing the rate of release by ten times. Mr. Meinschein stated that because the existing site does not currently flow to Northwest Highway, lOOT will not allow the storm sewer to be connected to Northwest Highway. Arlene Juracek, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting December 14,2006 PZ-14-06 (2) Page 5 Chairperson Juracek stated that Paul Glombowski, resident of 206 MacArthur Drive, was sworn in at the September 28, 2006 meeting. Mr. Glombowski stated that the Northwest Meadows has a combined sewer system and wants assurance that the addition of 17 new residences will not overload the system. Chairperson Juracek asked Staff if the Engineering Department reviews the sewer system. Ms. Connolly said that Engineering Staff would complete a review at the time of permit. Chairperson Juracek stated that Mary Simon, resident of 803 W. Isabella, was sworn in at the September 28, 2006 meeting. Ms. Simon said she is concerned the Village would not be able to easily correct a future problem if the drainage problem is not adequately addressed ahead of time. Chairperson Juracek asked Mr. Meinschein to address the resident concerns. Mr. Meinschein stated that the proposed project is increasing the greenspace on the site from 29 percent to 50 percent, which means there is more ground to absorb rainwater. He said that the survey of the site shows separate storm and sanitary sewer systems and that there presently is no restrictor on the site. He said this means the proposed site improvements will reduce the load on the sewer systems. In his professional opinion, the proposed underground detention will provide more volume than the current paved lot can hold. Chairperson Juracek asked what size restrictor will be installed at the site. Mr. Meinschein stated that the restrictor size has yet to be determined. Mr. Schiess stated he would like to have Mr. Meinschein address concerns one-by-one. Mr. Schiess asked if the proposed project will store more water in volume than the existing conditions; Mr. Meinschein said that is correct. Mr. Schiess stated that during the engineering review, no evidence of a restrictor was documented; Mr. Meinschein verified that is correct. Mr. Schiess stated that regardless of an existing restrictor, the proposed restrictor will decrease the amount of runoff from the site by nearly ten-times; Mr. Meinschein stated that is true. Mr. Schiess asked if the proposed sanitary lines leaving the site would have a restrictor; Mr. Meinschein stated that per code, a restrictor cannot be placed on sanitary lines. Mr. Meinschein stated that there has been no concern raised by the Village Engineering Department regarding the proposed stormwater detention or sanitary lines for this project. He said the capacity of the current sanitary pipes tying into the site, is adequate to handle the 17 residences. Chairperson Juracek noted that a more intensive engineering review would be done prior to the issuance of the building permit. Mr. Schiess concluded the summary of his proposal and stated that they accept all of the conditions for approval for the project. Chairperson Juracek called for questions from the Commission. Richard Rogers stated that he reviewed the underground detention system and agrees that the proposed system provides adequate detention. He stated his concern is that the pipes are located in areas of significant landscaping and might not provide enough room for tree growth. Mr. Schiess stated that the landscape architect reviewed the plans and did not see any issue with the proposed pipes. Mr. Meinschein stated that no large trees will be planted directly over the pipes. Mr. Schiess stated that adjustments to the landscaping can be made to accommodate the pipes. Mr. Rogers stated that plans show two sewers leaving the site, sanitary sewer and storm sewer, and asked if they combine at some point. Mr. Schiess said that engineering plans they have seen do not show the pipes conjoining. He said they may join at some point further down the line, and he would defer to Village Engineering regarding that issue. Mary Johnson asked about the difference in sanitary sewer capacity of a large office building versus the 17 residences. There was general discussion regarding the existing conditions. Ms. Johnson stated she has concerns with the "alternate" parking plan. She said there is not adequate visitor parking. Mr. Schiess stated that the alternate parking plan could accommodate additional parking, but that plan would bring the lot coverage over the allowed 50 percent. Mr. Schiess stated that residences can take advantage of the 2 spaces in driveways and the guest parking spaces scattered throughout the site. Arlene Juracek, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting December 14,2006 PZ-14-06 (2) Page 6 Keith Youngquist asked for clarification on the rear elevations. He said he did not see the floor plans matching the building elevations. Mr. Schiess explained the organization of the plan documents. Mr. Youngquist stated according to the plans, Building 2 and Building 5 have the same elevations, however in the floor plans, Building 2 does not have balconies. Mr. Schiess stated that building 2 does not have balconies. There was general discussion regarding the presented elevations versus the proposed floor plans. Chairperson Juracek asked if the rear of Building 2 is essentially flat. Mr. Schiess stated that is correct. Mr. Youngquist stated that he would like to see a drawing of the rear elevation for Building 2. There was general discussion regarding potential changes to Building 2 to add architectural interest to the rear elevation. Leo Floros asked about the impact on the public school system. He asked what the base price was on the units. Mr. Schiess stated the base price is $530,000. Mr. Floros asked for the description of the focus resident. Mr. Schiess said the units will be marketed to the young professional with either no family or just beginning a family; people who would use these as starter homes. He said the other buyer type might be the "right-sizer;" a person in their mid-50s with children who have left home or are about to leave home. Mr. Floros stated there has been a large amount of condominium type housing built in Mount Prospect and he is concerned about the saturation point. Mr. Schiess replied that Mount Prospect is one of the healthiest condominium/town home markets in the Chicago land area. Chairperson Juracek called for testimony from the audience. Chairperson Juracek swore in Nancy Fritz, president of the Northwest Meadows Homeowners Association. Ms. Fritz stated the subdivision consists of 104 homes with 60% being the original homeowners. The Association is concerned with the density ofthe property. She said their community is founded on one-story, single family home on a minimum of half-acre lots and this proposed development is just too dense for the neighborhood. She said they are also concerned with the setbacks of the townhomes. She stated that the Association has concerns with the impact on the school district. She said regardless of whom the target market is for these homes, small children grow up and will need to enter the school system. She said the Association has legitimate concerns with the stormwater systems. She said the ditch/culvert system in their neighborhood is aging and the additional volume could be detrimental and costly to the Northwest Meadows storm system. Ms. Fritz also stated they have concerns with the parking allotment for the development. The volume of parked cars in a residential area could far exceed a commercial property, where cars are not parked for long periods of time. The Association is also concerned with the proposed lot coverage; compared to their neighborhood, this project is very dense. As a final concern, Ms. Fritz stated the Association does not want the balconies on Building 2 overlooking the neighboring homes. Chairperson Juracek stated that Jean Spejcher had been sworn in at the September 28, 2006 meeting. Ms. Spejcher said she is concerned with garbage can storage. She said if two cars are parked in the garage, there is little to no room for garbage can storage. She is concerned the residents would resort to storing cans on their patios. She also questioned the volume of underground water detention. Chairperson Juracek stated that the proposed underground storage has a higher storage volume than what is currently on the site. Mr. Glombowski asked if the proposed Building 1 would obstruct the view of cars pulling out to Northwest Highway. He said he is also concerned with emergency vehicle access to the site and that he still has doubts that the proposed design will provide adequate access for emergency vehicles. Chairperson Juracek said that the developer worked with the Fire Department to revise the plans. Chairperson Juracek swore in Rob Smith, resident of 213 Dale. Mr. Smith stated that his primary concern is the parking situation and said the development does not provide enough guest parking. He added that guests of the Villas of Sevres are currently parking in the commercial lots, and noted that the additional parking will over-flow into the neighborhood if the new townhomes go in. Arlene Juracek, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting December 14, 2006 PZ-14-06 (2) Page 7 Ms. Simon stated that she is concerned that any allowances or adjustments to the landscaping plan are going to decrease the screening to the neighborhood. She also asked when neighborhood went from septic to sewer; Ms. Fritz stated the conversion occurred in 1965. Leo Floros asked if the Association would be satisfied with single family homes going on that site. Ms. Fritz said that would be acceptable. There was general discussion regarding the typical size of new construction single- family houses and the number of homes that could be constructed on this site. Richard Rogers asked Ms. Fritz how deep the storm sewer is in front of her home. Ms. Fritz stated that she is not sure on the depth, but can find out and get back to the Commission. Mr. Meinschein asked if the storm sewer was above ground or below ground. Ms. Fritz explained the ditch/culvert system in the neighborhood. Chairperson Juracek called for additional comments from the audience. There were none. Mr. Schiess addressed the concerns of the Association. He stated that building four single-family homes on this site is not financially feasible. He stated he wants to assure the Association that the sewer lines would be constructed to code. Mr. Schiess said he does not see that 50 additional cars will ever be parking at the site and anticipates the proposed guest parking will be sufficient. He stated that the landscaping may be adjusted, but they would not decrease the amount of screening. Mr. Schiess said that Village Code prohibits garbage can storage on the patio. He stated that the emergency vehicle turn radius was developed in conjunction with the Fire Department and meets their requirements. He concluded his presentation with a brief summary of the plan reVISIOns. Chairperson Juracek called for additional comments. Hearing none, the public hearing was closed. Chairperson Juracek summarized the conditions as presented by staff and noted that Mr. Schiess conceded to these conditions. Mr. Rogers stated he would like a provision added to the conditions that Building 2 rear elevations be revised to be similar to those of Building 5. He also stated that he would like to see a provision for five additional guest parking spaces added to the development. He realizes this would reduce greenspace, but the over-flow parking is a major concern. Richard Rogers made a motion to approve Case Number PZ-14-06 for the property at 1040 W. Northwest Highway, modified per Staff recommendations and with the additional provisions regarding rear elevations of Building 5 and the addition of five more parking spaces. Joseph Donnelly seconded the motion. Chairman Juracek stated, for clarification, that the vote includes the Map Amendment, Conditional Use and Variance for lot coverage. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Donnelly, Haaland NAYS: Floros, Roberts, Rogers, Youngquist, Juracek Motion was defeated 5-2. After hearing three additional cases, Marlys Haaland made a motion to adjourn at 10:22 p.m., seconded by Keith Youngquist. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. ommunity Development Assistant !oning Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department CASE SUMMARY - PZ- 14-06 LOCATION: PETITIONER: OWNER: PARCEL#: LOT SIZE: ZOl\TJNG: LAND USE: REQUEST: 1040 W. Northwest Highway John Conrad Schiess Mount Prospect Development Group, LLC 03-33-407-025-0000 2.08 acres B 1 Business Office Office building (vacant) 1) Rezone from B 1 to R2 Attached Single Family 2) Conditional Use for a Planned Unit Development LOCATION MAP 211:: "'-.. // ~. $"f/-- ------.1/11 lSAI?!"~\Jl. 1'04)(' \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ I I \, 211 221 21<1 > <l: w. ...J <l: o 212 217 ~1Z 1005 100:~ 1100 1':10011,\) <(I 21':, , ~'v ~~~~ ~.~.~ ~~~~ MEMORANDUM Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department TO: MOUNT PROSPECT PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ARLENE JURACEK, CHAIRPERSON FROM: JUDY CONNOLLY, AICP, SENIOR PLANNER DATE: DECEMBER 7,2006 HEARING DATE: DECEMBER 14, 2006 SUBJECT: PZ-14-06 - MAP AMENDMENT & CONDITIONAL USE (PUD TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT) 1040 W. NORTHWEST HIGHWAY - JOHN CONRAD SCHIESS (APPLICANT) BACKGROUND The public hearing to review the application by John Conrad Schiess (the "Petitioner"), regarding the property located at 1040 W. Northwest Highway (the "Subject Property") was continued from the September 28, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting to December 14, 2006. The Petitioner is seeking: 1) to rezone the Subject Property from B1 Business Office to R2 Attached Single Family, and 2) approval of a Conditional Use permit for a Planned Unit Development. The P&Z Commission hearing was properly noticed in the June 7, 2006 edition of the Journal Topics Newspaper. In addition, Staff has completed the required written notice to property owners within 250-feet and posted Public Hearing signs on the Subject Property. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The Subject Property is located on the north side of Northwest Highway, between Dale and Forest Avenues. The site currently contains the vacant State Farm office building with related improvements. The Subject Property is zoned B 1 Business Office and is bordered by the RX Single Family District to the north and east, railroad tracks to the south, and by an R2 Attached Single Family Planned Unit Development to the west, the Villas of Sevres. The Villas development has 6.4 units/acre and received zoning approval in 2002. SUMMARY The Petitioner's request to rezone the Subject Property and for approval ofa Conditional Use permit for a Planned Unit Development was continued from the September 28th Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. The P&Z Commission recommended the Petitioner revise the submittal to address concerns presented at that meeting. The Petitioner's proposal includes the demolition of the existing office building to construct a 17 -unit townhome development, which is the same number of units requested in the original submittal. The various elements of the proposal are outlined below: Rezoning Request - No Change The Subject Property is currently zoned B 1 Business Office. The Petitioner is requesting approval to rezone the Subject Property to R2 Attached Single Family. The R2 district allows a maximum density of 10 dwelling units PZ-14-06 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting December 14, 2006 Page 3 per acre for multi-family developments. The Petitioner's proposal includes a density of 8.2 units per acre (17 units/2.08 acres), which falls below the maximum density permitted within the R2 District. Conditional Use for a Planned Unit Development - No Change The Petitioner is also requesting approval of a Conditional Use permit for a Planned Unit Development for the townhome development. This request is due to the Village Code's requirement that two or more multi-family residential buildings may be located on the same zoning lot only as part of an approved planned unit development (PUD). The PUD process also allows for unified zoning control over the entire development, which would require formal Village approval if any modifications to the development are proposed in the future. Site Plan - Modified The attached site plan illustrates the proposed layout for the l7-unit townhome development. The development would consist of 5 townhome buildings: (3) 3-unit building, and (2) 4-unit buildings. Each of the townhome units would have a separate entrance, a two-car garage, and a two-car driveway. The pavement width of the access aisle/driveway throughout the development is 24-feet and allows for 2-way traffic throughout the development. The interior side yard setbacks were increased to create larger 'rear yards' for each unit. The design was changed to eliminate the interior landscape area that also accommodated 9 centrally located Guest Parking spaces on the previous site plan. The revised plan calls for locating 8 Guest Parking spaces in scattered clusters throughout the development. Building Desi!P1 - Modified as noted below: o Front elevation: no change from the September 18, 2006 elevations that called for an all face brick elevation; o Side elevation: modified to include all brick/stone materials, includes larger (taller) windows; o Rear elevation: modified to include larger, more pronounced peaks over the windows, which helps to add architectural interest and break-up the elevation, and some units have a balcony on the second floor. Site Access - Modified The proposed site plan indicates that the development will be accessed from Northwest Highway and have one ingress/egress. The access aisle/driveway no longer loops throughout the development, and now includes a cul- de-sac. The access aisle and cul-de-sac would be privately owned and maintained, and would be designated as a Fire Lane. Therefore, parking would not be allowed and signs would be posted identifying the Fire Lane and stating the parking restrictions. The proposed cu-de-sac configuration was modified to ensure optimal ease of emergency vehicle maneuverability. The Fire Department verified the proposed turning radius will allow emergency vehicle movement, if no vehicles are parked in the Fire Lanes. The enclosed plan documents that emergency vehicles will be able to safely enter and exit the site, and the Fire Department confirmed their previous concerns appear to have been addressed with the proposed design. Parking The Petitioner's proposal indicates that each unit would include at least 2 bedrooms plus an office, but no more than 3 bedrooms. The Village Code requires 2 ~ parking spaces per dwelling unit (for multiple-family dwellings containing 3 bedrooms or more). The Petitioner's proposal contains a 2-car garage plus two driveway parking spaces per unit. However, the Petitioner proposes 8 Guest Parking Spaces to be shared by the development, which is one space less than the previous submittal. Currently on-street parking is not allowed on Northwest Highway and the Petitioner would have to work with mOT to determine if creating parking on Northwest Highway is possible. Lot Coverage - No Change The Petitioner's site plan indicates that the project would have 50% lot coverage, which complies with the Village Code's lot coverage limitation. However, expansion and modification to the patios will not be allowed; to do so would bring the project over lot coverage. PZ-14-06 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting December 14, 2006 Page 4 Landscape Plan - Modified The revised plan indicates that a variety of new landscaping materials will be planted throughout the development. The plan indicates that shade, ornamental, and evergreen trees will be the primary screening material around the perimeter of the Subject Property. Also, the plan has been revised to include a berm along the Northwest Highway frontage. The number of shrubs, specifically 5' Arborvitae, has been increased to screen the property, but the plan calls for fewer trees than the previous submittal. The revised landscape plan does not note the existing wrought iron fence along the west lot line. The plan also does not appear to indicate that a fence would be installed along the north and east lot lines, which is contrary to the Village's Crime Prevention Unit recommendation. The Police Department reviewed the revisions dated November 28, 2006 and reiterated their recommendation to install a fence along the north and east lot lines. The Planning Division confirmed that a wrought-iron style fence, similar to the existing fence along the west lot line, would meet the Police Department's requirements. Preliminary Engineering - The Engineering Division reviewed the plans and found that the proposed development will be subject to all development requirements, as detailed in Section 15.402 of the Village Code. A detailed review of the site plans will be performed when the final plans are submitted for a Building Permit. Comments pertaining to the details of the design will be provided at that time. (Their review and recommended approval of the proposed Conditional Use focused on the items most closely relating to the requested relief from the setback requirements.) The Petitioner has not requested relief from Village regulations and is required to meet all Village Code requirements. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION AND ZONING The property is located along a state highway, on a commercial corridor. It is adjacent to a townhome development (Villas of Sevres), and single family residences. The Comprehensive Land Use Map designates the subject properties as General Commercial - Office. However, the development is consistent with a townhome development approved by the Village Board in 2002, which was also designated for General Commercial - Office. GENERAL ZONING COMPLIANCE The following table provides zoning district information for the property's proposed zoning classification and summarizes the proposed setbacks. Proposed R2 Zoning District R2 PZ-14-06 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting December 14, 2006 Page 5 MAP AMENDMENT STANDARDS The standards for Map Amendments are listed in Section 14.203.D.8.a of the Village Zoning Ordinance. When a Map Amendment is proposed, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall make findings based upon the evidence presented to it in each specific case with respect to, but not limited to, the following matters: · The compatibility with existing uses and zoning classifications of property within the general area of the property in question; · The compatibility of the surrounding property with the permitted uses listed in the proposed zoning classification; · The suitability of the property in question to the uses permitted under the existing and proposed zoning classifications; and · Consistency with the trend of development in the general area of the property in question, and the objectives of the current Comprehensive Plan for the Village. The Subject Property is adjacent to an existing townhome development and single-family residences. It would be consistent with recent developments approved in the Village and it would be an appropriate use for the Subject Property. The proposed zoning district is compatible with existing properties within the general area of the Subject Property. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The standards for approving a Planned Unit Development are listed in Section 14.504 of the Village Zoning Ordinance. The section contains specific findings that must be made in order to approve a Planned Unit Development. These standards relate to: · The proposed development complies with the regulations of the district or districts in which it is to be located; · The principal use in the proposed planned unit development is consistent with the recommendations of the comprehensive plan of the village for the area containing the subject site; · That the proposed planned unit development is in the public interest and is consistent with the purposes of this zoning ordinance; · That the streets have been designed to avoid inconvenient or unsafe access to the planned unit development and for the surrounding neighborhood; and that the development does not create an excessive burden on public parks, recreation areas, schools, and other public facilities which serve or are proposed to serve the planned unit development. The proposal is not consistent with the Village's Comprehensive Land Use Map. However, the townhomes are in keeping with previously approved redevelopment projects in this area of the Village and the proposal complies with the R2 Zoning District regulations. RECOMMENDATION The proposed Map Amendment and Conditional Use requests meet the standards for each request as listed in the Zoning Ordinance subject to the Map Amendment being tied to a specific townhome development proposal. Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission approve the following motion: PZ-14-06 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting December 14,2006 Page 6 "To approve: 1) a Map Amendment to rezone the property from B 1 Business Office to R2 Attached Single Family Residence; 2) a Conditional Use permit for a 17-unit townhome Planned Unit Development subject to the following: A. Development of the site in general conformance with the site plan prepared by The Office of John Conrad Schiess, revision date November 28, 2006; B. Development of the site in general conformance with the landscape plane prepared by The Office of John Conrad Schiess, revision date November 27, 2006, but revised to include a wrought-iron style fence along the east and north lot lines; C. Development of the units in general conformance with the floor plans prepared by The Office of John Conrad Schiess, revision date November 8, 2006; D. Development of the elevations in general conformance with the site plan prepared by The Office of John Conrad Schiess, dated November 8, 2006; E. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the Petitioner shall submit a lighting plan that complies with the Village's lighting regulations for the lighting within the development; F. Prior to obtaining the first Certificate of Occupancy, the Petitioner must submit homeowner's association documents for Staff review and approval; and G. The Petitioner shall construct all units according to all Village Codes and regulations, includ.ing, but not limited to: the installation of automatic fire sprinklers, fire hydrants and roads must be located and constructed according to Development and Fire Code standards." The Village Board's decision is final for this case, 1040 W. Northwest Highway, Case No. PZ-14-06. I concur: l~~~ ~ William 1. Cooney, AICP, rector of Community Development Ijmc H:\PLAN\PlalUling & Zoning COMM\P&z 2006\StaffMcmo\PZ~14-06 MEMO 3 (1040 W NW HWY Lownhome project Rezone Condi).doc 4 (/) ^ ::r: i:S' ~~ '< ;: ;) ~, 1) o (I) 'D '" 51 x ;"-"!;io S1 E" ',^, c> @ :5 # 0- ~~f s. f r~' % ~ ~.', ~ ~ '2 o ::t :< $ 5:1 :::J o @" ""' ~" ~ ~ !~ ~ '* ~ - l5 =r """l '"! i? i? ~ a ~ i;;%I 2 ;::; < '* '"! rJ (? ;:le ;l :::r ~ Q., ~ M :r' ~; ?# "Zj ~ i:t ; "'I - "'" ~ t::: ::;: - I>> :ir ~ ~.i "'I ~ V1 '*' <: ri ~ - ;S "'I ! gj (f) ,~ f"', ~. r:Y ~ """ ;r. ff; ~ Wi ~o ~ ,"" """ - S' '" Wi tfI Cl: "'" :;r. ~ z ~ "" " ~ tfI i' '11 "U ~. ?( .". 0, ~3 0>W>0G- NNN o Q Q ::~ ::l ::1 ::'1 ~~ :;:J J ;:::: ;;~:::, . l :1 ~ <<::l <(:.1 \0 ;r;; ZQ {.,";'; <<:~ 1L": nooo()ooao OO1'1(l<)OQO,o 5n5~S55~ g'fg-* rftfgitftT" o' 56' SO- 6 b ~:,. :J. ;:;:: ::::: V1 ;l. ::1 ;l. :;< X~VTl ~ ;,'j) w ~ -:{ <<.:. B' & 0' ~ ~ .~ N 1',) '" (.r> "--.f m Z ^P Z 0'.< '" '" " $: --< " " g '" '" J ::; 2 U '" "'. <.-1" f? 1; ~ ~ ?V '" f,~~ os 8 '2 [5 '" " 5l <>> D> '" ;n Xl ::u OJ )"J '" ,~ '1> Q '" 51, $. < << << '/": if< ~~. ;;; :;Ji '" %. '" t.:. '" " Q. ". ;~~ <<' '-0 1;) is' ~J: :;:, ']. ::u :U ~; :0 :ll ~J :: ~, -<: $' <t: itl W :{ ~ .1f. Of ,::> 0 '"' C! ;E ~? () .-:1 -;x ::r: 0 71_ .,.. is' ,y ::r: D '< . %;: 0 c ;::l 'U 0 (ft Tl 0 9,. S' 0 m' " c,> (f) ~\} ~~. m % ? ~ 1~ 1\1 ~\:1 1'.) 8gg ~ %~ * {;'). fE' i[ 8. 21 fi ~'; 3 ~ o t:'1 Z '"l "'d ';tJ C W "'d ~ "l:i '"l ';tJ o P;: Ul o "'0 .~ ~ t5 ~ E z 8 w I U I: I I:, d ::B 25 <<: "t ~ F'. ~ t3 It: I7:i m 1'1 :..- '. :1 . 0) @ iT ~ ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1040 WEST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY WHEREAS, John Conrad Schiess, Mount Prospect Development Group ("Petitionef), has filed an application to rezone certain property generally located at 1040 West Northwest Highway ("Subject Property'), and legally described as follows: Lot 1 in State Farm Subdivision, being a subdivision of part of the East ~ of the southeast X of Sec. 33, Township 42 North, Range 11 East of the Third Principal Meridian, in Cook County, Illinois, as shown on the plat thereof recorded September 28, 1988 as document number 88447034 Property Index Number: 03-33-407-025-0000; and WHEREAS, the Petitioner has requested the Subject Property be rezoned from B-1 (Business Office) to R-2 (Attached Single Family Residence) District; and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held on the request for rezoning being the subject of PZ-14-06, before the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 14th day of December 2006, pursuant to due and proper notice thereof having been published in the Mount Prospect Journal & Topics on the 7th day of June, 2006; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has submitted its findings and a negative recommendation to the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect; and WHEREAS, the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect have considered the request being the subject of PZ-14-06 and have determined that the best interests ofthe Village of Mount Prospect would be served by granting said request. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILUNOIS ACTING IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR HOME RULE POWERS: SECTION ONE: The recitals set forth hereinabove are incorporated herein as findings of fact by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect. SECTION TWO: The Official Zoning Map of the Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois, as amended, is hereby further amended by reclassifying the property being the subject of this Ordinance from B-1 (Business Office) to R-2 (Attached Single Family Residence) District. E PZ-14-06 Page 2/2 SECTION THREE: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of February 2007. Irvana K. Wilks Mayor ATTEST: M. Lisa Angell Village Clerk H:\CLKOIfiles\WIN\ORDINANC\mapamendment1 040WNWHWYjan2007.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIATION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1040 WEST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY WHEREAS, John Conrad Scheiss, Mount Prospect Development Group ("Petitioner") has filed a petition for a Conditional Use permit in the nature of a Planned Unit Development and Variations with respect to property located at 1040 West Northwest Highway ("Subject Property") and legally described as follows: Lot 1 in State Farm Subdivision, being a subdivision of part of the East ~ of the southeast X of Sec. 33, Township 42 North, Range 11 East of the Third Principal Meridian, in Cook County, Illinois, as shown on the plat thereof recorded September 28, 1988 as document number 88447034 Property Index Number: 03-33-407-025-0000; and WHEREAS, the Petitioner seeks to create a Planned Unit Development providing for the construction of a seventeen (17) unit townhome development; and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held on the request for a Planned Unit Development, Conditional Use permit and Variations being the subject of Case No. PZ-14-06 before the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 14th day of December, 2006, pursuant to proper legal notice having been published in the Mount Prospect Journal & Topics on the 7th day of June, 2006; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has submitted its findings and a negative recommendation to the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect; and WHEREAS, the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect have given consideration to the requests herein and have determined that the requests meet the standards of the Village and that the granting of the proposed Conditional Use permit for a Planned Unit Development and a Variation to allow lot coverage in excess of 50% to accommodate the modified footprint of building two (2) and five (5) additional guest parking spaces would be in the best interest of the Village. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS ACTING IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR HOME RULE POWERS: SECTION ONE: The recitals set forth hereinabove are incorporated as findings of fact by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect. SECTION TWO: That the Conditional Use Permit in the nature of a Planned Unit Development being the subject of this Ordinance is subject to the following conditions: A. Development of the site in general conformance with the site plan prepared by The Office of John Conrad Schiess, revision dated November 28,2006, and further revised to include: 1) modify building two (2) so its footprint is similar to building five (5) and has a three foot (3') off-set and balconies on the second floor; 2) the east setback is no less than seventeen foot (17') and 3) add five (5) additional Guest parking spaces. B. Development of the site in general conformance with the landscape plans prepared by The Office of John Conrad Schiess, revision dated November 27,2006, but revised to include a wrought-iron style fence along the east and north lot lines; C. Development of the units in general conformance with the floor plans prepared by The Office of John Conrad Schiess, dated November 8, 2006; f Page 2/3 PZ-14-06 D. Development of the elevations in general conformance with the site plan prepared by The Office of John Conrad Schiess, dated November 8, 2006; but Building two (2) is modified so it is similar to Building five (5) and has a three foot (3') off-set and balconies on the second floor and the east setback is not less than seventeen foot (17') and five (5) additional Guest parking spaces are added; and E. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the Petitioner shall submit a lighting plan that complies with the Village's lighting regulations for the lighting within the development; F. Prior to obtaining the first Certificate of Occupancy, the Petitioner must submit homeowner's association documents for Staff review and approval; and G. The Petitioner shall construct all units according to all Village Codes and regulations, including, but not limited to: the installation of automatic fire sprinklers, fire hydrants and roads must be located and constructed according to Development and Fire Code standards. SECTION THREE: The President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect do hereby grant approval of a Conditional Use permit and Variation as provided in Sections 14.203.F.7 & Sec. 14.203.C.7 of the Village Code, for a Planned Unit Development for a 17 unit townhome development, all as shown on the Site Plan revision dated November 28, 2006 a copy of which is attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof. SECTION FOUR: The Village Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to record a certified copy of this Ordinance with the Recorder of Deeds of Cook County. SECTION FIVE: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of February 2007. Irvana K. Wilks Mayor ATTEST: M. Lisa Angell Village Clerk H:\CLKO\files\WIN\ORDINANC\C USE,V AR-1 040nwhighwayfeb2007 .doc Mount Prospect Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM FROM: PROJECT ENGINEER "'t.. tJ, 2..1" 0, TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS DATE: JANUARY 31, 2007 SUBJECT: NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC STUDY RECOMMENDATION FOR INTERSECTION TRAFFIC CONTR LIMIT CHANGES FOR ZONE 12 The Engineering Staff transmits their recommendation to approve intersection traffic control and speed limit changes for Zone 12 as part of the Neighborhood Traffic Study. The Residential Intersection Traffic Control Program and Residential Speed Limit Program are the two traffic initiatives that are included in the current Neighborhood Traffic Study. The Residential Intersection Traffic Control Program involves reviewing all neighborhood intersections to determine the proper traffic control. The Residential Speed Limit Program involves reviewing all Village-owned streets to determine the appropriate speed limit. Both programs are being implemented on a neighborhood by neighborhood basis using today's engineering principles. The Village has been divided into 18 neighborhoods or "traffic zones" for the purpose of implementing the programs. With the assistance of a consultant, KLOA Inc., Staff has completed. the study of Zone 12. The neighborhood of Zone 12 is bounded by Central Road to the north, Northwest Highway and Route 83 to the east, Lincoln Street to the south, and Busse Road to the west. SUMMARY Residential Intersection Traffic Control Program A total of 64 intersections were reviewed to determine the proper traffic control in Zone 12. A summary of the recommendations are indicated in the tables below. Zone 12 Intersection Traffic Control Type # of Existing Intersections # of Recommended Intersections All-Way Stop Sign Control 9 8 Two-Way/One-Way Stop Sign Control 24 55 Yield Sign Control 7 0 No Intersection Traffic Control 24 1 Total 64 64 page 2 of7 Neighborhood Traffic Study January 31, 2007 Residential Speed Limit Program In addition to reviewing the intersections, the street system was reviewed to determine the appropriate speed limits in Zone 12. Staff also evaluated the three schools in the neighborhood to determine those streets that should be posted a school speed limit zone. Along those streets there would be a 20 mph speed limit during school hours when children are present. At other times, the speed limit would be 25 mph. Section 18.605 of the Village Code covers school speed limit zones. Therefore, a separate ordinance is not required. A summary of the recommendations are indicated in the tables below. Zone 12 Speed Limit # of Existing Miles Existing % # of Recommended Miles Recommended % 20 mph 3.9 37 0.0 0 25 mph 3.8 36 10.6* 100 30 mph 2.9 27 0.0 0 Total 10.6 100 10.6 toO * 0.7 miles recommended a school speed limit zone Public Notification & Input Once the studies were completed, the first piece of information sent to each of the 1300 properties within the neighborhood was a brochure. The brochure provided information about the programs and invited them to an Open House to learn about the proposed changes. A web page on the Village web-site was created and a 12 minute video explaining the programs was shown on MPTV as additional avenues to get information to the public. The Open House for Zone 12 was held on Wednesday, September 27th at Lincoln Junior High School. Residents could come anytime between 6:00pm & 8:00pm. The Open House included the video about the programs and an area where residents could see the recommended changes on display boards and talk with Staff. Residents could also fill out a Comment Card and provide Staff with feedback. All written comments received via the Open Houses, e-mail or regular mail are attached. 32 residents attended the Open House. A subsequent meeting was held with residents who live along Wa-Pella Avenue on January 9th. The meeting was in response to concerns raised by residents about the recommended removal of stop signs along the street. Approximately 30 residents attended the meeting. Staff presented the results of a recent traffic study and residents were given the opportunity to ask questions and express their opinions on the recommendations. Based on the study performed by KLOA Inc. and Staff, we are recommending changes to Chapter 18 (Traffic) of the Village Code as detailed on the following pages. The recommendations along Wa-PeUa A venue remain unchanged from the original traffic study. page 3 of? Neighborhood Traffic Study January 31, 2007 RECOMMENDATIONS AFFECTING THE VILLAGE CODE Intersection Traffic Control Section 18.2004A: Stop Signs Ordinances to be Repealed Name of Street Direction of Traffic Movement r-- East and Westbound At Intersection With Busse Avenue Cathy Lane Evergreen Avenue East and Westbound Wa-PeUa Avenue Hi-Lusi Avenue NorthandSoufubound Evergreen Avenue Milburn A venue Eastbound We-Go Trail Pendleton Place I Westbound I Wa-Pella Aven~ North and Southbound Wa-Pella Aven~~ North and Southbound l_~~l~~tr:et ______J__North and Southbound We-Go Trail _J Busse Avenue Milburn Avenue Milburn Avenue Section 18.2004B: Yield Signs Ordinances to be Repealed I-- I -- ~- Name of Street Direction of Traffic Movement At Intersection With Busse Avenue East and Westbound I-Oka Avenue - Can-Dota Avenue Northbound Busse Avenue Hi-Lusi Avenue I North and Southbound Busse Avenue Hi-Lusi Avenue North and Southbound Milburn Avenue I~e Street North and Southbound Evergreen Avenue Whitegate Drive l East and Westbound Cathy Lane I Wille Street r North and Southbound I Evergreen A venue Section 18.2004A: Stop Signs Ordinances to be Added Name of Street Direction of Traffic Movement At Intersection With Bobby Lane Northbound Busse Avenue Bobby Lane North and Southbound Cleven Avenue Busse Avenue East and Westbound I-Oka Avenue Busse Avenue Westbound WeUer Lane page 4 of? Neighborhood Traffic Study January 31, 2007 r--- -, - I Can-Dota Avenue Northbound Busse Avenue Cathy Lane Eastbound Can-Dota Avenue Cleven A venue East and Westbound Kenilworth Avenue Cleven A venue Eastbound Lancaster Avenue Cleven A venue Westbound Weller Lane Dresser Drive Northbound Busse A venue Dresser Drive Eastbound Can-Dota Avenue Evergreen Avenue Westbound l Can-Dota Avenue Evergreen Avenue East and Westbound I Hi-Lusi Avenue Hi- Lusi Avenue North and Southbound Busse Avenue Hi- Lusi A venue North and Southbound Milburn Avenue Kenilworth Avenue Northbound Busse Avenue -- I Lancaster A venue Southbound Pendleton Place ~-------l L_ Lincoln Street_ East and Westbound We-Go Trail I Milburn A venue I East and Westbound I Can-Dota Avenue Milburn Avenue .-=r-.. Westbound ~~ Kenilworth Avenue Milburn Avenue Eastbound Lancaster A venue Milburn Avenue I Westbound We-Go Trail Milburn A venue J East and Westbound Wille Street Pendleton Place Westbound Kenilworth Avenue Pendleton Place Eastbound J We-Go Trail I Pine Street C North and Southbound ~ Evergreen A venue I Pine Street North and Southbound Milburn Avenue I Prospect Avenue Westbound Elmhurst Avenue See-Gwun Avenue Southbound Milburn Avenue Sernar Court Westbound Busse Road Waverly Avenue Northbound Busse Avenue Waverly Avenue Southbound Cleven Avenue Waverly Avenue Northbound Milburn Avenue . Waverly Avenue Southbound Pendleton Place page 5 of7 Neighborhood Traffic Study January 3\, 2007 I Whitegate Drive East and Westbound Cathy Lane ~ille Street North and Southbound Evergreen A venue Speed Limit Section 18.2001: Speed Restrictions Ordinances to be Repealed Name of Street Bonita A venue Busse Avenue L- Cathy Lane Elmhurst Avenue Evergreen Avenue Hi-Lusi Avenue I r------ I i Kenilworth Avenue L 1______---------- I Ke_nilworth Avenue I I I I Lincoln Street Lincoln Street Lincoln Street Milburn Avenue Milburn Avenue Waverly Avenue Direction of Traffic Movement East and Westbound Description Entire jurisdiction East and Westbound Between Weller Lane and We-Go Trail North and Southbound North and Southbound 20 East and Westbound 25 North and Southbound 20 North and Southbound North and Southbound Between Central Road and Prospect Avenue Between Elmhurst Avenue and We-Go Trail I Between Douglas A venue and We-Go Trail -l Between Elmhurst Avenue and Mount Prospect Road East and Westbound East and Westbound East and Westbound 25 East and Westbound Between Can-Dota Avenue and Emerson Street 25 East and Westbound Between Owen Street and Mount Prospect Road 25 North and Southbound Between Route 83 and Prospect Avenue 20 North and Southbound Between Golf Road and Lincoln Street 25 North and Southbond Between Council Trail and Central Road 20 25 Between Golf Road and Lorunquist Boulevard 20 Between Lincoln Street and Central Road 20 Entire jurisdiction page 6 of7 Neighborhood Traffic Study January 31, 2007 Section 18.2001: Speed Restrictions Ordinances to be Added I Name of Street Direction of Speed Limit Description Traffic Movement (mph) I Bonita A venue East and Westbound 20 I Between Lincoln Street and Busse Road ! I Bonita A venue East and Westbound 25 1 Between Busse Road and cul-de-sac I East and Westbound 25 Between Weller Lane and We-Go Trail I Bu,",e Av",,", Cathy Lane North and Southbound 25 Entire jurisdiction I I I Cleven Avenue East and Westbound 25 Entire jurisdiction --- - 1 I Dresser DriV~ I Elmhurst AV~ I Evergreen A venue Hi-Lusi Avenue North and Southbound I Hi-Lusi Avenue r North and Southbound 1,1 -I~~~-~~~~~------------~T-----~orth and Southbound I --- L~enilw~rth Avenue __ __~orth and Southbound I Lams Court l North and Southbound I East and Westbound 25 Entire jurisdiction North and Southbound 25 Between Lincoln Street and Prospect A venue East and Westbound 25 Entire jurisdiction I Between Golf Road and Lincoln Street [ Between Lincoln Street and pro~pe~t A venue l Between Lincoln Street and Prospect A venue I Ii Entire jurisdiction _~ Entire jurisdiction _~ 20 25 25 25 25 -- --.---- - , Lincoln Street East and Westbound 25 Between Douglas A venue and Route 83 (Elmhurst Road) - Lincoln Street East and Westbound 25 Between Route 83 (Lincoln Street) and William Street Milburn Avenue East and Westbound 25 Entire jurisdiction Pendleton Place East and Westbound 25 I Entire jurisdiction Pine Street North and Southbound 25 I Between Route 83 and Prospect A~ See-GwunAvenue ~ East and Westbound 25 Entire jurisdiction Semar Court East and Westbound 25 I Entire jurisdiction Wa-Pella Avenue North and Southbound l 20 Between Council Trail and Lincoln Street Wa-Pella Avenue North and Southbound 25 Between Lincoln Street and Central Road Waverly Avenue North and Southbound 25 Entire jurisdiction We-Go Trail North and Southbound 25 Between Lincoln Street and Central Road Weller Lane North and Southbound 25 Entire jurisdiction l Whitegate Drive East and Westbound 25 Entire jurisdiction page 7 of7 Neighborhood Traffic Study January 31, 2007 Please include this item on the February 6th Village Board Meeting Agenda. Representatives from the Engineering Staff and KLOA Inc. will be in attendance to present the recommendations and answer questions. Matthew P. Lawrie Attachments Zone 12 Maps Intersection Traffic Control Recommendation Maps Speed Limit Recommendation Maps Comments from Residents cc: Village Clerk Lisa Angell h:\engineeringltraffic\ritcp\zones7-12-13\vb Jec j 2.doc VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT \frJ VILLAGE TRAFFIC ZONE MAP I 4 6 D COMPLETED ZONES 18 ZONES BEING PRESENTED FOR APPROVAL ZONES UNDER ENGINEERING REVIEW FOR THE PURPOSE OF IMPLEMENTING THE: RESIDENTIAL SPEED LIMIT PROGRAM & RESIDENTIAL INTERSECTION TRAFFIC CONTROL PROGRAM WESTBROO SCHOOL c [t: W UJ en :J. OJ VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT ~ ZONE 12 MAP CENTRAL RD I I DD LINCOLN JR HIGH SCHOOL LINCOLN ST RESIDENTIAL INTERSECTION TRAFFIC CONTROL PROGRAM - ZONE 12 EXISTING CONDITIONS VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 'f!J LEGEND ~ STOP SIGN ~- YIELD SIGN 8 TRAFFIC SIGNAL I u_ " '5 ,. " \l WESTBROOK SCHOOL ] ~ '" 1.l '" " UNCOLN Sf I I' RESIDENTIAL INTERSECTION TRAFFIC CONTROL PROGRAM - ZONE 12 RECOMMENDATIONS VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 'fiI LEGEND ~ STOP SIGN ~ YIELD SIGN 8 TRAFFIC SIGNAL I . ..--J l~ LJ LJ l---.J I ....:::.., il\ ~-- -,,~ " I ~-~..~;:; C:J8D~~ IlWESTBROOK \ r-l ' t T ~ ~~ ~~.:~~~:...~" SCHOOL \~ 111;5 BUSSE AVE U___ ~ "'"A::-..~9t"'" ~ e~G:::----" @E- . -Wi ~~ ~~....... I ~ jig . ~ ~ ~-J l< .. o ~ ~ .. ~ ~ I ,~ lB I~~!\!!\!~...t;: ~_w _~ ;!:5 c c = : W l- Ofl : ~._"" I ~ ie.-. ~._tl e.- .! e.-. ~ 'e.-! _ 8f-- PENDLETON~L!!! LINCOLN 0 D De~ 'I D~ [j [ l ~ JR HIGH SCHOOL iceooL ~. .. ~ ~l ff-i rfI ~!fI "I'CO~\ , -l rm'~ II r f;J Iii '" lD " .J H LINCOLN aT I r----t I, RESIDENTIAL INTERSECTION TRAFFIC CONTROL PROGRAM - ZONE 12 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT '&J I l_ ! SCHOOL J ] SEMAR CT BONITA AVE o a: i .. "'l r--II LEGEND 8 TRAFFIC SIGNAL .-- REMOVAL OF EXISTING STOP SIGN ~ REMOVAL OF EXISTING YIELD SIGN ~ REPLACE YIELD SIGN WITH STOP SIGN .- KEEP EXISTING STOP SIGN ~ NEW STOP SIGN IF INTERSECTION "BLANK", NO CHANGE IS RECOMMENDED I LJ L.J LJ '---.J I UNCOLN ST RESIDENTIAL SPEED LIMIT PROGRAM - ZONE 12 EXISTING CONDITIONS VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT ~ ~ t LEGEND '''= 10 mph 12'5/2 20 mph ...... 20 mph School Zone """" 25 mph 30 mph (per Village Code) ....... 30 mph (per statutory law) '~-' 35 mph 0= 40 mph ...... 45 mph J L-J L-J L-J L-J I '-... ,~~;'F::FI;:,:::,:Jf""~~"~T'~~~'~~~~'~ I t1 ^ [:j ~\t~ tl- 'II '\~,. U JI1 I-I fico II ~ Ii! Ul ii! !l [I " ;1 I r--ll I ill t~ " ~ ~ [j t:l i,~ -J~: U fj !S! Q c ~ I ~ ~ I : ""~~~, I ~ =, J UNCWl ST,Fr~~'r9~r~3'--=fF==r\-"~"b ~"yl'-r4"~ I RESIDENTIAL SPEED LIMIT PROGRAM - ZONE 12 RECOMMENDATIONS VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT ~ t LEGEND <= 10 mph ._~ 20 mph .... 20 mph School Zone ~ 25 mph 30 mph (per Village Code) .... 30 mph (per statutory law) =::2 35 mph = 40 mph .... 45 mph -, r-II I f!! I I LINCOLN JR HIGH SCHOOL UNCOUI ST I rI r---> r---> ~ i Village of Mount Prospect Neighborhood Traffic Study - Zone 12 Open House and E-mail Comments In keeping with past practice, the names and addresses are not included in the comments below. However, they are on record with the Village. We spoke with representatives from Kenig, Lindgren, et aI., Inc. and with representatives from Public Works and Police Department. We understand the philosophies about a more uniform traffic control policy in our village and they explained about the inability of the stop signs being legal in court (we know its something about warrants.) Our contention with removing the stop signs is that we feel the street will become more dangerous for the people especially the children that live on the 0-300 blocks ofWapella. Eight years ago (approx) we petitioned to have four-stops put in at Milburn & Wapella. A study was done and the village at the time recognized the need. There was a noticeable improvement after the stop signs had been put in. We haven't heard any real complaints about the traffic flow on our blocks in recent years. While it is commendable to be always improving our village and working to make our traffic laws defendable; we hope the board will see that in some situations (like ours) what is the "norm" is always a change for the better. Why fix what doesn't seem to be broken? I am opposed to the removal of stop signs on Wapella. I fail to see the logic in the removal of stop signs leading to safer driving and foot traffic at an intersection. Yes, there may be some people blowing a stop sign (although I have not seen it). But, having a stop at an intersection is critical with the number of people, especially children walking, playing, and riding their bikes to and from school. This would be a huge mistake as the intersection is the most dangerous. From my families experience on Wapella, cars do stop at these stop signs and having this occur at an intersection is key. These intersections are already 4 way stops and need to remain that way. In NO way do I feel removing a stop sign leads to a safer environment and I don't feel enough research has been done on interviewing with the residents on Wapella. Before any changes are actually considered, this research and more input from residents is critical! Zone 12 - Thanks for the opportunity to voice our opinions to the signage recommendations. As you are aware there is very strong resistance to this recommendation. I have yet to get a clear answer to the benefit or this change - consistency. Traffic would be moving faster and for longer stretches. This increases the risk for the over 50 kids on the 200 -300 block of Wapella. Is it worth changing something that is not broken? Is a life worth consistency? Ifthe residences don't agree with this recommendation will we be heard? Will an injury or death of one of our kids be the price to pay to see if the recommendation is a success? On yeah, how do we determine if the recommendations are successful? On yeah consistency! As I've told the paper, Wapella residents are extremely concerned and emotional about safety of their blocks with 4-way stops being turned to 2-day stops. I personally feel better, but will still side with my neighbors on the tendency to be afraid and not want change that can be detrimental to our close-nit neighborhood and blocks and, of course, to the safety of our children, school busses, comers, etc. Thank you for letting me give input! Consider "cross traffic does not stop" under 2-ways stop signs. Please consider "stop & go lites" on Central at We-Go or Cathy, between the long stretch between Weller and Prospect Ave. I appreciate all the logic. I have read all the data. But as a long time resident ofWapella, I disagree with the idea of removal or so many stop signs. I fear that street will become a cut through to Central. I am writing to the Village after reviewing the proposed changes to traffic controls in Zone 12 of Mount Prospect. Specifically, I am concerned about the removal of the stop signs at WaPella and Milburn Avenues for WaPella traffic. I live at the comer of this intersection, observe its traffic patterns daily, and strongly oppose the removal of the stop sign. WaPella is the only street that runs straight through from Lincoln to Central. Therefore, it is already a busier street than many in our subdivision. Did our consultants do a traffic study on WaPella when they took their samplings? I witness people speeding down our street aU the time with the stop sign being the only thing that keeps them from going faster. I realize someone has studied peoples' driving habits and concluded that stop signs don't slow people down, but 1 disagree. Additionally, many children walking to and from Lincoln Junior High and St. Raymond's School cross WaPeUa at Milburn. Removal of the stop sign would create a hazard for these children trying to walk home. There is also a bus stop for the elementary schools at this intersection and several of those children also cross WaPella at Milburn. Milburn cuts through the 2- and 300 blocks ofWaPeHa. There are approximately 35 children under the age of six in this short span. Just today, I have spoken to ten neighbors and aU are in agreement that our stop sign must stay. We are trying to get as many people as possible to attend the open house next week to voice our opinions in person. 1 think you will find that the local residents are happy to obey a stop sign and keep their neighborhood safe. The only people that the stop sign inconveniences are motorists cutting through. These people should be using major roads instead of our neighborhood streets. Please, reconsider the proposal to remove the WaPella stop sign at Milburn. Please do not turn 4 way stops into 2 way stops at the comer ofWaPella and Evergreen and the corner of WaPella and Milburn (see attached Zone 12 traffic study recommendations). This is an area that is rapidly turning over to include more and more young kids. Many of them are still learning to ride bikes and cross streets. Removal of these signs will increase the danger for our kids at these intersections...and for what? So that motorists can get places a few seconds faster? It's not worth putting our kids in danger. On my block alone, the 200 block ofWaPella, there are 30 young kids, including my 4 (Emma age 7, Jack age 5, Abby age 2 1/2, Taylor age 1). Please reconsider this recommendation. I am a homeowner living at 218 South Wapella. I have 2 young children ages 4 and 7. Upon reading the proposed changes to stop signs on our street, I was very concerned. On almost a daily basis I witness cars speeding down our street. By removing the 4-way stops at Wapella/Milburn and WapellalEvergreen all that will result is increased speeds and increased danger for the many young children on our street. There are 29 children on the 200 block alone. Most are between the ages of 6 months to 8 years. They are still learning to cross the street and to not chase a ball when it rolls into the street. Kids this age also become very excited seeing friends on the other side of the street and tend to react by running to greet them. They do not have the capacity to understand the dangers and stop themselves from reacting. As parents, we watch our children very closely but accidents can and do happen. By removing these stop signs it will only make things more dangerous for all. I don't understand the reasoning behind the proposed change. I have never seen congestion on our street because of the current 4-way stops. I am asking that you please reconsider the proposal and let us keep our stop signs and keep our familes safe. Thank you for your time. 1 am writing to ask that you seriously reconsider your recommendation to remove two existing stop signs on WaPella Ave, those at Milburn and Busse. I live at 211 S. WaPeUa Ave and have lived here for seven years. I have four young children, 7 and under. In addition, there are about thirty children on my block alone (WaPelIa between Evergreen and Milburn.) I walk my children to nearby S1. Mark's Preschool and St. Raymond, and I often notice cars speeding down WaPella. If you remove two current stop signs, drivers wiU only be able to go faster, which is a danger to my and other children on our block. Also, because WaPelIa is a "through" street from Lincoln to Central, it is busier than other streets in the area. I travel this route at least several times a day, and I feel that removing the stop signs would be hazardous and only encourage drivers to go faster. I am very concerned about the plan to turn the 4 ways stops at Wapella and Milburn and Wapella and Evergreen into 2 way stops. I live at 222 S. Wapella, on the comer ofWapella and Milburn. From my comer I am able to see the large number of children on the 200 block and on the 300 block. There are 28 children on our block, most of whom are under 8 years old. There are roughly 30 children on the 300 block. From my position I can see them riding bikes, chasing balls, and rushing around playing. There are many moms who stay home full time, and many children who are out playing at all hours of the day. I am very concerned that the traffic will be moving too quickly, as they will have an extra block to speed up, and that children will be injured or killed. I also am able to see from my comer view the stream of junior high students coming from Lincoln, and the stream of children walking to and from 8t. Raymonds. In addition, I take my 7 year old to the bus stop at our comer (and will take my 5 year old there next year), and see the 8 children waiting at the stop and getting off after school. I am concerned for the safety of all of these children as well. I see Wapella as a busy street with a lot of traffic, and it does not seem to me that it should be a road to move traffic along quickly. I understand the goal to make everything consistent, but I do not believe all streets have the same demographics. Please do not remove the 4 way stops on Wapella. After attending the Open House and speaking with Paul Hoefert, Matt, the police, and all the other individuals from Public Works, I feel I understand the issue better, but I am still concerned and extremely emotional on the issue of 4-way stops being changed to 2-way stops on Wapella. Safety of the high concentration of children on Wapella is my greatest concern among others: school bus issues on stopping on comers without stop signs, children waiting on comers for school busses without parents, children waiting on comers for school busses for Westbrook (and the children can be as young as 3 years old), confusion from drivers, and what if this doesn't work, who will fix it? If it doesn't work, changes need to happen immediately, not 6 months from that point. Speed limits should now definitely be posted, as I see on West Busse, bymy house. Maybe include Wapella in the decision-making a little bit more, or understand and really listen to our concerns. If the changes are made slowly with input, like tonight, the citizens will be less apt to be upset. I know that some are still very upset as I was originally. Just educate people more on the issue and they may understand it better. I'm a teacher and definitely think that education is the key on this issue! Thank you for the time to express my feelings at the open house! Change is tough for most because that is just human nature, especially with this particular issue. Wapella Residents really stick together and we have even had a 4th of July Parade on Wapella for 55 years or so, and I've only lived in Mount Prospect for5 of those 55 years, so history before me is also important. I was told that the 4-way stops on Wapella were fought for by the community and blocks, so the town did listen to the community previously on this very issue, so please look at the rich history on this block as well before your plan comes to fruition. Thanks again!!!!!!! I live at the comer ofWa-Pella and Milburn, which is a main artery for school foot traffic as it is between two schools. What I have discovered last night is that there has not been sufficient analysis as to how much foot traffic there is at that comer. There is a constant flow of pedestrians crossing that intersection. Without a 4-way stop sign configuration, there may be a need for a crossing guard. I ask both of you to carefully review this unique circumstance and discuss it at length with the consultants and public works prior to the hearing. I would like to encourage the village to plant an observer at that intersection during school rush hour times, A.M. & P.M. I am confident that after a careful observation of the daily activity at that intersection, you will agree that making any changes at the intersection will put children and adults at a much greater risk. Thank you for your consideration. I am writing in regard to the proposed removal of stop signs on my street - Wapella Ave. I live on the 200 block ofWapella and have two young children, ages 7 and 4. I was hoping to get the chance to address the Board at the October 17th meeting, but understand that the vote for our zone will be delayed. I would like to offer a few comments regarding my concerns. I understand that car traffic had been monitored for a short time to collect data for the traffic study. I am concerned that the pedestrian traffic, proximity to two schools, location of bus stops, the fact that we are the only through-street from Central to Lincoln, as well as consideration of the large number of young children living on our street has not been taken into account. There are 68 children living on just the 200 and 300 block combined! The proposed changes will leave Wapella with only one comer having north/south stop signs between Central and Lincoln Avenue. I, as well as many of my neighbors, are very concerned that our street will become traveled more frequently and at a higher rate of speed if these changes occur. On a daily basis we have children crossing over Wapella on their way to and from St. Raymond's School or Lincoln Junior High. We also have District 57 busses stopping at the comers ofWapellalEvergreen and WapeUa/Milbum for a total of 6 times a day taking our children to either Westbrook or Lions Park schools. These children need to cross over Wapella Avenue to reach their stops. Again, our street is unique to Hi-Lusi, Candota, I-Oka, etc. because we are the only through-street from Central to Lincoln Ave. Taking away the stop signs will endanger the children who are walking to/from St. Raymond's, Lincoln Junior High and District 57 bus stops. I understand that the idea is to have consistency across the Village when it comes to stop signs, but extra consideration needs to be taken in the case ofWapella Ave. According to the Mount Prospect Police Department, there have not been any accidents on our street. Let's keep it that way by keeping our 4-way stops. We don't want any of our children to have to pay the price for a foolish decision. Thank you for your time. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18 ENTITLED 'TRAFFIC CODE' OF THE VILLAGE CODE OF MOUNT PROSPECT BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS ACTING IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR HOME RULE POWERS: SECTION ONE: That Section 18.2001, "SCHEDULE I - SPEED RESTRICTIONS," of Chapter 18 of the Village Code of Mount Prospect, as amended, is hereby further amended by deleting the following: Direction of Speed Limit "Name of Street Traffic Movement (MPH) Description Bonita Avenue East and Westbound 20 Entire jurisdiction Busse Avenue East and Westbound 20 Between Weller Lane and We-Go Trail Cathy Lane North and Southbound 25 Between Central Road and cul-de-sac Elmhurst Avenue North and Southbound 20 Between Route 83 and Prospect Avenue Evergreen Avenue East and Westbound 25 Between Maple Street and Mount Prospect Road Hi-Lusi Avenue North and Southbound 20 Entire jurisdiction Kenilworth Avenue North and Southbound 20 Between Lincoln Street and River Road Kenilworth Avenue North and Southbound 25 Between Central Road and Prospect Avenue Lincoln Street East and Westbound 20 Between Elmhurst Avenue and We-GoTrail Lincoln Street East and Westbound 25 Between Douglas Avenue and We-Go Trail Lincoln Street East and Westbound 25 Between Elmhurst Avenue and Mount Prospect Road Milburn Avenue East and Westbound 25 Between Can-Dota Avenue and Emerson Street Milburn Avenue East and Westbound 25 Between Owen Street and Mount Prospect Road Pine Street North and Southbound 20 Between Route 83 and Prospect Avenue See-Gwun Avenue North and Southbound 25 Between Golf Road and Lincoln Street & Direction of Speed Limit "Name of Street Traffic Movement (MPH) Description Wa-Pella Avenue North and Southbound 20 Between Council Trail and Central Road Waverly Avenue North and Southbound 25 Between Golf Road and Lonnquist Boulevard We-Go Trail North and Southbound 20 Between Lincoln Street and Central Road Weller Lane North and Southbound 20 Entire jurisdiction." SECTION TWO: That Section 18.2001, "SCHEDULE I - SPEED RESTRICTIONS," of Chapter 18 of the Village Code of Mount Prospect, as amended, is hereby further amended by inserting the following: Direction of Speed Limit "Name of Street Traffic Movement (MPH) Description Bonita Avenue East and Westbound 20 Between Lincoln Street and Busse Road Bonita Avenue East and Westbound 25 Between Busse Road and cul-de-sac Busse Avenue East and Westbound 25 Between Weller Lane and We-Go Trail Cathy Lane North and Southbound 25 Entire jurisdiction Cleven Avenue East and Westbound 25 Entire jurisdiction Dresser Drive East and Westbound 25 Entire jurisdiction Elmhurst Avenue North and Southbound 25 Between Lincoln Street and Prospect Avenue Evergreen Avenue East and Westbound 25 Entire jurisdiction Hi-Lusi Avenue North and Southbound 20 Between Golf Road and Lincoln Street Hi-Lusi Avenue North and Southbound 25 Between Lincoln Street and Prospect Avenue I-Oka Avenue North and Southbound 25 Between Lincoln Street and Prospect Avenue Kenilworth Avenue North and Southbound 25 Entire jurisdiction Lams Court North and Southbound 25 Entire jurisdiction Lincoln Street East and Westbound 25 Between Douglas Avenue and Route 83 (Elmhurst Road) Lincoln Street East and Westbound 25 Between Route 83 (Lincoln Street) and William Street Milburn Avenue East and Westbound 25 Entire jurisdiction Direction of Speed Limit Name of Street Traffic Movement (MPH) Description Pendleton Place East and Westbound 25 Entire Jurisdiction Pine Street North and Southbound 25 Between Route 83 and Prospect Avenue See-Gwun Avenue East and Westbound 25 Entire jurisdiction Semar Cou rt East and Westbound 25 Entire jurisdiction Wa Pella Avenue North and Southbound 20 Between Council Trail and Lincoln Street Wa Pella Avenue North and Southbound 25 Between Lincoln Street Central Road Waverly Avenue North and Southbound 25 Entire jurisdiction We-Go Trail North and Southbound 25 Between Lincoln Street and Central Road Weller Lane North and Southbound 25 Entire jurisdiction Whitegate Drive East and Westbound 25 Entire jurisdiction." SECTION THREE: That Subsection A, "STOP SIGNS," of Section 18.2004, "SCHEDULE IV - STOP AND YIELD SIGNS," of Chapter 18 of the Village Code of Mount Prospect, as amended, is hereby further amended by deleting the following: Direction of "Name of Street Traffic Movement At Intersection with Busse Avenue East and Westbound Cathy Lane Evergreen Avenue East ancl Westbound Wa-Pella Avenue Hi-Lusi Avenue North and Southbound Evergreen Avenue Milburn Avenue Eastbound We-Go Trail Pendleton Place Westbound We-Go Trail Wa-Pella Avenue North and Southbound Busse Avenue Wa-Pella Avenue North and Southbound Milburn Avenue Wille Street North and Southbound Milburn Avenue." SECTION FOUR: That Subsection B, "YIELD SIGNS," of Section 18.2004, of "SCHEDULE IV- STOP AND YIELD SIGNS," of Chapter 18 of the Village Code of Mount Prospect, as amended, is hereby further amended by deleting the following: "Name of Street Busse Avenue Direction of Traffic Movement East and Westbound At Intersection with I-Oka Avenue Candota Avenue Northbound Busse Avenue Direction of "Name of Street Traffic Movement At Intersection with Hi-Lusi Avenue North and Southbound Busse Avenue Hi-Lusi Avenue North and Southbound Milburn Avenue Pine Street North and Southbound Evergreen Avenue Whitegate Drive East and Westbound Cathy Lane Wille Street North and Southbound Evergreen Avenue." SECTION FIVE: That Subsection A, "STOP SIGNS," of Section 18.2004, of "SCHEDULE IV - STOP AND YIELD SIGNS," of Chapter 18 of the Village Code of Mount Prospect, as amended, is hereby further amended by inserting the following: Direction of "Name of Street Traffic Movement At Intersection with Bobby Lane Northbound Busse Avenue Bobby Lane North and Southbound Cleven Avenue Busse Avenue East and Westbound I-Oka Avenue Busse Avenue Westbound Weller Lane Can-Dota Avenue Northbound Busse Avenue Cathy Lane Eastbound Can-Dota Avenue Cleven Avenue East and Westbound Kenilworth Avenue Cleven Avenue Eastbound Lancaster Avenue Cleven Avenue Westbound Weller Lane Dresser Drive Northbound Busse Avenue Dresser Drive Eastbound Can-Dota Avenue Evergreen Avenue Westbound Can-Dota Avenue Evergreen Avenue East and Westbound Hi-Lusi Avenue Hi-Lusi Avenue North and Southbound Busse Avenue Hi-Lusi Avenue North and Southbound Milburn Avenue Kenilworth Avenue Northbound Busse Avenue Lancaster Avenue Southbound Pendleton Place Lincoln Street East and Westbound We-Go Trail Milburn Avenue East and Westbound Can-Dota Avenue Milburn Avenue Westbound Kenilworth Avenue Direction of "Name of Street Traffic Movement At Intersection with Milburn Avenue Eastbound Lancaster Avenue Milburn Avenue Westbound We-Go Trail Milburn Avenue East and Westbound Wille Street Pendleton Place Westbound Kenilworth Avenue Pendleton Place Eastbound We-Go Trail Pine Street North and Southbound Evergreen Avenue Pine Street North and Southbound Milburn Avenue Prospect Avenue Westbound Elmhurst Avenue See-Gwun Avenue Southbound Milburn Avenue Semar Court Westbound Busse Road Waverly Avenue Northbound Busse Avenue Waverly Avenue Southbound Cleven Avenue Waverly Avenue Northbound Milburn Avenue Waverly Avenue Southbound Pendleton Place Whitegate Drive East and Westbound Cathy Lane Wille Street North and Southbound Evergreen Avenue." SECTION SIX: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of February 2007. Irvana K. Wilks Mayor ATTEST: M. Lisa Angell, Village Clerk Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM FROM: ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERINTENDENT TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS DATE: FEBRUARY 1, 2007 SUBJECT: ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 11 AND 19 OF THE VILLAGE CODE On June 6,2006 the Village Board passed two ordinances amending Chapters 11 and 19 of the Village Code relating to scavengers and solid waste respectively. The changes approved on June 6, 2006 were necessary due to the changes in the solid waste collection program. Subsequently, the Village Attorney has deemed necessary further changes to create a more concise and understandable code relating to scavengers and solid waste collection services. The proposed code changes include, combining Chapter 11, Article XXIII Secondhand Dealers and Scavengers into Chapter 19, Article II Solid Waste Disposal into one chapter and the addition of language concerning single family and multi family fee schedules in Appendix A, Division I. The proposed ordinance does not represent substantive changes to the current code, but rather represents changes that are intended to create a more clear and understandable code in regards to solid waste collection services. The consolidation will also make it easier for the codifiers to link the code to the fee structures. Jason H. Leib ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 11, 19 AND APPENDIX A OF THE VILLAGE CODE OF MOUNT PROSPECT BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS ACTING IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR HOME RULE POWERS: SECTION ONE: Article XXIII entitled "Secondhand Dealers and Scavengers" of Chapter 11 entitled "Merchants, Businesses, Occupations and Amusements" shall be deleted in its entirety. SECTION TWO: Article II entitled "Garbage and Refuse" of Chapter 19 of the Village Code of Mount Prospect; as amended, is hereby further amended by deleting Sections 19.201, 19.202, 19.203, 19.205, 19.207, 19.208 and 19.209 in their entirety and adding new Sections 19.201,19.202, 19.203 to Article II entitled "Solid Waste Collection", which shall read as follows: ARTICLE II SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SECTION: 19.201 19.202 19.203 General Regulations Regulations with Respect to Customers of Solid Waste Collection Services Regulations with Respect to Providers of Solid Waste Collection Services Sec. 19.201 GENERAL REGULATIONS. A. Definitions 1. "Solid Waste Contractor" as used in this Article II shall mean an entity engaged in the business of collecting and hauling garbage, waste, refuse, trash, recyclables, yard materials and bulk items. Such materials are collectively referred to as "Solid Waste" . 2. "Owner" shall include an owner, co-owner, beneficial owner, tenant, renter, lessor, lessee or other type of occupant or manager of a property. iMa nage: 17 5625_1 0 B. Additional Rule Making Authority. The Village Manager may from time to time provide additional rules in a booklet made available, without charge, to the public. The current edition of such publication is entitled, "Solid Waste Services." C. Clean Up Charges. If any solid waste contractor bills the Village for any clean-up of any solid waste due to the failure of the owner to properly dispose of such solid waste, the owner shall pay for such charges, plus an administrative fee as set forth in Appendix A, Division Ii. D. Renters. The provisions of this Article II shall apply to all users regardless of whether the property is owner-occupied or tenant-occupied. An agreement between a property owner and his or her tenant regarding the payment for solid waste collection charges shall not be binding on the Village. E. Penalty. Unless otherwise set forth, any person violating any portion of this Article II shall be fined as set forth in Appendix A, Division III. Sec. 19.202 REGULATIONS WITH RESPECT TO CUSTOMERS OF A SOUD WASTE COLLECTION SERVICE. A. Residential Consumers 1. All solid waste collection for residential dwellings shall be made, in every instance, by the exclusive solid waste residential contractor servicing the village as set forth in a current Solid Waste Contract ("Exclusive Residential Franchisee"). 2. Every occupied residential dwelling unit within the corporate limits of the Village shall be billed for and shall be required to use the services of the Exclusive Residential Franchisee. 3. Such residential solid waste collection shall be performed at least once each seven (7) days unless interrupted by a legal holiday. 4. No receptacle or other discarded items may be placed on the parkway or alley prior to four thirty o'clock (4:30) P.M. on the day before the day designated by the Village for such collection. 5. Except for placement at the curb for collection, solid waste receptacles may be stored only in a side or rear yard and not forward of a principal building. For purposes of such placement, porches, decks, stoops and overhangs shall not be deemed part of the principal building. Receptacles may not be placed in a corner or other exterior side yard unless completely screened from the adjacent street by a permanent fence or dense evergreen planting. 6. No item of solid waste, except those that are disposed of pursuant to subsection 9(e) below, may be placed outside of any building or structure unless such items are placed in an approved receptacle. 7. Approved receptacles shall be removed from the parkway or alley, as the case may be, after collection on the designated day of collection. iManage: 175625_1 0 2 8. Any owner of a single family or multi-family dwelling unit desiring available special services over and above curb service may, by separate contract with the Exclusive Residential Franchisee, secure such special services by payment of an additional fee. 9. It shall be the duty of every residential owner to maintain solid waste receptacles in good order and in accordance with the law. Approved solid waste receptacles shall include only the following and may be used only for the purposes set forth below: a. Garbage Receptacles. Village owned and furnished wheeled carts, green in color, with thirty-five (35), sixty-five (65) and/or ninety-five (95) gallon capacity for the storage and disposal of garbage, refuse, waste, rocks and building materials resulting from do-it-yourself projects and all other items of similar nature which do not exceed the size of the approved receptacle. There is no limit as to the number of such containers that may be used by any residential dwelling unit. b. Yard Waste Receptacles. Biodegradable thirty-two (32) gallon compost bags or thirty-two (32) gallon standard garbage cans with a yard material decal or scavenger owned and provided ninety-five (95) gallon wheeled cart are the only approved receptacles for disposal of yard materials. "Yard materials" are defined as small amounts of sod, grass clippings, garden materials, small brush, leaves, twigs and weeds. Yard materials placed in these receptacles shall not exceed the size of the receptacle or fifty (50) pounds in total weight. c. Recyclable Receptacles. A village owned and furnished thirty-five (35) or sixty-five (65) gallon or ninety-five (95) gallon capacity wheeled cart, blue in color. d. Multi-Family Collection Receptacles. Receptacles furnished by the Exclusive Residential Franchisee may be approved for multi-family residential dwellings where curb service for individual dwelling units is not provided. e. Bulk Items; No Receptacle Necessary. Containers are not required for discarded household appliances, furniture, brush bundles, construction debris and other items as described in the most recent edition of the Village "Solid Waste Services" booklet. Such items shall be neatly placed or stacked along side of approved receptacles for collection. 10. All animal or vegetable matter shall be placed in paper or plastic wrappers or bags before being placed in any receptacle. 11. Mixing of yard waste with any other type of solid waste is prohibited. 12. The fees and the method of payment for the collection and disposal of solid waste are set forth below: a. Amount of Payment. i. Each dwelling unit that is required by either the Village or a property manager to use approved receptacles as set forth in Section 19.202(A)9(a, b and c) shall be assessed in the amount set forth in Appendix A, Division II of this Code. iManage: 175625_10 3 ii. Multi-Family Dwellings using receptacles other than as set forth for single family dwelling units in Section 19.202(A)9(a, b and c) shall be assessed in the amount set forth in Appendix A, Division II of this Code. This amount will be determined by the Village Manager and bear a direct relationship to the entire cost to the Village to effect such collection. iii. Yard material collection and disposal shall require a user fee through the purchase of a village yard waste sticker, which must be attached to every unit containing yard material and placed for collection. The sticker fee, as set forth in Appendix A, Division II of this Code, will be determined by the Village Manager as an amount directly related to the cost of the sticker, its distribution and the cost of the collection and disposal of yard materials. b. Payment Process. i. All residential once-a-week garbage collection charges shall be due and payable to the Village Finance Department on or before the twenty-first day (215t) day after the date of the statement for such charges. ii. Payments by multi-family customers submitted on or before the tenth (10th) day following the date of the statement for such services, will receive a one percent (1 %) discount for that monthly service. iii. Late charges shall be assessed as set forth in Appendix A, Division II of the Village Code. iv. If payment is made sixty (60) days or more after the due date, the property owner, tenant, occupant or manager will be required to remit a deposit equal to two months of the service, in addition to the balance due and all late charges. v. For purpose of this section, the person to whom the last general tax bill on the property was sent shall be presumed to be responsible for the bill. The finance department may send statements to, and enforce collections from, property users other than the property owner. c. Lien Against The Property. Whenever a statement for solid waste collection service remains unpaid for sixty (60) days after the statement for service was mailed, the finance director may file in the office of the recorder of deeds of Cook County a sworn notice of lien claim as set forth in Section 23. 1404(E) of this Code. d. Other Remedies For Nonpayment. In addition to the foregoing, the Village shall have the following remedies for failure to pay for solid waste collection service. These remedies shall be cumulative with any and all other remedies at law and equity: iManage:175625_10 4 i. Whenever charges for solid waste collection services have remained unpaid for more than ninety (90) days after the date of the statement for such services, the water service may be shut off for the premises of such delinquent customer. The customer shall be given at least ten (10) days' written notice of intent to shut off such services, the reason for the shut off, and an opportunity to request and obtain a hearing, within the ten (10) day period with respect to such unpaid charges, before the Village Manager or Finance Director. If the Village Manager or Finance Director confirms the shut-off order, the customer shall be allowed an additional five (5) days, to pay the delinquent charges prior to the shut off of services. Water service, which has been shut off shall not be resumed until all bills, late charges and penalties shall have been paid, including the fee set forth in AppendiX A, Divisions II and III of this Code for shutting off and turning on the water. ii. If the premises is subject to a business license, the business license may be revoked pursuant to chapter 10 of this Code. iii. Such other legal remedies, including injunctive and other equitable relief, as may be pursued by the Village. (Ord. 4776, 2-20-1996; amd. Ord. 5051, 10-5-1999; Ord. 5189, 5-15-2001) B. Non-Residential Consumers Every owner of an occupied or otherwise utilized non-residential building or establishment shall make private arrangements for the collection and disposal of all solid waste on at least a weekly basis. The owner and occupier shall assure that such collection and disposal is accomplished in a prompt and sanitary manner. This shall include the use of receptacles or other containers meeting the specifications set forth in Section 19.202(A)9 above. Other receptacles furnished by a licensed solid waste contractor may be approved for non-residential buildings and establishments. The Village Manager may promulgate such additional rules as may be advisable for such collection and disposal. (Ord. 2888, 4-4-1979; amd. Ord. 4167, 4-3-1990) Sec. 19.203 REGULATIONS WITH RESPECT TO PROVIDERS OF SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SERVICES. A. License Required No person shall engage in the business of removing solid waste within the corporate limits of the Village, except in compliance with the provisions of this Article. 1. Residential Dwellings and Dwelling Units; Exclusive Franchise License: There shall be issued in the Village no more than one solid waste contractor license for the collection of solid waste for any and all residential dwelling units located within the corporate limits of the Village. The Exclusive Residential Franchisee shall furnish all labor, materials and equipment for the removal of solid waste in regular weekly collections, as set forth in the current solid waste contract. The annual fee to be paid by the Exclusive Residential Franchisee shall be as set forth in Appendix A, Division II of this Code or otherwise stated in the Exclusive Franchise Contract. There shall be no limit as to the number of approved receptacles which may be used by a residential owner for weekly disposal. iManage:175625_10 5 2. Solid Waste Collection for Other Than Residential Service: No person shall engage in the pick up or collection of solid waste within the corporate limits of the Village unless that person shall first have obtained a license from the Village and paid the proper license fee. The annual fee to be paid for the license shall be as set forth in Appendix A, Division II of this Code. 3. Transfer stations for refuse disposal shall be designated as Class II establishments and shall pay the annual fee as set forth in Appendix A, Division II of this Code. (11.3405) B. General Operating Requirements or Solid Waste Collectors. In addition to all other duties and obligations imposed by the Mount Prospect Village Code upon collectors and haulers of solid waste, such licensees shall have the following duties and obligations whether such license is a general license or an exclusive franchise license: 1. Equipment: a. Except for large bulky items such as discarded furniture, fixtures and household appliances, licensees shall collect all solid waste in fully enclosed, leak proof trucks. b. Whenever any solid waste contractor provides containers for disposal (other than open construction bins), such containers shall be: i. Drip proof with tight fitting lids or covers; ii. features; Equipped with adequate outriggers and other standard safety iii. Exchanged and replaced on a annual basis (or more often as may be necessary to keep such containers in sanitary condition) with steam-cleaned sanitary containers clearly marked on the front of such container to state the date such container was last cleaned in conformity with this article; and IV. Scheduled for regular collection. 2. Disposal: Licensees shall transport all solid waste to areas outside of the corporate limits of the Village and shall deposit the same only at a lawful site designated and maintained for such purpose under the laws of the State of Illinois. 3. Insurance: Each licensee shall carry the following insurance: a. Workers' compensation: Such coverage shall be placed with a company authorized under the laws of the State of Illinois in amounts sufficient to protect the contractor against liability under the workers' compensation and occupational diseases regulations of the State of Illinois. iManage: 175625_1 0 6 b. Automobile Liability Insurance: Automobile liability insurance coverage in the amounts set forth in Appendix A, Division I of the Village Code; and c. General Liability: A comprehensive liability policy for all operations other than vehicular operations with coverage in not less than the amounts set forth in Appendix A, Division I of the Village Code. d. The licensee shall procure and maintain at its own cost and expense, any additional kinds of insurance which may be necessary for proper protection in the prosecution of the work. The foregoing coverage constitutes the minimum requirements and these requirements shall in no way lessen or limit the liability of the license. 4. Indemnification: The licensee shall indemnify and save harmless the Village against any and all damages to property and injury to or death of any person or persons, including property and employees, agents or invitees of the Village. The Licensee shall defend, indemnify and save harmless the Village from any and all claims, demands, suits, actions or proceedings of any kind or nature, including but not limited to, workers' compensation claims. This indemnity shall apply to all damages or injuries that in any way result from or arise out of the operations connected with the license issued pursuant to this Code. This shall include actions or omissions of employees or agents of the licensee and operations of subcontractors. The Village may require the Licensee to execute an agreement setting forth this indemnity. 5. Care and Performance: Each licensee shall undertake to perform all disposal services in a neat, orderly and efficient manner. Each licensee shall use care and diligence in the performance of its work and provide neat, orderly and courteous employees and personnel on its crews. 6. Sobriety: Each licensee shall prohibit any drinking of alcoholic beverages by drivers and crew members while on duty or in the course of performing their duties. If any employee or agent of a licensee has been found to have any level of alcohol or controlled substance in his or her system, while operating equipment in the Village, the Licensee shall be fined in the amount set forth in Appendix A, Division III and be subject to the loss of the license. This subsection is meant to be a zero tolerance policy and to impose vicarious responsibility on the Licensee. This fine against the Licensee shall be separate and distinct from any criminal or civil charges brought against the driver or operator and shall be in addition to any other penalties. The hearing with respect to this subsection shall be held before the Village of Mount Prospect Administrative Law Judge. 7. Obedience to Other Laws: Each licensee shall obey all other laws regulating its business. iManage:175625_10 7 8. Working Hours: Collection of solid waste from residential properties and commercial or industrial sites adjacent to residential property is prohibited prior to 6:30 a.m., Monday through Saturday. All such collection is prohibited on Sundays. SECTION THREE: Appendix A of the Code of Ordinances of the Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois, shall be amended to insert the following new sections in numerical order by Section number to be and read as follows: APPENDIX A. DIVISION I SectiQn 19.203 RegulatiQns with Respect tQ PrQviders Qf Selid Waste Cellectien B(3)b Auto $2,000,000 B(3)c General $5,000,000 APPENDIX A. DIVISION II Sectien 19.201 General Regulatiens (C) Administrative fee: $25.00 (E) Not less than $100.00/day or more than $2,500.00/day Sectien 19.202: Regulatiens with Respect te CustQmers Qf Selid Waste Collectien Services Individual Dwelling Unit fees: $75.00 Multi-Family: As determined by the Village Manager Yard Waste Sticker Fee: As determined by the Village Manager Late Fee: 10% of bill if not paid by due date and $10.00 per day additional for each day beginning on the 16th day after the due date. 12(d)(i)Expenses Incurred for Shutting Off And Turning on Water: $100.00 12(a)(i) 12(a)(ii) 12(a)(iii) 12(b)(iii) SectiQn 19.203 Regulatiens with Respect te Previders ef Selid Waste Cellectien Services A(1) Annual Fee (Exclusive Franchise Licensee): $100.00 8(2) Other $300.00 C(3) Transfer Stations See Section 11.3405 APPENDIX A. DIVISION III Sectien 19.201 General Regulations E. Penalty: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $2,500.00 for each day that such violation continues. iManage:175625_10 8 Section 19.203 Regulations with Respect to Providers of Solid Waste Collection Services 8(6) Zero Tolerance $2,500.00 SECTION FOUR: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of ,2007. Irvana K. Wilks Mayor ATTEST: M. Lisa Angell Village Clerk H :\CLKO\files\WI N\ORDINANC\CHAPTER 19GARBAGEFEB2007. DOC iManage:175625_10 9 Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: VILLAGER MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS VILLAGE CLERK LISA ANGELL FROM: VILLAGE ENGINEER DATE: JANUARY 30, 2007 SUBJECT: CHILELLI'S SUBDIVISION GOLF ROAD AND DEBORAH LANE Attached please find the Village Board Approval and Acceptance form for the subject project. The project has been satisfactorily completed and I recommend approval of this project. Please place this in line for inclusion at the February 6, 2007 Village Board Meeting. ~ Cc: Glen R. Andler, Public Works Director H: \Engineering\Development\DEV\BOARDACC\ChileIliMm VILLAGE BOARD ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND/OR PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT APPROVAL PROJECT: Chilelli's Subdivision LOCATION: Golf Road and Deborah Lane DATE: January 19,2007 ST AFF APPROVAL ENGINEERING DRAWINGS APPROVED: PLAT OF SUBDNISION RECENED: PLAT OF SUBDNISION RECORDED: AS BUILT PLANS REVIEWED AND APPROVED: PUBLIC WORKS APPROVAL: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL: FIRE DEPARTMENT APPROVAL: J~w f811 ~ Jlt= ENGINEER CLERK CLERK ENGINEER PUB.WKS.DIR. COMM.DEV.DIR. FIRE PREVENTION PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR ACCEPTANCE BY VILLAGE SANITARY SEWER STREET LIGHTS PARKWAY TREES 496' - 8" Sewer Covenant 3 PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS APPROVED WATER SERVICE SANITARY SEWER SERVICE STORM SEWER STORMWATER DETENTION Complete Complete Complete Complete APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, THIS DAY OF ,2007. Village Clerk Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM FROM: VILLAGE ENGINEER TO: VILLAGER MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS VILLAGE CLERK LISA ANGELL DATE: JANUARY 30, 2007 SUBJECT: HILL STREET NATURE CENTER 501 EAST RAND ROAD Attached please find the Village Board Approval and Acceptance form for the su ect project. The project has been satisfactorily completed and I recommend approval of this project. Please place this in line for inclusion at the February 6, 2007 Village Board Meeting. ~~ Cc: Glen R. Andler, Public Works Director H: \Engineering\Development\DEV\BOARDACC\HiIIStNatMm VILLAGE BOARD ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND/OR PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT APPROVAL PROJECT: Hill Street Nature Center LOCATION: 501 East Rand Road DATE: January 22,2007 STAFF APPROVAL ENGINEERING DRAWINGS APPROVED: PLAT OF SUBDIVISION RECEIVED: PLAT OF SUBDIVISION RECORDED: AS BUILT PLANS REVIEWED AND APPROVED: PUBLIC WORKS APPROVAL: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL: FIRE DEPARTMENT APPROVAL: ENGINEER CLERK CLERK ENGINEER PUB.WKS.DIR. COMM.DEV.DIR. FIRE PREVENTION PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR ACCEPTANCE BY VILLAGE ROADWAY PAVEMENT CURB SIDEWALKS STREET LIGHTS PARKWAY LANDSCAPING 451 S.Y. 575 L.F. 2,230 S.F. Covenant Complete PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS APPROVED SITE GRADING WATER SERVICE SANITARY SEWER SERVICE STORM SEWER STORMW A TER DETENTION PARKING LOT SITE LIGHTING Complete Complete Complete Complete Complete Complete Complete APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, THIS DAY OF ,2007. Village Clerk