Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW Agenda Packet 09/12/2000 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA Meeting Location: Meeting Date and Time: Mount Prospect Senior Center Tuesday, September 12, 2000 50 South Emerson Street 7:30 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL Mayor Gerald L. Farley Trustee Timothy Corcoran Trustee Dennis Prikkel Trustee Paul Hoefert Trustee Michaele Skowron Trustee Richard Lohrstorfer Trustee Irvana Wilks II. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES OF AUGUST 22, 2000 III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD IV. I.N. FORMATIONAL UPDATE ON FEMA FLOODPLAIN MAPS Mike Hughes of the engineering firm of Burns & McDonnell will be present along with Village Engineer Jeff Wulbecker to provide an update to the Village Board regarding the revised Floodplain Maps and the success of the appeal of the floodplain and floodway associated with the Des Plaines River and McDonald Creek. When the Maps were originally proposed, the Village had 106 buildings identified in the floodway. With the revised Maps following the appeal, there is one building in the floodway. Also, there were 297 buildings in the floodplain with the original Maps and now that number is down to 122 buildings in the floodplain based on the revised Maps regarding the appeal. As evidenced by the reduction in the number of buildings in the floodway and floodplain, the efforts of the Village to reduce the impact upon the residents in the area affected has been highly successful. This will be an informational update for the Board and will not require any official action. V. DES PLAINES RIVER LEVEE 37 UPDATE Discussions have been under way for close to ten years regarding a proposed Levee or wall along the west side of the Des Plaines River as a physical barrier to prevent the Des Plaines River from flooding adjacent homes in Mount Prospect and Prospect Heights. NOTE: ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND THIS MEETING BUT BECAUSE OF A DISABILITY NEEDS SOME ACCOMMODATION TO PARTICIPATE, SHOULD CONTACT THE VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE AT '100 SOUTH EMERSON, MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 60056, 847/392-6000, EXTENSION 5327, TDD #847/392-6064. Recently, activity has picked up dramatically with discussions among the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and various State agencies including the Cook County Forest Preserve, Village of Mount Prospect and City of Prospect Heights. The Corps of Engineers has proposed to complete the design by June 2001 and award the construction in June of 2002 with construction completion in 2003. The increase in priority for this project is the result of funding availability from the Federal Govemment regarding this project. It has also been estimated that the Village of Mount Prospect and Prospect Heights would be responsible for approximately $855,000 each as the local share for this project. To date, no official action or request for local funds has occurred and the proposed amount is based strictly on the typical percentage of local funding normally requested for Federal projects such as these. However, depending on IDOT involvement, there may be the possibility of a reduction in local sponsor costs for Mount Prospect and Prospect Heights. Discussion continues with the Corps of Engineers regarding details on this project and since nothing has yet to be finalized, there has been no need to consider the expenditure of any funds in the Village's ClP Budget. Village Engineer Jeff Wulbecker will be present to facilitate the discussion and answer any questions the Village Board may have. This item is for informational purposes only and does not require any official action at this time. VI. GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM (GIS) UPDATE The Village has been in the process of developing GIS technology since early 1997. Over the last three years, extensive development has taken place regarding the use of mapping data and various map layers in the use of new aerial photography of the Village. Development has continued and it is now possible to gain some benefit from the investment is beginning to pay off as evidenced by the attachments of various maps included in the packet for informational purposes. It is important to note that as more data is developed for use of the mapping system, the more valuable the map information will be. Database development has also been underway regarding the use of the maps with various data illustrations. In the future, there will be continued development of additional GIS layers of information and the expansion of additional workstations in other Departments that may benefit from the existing data and additional data to come. GIS Analyst Leanne Brehob will be present to answer any questions the Village Board may have. This is for informational purposes only and requires no official Board action at this time. VII. PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT UPDATE This discussion will constitute the state of the streets by the Village Engineer for the year 2000. This is the fourth annual installment. The accelerated Paving and Reconstruction Program is cleady showing value based on the reduction in the amount of effort necessary to resurface and reconstruct streets. The Village is still on target to eliminate the backlog of streets as projected previously. It should be noted in the last four years, 19.8 miles of streets have been resurfaced for an average of 5 miles of resurfacing per year at an average cost of $177,000 per mile. In the same four-year period, 12.8 miles of streets have been reconstructed for an average of 3.2 miles per year at an average cost of $705,000 per mile. Also, due to some favorable bid results, additional work was undertaken to repair streets and street sections, which had been impacted by underground work. The Engineering staff has undertaken several test areas in order to extend the life of newly resurfaced streets. Such experiments include pavement joints and seal coating. To date, there has been no observable difference between the experimental sections and the non- experimental sections and they will continue to be monitored to determine whether a difference exists in the future. Next year, 2001, is slated to be the final year of reconstruction based on the streets identified in 1997 that were in need of reconstruction. In the years between 2002 and 2006, efforts will be focused on resurfacing the street backlog. Village Engineer Jeff Wulbecker will be present to answer any questions any Village Board members may have. This item is for informational purposes only and requires no Board action at this time. VIII. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT IX. ANY OTHER BUSINESS X. ADJOURNMENT H:\GEN\Cow~Agenda\091200 COW Agenda.doc MINUTES COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AUGUST 22, 2000 I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:33 p.m. by Mayor Gerald Farley. Present at the meeting were: Trustees Richard Lohrstorfer, Dennis Prikkel, Michaele Skowron and Irvana Wilks. Absent from the meeting were: Trustees Timothy Corcoran and Paul Hoefert. Staff members present included Village Manager Michael Janonis, Assistant Village Manager David Strahl, Public Works Director Glen Andler, Village Engineer Jeff Wulbecker, Police Sergeant John Dahlberg, Community Development Director William Cooney, Deputy Community Development Director Mike Blue and Senior Planner Judy Connolly. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of Minutes from July 25, 2000. Motion made to approve the Minutes by Trustee Lohrstorfer and Seconded by Trustee Prikkel. Minutes were approved. Trustee Skowron abstained. Approval of Minutes from August 1, 2000 Special Committee of the Whole meeting. Motion made by Trustee Lohrstorfer and Seconded by Trustee Prikkel. Minutes were approved. Approval of Minutes from August 8, 2000. Motion made by Trustee Wilks and Seconded by Trustee Skowron. Trustee Prikkel requested a change in the language regarding the consensus recommendation from the Board concerning Community Center use for senior activities. Minutes were approved with the modification. III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD None. IV. WISCONSIN CENTRAI_/METRA NORTH CENTRAL COMMUTER LINE DOUBLE TRACK PROJECT-UPDATE Village Manager Janonis stated that the Village staff has been in discussions for at least five years with the Wisconsin Central and Metra representatives regarding the upcoming addition of a track line adjacent to the existing track that runs through the northeast portion of the Village. In the 1960s, the railroad owner at that time removed one of the tracks to make it a single line, however, with the purchase of the line by Wisconsin Central and the addition of commuter lines, traffic has increased to the point where an additional track is necessary to handle the traffic volume. Village staff has worked diligently to minimize the impact on the adjacent residents near the Prospect Heights station including the erection of a fence and location of the boarding platform. The second track will be located to the west side of the existing track with the platform in between and construction is slated to begin in September of this year. Construction drawings have been received and reviewed and are consistent with previous commitments made by Wisconsin Central and Metra. Staff has also worked to close the private crossing in the unincorporated area of Mount Prospect referred to as Morrison Avenue. The closing and relocation of the entrance to this private parcel will relieve the train engineers from blowing their whistle at this uncontrolled intersection in the future. Staff has also prepared cost estimates and purchase agreements to install quick- curb at Emmerson and Euclid if in fact the Federal Railroad Association (FRA) requires whistles to be blown at that intersection. Previous commitments from FRA have stated that if a physical device is installed to keep drivers from going around the gates, they would not require a whistle' being blown. He stated the screening fence that is currently in place behind the residents adjacent to the existing platform will be removed during the construction process but reinstalled. It is his intention to put together a Resident Information Bulletin for home delivery this week to provide information to the residents along the track line. This item was for information purposes only and required no Board action. V. ROUTE 83 RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT - UPATE Village Engineer Jeff Wulbecker provided a progress report regarding the construction and stated that the Phase I portion of the project regarding the east side of the street is almost completed. There was a pouring of concrete all day today and another one will be scheduled for this coming Friday. He stated the bridge for the east of the road will be completed within two weeks and IDOT has approved overtime to make sure the bridge construction portion is brought back on schedule. He stated several factors including a labor strike, structural steel shortage and utility location issues have caused the project to fall slightly behind but two-way traffic is still expected by Thanksgiving and the traffic should be shifted to the newly paved east side within three weeks. He does not expect permanent traffic signals, right-of-way restoration and other final items to be completed until next spring. Police Sergeant John Dahlberg provided an overview of the Police activities during the construction process. He stated the Police Department has stepped up enforcement along Emerson and has written almost 250 citations for either speeding or Stop sign violations along Emerson. He stated that the Police and Village staff have spent substantial time addressing the traffic issues of not only Emerson but also adjacent streets in which traffic is found as an alternative to Route 83 during the construction. He stated that Public Works has been very responsive in putting up additional signage within short turn-around periods to improve the flow of traffic through the area. He stated discussions with IDOT have been fruitful in altering the signal timing for the traffic lights and Police personnel have been located at strategic intersections in an effort to educate drivers during the process. He stated that currently Officers are assigned to Prospect and Emerson in the evenings to improve the flow of traffic at that intersection. He stated that even after the left turn from Prospect to northbound 83 was instituted with extensive signage and barricades, 12 citations were issued for people ignoring the signage and barricades. Public Works Director Glen Andler stated that he has retained a Traffic Consultant to assist the Village in suggesting alternatives to the ICC in reviewing the staff suggestions regarding the intersection of Prospect Avenue and Route 83 near the tracks. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: A number of Trustees stated that this project has been a model of cooperation between different agencies and have recognized the extensive staff commitment to make the project move along as smoothly as possible. John Korn, 301 North William, spoke. He referred to a recent article in the Daily Herald newspaper which referred to the construction being completed next year. He felt the article was not entirely accurate due to the fact that only restoration would be completed next year and it appears as if the construction process itself should be completed on time. He suggested Village staff correct these misstatements by the newspaper. VI. MISCELLANEOUS ZONING ISSUES DISCUSSION Community Development Director Bill Cooney stated that there are three major issues that he is bringing forward this evening for general discussion and comment. Those items include lot coverage, tear downs and oversized garages. Lot Coverage This is defined as the amount of land covered by a structure or improvements to a piece of property and the ratios that are established in the current Ordinance are based on the various Zoning Districts. Several items impact lot coverage including storm water runoff and aesthetics to the property and neighboring properties. Some of the staff issues that arise with lot coverage discussions include situations where lot coverage is exceeded as existing and when a resident wants to come in to replace a deck, a patio or a driveway, they are informed they cannot replace such an improvement due to them exceeding the lot coverage. Unfortunately, many of the improvements to a large number of homes in the Village were either built in the County or built when Codes were substantially different. There are several options available for consideration including leaving the lot coverage ratios the same, or credit different amounts of coverages as a percentage of the total, or allow administrative flexibility in allowing residents to restore existing non-conforming coverage. Tear Downs This is defined as the removal or substantial rebuild of single-family homes. This is a significant reinvestment in the community and in the housing stock within the community. While the impact on the neighborhoods may be based on various judgmental differences, the phenomenon has occurred on a very limited basis in Mount Prospect to date. Other communities have taken different approaches to this single-family redevelopment. Oversize Garages Community Development Director Bill Cooney stated it is quite typical that residents have submitted plans for significantly larger structures than current allowed by Code and the Zoning Board of Appeals is involved in considering all garages under 600 square feet. It has been very difficult to define hardship as required by the Code for a significantly larger garage than allowed by Code. General comments from the Village Board members included the following items: There was a concern regarding the definition of hardship for Variation and whether such hardship is consistently used in Mount Prospect as other communities. There was also a suggestion that some consideration be considered for lot coverage related to a ratio of the lot size. Several Board members stated they did not necessarily see an issue with allowing replacement in-kind for structures that are currently non-conforming. There were also some comments regarding the consideration for the administrative option for allowing a percentage of Variation with certain conditions regarding replacement of existing structures. Generally, the Board members felt that additional study needs to be undertaken regarding tear down and rebuild of single-family homes. There was also a concern raised regarding retaining affordable housing within the community and whether the community is at any legal exposure. It was suggested that the ZBA be offered the opportunity to provide input regarding these subjects for the Board to consider. VII. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT None. VIII. ANYOTHER BUSINESS None. CLOSED SESSION Motion made by Trustee Wilks and Seconded by Trustee Lohrstorfer to move into Closed Session to discuss Personnel, Litigation and Property Acquisition. Meeting adjourned into Closed Session at 9:17 p.m. Meeting reconvened into open session at 10:29 p.m. IX. ADJOURNMENT No other business was transacted and the meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m. · ~ Respectfully ~ubmi~_ed, / DAVi E~ ~-~_AH L~-'"'~-- ~ DS/rcc Assistant Village Manager H:\GEN\Cow\Minutes\082200 COW Minutes.doc Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM "rv,~ ~n' ~,~,~ TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E..~ANONIS (TOW t FROM: VILLAGE ENGINEER c~_ It- o DATE: SEPTEMBER 7, 2000 SUBJECT: REVISED FEMA FLOODPLAIN MAPS UPDATE Attached is a letter from Mr. Mike Hughes of the engineering firm Burns & McDonnell that provides a summary of the Revised Floodplain Maps process. The maps have been finalized by FEMA and will become effective on November 6, 2000. As you may recall, the Village filed an appeal to the maps concerning the location of the floodplain and floodway associated with The Des Plaines River and McDonald Creek. The appeal was highly successful, reducing the area within the floodway and floodplain and minimizing the buildings shown to be in the floodway and floodplain. The results of the appeal are quantified below: Buildings in Floodway Buildings in Floodplain 1982 Maps ... 8 110 1997 Proposed FEMA Maps ... 106 297 Final Revised Maps following appeal ... i 122 To achieve the final numbers, it will be necessary to file Letters of Map Revisions (LOMR's) to the new maps for certain properties. This process allows for minor corrections to the map based on specific surveying information obtained by the Village~ The Village has committed to complete this task for the residents. The exact number of (LOMR's) has not yet been determined but is estimated to be approximately 40. The results are especially significant considering the number of buildings removed from the floodway, which has significant building restrictions associated with it. Prior to the effective date of the maps, the Village is required to modify our current floodplain ordinances and to adopt the new maps. Within the next month, these revisions will be brought before the Village Board for their consideration. A follow-up meeting with the affected residents will be held in November to present the results of the appeal and give them an opportunity to view the new maps. This has been a long but successful process. A process that has ultimately resulted in maps that as accurately as possible predict the properties with the potential to experience flooding during a 100-year storm event. {~Vulbecker X:\files\engineer\FEMA\firrnaps\mapupdt3 SePtember 7, 2000 Mr. Glen Andler Village of Mount Prospect 1700 W. Central Road Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 Re: Status of Flood Map Revisions within the Village of Mount Prospect DesPlaines River and McDonald Creek Dear Mr. Andler: As you are aware the revised FEMA Flood Insurance Study (FIS) and the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) for Cook County become effective November 6, 2000. In anticipation of that event and at your request, tkis letter summarizes the actions taken by the Village, the responses to those actions by FEMA and future actions to be taken bY the Village to assure that the effective FEMA mapping of the DesPlaines River and McDonald Creek Flood Hazard Areas within the Village is as accurate as possible. This summary has been organized in chronological order and is as follows: September 30, 1997- Draft Flood Insurance Study and Draft Flood Insurance Rate Maps issued by FEMA. These documents were prepared by FEMA in consultation with the Illinois Department of Natural Resources / Office of Water Resources (IDNR/OWR) to best represent the flood profile and flood boundaries of most rivers and streams within Cook County. A key objective of this work, in addition to improving the accuracy of the documents, was to place this information within one FIS and within one set of FIRM maps for the entire County. Currently this information is contained wit?fin a separate FIS and FIRM for each municipality and within an additional FIS and FIRM for the unincorporated area of the County. July 13, 1998 - Village of Mount Prospect Appeal of the FEMA Draft Flood Insurance Study and Draft Flood Insurance Rate Maps. This appeal took exception to the Flood Hazard Boundary and the Floodway Boundary, aS illustrated on the Draft FIRM, for both the DesPlaines River and McDonald Creek. The work performed in the preparation of this appeal, however, found the anticipated 100-year regulatory flood profiles for these streams to be reasonable were therefore not included in the Village appeal. This determination was based upon dated gathered by the Village of Mount Prospect Engineering Department during the 1986 flood and a review of the Draft FEMA Flood Insurance Study. May 13, 1999 - Submittal of Letters of Map Revision (LOMR) to FEMA. Because of the lengthy time required by FEMA to resolve all appeals of the Draft Cook County FIS and FIRM and because of the'inaccuracy of this information as applied to specific properties within the Village, individual requests for Letter of Map Revision were filed for forty-three properties. Where a property is located near a regulated river or stream, LOMA's are the best way to document that a particular property not located in the ftoodplain or floodway. These LOMA's were filed for homes on properties that were illustrated to be within the Special Flood Hazard Area (FEMA term for floodplain) as illustrated on the currently effective 1982 Flood Insurance Rate Map but had in fact been constructed at an elevatiOn above the 100-year regulatory flood elevation. In addition, these homes were constructed at an elevation above the regulatory flood elevations as proposed by the Draft FIS. 2601 West 22nd Street Oak Brook, Illinois 60523-1229 Tel: 630 990-0300 Fax: 630 990-0301 w~nv. burnsmcd, com i:~t. ProspectlFEMA Map RevisionsllOOlO907OOltr. doc Summary of FEMA Related Actions September 7, 2000 Page 2 Mach 30, 2000 - FEMA Resolution Letter of the Village Appeal. The Resolution Letter is FEMA's official decision related to' the technical issues raised, in-the Village's July 13, 1998 appeal. FEMA determined that the Village had adequately demonstrated that revisions to the floodplain and floodway boundaries of the DesPlaines River and McDonald Creek were warranted. The Village appeal and subsequent decision by FEMA will result in all but two or three properties along the DesPlaines River being removed from what would have otherwise been the regulatory floodway. However, FEMA declined to adjust the floodplain boundary from that illustrated on the September 30, 1997 Draft FIRM. April 20, 2000 - Village Response to FEMA Resolution Letter. This response was submitted to request reconsideration of the DesPlaines River floodway and floodplain boundary as illustrated on the FIRM that accompanied the March 30, 2000 Resolution Letter. FEMA at the very north of the Village made a slight adjustment to the Floodway Boundary proposed by the Village, in an effort to transition this boundary with that of Prospect Heights. However, this FEMA modification resulted in the inadvertent inclusion of 2 to 3 homes within the Floodway. In addition, information was presented to convey to FEMA that the adjustments in floodplain boundary requested by the Village were based upon superior ground survey information. No formal response from FEMA has been received to date. Anticipated Further Action. 1. Based upon a recent conversation with FEMA's consultant, the issues raised in the April 20, 2000 response letter have been found by FEMA to justify further modification to the FIS and FIRM. In short no homes along the DesPlaines River within the Village will be located within the regulatory floodway. The consultant was unsure as to whether further adjustments to the floodplain boundary will be included. 2. A decision on the Letters of Map Revision should be received by the Village shortly after the FIS and FIRM become effective on November 6, 2000. 3. The Village will need to file additional requests for Letters of Map Revision for homes on properties that were not located within the 1982 floodplain but will be located within the floodplain as illustrated on the November 6, 2000 FIRM but have been constructed at an elevation above the regulatory flood elevations as presented in the November 6, 2000 FIS. I trust this information adequately summarizes the stares of the FEMA regulatory flood information applicable to the DesPlaines River and McDonald Creek. Sincerely, BURNS & MCDONNELl_ Michael E. Hughes, P.E. cc: Village of Mount Prospect - Jeffrey Wulbecker 2601 West 22nd Street Oak Brook, Illinois 60523-1229 Tel: 630 990.0300 Fax: 630 990-0301 va~v. burnsmcd, com L. Bdt. ProspectlFEMA Map RevisionsllOOlO907OOltr. doc Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E..1ANONIS t~r,.-X.,~ /~"~ FROM: VILLAGE ENGINEER ~ DATE: SEPTEMBER 7, 2000 SUB]ECT: DES PLAINES RIVER LEVEE 37 UPDATE Recent meetings in the past three months with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) have provided me updated information concerning the proposed construction of Levee 37. The Corps is proposing to construct a levee / wall along the west side of the Des Plaines River as a physical barrier to prevent the Des Plaines River from flooding the adjacent subdivisions in Mount Prospect and Prospect Heights. The current project schedule as stated by the Corps is: · Project design completion by .lune 2001 · Award construction contract June 2002 · Complete construction in 2003 The players involved in the project include: · U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Federal Sponsor of the project, estimated financial involvement $8,280,000. · Illinois Department of Natural Resources / Office of Water Resources (IDNR/OWR) Non-Federal (State) Sponsor, estimated financial involvement $525,000. · Mount Prospect and Prospect Heights Local Sponsors that will assume maintenance responsibilities of the project, estimated financial involvement $855,000 each. · Cook County Forest Preserve District Owns part of the property where the levee/wall will be located. No direct financial involvement. · Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) Owns part of the property where the levee/wall will be located; the River Road and Milwaukee Avenue Rights-of-Way. IDOT is also considering a project to raise the level of Milwaukee Avenue bridge and the adjacent roadway to eliminate the need for a temporary closure across the roadway during a flooding event. Currently IDOT has no direct financial involvement. However, two of the major benefits identified in the Army Corps study are the ability to maintain traffic on River Road during a flood event and the reduced pavement maintenance costs resulting from the elimination of the flooding of River Road. Because these benefits are directly attributable to IDOT property, efforts are underway to secure IDOT participation in the local share of the project. This would reduce the local sponsors costs for Mount Prospect and Prospect Heights. age two... Levee 37 Update September 7, 2000 The recent meetings have centered on pulling the involved entities together to establish the acceptable design features. Areas of emphasis include: · Minimize the acreage of Forest Preserve District property disrupted. · rvlinimize the encroachment onto IDOT ROW. · Coordinate design with TDOT's Milwaukee Avenue design. · IVlinimize maintenance operations. In the upcoming months, the Village will need to approve agreements with the IDNR/OWR as the local sponsor and with the City of Prospect Heights to formalize maintenance responsibilities. (~ulbecker X:\files\engineer\armycorp\levee 37\update-sept00 CC Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS FROM: GIS ANALYST DATE: SEPTEMBER 5, 2000 SUBJECT: GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM UPDATE. A Geographic Information System (GIS) can be described as computer software and hardware that provides a dynamic link between graphic infomxation, such as a map, and tabular information, such as a computer database. The result of this link is an extremely powerful and intuitive way to access, retrieve, and analyze spatially related data. The Village made a commitment to develop GIS technology in early 1997. This commitment began with the purchase of GIS software from Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. of Redlands, California and the commission of full-detail, Village-wide, plan/metric maps, from the Sidwell Company of St. Charles, Illinois. In late 1997 I was hired to fill the GIS Analyst position in the Public Works department. These actions mark the start of the Village's commitment to the development of GIS technology. Over the course of the last three years, I have expended time and energy toward the development of a Village-wide GIS. The first year of GIS development was dedicated to the conversion of base data from the computer aided design software program AutoCAD to the ESRI GIS software program Arc/Info. The steps involved in that conversion process were discussed in detail at the Committee of Whole meeting in October of 1998. Since October of 1998 GIS activity has focused on layer creation, database integration, and product dissemination. The remainder of this document summarizes these GIS activities and identifies the proposed course of action for 2001. 1. GIS Activities I. 1 Laver Creation. A GIS is built upon layers of graphic information. Each layer of graphic information in a GIS is drown using line, polygon or point features. The fundamental difference between a graphic drawing and a GIS graphic layer is the GIS graphic layer features are smart. Smart in the sense that each feature knows its location relative to the other features found within the same layer. Due to the fact smaxt features exist in GIS layers, the ability to dynamically associate attribute information, information about a feature, also exists. This attribute information can be stored directly in the GIS software tables or in an outside database management system (DBMS) such as Oracle or Microsoft Access. The powerful combination of relative location and attribute association provides endless options of high-level spatial analysis and manipulation of each GIS layer. Many issues need to be addressed prior to the creation ofa GIS layer but the two most critical deal with accuracy and maintenance. Accuracy issues are most critical during the creation of the base layers. Base layers are layers of information that provide the building Page 2 Geographic Information System Update September 5, 2000 blocks ia terms of locational reference, graphical reference and/or at~bute reference for other layers. The parcel layer is a base layer. The phrase "building blocks" implies an interconnected hierarchy between GIS layers. The interconnected hierarchy between the different layers creates a domino effect when it comes to layer maintenance. Much thought is placed into the creation and storage of each layer in order to minimize the time and energy needed carry the updates down to the lowest level. In house update procedures exist for many of the GIS layers however; the planimetric layers are. not maintained. The task ofmaintaiaiag the planimetric information captured in 1996 is too great for a one-person operation and not critical due to the fact the Village is "built-out". It would benefit the Village to contract an outside farm to produce orthophotography and planimetric information on a seven to ten year cycle. In periods of major redevelopment, a seven-year cycle is more prudent. The list below briefly describes each of the layers developed over the course of the last two years. Base Layers Parcels Outlines of parcels - stored as lines and polygons.. Attributes include block .numbers, Parcel Identification Numbers and addresses. Orthophotography Image files of 1996 aerial photographs corrected for distortion (ATTACHMENT "A") Planimetric Layers Roads Outlines of roads - stored as lines and polygons. Attr~ute information includes road names. Building Foot Prints ' Outlines of building footprints - stored as lines and polygons. Sidewalks Outlines of sidewalk- stored as lines. Hydrology Outlines of all water features - stored as lines and polygons. Attributes include water body names and water body types. Driveways Outlines of driveways - stored as lines. Fences Outlines of major fence structures - stored as lines. General Larers Trees Points that represent each parkway tree. Attributes include tree identification number. Road Centerline Lines that depict the center of a road. Attribute information includes address ranges and line identification number. Zoning Outlines of zoned areas that exist as polygons. Attribute (ATTACHMENT "B") information includes zoning classification. Page 3 Geographic Information System Update September 5, 2000 Sanitary Sewer Lines and points that represent the sanitary sewer network. (ATTACHMENT "C") Attributes include line identification number, line type, pipe diameter, manhole identification number, manhole lid type, etc. Sanitary Sewer Basins Outlines of each sanitary sewer basin - stored as lines and polygons. Attributes include basin identification number. Street Lights Points that depict every streetlight. Attributes include, identification number. Annexation Outlines of each annexation - stored as lines and polygons. Attribute information includes county identification number, ordinance number, in-house file number and date. Subdivision Outlines of each subdivision - stored as lines and polygons. (ATTACHMENT"D") Attribute information includes county identification number, subdivision name, in-house file number. Police Beats Outlines of each police beat - stored as lines and polygons. (ATTACHMENT "El" and Attributes include police beat number. ATTACHMENT "E2) Fire Districts Outlines of each fire district - stored as lines and polygons. Attributes include fire district number. Park Districts Outlines of each park district - stored as lines and polygons. Attributes include park district name. School Districts Outlines of each school district - stored as lines and polygons. Attributes include school district names. Forestry Sections Outlines of each forestry section - stored as lines and polygons. Attributes include forestry section numbers. Schools Points that represent each school. Attributes include school name and district. Parks Points the represent each park Attributes include park name and district. Fire Stations Points that represent each fire station. Attributes include fire station name and district. 1.2 Database Management System (DBMS) Integration. DBMS integration means a direct connection using a like or linking field between a GIS layer and an Open Database Connectivity (ODBC) compliant DBMS can be obtained. A direct connection harnesses the power of GIS spatial queries to directly update the attributes contained in the DBMS. Unfortunately the DBMS systems found throughout the Village are proprietary and do not allow direct connections. However due to the growth in the GIS industry, many proprietaxy DBMS companies developed import and export modules. These modules allow for indirect update capabilities. Indirect update capabilities mean that the data fi.om a DBMS can be exported into a flat file. The GIS layer can connect to the flat file utilizing a like field or linking field. Indirect connections are of benefit, but more behind the scenes work is needed m maintain data integrity between GIS and the DBMS. To date, a number of indirect GIS/DBMS connections exist or are near completion. A Page 4 Geographic Infonmtion System Update September 5, 2000 detailed description of each of the GIS/DBMS connections or potential connections is listed below. Systems Consultants, Inc. (SCI) Integration. In 1998 the finance department purchased a DBMS from Systems Consultants, Inc. (SCI) of St. Louis, Missouri. Plans have been made to utilize the database in wide variety of inter-departmental applications including water billing and permit tracking. SCI organizes its information based on the property definitions of address and PIN. In order to indirectly connect SCI and the GIS all PIN and address information must agree. The PIN and address information needed to create the connection was created as part of the 1998 board-approved Cadastral Data and Verification and Creation Project. Along with providing PIN and address information the Cadastral Data Verification and Creation Project updated the graphic parcel information and created various GIS layers from information including subdivision, township and range quarter and eighth section, county block number, and address annotation. Although the PIN and address information needed to create the link is available, the nature of the SCI DBMS import module adds complexities to the import process. Currently meetings with GIS and Data Proces,sing are underway to determine the best way to import the PIN and address information. Once SCI is populated a linking field to connect the two systems will exist. Hansen Infrastructure Management System Integration The Public Works Department utilizes a DBMS developed by Hansen Information Technologies Inc. of Sacramento, California. The Hansen DBMS is an all inclusive infrastructure management system Everything from sanitary sewer information to electric line information can be stored in the variety of available modules. Once a module is populated Hansen can be used for work order assignment, permit tracking, complaint tracking, inspection record maintenance, etc. Over the course of the last two years, two joint projects between the water/sewer division and GIS were undertaken. The first and largest of the projects was the creation of an accurate sanitary sewer GIS layer. The purpose of this project was to create a sanitary sewer layer that contained both graphic and attribute information. Accurate graphic information was obtained through the use of a Global Positioning System (GPS) purchased by the Village. The GPS unit, a Pathfinder Pro XR captures data at the sub meter level and uses a real-time differential correction system Real-time differential correction means that the GPS location collected in the field is corrected instantaneously in order to obtain a horizontal position with sub meter accuracy. To ensure accurate attribute information the data collector attached to the GPS unit was programmed to only accept predefmed attributes. Much care was taken to ensure these predefmed attributes were compatible with the Hansen database structure. Compatible data structures should eliminate or minimize import problems. Once populated a link to connect the two systems will exist. The creation of an accurate street light layer was the second project completed with GIS and water/sewer cooperation. The majority of the street light layer was created from a variety of in-house information. However, the water/sewer department field checked the streetlights and identified those that have been Page 5 Geographic Information System Update September 5, 2000 added over the last several years. These added lights were captured with the GPS unit. Again, much care was taken to ensure data structure compatibility with Hansen. ACRT Tree Manager Integration Currently, the forestry division maintains its tree inventory in a DBMS called Tree Manager. Tree Manager is a product of ACRT, a company that resides in Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio. Within the Tree Manager Database each tree is identified by a serial number. Utilizing a grant from the State of Illinois, the forestry division and GIS created a tree layer in which every record in the Tree Manager database was represented by a point and assigned the corresponding serial number. The serial number found in both systems created the link needed to connect to the information indirectly. Infrastructure Management Services, Incorporated Pavement Management System Integration The engineering division maintains a pavement management system developed by Infrastructure Management Services, Incorporated (IMS) of Arlington Heights, Illinois. The pavement DBMS developed by IMS stores a variety of pavement conditions gathered from field-testing. The pavement DBMS uses these conditions to analyze the data and predict the life expectancy of the pavement. Normally this information would be obtained in a tabular report however, a GIS link was created on the road ceuterline file in order to view the information graphically. 1.3 GIS Technolog~ Dissemination. The current GIS Implementation Plan, sanctioned by the Village-wide GIS Committee in May 1996, calls for the following distribution of GIS software and hardware: Item Quantity Distribution GIS NT Server 2 1 at Public Works, I at Village Hall Arc/Info licenses 3 2 at Pubhc Works, I at Village Hall ArcView licenses 27 Distributed to all Villase departments Changes in GIS software and the Village's network configuration allow the Village to carry out a much more practical and cost-effective GIS technology dissemination plan. In the last two years ESRI has developed Interact GIS software programs. At present, the Village utilizes a software program called Map Objects Interact Map Server (MO/IMS). MO/IMS is a tool for authoring, cnstomazmg, serving and administering Interact mappmg applications. The implementation of MO/IMS will enable village employees to view GIS data through standard browser software (Intemet Explorer 5.0). Along with viewing capabilities, employees will have the ability to utilize analysis tools including buffering, querying and address matching in an easy, user-friendly manner. It is expected that many of the department GIS needs will be met with distribution of MO/IMS. Meeting needs with MO/IMS will reduce the number 0fneeded ArcView licenses and reduce training costs. MO/IMS is in working order at Public Works. Village Hall can access the GIS intranet web pages that contain links to MO/IMS, however the maps are too large m access using the current building network configuration. This problem will soon be solved once the fiber optic line installation is complete. Page 6 Geographic Information System Update September 5, 2000 A couple of months ago Public Works arranged with Ameritech New Media the installation of a fiber optic line to extend from Public Safety Building to the Public Works facility. In conjunction with other installations throughout the Village, Ameritech New Media agreed to install this line for a substantially reduced fee. The installation of this high-speed fiber line expands the GIS data storage options. It now becomes feasible to maintain a single GIS database at the Public Works facility. The use of a single database would provide a system that is easier to maintain and monitor. Below is the proposed software and hardware configuration. As the GIS expands the number of required licenses may change. Item Quantit7 Distribution GIS NT Server 1 1 at Public Works Arc/Info licenses 2 2 at Public Works ArcView licenses On a need basis* Distributed to a variety of departments MO/IMS licenses 1 Distributed to all departments * Currently 4 licenses exist in Public Works. A license has been purchased for Community Development and plans are underway to purchase a license for the Fire Department. 2. 2001 Plans · 2.1 Continue the Establishment of GIS Layer Update Procedures. Much data has been collected and organized by the GIS staff in the last two years. Consistent and continuous maintenance of this data is of utmost importance. Formal data maintenance procedures are in the process of being established for the GIS layers however, they are not complete. Maintenance of the PIN and address information is the most complicated to formalize and the most critical. Critical because changes in both PIN and address infomaation will affect outside databases (SCI, Hansen) and applications (Automated Call-Back System) along with a multitude of GIS layers (centerline, parcel, annotation). The establishment and implementation of data maintenance procedures are important for any large scale GIS undertaking. 2.2 Continue GIS Dissemination. Once the fiber line is in working order the capabilities of MO/IMS will be made available on a Village-wide basis. In the last several months ESRI has improved and renamed the MO/IMS software to ArclMS ArclMS retains and expands the capabilities of MO/IMS while still greeting users with a friendly interface. Migration to ArclMS will begin in 2001. Many Village departments will require greater GIS functionality than is available in either MO/IMS or Arc/IMS. Departments can greatly increase GIS functionality through the use of ArcView. ArcView has been purchased for Community Development and plans are underway to supply the Fire Department with an ArcView license as well. The GIS analys~ will work with both these departments in order to assist with training, database integration and application development. It is hoped that by early 2001 an ArcView workstation will be also be up and running in the Police Department 2.3 Expand GIS Layers. The number of layers a GIS can contain is limitless and the Village has only begun its efforts. In 2001, the major GIS layer expansion will be focused on utility information. As with the sanitary sewer layer, the water and combined water and sewer layers will be completed with the cooperation of the public works divisions in age 7 Geographic Information System Update September 5, 2000 charge of each respective utility. Care will be taken to ensure any and all infomaation captured will be compatible with the Hansen database structure. Once imported to Hansen procedures will be set in place to make sure data integrity between the GIS layer and the Hansen DBMS is maintained. 2.4 Continue Data Base Integration The two main goals of database integration for 2001 are to fully integrate the GIS with the SCI DBMS and the Hansen DBMS. As previously stated GIS/SCI integration meetings are being held. Hopefully the import of data to SCI will occur before the end of 2000. Once the data is imported the larger job of maintaining the data link begins. Many employees will have access to SCI and a number of address and PIN changes occur in the Village each year. Strict update procedures to maintain address and PIN synchronicity of the GIS and SCI need be established by the GIS and Data Processing staff. Hansen integration will occur as quickly as the utility GIS data layers are created. Once a GIS utility layer is complete the corresponding Hansen module will be populated. The GIS staff and the public works division responsible for the data work together to develop maintenance procedures. 2.5 Explore Wireless Field Connections. As databases become populated and work order and permit modules become familiar, wireless database field connections become feasible. Wireless connections would enable field crews to receive up to the minute work order changes or additions and inspectors could obtain real-time penmt information. Wireless field connections would also allow GIS updates to be made in the field and posted back the appropriated layer. Wireless communication would undoubtedly reduce paper work thereby increase response time. 3. Conclusion This is an exciting time for GIS in the Village of Mount Prospect. A great deal of progress has been made and will continue to be made toward the development of a Village-wide GIS. In 2001 great strides are anticipated in database population and integration and GIS dissemination. With the installation of the fiber line, the continued effort to upgrade employees desktop computers by Management Information Systems, and the development by ESRI of GIS intemet software makes the dissemination of GIS technology much more practical in the coming year. Departments will soon be able to use GIS software and discover its wide variety of capabilities. Leanne Brehob GIS Analyst ATTACHMF~NT "A" Village of Mount Prospect Orthophotography and Planimelric hlfoi-ffaation ATTACHMENT "B" 2 1 2 1 3 4 4 3 6 5 6 5 8 7 8 7 9 10 9 10 11 12 11 12 14 13 14 13 15 16 16 15 I 17 18 18 17 19 20 19 2O 22 21 22 21 o,so~ GRIIVDEL DR 100 101 100 102 103 102 103 104 105 104 105 109 ~0~ 108 111 110 113 112 116 117 ~7~7 120 ~ 200 ~ 203 2O4 1912 1911 1913 210 o~s3~ 320 321 ~ 2001 322 323 324 2003 324 2002 2005 2004 0 200 FT, ~ SCALE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT S A N I T A R Y S E WE R M A P 1OO SOUTH EMERSON STREET / ~ MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS E L K G R O V E T O W N S H I P PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT W . 1 / 2 N . E . 1 / 4 S e c I 0 - 4 1 1 1 COORDINATE SYSTEM: State PlaNar, IL-E Disclaimer: This map is only a representation of the physical and political landscape of the Village of Mount Prospect. It is o~ovi~[ed for aennrnl informntionni nuronses only nnd should not h~ r~-Ii~d tsnon for Inonl nr finnnninr trnn~nntinn~ Village of Mount Prospect:.,. . ...... ... .... :.." :. · ~FL~'~JOJ~'¢~ ~,x.-o:~."' '"i'". 'i.' :.:' '.': '"' Subdivision Information ':" '"':' :~::::'''':' ":'::'""':~J~:' "'"" '"'""" - ..:::':.:':...il "?.:':'::: · ' 7b'.':.: .:.... ' '::.'.7..":..'.. ': :::*sg4~. · i' :' .... "'" '. '.' "'' ..'.' .... '. '.'.:~r~$~¢33.'.':. :: ::,.."..' : .... ... .'.....::':: :::: ':: · . ---- '::"~ :,:!. ~:!~:':{:::.'::'t i~:'~i,.........,.. ~....,.......... ,.: .:.::.;.~,~: ~':".~ · .: :... '. i.:" i': '.::... ':.. '. ' '.' ':.:'. :.. .: .,..~,t.::: :. '....-:: "..' .'".'::. ~'x.~' ~ ~ ~ ,: ~T3~£S'S~ :' 's'r ~ )~ ' ~0g¥4,~co~i~s. ~..:: i:...:: .... "..i:.':...... Z:' .:: "[:::: .:. · .'::"' · :' ':: :.: :... i ' · '.,.c":':'.i0.' ' : :..::.i. '" I':. I' 9252~32. ::':l ..... ' ....... ."'1:"' ''" '' 'l ""':'.': .... '. '" '.": ':'..'.'.' "c" '~' :.i .{:: ':":':.: ':..:..: ~.:: ''~ "::. i:.'::l:' :i'.. :.' '." .x.i:I ":' ............. !'::'::'i'~:.:'..'.i'ii:i !" t ;:ii': .':.'.".:':":'."'"'Z:~:":..'":.: %." ":;~'i;: ::~i':"..'{: {ii'..:.:'i ..' i..i'~.':: .:" ; i:: :':'. ::. ::.: ': ::: :::i. ............................. ::i . ::..i: .: . .. .. ~ ::: .'" ~. ".: '.:'.." .:. :'.'.: i'7T.777' :_~. ['W'~!~'~W :{. :" i': .::(:.?:i: :':: ................... ' ........................ ':':' '":' "" '"'":'" '"'" ..... ' ...... N '" "':,,.i(,.'"",!' · ' ......" ':" '" ~q.?:' '~'~ "i.". :.i~^'~""' '" :"' :'" '::":'"':'"' :' · 2' ' ' .""Z'.::.''.il' ':..' ::::.' :..i .:: .'q':' .~i'~aND.R:SCq~.' "i'::: Z:......: :' ...Z ':....:.". '.,:...'.' .... .' ".:'..-~. ' · :x292~ ::::~: :i ':'::. ':......' "".".:.i.: .' :. '.. 'i :'!.i':.::... ATTACHMENT "El" Village of Mount Prospect Police Department Police Beats __nrlBBB nBrlB Village Limits Police Beats 6O ATTACHMENT "E2" Village of Mount Prospect Police Department Police Beat 3160 .D I inch = 950 feet  Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TREE CITY USA VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. ]ANONIS ~(~ TO: FROM: VILLAGE ENGINEER DATE: SEPTEMBER 7, 2000 SUBJECT: PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT UPDATE The purpose of this Update is to provide the Village Board with a status report of the Pavement Management Program for the Village street system. In 1996 I presented what I called my "State of the Streets Address" to the Vii age Board. At that time the Engineering Staff had just received the Pavement Evaluation report from our Consultants, Infrastructure Management Systems (IMS). The Report indicated that we had a backlog of 33 miles of streets requiring resurfacing and 12 miles of streets requiring reconstruction based on the structural testing of the street. In 1997 the Village Board approved a 10-year accelerated paving program. The emphasis of the first five years was to eliminate the reconstruction streets backlog. During the remaining five years the resurfacing streets backlog will be eliminated. Following that 10-year period we established the standard that streets would be resurfaced on a 20-year basis, or 1/20 (or 5%)of the streets would be resurfaced each year. We have now completed year four of the program. During these first four years we have made considerable progress. Resurfacing Streets: In the past four years, 19.8 miles of streets have been resurfaced; an average of 5 miles of resurfacing per year at an average cost of $177,000 per mile. This allowed us to stop any streets from deteriorating enough to move into the reconstruction category, however it didn't keep pace with the number of streets that moved into the resurfacing category. This was anticipated since the first five years of the program focused on eliminating the reconstruction backlog, thus it was expected that the--resurfacing backlog would increase. The IMS pavement evaluation program predicted that more miles of streets would move into the resurfacing category than we would be resurfacing. However the critical dollars were spent to assure that the reconstruction list would not increase. Reconstruction Streets: 12.8 miles of streets have been reconstructed; an average of 3.2 miles per year at an average cost $705,000 per mile, in the first four years of the street reconstruction program. Due to favorable street construction bids, we have age 2 Pavement Management Update September 7, 2000 actually been able to repair streets which required various repairs that were not part of the reconstruction backlog. For example, streets that had experienced pavement failure due to sewer trench settlement, such as Henry Street and Elm Street were repaired. We were. also able to inclu~le such repairs as the pavement widening and installation of curb on Oak Street, Lincoln Street, and Helena Avenue and curb and the bike path along Prospect Avenue. All this was accomplished along with the anticipated street reconstruction within the original budget established for the Street Reconstruction Program. The program remains on schedule. The TMS report is used as. a base for predicting pavement life and determining which streets to rehab each year. As part of the evaluation process, the Engineering Staff also physically drives each street every year to determine if any significant deterioration has taken place within the past year. Tn the past 4 years, the Engineering staff has experimented with alternate pavement design and maintenance procedures. In 1997, pavement joints were installed in some of the newly resurfaced streets. This technique may prove to reduce the amount of cracking typically experienced in asphalt pavements. In 1998, a section of pavement, resurfaced in 1996, was sealcoated to determine if this application can extend the pavement life. Isabella between Elm and Owen was be sealcoated and can be compared to Isabella between Owen and Rand. Both sections were resurfaced in 1996. Presently, there is no observable difference between these experimental sections of pavement and the typical sections. It will take a few years before the success and benefits of these applications can be determined. 2001 will be the final year of the reconstruction program. All streets identified in 1997 in need of reconstruction will be complete. Years six through ten (2002-2006) will focus on the resurfacing street backlog elimination. Starting year eleven (2007) and every year after that, the pavement management program will consist of resurfacing of 1/20, or 6.7 miles, of the Village's streets. We will continue to keep the Village Board informed of the progress of the Pavement Management Program with yearly updates such as this. Cc: Public Works Director Glen R. Andler Finance Director, Doug EIIsworth X:\FI LES\ENGIN EER\PAVEM ENT~OO\Pvmg mt.doc Director Water/Sewer Superintendent Glen R. Andler Rederick T O'Donovan Deputy Director Streets/Buildings Superintendent Seen F~ Dorsey Paul C. 8ures Village Engineer Forestry/Grounds Superintendent Jeffrey A, Wulbecker Sandra M. Clark Solid Waste Coordinator Vehicle/Equipment Superintendent M. Lisa Angell James E. Guentner Mount Prospect Public Works Department 1700 W. Central Road Mount Prospect. Illinois 60056-2229 Phone 847/870-5640 Fax 847/253-9377 TDD 847/392-1235 SAFETY COMMISSION AGENDA MEETING LOCATION: MEETING DATE AND TIME: Public Works Department Monday 1700 West Central Road September 11, 2000 Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 7:30 p.m. I. Call to Order I1. Roll Call II1. Approval of Minutes IV. Citizens to be Heard V. Old Business A. Status Report of the Proposed Traffic Calming Improvements along Council Trail VI. New Business A. Request for Yield Signs at the Intersection of Hi-Lusi Avenue and Busse Avenue VII Adjournment NOTE: ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND THIS MEETING BUT BECAUSE OF A DISABILITY NEEDS SOME ACCOMMODATION TO PARTICIPATE SHOULD CONTACT THE VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 100 SOUTH EMERSON STREET, MOUNT PROSPECT, 8471392-6000, EXTENSION 5327, TDD 8471392-6064. ******** TO ALL COMMISSION MEMBERS ******** ******** IF YOU CANNOT ATTEND THE SAFETY COMMISSION MEETING ******** ******** PLEASE CALL MATT LAWRIE 870-5640 IN ADVANCE ******** Recycled Paper - Printed with Soy Ink MAYOR ~ G~rald L. Farl~ VILLAGE MANAGER Michael E. Janonis TRUSTEES Timothy J.Corcoran Viii g f M p P VILLAGE CLERK PaulWm. Hoe£ert a e oount res ectVelmaLowe Richard M. Lohrstorfer De~s O.P.~e! Community Development Department Phone: 847/818-5328 Michaele W. Skowron Fax: 847/818-5329 ~na ~:. wi~s 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 TD~: 847/392-6064 AGENDA MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING LOCATION: MEETING DATE & TIME: Senior Center Thursday 50 South Emerson Street September 14, 2000 Mount Prospect, IL 60056 7:30 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Minutes of August 24, 2000 1. ZBA-28-2000 / 1104 W. Central Rd. 2. ZBA-29-2000 / 521 N. Eastwood 3. ZBA-31SR-2000 / 1 E. Rand Rd. 4. ZBA-32-2000 / 411 N. Emerson St. IV. OLD BUSINESS V. NEW BUSINESS A. ZBA-26-2000 / Urban Retail Construction / 1740 Dempster Street / Conditional Use and Variations to construct a 7-11 Store and Citgo Station. NOTE: This Case is Village Board Final B. ZBA-30-2000 / AutoBarn / 333 W. Rand Rd. / Variations to remodel the building. WITHDRAWN C. ZBA-33-2000 / Mount Prospect Moose Lodge / 601 N. Main St. / Variation to allow six foot fence and other Variations as needed. NOTE: This Case is ZBA Final VI. QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS VI. ADIOURNMENT Any individual who would like to attend this meeting, but because of a disability needs some accommodation to participate, should contact the Community Development Department at 100 S. Emerson, Mount Prospect, IL 60056, 847-392-6000, Ext. 5328, TDD #847-392-6064. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CASE NO. ZBA-28-2000 Hearing Date: August 24, 2000 PETITIONER: Rita Femandes PUBLICATION DATE: August 9, 2000 JOURNAL/TOPICS REQUEST: Variation to construct a 6-foot fence in an R-A District MEMBERS PRESENT: Merrill Cotten Hal Ettinger Leo Floros Elizabeth Luxem Richard Rogers Keith Youngquist Arlene Juracek, Chairperson MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Blue, AICP, Deputy Director of Community Development Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner INTERESTED PARTIES: Carl & Mildred Anderson Ray Costan Darla R. Coyle Rita Femandes Frank Zavask Chairperson Arlene Juracek called the meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. After a motion by Richard Rogers, seconded by Elizabeth Luxem, minutes of the July 27, 2000 meeting were approved, new member, Hal Ettinger, abstained from voting. At 7:35, Ms. Juracek opened Case ZBA-28-2000, a request for a Variation to construct a 6' fence in an R-A District. Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, stated that public notice had been given and introduced the staff memorandum for the item, a Variation to construct a 6 foot fence in an R-A District and said the case would be Zoning Board final. Ms. Connolly said that the subject property is an existing residence on an interior lot in a single-family residential neighborhood that has an existing four-foot fence around the perimeter of the property. She said that the applicant proposes to remove the existing fence and install a six-foot wooden, perimeter fence. Ms. Counolly explained that the Zoning Code permits a five-foot fence but the petitioner is requesting a six-foot fence because the petitioner has a special needs child who requires a taller, sturdier fence to ensure that the child stays in the yard. Ms. Connolly said the child's neurologist submitted a letter of support for the proposed Variation request and agrees with the petitioner's assessment that a taller fence is needed to ensure the child's safety when he is playing in the yard. Ms. Connolly said Staff reviewed the request with the petitioner and suggested possible alternatives to installing a six- foot fence, but the petitioner said that the alternatives would not be as effective as a six-foot fence. Ms. Connolly stated that staff reviewed the petitioner's plat of survey and site plan, and visited the site. She described the subject parcel as being similar to other lots in the Village and not unique in its surroundings, shape, or topography. She said the rationale for the proposed variation is related to the petitioner's child's quality of life. Ms. Connolly said that the proposed fence would not have a significant effect on public welfare or neighborhood character, but the applicant's request for a taller fence and location is based on her child's needs, and no real hardship related to the site exists as outlined by the Zoning Ordinance. Zoning Board of Appeals ZBA-28-2000 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 2 Ms. Connolly reported that, based on the lack of a finding of hardship as defined by the Zoning Ordinance, Staff recommends denial of a Variation to install a six-foot wooden perimeter fence at 1104 W. Central Road, Case No. ZBA-28-2000. She said that the petitioner's request does not meet the standards for a Variation as defined by the Village's Zoning Ordinance. However, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) indicates that reasonable accommodations are made for individuals when ADA regulations apply. The child's doctor told staff that the ADA regulations apply to the child's situation and Ms. Counolly said that if the ZBA grants the variation, Staff recommends that the variation be conditioned to the petitioner only. She requested that provisions be made that require the six-foot fence be reduced to five-feet or removed when the petitioner moves from the property. She concluded her report by stating that the Zoning Ordinance grants the ZBA the authority to make this requirement and that this case is final at the ZBA level. Board members questioned how removal of the fence could be enforced in the future. Ms. Connolly and Mr. Blue said it could be enforced by recording a covenant on the deed and tracked through the Geographic Information System (GIS) or the property transfer stamp process. Raymond Carston, 23324 Robert Johnson St., St. Clair Shores, Michigan was sworn in as the petitioner's representative. He stated that he has a mentally challenged child and attested to the difficulty of keeping the petitioner's child from climbing. He stated the child is extremely hyperactive, mentally challenged and incapable of realizing the danger of busy streets and railroad tracks. He said the child is fond of trains and would try to get to them when he heard them. He stated that the petitioner was also requesting that the finished side of the fence be turned in to prevent the child from scaling the 6' fence. Chairperson Juracek informed Mr. Carston that facing the posts and rails towards the neighbors was contrary to our standards. Mr. Carston said this child was autistic and very agile. Ms. Juracek asked how long the petitioner had occupied the home and was told that the petitioner bought the home July 20. Board members questioned the wisdom of purchasing a home located on a busy street near a very busy railroad crossing, knowing that there is a problem keeping the child in his own backyard. Mr. Carston speculated that the cost of the house was in the petitioner's price range and was probably all that she could afford. In addition, Mr. Carston stated that the child is in a group home and is only in his mother's home seven, non-consecutive days per month. Ms. Luxem asked if a 5' fence, with the smooth side facing the petitioner's property, would be sufficient to restrain the child. Mr. Carston said that a 6' fence would work perfectly and it would be more effective than a 5' fence in preventing an unfortunate accident. Ms. Luxem asked if they had apprised the neighbors of the request and Mr. Carston said they had, and the neighbors had no objections. Board members asked about the child's age and height. Mr. Carston said he would be twelve the next day and was approximately 4-1/2' tall. Mr. Carl Anderson, 4 N. Lancaster in Mount Prospect, was sworn in. He explained that his property backs up to the rear of the subject property and that he objected to the 6' height and to the rough side of the fence facing his property. Darla Coyle, 1358 Grosse Point Road in Michigan and grandmother of the child, was sworn in and said that they had driven along Central Road and saw several fences higher than 5' with the rough side facing the road. Mike Blue said that the Zoning Code permits fences along arterial roads to have the finished side toward the residential use. He clarified that the petitioner's request is to have the unfinished side facing another residence. At 8:05, Chairperson Jumcek closed the Public Heating and asked for discussion from the Board. Board members discussed many remedies to arrive at a workable solution to the request. Mr. Hal Ettinger suggested allowing the 6' fence with the top rail to be located at 5', with the stipulation that the top 1' of the fence be removed at the time of sale of the subject property. Zoning Board of Appeals ZBA-28-2000 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 3 Ms. Luxem said that in order to be fair to the neighbors, approval should be granted only if rails and posts are covered on the neighbors' side. Ms. Juracek reopened the Public Heating to examine the fence sample provided by the petitioner and closed the Public Hearing again at 8:20. Richard Rogers made a motion to recommend approval of the request for Variation to erect a 6' wooden fence with the top rail located l' below the top (at 5'), with the finished side facing in and a shadow box pattern on the exterior of the fence, covered rails and posts on both sides; and recording a covenant requiring that the top 1' portion of the fence to be removed when the petitioner no longer lives at the subject property. Elizabeth Luxem seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Cotten, Ettinger, Floros, Luxem, Rogers, Youngquist, and Juracek NAYS: None Motion was approved 7-0. At 9:25 p.m., Elizabeth Luxem made motion to adjourn, seconded by Keith Youngquist. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Barbara Swiatek, Planning Secretary Judy Connolly, Senior Planner \\V~V02~DEPT~COMDEV~GEN~PLNG~ZBA~ZBA 2000\M]nutes~ZBA- 2g- 1104 W Central.doe MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CASE NO. ZBA-29-2000 Hearing Date: August 24, 2000 PETITIONER: Joaune Clevenger PUBLICATION DATE: August 9, 2000 JOURNAL/TOPICS REQUEST: Conditional Use for an unenclosed porch to be constructed within 25'10" of the front property line MEMBERS PRESENT: Merrill Cotten Hal Ettinger Leo Floros Elizabeth Luxem Richard Rogers Keith Youngquist Arlene Juracek, Chairperson MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Blue, AICP, Deputy Director of Community Development Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner INTERESTED PARTIES: None Chairperson Arlene Juracek called the meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. After a motion by Richard Rogers, seconded by Elizabeth Luxem, minutes of the July 27, 2000 meeting were approved, new member, Hal Ettinger, abstained from voting. At 8:22, after hearing another case, Ms. Juracek opened Case ZBA-29-2000, a request for a Conditional Use for an unenclosed porch to be constructed within 25'10" of the front property line. Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, stated that public notice had been given, introduced the staff memorandum for the Conditional Use and informed the Zoning Board that the case would be Village Board final. Ms. Counolly summarized the case by stating that the subject property is an existing home located on a comer lot on a single-family residential street, currently set back 29'10" from the front lot line. She said the applicant proposes to construct a 4'x19' unenclosed porch along the front of the house which would encroach 4'2" into the required front setback. Ms. Counolly said the petitioner is seeking a Conditional Use to allow the portion of the porch addition along the front of the structure to encroach 4~feet into the required front yard. She said the petitioner is not proposing improvements other than the front porch and wants to improve the appearance of her home and add a desirable feature to the structure. Ms. Connolly said staff conducted its analysis of the proposed Conditional Use by reviewing the petitioner's plat of survey and site plan and visiting the site. She explained that the subject parcel for the proposed Conditional Use is a 7,620 square foot parcel developed with a single family home and the applicant proposes a porch that extends into the front setback. This encroachment of the porch into the front setback is listed as a Conditional Use in the R-A district but meets all other zoning requirements. She said the proposal would have no negative impact on the adjacent area, utility provision or public streets, and would be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. Ms Connolly said the essential character of the neighborhood - a single-family residential area - would not be affected by the proposed Conditional Use and the Conditional Use would not have any significant effect on the public welfare. Based on these findings, Staffrecommends that the ZBA make a recommendation to the Village Board Zoning Board of Appeals ZBA-29-2000 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 2 to approve a Conditional Use for a covered, unenclosed porch to encroach 4-feet into the required front setback for the residence at 521 N. Eastwood, Case No. ZBA-29-2000. Chairperson Juracek asked if Board members had questions for Ms. Connolly. There were no questions and Ms. Juracek asked if petitioner wished to speak. Joanne Clevenger was sworn in and said she wanted to echo Ms. Connolly's words. She said the porch would enhance the appearance of her Cape Cod home and provide additional shade. She stated that the neighbors did not object to her plans. Ms. Juracek remarked that, from the drawings, the porch appeared be an attractive addition and compatible with other homes in the area. Richard Rogers asked Ms. Clevenger if she understood the pomh would need to remain open and unenclosed. Ms. Clevenger said she did understand she could not enclose the porch at a future date. Mr. Hal Ettinger said the drawings seemed to indicate the improvement would consist of the existing concrete stoop with a wood deck abutting it and asked if the porch would be all one surface. Ms. Clevenger said the porch would be an even surface but would be concrete and wood. Leo Floros made a motion to recommend approval of the request for Variation and Conditional Use with the conditions listed in the staff memo. Richard Rogers seconded the motion. At 8:29, Chairperson Juracek closed the Public Hearing and asked for discussion from the Board. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Cotten, Ettinger, Floros, Luxem, Rogers, Youngquist, and Juracek NAYS: None Motion was approved 7-0. At 9:25 p.m., Elizabeth Luxem made motion to adjourn, seconded by Keith Youngquist. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Barbara Swiatek, Planning Secretary Judy Connolly, Senior Planner MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CASE NO. ZBA-31SR-2000 Hearing Date: August 24, 2000 PETITIONER: Collins Signs, Agent for CVS Pharmacy Aimee Tullos 7730 Ravensridge St. Louis, MO 63119 PUBLICATION DATE: August 9, 2000 JOURNAL/TOPICS REQUEST: Variation to increase the number of permitted wall signs on the north wall of the building from one to three MEMBERS PRESENT: Merrill Cotten Hal Ettinger Leo Floros Elizabeth Luxem Richard Rogers Keith Youngquist Arlene Juracek, Chairperson MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Blue, AICP, Deputy Director of Community Development Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner INTERESTED PARTIES: Aimee Tullos Chairperson Arlene Juracek called the meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. After a motion by Richard Rogers, seconded by Elizabeth Luxem, minutes of the July 27, 2000 meeting were approved, new member, Hal Ettinger, abstained from voting. At 8:30, after hearing two other cases, Ms. Juracek opened Case ZBA-31SR-2000, a request for a Variation to increase the number of permitted wall signs on the north wall of the building from one to three. Ms. Juracek announced this was the first time a Sign Review case would be presented to the Zoning Board, but two members of the ZBAhad also been serving on the Sign Review Board until its dissolution. Judy Colmolly, Senior Planner, stated that public notice had been given and introduced the staff memorandum for the item, a Variation to increase the number of permitted wall signs on the north wall of the building from one to three. Ms. Connolly informed the Zoning Board that the case would be Zoning Board final. Ms. Connolly summarized the case. She stated that the subject property had received a Conditional Use permit and approval of setback variations to construct a 10,880 square foot pharmacy with a drive-through drugstore facility. She said the property owner is in the process of demolishing the former Heilig-Meier building, and the redeveloped site will contain 20,880 square feet of commercial space, including the 10,880 sq. ft. CVS Pharmacy. Ms. Connolly said the approved building will front onto three major thoroughfares, Elmhurst Road/Rt. 83, Rand Road/Rt. 12, and Kensington Road. The sign program for the CVS Pharmacy includes wall signs on the three frontages and two monument signs. Ms. Connolly said the petitioner is seeking relief from code requirements to allow the installation of three wall signs on the Kensington Road frontage to advertise that the CVS Pharmacy has a food mart and a drive- through. Ms. Cormolly reported that the Sign Ordinance permits one wall sign per street frontage with a maximum size of 150 square feet for a wall sign. She said the code states that the Director of Community Development may authorize additional signs for distinct uses within the establishment, provided there is a separate entrance from the exterior of the Zoning Board of Appeals ZBA-31SR-2000 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 2 building. She explained that the petitioner's request for two separate wall signs, "Foodmart", 13.5 square feet, and "drive-thru/pharmacy", 25.25 square feet, do not meet the criteria to allow such additional signage listed in the Sign Code. In addition, the combined size of the three proposed wall signs for the Kensington Road frontage exceed the 150 square foot maximum size permitted by code. Ms. Connolly pointed out that the petitioner can fit the text of the three signs within the main signable area and meet code requirements. She said the three signs could be placed together to create one-115.5 square foot sign and the petitioner could also reformat the signs so "CVS" would be the top line of signage, "Pharmacy/Foodmart" would be the second line, under the "CVS", and the "24 Hours" square could be adjacent to the two lines. Ms. Connolly said the petitioner stated that the "CVS/Pharmacy" is a registered trademark logo and cannot be altered. The additional signs identify uses that are located in the CVS store and accessed through the main entrance. Ms. Connolly said the uses described by the additional requested text do not have separate entrances, so a variation is required for the signs. Ms. Counolly reported that, historically, the Village has not approved variations for multiple wall signs at a single business unless over separate entrances. She stated that the proposed sign variation does not meet the standards for a variation because the store is visible from three major streets, the petitioner will have wall signs on all three frontages, and the sign could be reformatted to meet code requirements. In addition, the "Foodmart" sign is not a distinct use that is accessible by a separate entrance as required by the Sign Ordiuance. Finally, the main signable area could accommodate the proposed signage with minimal modifications and still use the trademark logo. Ms. Connolly explained that since the request does not meet the standards for a variation, Staff recommends denial of sign variations to permit an increase in the number of permitted wall signs for Case No. ZBA-31SR-2000 at 1 E. Rand Road. Ms. Juracek asked if, as at the Walgreen's property, signs over an entrance were allowed in addition to a wall sign. Ms. Connolly said they were and that the variation had been allowed in that case because the covered entry gives the appearance of an actual entry. Richard Rogers confirmed that, in the Walgreen's case, the Sign Review Board had required that the archway be moved forward to create an entry "appearance" in order to approve a sign over that area. The Jewel/Osco, Dominick's, and Big "K" have additional signs over the entry only. Mr. Blue said that the Dominick's at Rand and Central Roads was another good example, having the Bank One sign over the door leading directly to the bank. Ms. Luxem said the comer this pharmacy is on is o~ne of the busiest and the extra signs would be a distraction. Merrill Cotten asked if a sign over the drive-through/pharmacy canopy would be allowed, and Ms. Connolly responded affirmatively. Hal Ettinger asked how the store would advertise their food mart without the variation. Ms. Connolly said Exhibits A & C show the acceptable sign arrangement, with the words "Food Mart" and "24-hours" under the CVS logo. Staffhad also suggested they could reduce the size of the lettering and put "Food Mart" next to CVS. Michael Blue, Deputy Director of Community Development, said that wall signs are measured as percentage of the signable area, the wall they are on. That area can be filled with "CVS/Pharmacy" or use smaller letters with "Food Mart/Drive-through" on a second line. The square footage ultimately controls the lettering. Mr. Youngquist said the picture of Border's, with their awnings, was a good example of that. Arlene Juracek pointed out that awnings and window signs were covered under a separate section of the Zoning Code. Richard Rogers said the sign shows CVS and three tenant signs, and asked for confirmation on how many tenant signs were allowed. Ms. Connolly and Ms. Juracek said up to six tenant signs were allowed in the Sign Code. Aimee Tullos, 7730 Ravensridge Rd., St. Louis, MO 63119, was sworn in as a representative of CVS and said that they are willing to compromise, but CVS cannot break-up their registered trademark. She said this Mount Prospect store was their first store in the Chicago area and the residents are unaware of services they provide. They need to get their point across to the public. She said the front elevation was designed to have three separate signs, to be aesthetically pleasing, and to afford separate signage advertising to consumer. Ms. Tullos said signs on the canopy read: "Enter Drive-Through Pharmacy"; "Drive-Through Pharmacy"; and "Exit Drive-Through Phannacy". CVS would be willing to get rid of the "Drive-Through Pharmacy" part of the sign so as not to be so repetitive. Zoning Board of Appeals ZBA-31SR-2000 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 3 Arlene Juracek said the entire front frieze of the building seems to be one large sign, which is extremely excessive, especially on the Kensington frontage. She noted that "Drive-Through Pharmacy is included on the two monuments, and even though CVS is willing to remove the "Drive-Through Pharmacy" on the canopy (where it is more appropriate), the "Drive-Through Pharmacy" wall sign is redundant. Ms. Juracek said it would probably be most appropriate to remove the "Drive-Through Pharmacy" sign from the building. Aimee Tulles responded that the signs on the canopy would not be visible to approaching motorists. When reminded that "Drive-Through Pharmacy" is on the two monument signs for the passing motorists to see, Ms. Tulles noted the monument signs had limited visibility and suggested they could remove the "Drive-Through" on the Elmhurst Road monument sign and reduce the size of the sign from 70 s.f. to 22 s.f. Ms. Luxem asked if they could put "Food Mart" on the monument sign, to be in compliance. Ms. Juracek asked Ms. Luxem if she was suggesting one monument say "Drive-Through" and one say "Food Mart". Ms. Luxem said "Food Mart" could be included on both monument signs, instead of "Drive-Through". Leo Flores pointed out that one of their exhibits shows "CVS/Pharmacy" on two lines and asked if that violated their trademark rule of CVS/Pharmacy being on one line. Ms. Tulles said she had no answer for that. Ms. Juracek suggested CVS put the information on one wall sign, the monument signs and the driveway markers so that no variation would be required. Aimee Tulles said the description of Walgreens signs having a covered walkway which make it appear to be an entry could be compared to what they are asking for, it is the same type of situation. Elizabeth Luxem disagreed and said there is too much square footage and too much redundancy on the requested wall signs. Ms. Juracek said the Zoning Board was reluctant to approve the request as there have been oppommities to change the wording on the monument signs and eliminate the need for the two signs being requested Ms. Juracek said her concern regarding this petition is that CVS wants to put up signs which they say have no visibility. Their justification in the variation request package states the signs are "not illuminated and not very visible from the street". So they are asking for more signage with the reason being nobody can see them. The monument signs would offer greater information to a car driving by than a wall sign which is parallel to the street. Removing the monument signs (as offered by the applicant) is a sub-optimal solution and we are finding this request is redundant and contrary to the aesthetic aspects of our Sign Code and our Village standards. Other Zoning Board members agreed with Ms. Juracek. She asked the petitioner if there was any compromise to her signage request. Ms. Tulles responded that if the variations were not requested~ they would need to work out another plan. Leo Flores made a motion for approval of the request for a Variation to increase the number of permitted wall signs on the north wall of the building from one to three. Elizabeth Luxem seconded the motion. At 9:00, Chairperson Jumcek closed the Public Heating and asked for discussion from the Zoning Board. Ms. Luxem clarified that a "No" vote denies approval of the request. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Flores NAYS: Cotten, Ettinger, Luxem, Rogers, Youngquist, and Juracek Request was denied 6-1. Zoning Board of Appeals ZBA-31 SR-2000 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 4 At 9:25 p.m., Elizabeth Luxem made motion to adjourn, seconded by Keith Youngquist. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Barbara Swiatek, Planning Secretary Judy Colmolly, Senior Planner H:\GEN~PLNG~ZBA~ZBA 2000hMinuteskZl~A-3 ISR-I E Rand.doc MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CASE NO. ZBA-32-2000 Hearing Date: August 24, 2000 PETITIONER: Kevin and Cheryl Murray PUBLICATION DATE: August 9, 2000 JOURNAL/TOPICS REQUEST: Conditional Use for an unenclosed porch within 26 feet of thc front property line MEMBERS PRESENT: Merrill Cotton Hal Ettinger Leo Floros Elizabeth Luxem Richard Rogers Keith Youngquist Arlene Juracek, Chairperson MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Blue, AICP, Deputy Director of Community Development Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner INTERESTED PARTIES: None Chairperson Arlene Juracek called the meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. After a motion by Richard Rogers, seconded by Elizabeth Luxem, minutes of the July 27, 2000 meeting were approved, new member, Hal Ettinger, abstained from voting. At 9:08, after hearing three other cases, Ms. Juracek opened Case ZBA-32-2000, a request for a Conditional Use for an unenclosed porch within 26 feet of the property line. Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, stated that public notice had been given and introduced the staff memorandum for the item. She stated that the subject property is an existing home located on an interior lot on a single-family residential street, currently set back 31.10-feet from the front lot line. She said the applicants propose to construct a 5'x32' unenclosed porch along the front of the house, which would encroach 4-feet into the required front setback. Ms. Connolly explained that the petitioners are seeking a Conditional Use to allow the 32-feet front portion of the porch addition to encroach 4-feet into the required front yard. She said the petitioner is not proposing other improvements and they feel the addition will improve the appearance of their home and add a desirable feature to the structure. Ms. Connolly said that, to conduct its analysis of the proposed Conditional Use, staff reviewed the petitioner's plat of survey and site plan and visited the site. She said the subject parcel is a 7,620 square foot parcel with a single family home and the applicant proposes to build a porch that extends into the front setback. The encroachment of the porch into the front setback is listed as a Conditional Use in the R-A district and meets all other zoning requirements. Ms. Connolly explained that the proposal would have no negative impact on the adjacent arca, utility provision or public streets. She said the proposed Conditional Use would be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance requirements and the essential character of the neighborhood - a single-family residential area - would not be affected by the proposed Conditional Use and the Conditional Use would not have any significant effect on the public welfare~ Zoning Board of Appeals ZBA-32-2000 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 2 Ms. Connolly gave Staffs recommendation that the ZBA make a recommendation to the Village Board, whose decision is final for this case, to approve a Conditional Use for a covered, unenclosed porch to encroach 4-feet into the required front setback for the residence at 411 N. Emerson Street, Case No. ZBA-32-2000. The petitioner, Kevin Murray, was sworn in and testified he had lived in the house for 41 years, was raised there and was now raising his children in the same house. He wanted to add a front porch for the family's enjoyment. He said he thought the porch addition would be compatible with the area and mentioned several other front porches in the immediate vicinity. Ms. Juracek said she could understand his reasons for wanting a porch addition. Richard Rogers asked if Mr. Murray understood he could never enclose the porch or convert it to a room addition. Mr. Murray said he realized that. Richard Rogers made a motion to recommend approval of the request for a Conditional Use for an unenclosed porch within 26 feet of the property line, with the conditions listed in the staffmemo. Leo Floros seconded the motion; At 9:12, Chairperson Juracek closed the Public Heating and asked for discussion from the Board. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Cotten, Ettmger, Floros, Luxem, Rogers, Youngquist, and Juracek NAYS: None Motion was approved 7-0. At 9:25 p.m., Elizabeth Luxem made motion to adjourn, seconded by Keith Youngquist. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Barbara Swiatek, Planning Secretary Judy Counolly, Senior Planner