Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW Agenda Packet 12/09/2003COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA Meeting Location: Mt. Prospect Park District Community Center 1000 West Central Road Meeting Date and Time: Tuesday, December 9, 2003 7:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL Mayor Gerald L. Farley Trustee Timothy Corcoran Trustee Michaele Skowron Trustee Paul Hoefert Trustee Irvana Wilks Trustee Richard Lohrstorfer Trustee Michael Zadel II. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 11, 2003 Ill. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD IV. PRIMECO INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE FEE LITIGATION In 1997, the Illinois State Legislature created the Infrastructure Maintenance Fee (IMF) as a means of simplifying the long-standing "Franchise Agreement" system that governed how utilities operated within municipal rights-of-way. Mount Prospect, along with most other municipalities in the State, adopted the IMF in lieu of executing individual franchise agreements with the then rapidly expanding telecommunications industry. Since its adoption, the IMF has generated approximately $250,000 per year for the Village. The Constitutionality of the IMF was challenged by PrimeCo in a Suit against the City of Chicago and the Village of Skokie. Mount Prospect, through the Northwest Municipal Conference (NWMC), has contributed modest funding to Skokie to help underwrite the cost of defending the pending Suit since all municipalities have a strong interest in seeing the IMF legislation upheld as valid. The litigation has progressed to the point where the IMF has been declared invalid as to wireless telecommunication carriers, but the question is still undecided as to landline carriers. There is also a question as to whether wireless carriers are entitled to a refund of previously collected fees (about $400,000 in the case of Mount Prospect). As to these outstanding issues, the Court recently certified a Class Action Suit naming all municipalities in the State that have IMF provisions in place. As a named class defendant, Mount Prospect has the option of mounting a joint defense with other named defendants or "opting out" of the litigation and defending against the same issues on our own. After consulting with the Village Attorney, it is staff's recommendation that Mount Prospect join in a joint defense of the IMF Statute. Through the NWMC, a legal fund cost-sharing formula has been crafted based on population ($.25 per capita). Mount Prospect's initial assessment would be approximately $14,000. The NWMC is requesting that all municipalities participating in the joint defense execute an Intergovernmental Agreement. NOTE: ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND THIS MEETING BUT BECAUSE OF A DISABILITY NEEDS SOME ACCOMMODA TION TO PARTICIPATE, SHOULD CONTACT THE VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 100 SOUTH EMERSON, MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 60056, 847/392.6000, EXTENSION 5327, TDD #~47/392-6064. VI. VII. Background information has been provided as part of the Committee of the Whole package. Village Attorney Everette Hill along with appropriate staff will be in attendance to facilitate discussion and answer questions. ABANDONED SHOPPING CART AMENDMENTS The Village continues to wrestle with the eyesore and expense of removing abandoned shopping carts from public rights-of-way. The current regulations are not punitive enough to motivate businesses to either prevent shopping carts from leaving their premises or actively recover carts from rights-of-way or the Public Works facility. The Village currently incurs upwards of $17,000 in overtime expense annually to pick up abandoned carts. Staff would like to discuss several changes to the current regulations designed to 1) motivate businesses to keep shopping cads from leaving their property and 2) ensure an easily enforceable mechanism for the Village to recover its out of pocket costs, including from out of town businesses. The attached report provides pertinent background information. Appropriate staff will be in attendance to facilitate discussion and answer questions. STAR LINE CONSULTING CONTRACT Mount Prospect has been a participant in the initial planning for a mass transit system that would connect the Northwest Suburbs (located along the Northwest Tollway (I-90/94) with the City of Chicago. That planning process has resulted in the development of the STAR Line proposal which is a melding of our own "Northwest Transit Corridor" Study and "Outer Circumferential Service" (along the E.J. & E Railway) planning efforts. With Metra as the lead transit agency and dozens of communities supporting the plan, a strong push is being made to secure substantial Federal funding for this $1.2 billion project as part of the next Federal Transportation Funding Bill. To that end, it is imperative that local communities work together, as well as with Metra, to develop a technically feasible and financially workable plan that will garner Federal support in a highly competitive "scramble" for transportation dollars. The STAR Line Municipal Task Force (of which Mount Prospect is a member) is strongly recommending that a consultant be retained to further study strategic policy, financial and advocacy issues critical to the success of the project. Mount Prospect has previously committed approximately $10,000 to early planning efforts. The Task Force leadership, with technical assistance from the Northwest Municipal Conference (NWMC), is asking members to commit up to $20,000 each toward underwriting the expense of further study. It is currently estimated that 2004 costs would be about $4,000 per community. Communities are being asked to adopt a Resolution memorializing said financial commitment. Due to the future economic benefits Mount Prospect would derive from implementation of the STAR Line project, staff recommends continued financial support for Task Force activities. Background information is provided. Appropriate staff will be in attendance to facilitate discussion and answer questions. POTENTIAL CODE AMENDMENTS & RELATED ISSUES On a day-to-day basis, staff sometimes finds that the Municipal Code either does not address, or addresses inadequately, citizen complaints or staff identified concerns regarding the upkeep, development or use of one's property. Additionally, over time, staff finds that current regulations are not keeping pace with prevailing trends in these same areas. As a result, from time-to-time, staff brings forward a "laundry list" of such concerns and issues for discussion by and direction from the Village Board prior to formally processing a number of potential Text Amendments. Zoning issues are the focus of this discussion. In addition, to the attached memorandum, staffwill make a power point presentation at the Committee of the Whole meeting highlighting the nuances of each issue, as well answer questions and facilitate discussion. VIII. IX. X. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT ANY OTHER BUSINESS ADJOURNMENT CLOSED SESSION PERSONNEL: 5 ILCS 120/2 (C) (2). "Collective negotiating matters between the public body and its employees or their representatives, or deliberations concerning salary schedules for one or more classes of employees." WRITTEN MINUTES OF MEETINGS: 5 ILCS 120/2.06 (c). "Each public body shall periodically, but no less than semi-annually, meet to review minutes of all closed meetings. At such meetings, a determination shall be made, and reported in an open session that (1) the need for confidentiality still exists as to all or part of those minutes or (2) that the minutes or portions thereof no longer require confidential treatment and are available for public inspection." I1. MINUTES COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE NOVEMBER 25, 2003 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m., in the Mt. Prospect Park District Community Center, 1000 West Central Road, by Mayor Gerald Farley. Present at the meeting were: Trustees Timothy Corcoran, Paul Hoefert, Richard Lohrstorfer, Michaele Skowron and Michael Zadel. Absent from the meeting was Trustee Irvana Wilks. Staff members present included: Village Manager Michael Janonis, Assistant Village Manager David Strahl, Community Development Director William Cooney, Deputy Community Development Director Michael Jacobs, Finance Director Dave Erb, Fire Chief Michael Figolah, Deputy Fire Chief John Malcolm, Human Resources Director Patrick Seger, Human Services Director Nancy Morgan, Deputy Human Services Director Jan Abernethy, Police Chief Richard Eddington, Deputy Police Chief Ron Richardson, Public Works Director Glen Andler, Deputy Public Works Director Sean Dorsey, Village Engineer Jeff Wulbecker, Vehicle Maintenance Superintendent Jim Guenther, Forestry Superintendent Sandy Clark and Streets and Buildings Superintendent Paul Bures. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of revised Minutes from October 28, 2003. Motion made by Trustee Zadel and Seconded by Trustee Lohrstorfer. Minutes were approved. Approval of Minutes from November 11, 2003. Motion made by Trustee Zadel and Seconded by Trustee Skowron. Minutes were approved. III, CITIZENS TO BE HEARD None. IV. 2004 BUDGET DISCUSSION Mayor Farley provided general opening remarks and highlighted that this will be the last Committee of the Whole discussion regarding the 2004 BudgeL He stated the Public Works Department along with non-Departmental expenditures will be discussed this evening. Public Works Department Public Works Director Glen Andler provided a summary of the activities and functions provided by the Public Works Department. He also introduced his staff. He stated that several positions within Public Works have been held vacant through 2003 to relieve pressure on the 2003 Budget heading into 2004. He also anticipates filling several of these positions in 2004. He stated that the Department has resurfaced eight miles of streets totaling $3.1 million which increases the total number of streets resurfaced through the accelerated program to 42 miles. He also stated the total miles of streets that have been reconstructed to date through the accelerated program is 16 miles. He stated one of the major objectives for 2003 was the replacement of the water control system which was originally installed in 1985. He stated the Department is taking advantage of radio frequency technology for water control system management. He stated the combined sewer study is underway with approximately 60,000 lineal feet already televised with 240,000 lineal feet yet to be completed. He stated the Department completed the William Street bridge rehabilitation and has put additional monies in for 2004 for additional bridge rehabilitations based on the experience at the William Street bridge. He stated the Wille streetscape has been completed along with Central Road streetlights. He stated the Public Works Department budget represents a decrease of 5.82% for 2004. He stated the leaf program has been transferred to the Refuse Fund as an expenditure, therefore, reducing the impact on the General Fund. He stated the Department is also recommending the elimination of the Tree Replacement Program for 2004 whereby the 50/50 parkway tree program will be eliminated and the focus of the Department will be maintenance of the existing tree inventory. He stated the Solid Waste Contract expires on December 31, 2004 and the renewal process is currently underway with the drafting of RFP documents and initial discussions are being coordinated with the appropriate Commissions. He stated the Solid Waste Program also includes a commercial pick-up component and that is currently under review. He stated the Prospect Manor storm sewer project has been postponed for 2004. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: A comment was made regarding the efficient use of vehicles prior to replacement whereby the number of hours of usage along with miles are calculated as part of the determination of replacement timing. There was also a discussion regarding the existing life of the leaf pick- up equipment currently used by the Department and possible impact upon leaf pick-up once the equipment is no longer available. A comment was made regardin'g the deferment of resurfacing of streets and the deterioration at the curb line when streets are ground and overlaid. Non-Departmental Discussion Community/Civic Services Budget Finance Director Dave Erb provided information on the community/civic services budget. He stated the budget has been reduced by 5.9% and the areas that have been reduced include Historical Society funding, white lights and the 2004 Winter Festival Parade. Debt Service He stated the Budget of $9.5 million in debt service has been increased by 1.9%. The shortfall in Sales Tax receipts has impacted the Flood and Streets Programs, therefore, the difference has been made up by reserves at this point. He stated the outstanding Village debt of $34.6 million is well below the limit allowed by law for a Village under Home Rule status. Pensions He stated the Pension Budget is increasing 10.5% and includes increases in the Police pension contribution of $7.4% and the Fire pension contribution increase of 14%. He said the increases are due to poor performance in investments over the 3revious year. 2 Risk Management and Insurance He stated the Risk Management Insurance Fund is increasing approximately 20.5% totaling $5.6 million. This increase includes health insurance costs increase of 22.7% along with property and casualty expenditures increase of 11.8%. He stated Workers' Compensation insurance costs are increasing by 17% and is reflective of higher costs and claims experience over the past year. Mount Prospect Public Library Budget The Mount Prospect Public Library Budget was recently submitted and totals $22 million for 2004 which represents a 10% decrease from the previous year. He stated the $6.3 million Tax Levy includes the construction cost currently underway. Community and Civic Services Budget Mayor Farley suggested that consideration be made to reinstate the Winter Festival Parade funding if revenues increase sufficiently for next year prior to the typical Parade date; thereby, the revenues would need to increase at least $24,000 to cover the cost of the parade. Joan Schwarzbeck, Ten South Elm, Executive Director of the Historical Society, spoke. She is concerned about the significant cut in the Historical Society funding. The cut represents approximately 5% of their funding and requests that the Board reconsider funding the Historical Society at the original amount or at least $37,500 compared to the typical funding level of $40,000. Village Manager Janonis stated that the Budget recommendation for 2004 is $35,000 while the 2003 amount was $38,000. He stated staff had originally recommended a reduction to $36,000 for 2003, however, the Village Board added $2,000 back in from other sources for 2003. John Kom, Chairman of the Finance Commission, spoke. He stated the Commission supports the elimination of the 50/50 Tree Replacement Program and the focus on maintenance of the parkway tree inventory for 2004. However, if revenues do improve, the Commission would fully endorse restoration of this program. He stated the Commission has expressed some concern that once the sewer survey is completed and the cost of repair is considered, such a cost could be substantial and would impact many funding areas already stressed. He stated the Commission supports the cuts presented by the various Departments. Mayor Farley suggested that the funding for his attendance at the U. S. Conference of Mayors for 2004 be redirected to the Historical Society funding in an effort to restore a portion of their funding for 2004. The funding transfer should be approximately $1,500. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: t was noted that the Historical Society has evolved over time and does have value to the community and has positively responded to the Village Board in its challenge to supplement Village funding through fund-raising efforts. It was also noted that there is a concern about the training reduction for staff and the concern that staff could lose their edge without appropriate training over time. It was noted this is the third year of the training moratorium due to budget considerations. Consensus of the Village Board was to shift the funding for the Mayor's attendance at the U.S. Conference of Mayors to the Historical Society funding. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: It was suggested that the Winter Festival Parade for 2004 be reinstated once funds become available and there be a future Committee of the Whole discussion on self-insurance savings opportunities. The Board also requested the staff consider putting together a summary of pent up expenses and acknowledging the critical items that have been deferred whereby once revenues improve, what the prioritization is on restoring projects. There was a concern that the Village would fall further behind due to the large number of deferments that have been made over the last several years. It was also noted that the Fund balance has been used extensively over the last few budget cycles and without this resource, the budget would be further stressed and the fact that the Board built the reserves up adequately to whether this revenue shortfall was noted. ANY OTHER BUSINESS Village Manager Janonis stated that Winter Festival Parade is scheduled to kick-off at 5:00 p.m., on December 6. Trustee Zadel wanted to congratulate the Prospect High Football Team on their fine season; unfortunately falling two victories short of the State title this year, but a fine season nonetheless. Village Manager Janonis responded to a question that was called from the viewing public regarding the Budget. He stated that the employee contributions for health insurance amount to $893,000 in 2003. VIII. ADJOURNMENT DS/mc There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully SU~~ DAVID STRAHL Assistant Village Manager 4 NORTHWEST MUNICIPAL CONFERENCE 1616 East Golf Road DeB Plaines, Illinois 60016 {847) 296-9200 - Fax (847) 296-9207 www. nwmc-cog, org MEMBERS Antioch Arlington Heights Barrington Bartlett Buffalo Grove Cary Deedield Des Plaines Elk Grove Twp. Elk Grove Village Evanston Evanston Twp. Fox Lake Fox River Grove Grencoe Glen¥iew Grayslake Golf' Hanover Park Hawthorn Woods Highland Park Hoffman Estates Inverness Lake Bardngton Lake Forest Lake Zurich Lake in the Hills Libertyville Lincolnshire Lincolnwood Morton Grove Mount Prospect New Trier Twp. Niles Northbr0ok Notthfield Northfie[d Twp Palatine Park Ridge Prospect Heights Rolling Meadows Roselle Schaumburg $chaumburg Twp. Skokie Streamwood Vernon Hills Wheeling Wilmette Winnetka President Catherine ,J, Metchert Bartlett Vice-President Elliott Hartstein Buffalo Grove Secreta,3/ Richard M Hall Elk Grove Township Treasurer Robert L. In/in Lincolnshire ,v c ATTACHMENT B A Regional Association of Illinois Municipafities and Townships Representing a Population of Ove5 One Million Memorandum TO: NWMC Membership Regional Councils of Government and Other Interested Parties FROM: Mark L. Fowler Executive Director PrimeCo IMF Litigation Intergovernmental Agreement DATE: November 13, 2003 Action Requested: Approve and execute the attached intergovernmental agreement in order to participate in the joint defense and sharing of litigation costs for the Infrastructure Maintenance Fee (IMF) class action lawsuit. Each participating municipality should return the executed document to their representative Council of Government (COG), who will then prepare an invoice for the joint defense of the litigation. Issue: The Northwest Municipal Conference (NWMC) convened a regional forum on October 20 to update municipalities on the PrimeCo litigation and to propose a joint regional effort to fund and manage the defense of the litigation. The participants at the forum requested that a letter of agreement be prepared to guide this regional effort and identify potential costs. The Village of Skokie drafted the attached agreement, which has been approved by Skokie's attorneys, Holland & Knight LLC, and the NWMC. Background: Municipalities imposing a telecommunications IMF received notices of pendency of class action, naming all municipalities with an IMF as members of a class of defendants. The Village of Skokie is named as the putative class representative of all municipalities in the state which had levied the IMF fee. Municipalities named in the notice have the option of opting out of the defendant class by December 12, 2003. Those who elect to opt out face the potential that individual suits will be filed against them and the municipality would then be required to defend the litigation individually. For additional information about the case, Holland & Knight has devoted a portion of their web site to the litigation, http://paw.hklaw.com/. Once on the practice area website, click on Public User, scroll down to PrimeCo vs. ICC, click Go, click on Documents (left side of screen), and click on Infrastructure Maintenance Fee Litigation documents. Executive Director Mark L. Fowler G:',Skokie IMF Agreement Memo.doc 'Affiliate Member AGREEMENT FOR THE SHARING OF LITIGATION EXPENSES This Agreement is hereby entered into by each municipality and Council of Government (referred to herein as "COG") executing a signature page confirming that they are a party to this Agreement and accept all terms herein. Whereas, various telephone service providers in the State of Illinois, customers of wireless telephone service providers and customers of landline telephone service providers have been engaged in litigation against various municipalities and other public agencies of the State of Illinois in relation to the enforceability and constitutionality of the Municipal Telecommunications Infrastructure Maintenance Fee Act, 35 ILCS 635/1 et seq., (hereinafter referred to as the "IMF") (said litigation collectively referred to as the "Litigation"); Whereas, in June 2001, the Illinois Supreme Court held the IMF to be unconstitutional as applied to customers of wireless service providers, however, the Court did not decide the issue of the constitutionality of the IMF as applied to customers of landline service providers; Whereas, on March 28, 2003, the Circuit Court of Cook County certified the Litigation as a class action (a) identifying plaintiffs as members of three sub-classes, and (b) identifying defendant municipalities as members of three sub-classes, as specified in the court's order of March 28, 2003 (and as clarified in the court's order dated August 5, 2003); Whereas, the Circuit Court of Cook County appointed the Village of Skokie as the defendant class representative for all three defendant sub-classes and appointed Jack Siegel of Holland and Knight LLC as defendant class counsel unless a municipality enters an appearance through separate counsel; Whereas, the parties hereto have decided not to opt-out of the Litigation and therefore agree to jointly provide funds and cover the costs of legal fees and other expenses associated with the Litigation; Now, therefore, in consideration of the mutual promises and obligations, the parties hereby agree to the following terms and provisions: 1. Recitals. The above stated Recitals are restated and incorporated herein as if stated in full. 2. Definitions. The following words or terms shall have the meaning ascribed to them: "Attorneys" shall mean the law firm Holland and Knight LLC, including Jack Siegel, lain Johnston and such other attorneys of the law firm. "Attorneys" shall also mean any other attorney appointed by a court to be a class counsel for the any of the defendant sub- classes or the defendant class. "Attorneys Fees" shall mean the fees billed by the Attorneys. G:\lMF\Skokie IMF Agreement - FinaLdoc "Defense of the Litigation" shall mean all efforts by the Attorneys to defend against the allegations made by a plaintiff, including but not limited to presentation of defenses on legal issues and damages, affirmative defenses, counter claims or set-offs. "Municipality" or "Municipalities" shall mean a municipality that is a defendant in the Litigation and a party to this Agreement, or in the plural, collectively all municipalities that are parties to this Agreement. "Shared Costs" means the costs incurred in the Defense of the Litigation that the Municipalities have agreed to share and as defined in paragraph 3 below and limited in paragraph 4. Shared Costs. T he Municipalities will jointly s hare a II costs a nd expenses associated with the Defense of the Litigation, including but not limited to, Attorney's Fees, out of pocket expenses incurred by the Attorneys, cost advances made by the Attorneys, paralegal expenses, court costs, court reporter and transcript expenses, expert fees and expenses and any and all expenses incurred in the Defense of the Litigation (hereinafter referred to as the "Shared Costs"). 4. Excluded Costs. Shared Costs does not include the following costs and expenses: A. Fees billed by attorneys other than attorneys appointed as class counsel, or a sub- class counsel, by a court; B. Salaries of employees or other compensation paid to agents of a municipality that may expend time or effort on behalf of the Defense of the Litigation; or C. Any cost or expense associated with any lawsuit or legal proceeding other than the Litigation. Governance. A Committee of Municipalities shall have the primary responsibility for providing guidance to the Attorneys and for communicating with the parties to this Agreement. The Committee shall be comprised of representatives of Municipalities and a representative from each Council of Government (herein referred to as "COG") that is a party to. this Agreement. Each COG shall designate two representatives of Municipalities that are members of the respective COG to serve on the Committee. In the event two or less COGs are parties to this Agreement, then each COG will designate three representatives of Municipalities. Representation on the Committee of parties that are not a member of a COG shall be determined by the Committee. Committee of Municipalities. The Committee of Municipalities shall review all invoices or bills submitted in relation to the Shared Costs and approve them for payment. The Committee may reject any invoice or bill that it determines is not appropriate or correct. The Committee shall establish a methodology for assessing and collecting each Municipalities' share of the Shared Costs. The methodology for assessing the Shared Costs shall be on a per capita basis utilizing the Municipalities' population. Each COG shall have the responsibility of communicating and collecting the assessments from the Municipalities that are members the respective COG. Payment. Each Municipality shall make a payment for Shared Costs in amount equal to its population times twenty-five cents (population x $.25). Such other payments shall be made at the time, and in the amounts, as determined by the Committee of Municipalities. At such time as all Litigation is ended, any funds remaining shall be returned to the Municipalities on a per capita basis. Nothing in this Agreement precludes a Municipality from withdrawing from this Agreement, however, the withdrawing Municipality shall not be entitled to withdraw any of the initial amount paid pursuant to the first sentence of this paragraph, COG. Any and all expenses incurred by a COG shall be borne solely by the respective COG and shall not be considered Shared Costs, except the Committee of Municipalities may determine that the COG should be reimbursed for the expense. No COG shall be obligated for Shared Costs and no assessment shall be made to a COG. 9. Counterpart. It is contemplated that this Agreement will be executed through the use of counterparts and such execution is authorized. In Witness whereof, the below named Municipality/COG, agrees to be a party to the Agreement for the Sharing of Litigation Expenses and the authorized municipal/COG officials have duly executed and affixed their signatures hereto. Name of Municipality or COG By: Signature of Official Date Print Name of Official Title Attest: By:. Signature of Official Print Name Title Date Population: X $0.25 per capita = $ (contribution) HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP 131 South Dearborn Street 30th Floor Chicago, Illinois 60603 312-263-3600 312-578-6666 Fax www.hklaw.com October 13, 2003 Annapolis Atlanta Bethesda Boston Bradenton Chicago* Fort Lauderdal e Jacksonville Lakeland Los Angeles Miata/ New York Northern Virginia Orlando Portland Providence St. Petersburg Ba~ Antonio JACK I~ SIEGEL 312-578-6530 San Francisco Seattle Tallabassee Tampa Washington, D.C. Offices: Mexico City Rio de Janeiro S~o Paulo Tel Aviv** Tokyo jack.siegel@hklaw.com Mr. Patrick Hanley Corporation Counsel Village of Skokie 5127 Oakton Street Skokie, IL 60077 Re: PrimeCo Litigation Dear Pat: This is a class action suit in which the Village of Skokie and the City of Chicago have been named as representative parties. The original litigation arose out of an action brought by PrimeCo, a wireless provider, against the Illinois Commerce Commission and the City of Chicago. At issue was the constitutionahty of the Municipal Infrastructure Fee authorized by statute. A prior judge, Judge Boharic, declared the statute unconstitutional as a violation of the uniformity clause of the Illinois Constitution. He 'decided that since PrimeCo., a wireless provider, did not maintain their facilities in the public streets, including wireless carriers within the purview of the statute, violated the uniformity clause. The case was appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court which affirmed Judge Boharic, but only with respect to wireless. Boharic had thrown out the entire statute but the Sup. reme Court refused to hold the statute unconstitutional on its face as applied to landline providers. After Boharic had initially held the statute unconstitutional, a number of intervenors sought to broaden the scope of the action to include landlines. The intervenors named the Village of Skokie and the City of Chicago as putative class representatives of all municipalities in the state which had levied the IMF fee. The statute provided that if municipalities repealed their existing franchises, municipalities over 500,000 population could levy a two percent fee and municipalities under 500,000 could impose a one percent fee on the gross receipts of C:\Win2kProfiles\MJanonis\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK2\Skokie PrimeCo Update 10-13-03.DOC Patrick Hanley Page 2 October 13, 2003 companies providing service in the municipalities levying the IMF. The purpose enunciated, both in the statute and in the Supreme Court opinion was to provide a uniform method of compensation instead of the multiplicity of franchise agreements which existed throughout the state. After the Supreme Court opinion, the City of Chicago and the Village moved to strike the intervenors' complaint. The first motion was successful. An Amended Complaint was filed which basically repeated the allegations but a second Motion to Dismiss brought under §2'615, was only partially successful. Judge Boharic held that the motion to dismiss the claims with respect to landlines was denied, based On an earlier Supreme Court decision in the Chicago Heights case. Judge Boharic retired and was replaced by Judge McGann. Judge McGann proceeded to certify a class of plaintiffs, both wireless and landhnes with separate subclasses naming the Village and the City as representative defendants for all municipalities in the state that had levied the IMF. The City of Chicago settled wireless claims as did the City of Rockford, both with PrimeCo and with the intervenors. The original attorneys for PrimeCo, now purport to represent PrimeCo customers and they remain in the case. Notices of the Pendency of the Class Action with respect to PrimeCo for all municipalities other than Rockford and Chicage- have gone out. Notices for the defendant class have been approved by Judge McGann and will be mailed and published, allowing municipalities to opt out as well as individuals from the wireless class actions. Judge McGann early on suggested that a 308 petition might be appropriate. The City of Chicago and the Village of Skokie moved to certify three questions pursuant to §308 of the Supreme Court Rules. That section allows an inter!oqutory appeal of issues when there is a substantial question and the resolution of the question may hasten the termination of the litigation. Judge McGann certified one question. The question in substance is whether or not the statute is unconstitutional as applied to landlines. He refused to certify the additional questions which involved the application of the voluntary payment doctrine as recognized in the previous decision of the Appellate Court known as the Dreyfus case. He also refused to certify a question regarding the application of the Tort Immunity Act which would bar monetary recovery. The City of Chicago while joining in the original motion for the 308 did not file an application for the 308 review of the single question certified by Judge McGann. The Village has filed such an application supported by an appropriate record and that matter is now pending in the Appellate Court for the First District. In the meantime, Judge McGann has held up any notices which respect to landlines. In summary, there are three remaining questions which must be determined in this litigation. They are as follows: atrick Hanley Page 3 October 13, 2003 1. Whether the statute is unconstitutional as applied to landline providers. That issue may or may not be decided on the 308 application. The Appellate Court has discretionary authority to accept the question certified. If the Appellate Court should hold the statute to be unconstitutional as applied to landlines, a direct appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court would follow; 2. Whether the voluntary payment doctrine as enunciated in Dreyfus is applicable in which case there would be substantial question as to the possibility of recovering past payments. Each municipality would have a different situation as to whether the payments were made under protest or whether duress existed as a matter of law; 3. There remains open the question as to whether the Tort Immunity Act which bars financial recovery which arises out of an ordinance which was adopted in good faith pursuant to a statute which was subsequently declared unconstitutional would apply in this case. If the Tort Immunity Act, which apparently on its face would Prohibit monetary recovery applies, then the liability of the municipalities would presumably disappear. I hope that the foregoing is an adequate summary of the status of this matter. I look forward to meeting with you and the other interested parties to further discuss this matter on October 20, 2003. Very truly yours, HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLC JMS:rp Jack M. Siegel # 1280907_vl Patrick A. Lucansky E. Kenneth Friker Gerard E. Dempsey Terrence M. Bamicle Bruce A. Zolna James P. Ba~tley Michael J. Duggan Thomas P. Bayer Dennis G, Walsh Scott F. Uhler Everette M. Hill, Jr. Janet N. Petsche James V. Ferolo Michael T~ lumsik Thomas M. Melody Lance Malina LAW OFFICES KLEIN, THORPE AND JENKINS, LTD. Suite 1660 20 North Wacker Drive Chicago, Illinois 60606-2903 Telephone (312) 984-6400 Facsimile (312) 984-6444 (312) 606-7077 Orland Park Office 15010 S. Ravinia Avenue, Suite 17 Orland Park, IL 60462-3162 Telephone (708) 349-3888 Facsimile (708) 349-1506 Wfiter=s Direct Dial (312) 984~6420 Wfiter=s E-Mail emhill:?~iktinet.com Rinda Y. Allison Kathleen T. Henn George A. Wagner James G. Wargo Suzanne M. Fitch Michael Mans Shawn p, Lee Jacob H. Karaca Jennifer Chavez Of Counsel Richard T. Wimmer November 21, 2003 VIA E-MAIL Mr. David Erb Village of Mount Prospect 100 S. Emerson Street Mount Prospect, IL 60056 Re: Infrastructure Maintenance Fee Class Action Litigation Dear David: This letter summarizes the opinion of Klein, Thorpe and Jenkins, Ltd., regarding the decision which must made in the Infrastructure Maintenance Fee class action litigation as to whether or not to opt out of the municipal defendant class. The deadline for the opt out is December 12, 2003. As you know, the Village of Skokie has requested that municipalities remain in the defendant class to present a united front and to share legal costs by using Skokie's counsel, Jack Siegel, to present the arguments on behalf of all Illinois municipalities in the class. We have looked into the various issues and are of the opinion that our clients will be best served by staying in the pending litigation and sharing the costs of defense. The issue of the legality of the IMF as it applied to wireless providers is decided: the IMF was illegal as it applied to wireless providers. The question now is whether already collected taxes should be refunded to the wireless providers. The issue is the same for all municipalities and the arguments are the same. It also makes sense to present a united front to a single judge so that the judge r. David Erb November 21, 2003 Page 2 understands the state-wide impact that the decision will have on Illinois residents. Our primary defense wilt be that once a payment is made to a public body, under Illinois law no refund is available so long as the municipality was acting pursuant to the law as it existed at the time of collection. The only way that opting out would work to a municipality's advantage would be if the amount collected in taxes was too small to interest PrimeCo in filing an individual suit against the municipality opting out. I do not believe that Mount Prospect falls into that category. We have been in contact with the wireless providers' lawyers and it appears that no reasonable settlement avenue is available to the individual municipalities. When all is considered, it appears most advisable to stay in the suit and present the municipalities' defense in a cogent and united manner. If at any point, concerns in the joint representation arise, each municipality would retain its ability to have legal counsel of its choice become involved in whatever way is deemed appropriate. If you have any questions regarding the above, please feel free to call either Lance Malina or me. EMHjr/hm Sincerely, the ¥illa§{ o~Moun P~spect ~,ttorney for Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS FROM: SOLID WASTE COORDINATOR DATE: DECEMBER 4, 2003 SUBJECT: ABANDONED SHOPPING CARTS Background In early 1993 the Village of Mount Prospect began an active campaign to rid the community of abandoned shopping carts. While initial efforts focused on the patrolling and removal of abandoned carts from public and/or private property the ultimate goal was to keep shopping carts on store property. For over e decade the Village has dedicated considerable resources to "manage" shopping cads. Utilizing both punitive and proactive measures the Village has encouraged local merchants to "control and contain" shopping cads. As Attachment A illustrates there is a significant cost to the Village for removing the unsightly and potentially hazardous nuisance(s). Since 1998 the Village has removed approximately 2,808 abandoned carts and incurred over $84,000 in labor costs. These same figures also demonstrate the lack of effective action taken by local merchants to contain their shopping cad inventory. At the March 11, 2003 Committee of the Whole Meeting, Public Works staff presented a summary report of the Village's ten year struggle to "manage" abandoned shopping cads. (March 6, 2003 attachment) Concerned with the Village's role in shopping cart "management", the Village Board directed staff to seek a viable alternative(s) to existing practices. · Contact potential scavengers regarding the collection and disposal of the abandoned cads. · Modify the existing ordinance; eliminate the grace period and increase the fines to reflect the actual cost for removal and disposal of abandoned cads. Discussion Staff's ability to negotiate a contractual agreement with a scavenger have been unsuccessful. The.Village attorney, Mr. Hill has advised staff that Illinois statute mandates abandoned property be returned to its owner without benefit of any form of compensation from the owner. And, although the VilIage could compensate the scavenger from fees collected from merchants in violation of the shopping cad code, there has been no interest from scavengers to enter such an agreement. While it appears the Village has little recourse other than to continue to collect the abandoned carts, revisions that will enhance the regulation and enforcement of fines imposed to merchants in violation of the code can be made. In reviewing current policies and procedures with Mr. Hill, it was determined that the fine can be increased to cover the Village's cost for collection and disposal, and unpaid fines can be added to the merchant's business license renewal fee. [The current $15.00 per cart fine would be increased to $75.00 per cart with no grace 'period.] To facilitate these revisions, changes to the collection and administration process would also be made. 1 ) Collection Abandoned shopping carts removed from a location other than store propeAy would be returned to the store; ublic Works staff will obtain written acknowledgement including date and time from the store representative. 2) Administration Public Works will maintain the records documenting the removal and return of the abandoned carts. Quarterly reports will be submitted to the Finance Depadment for billing purposes. 3) Fines The Finance Department will bill merchants on a quarterly basis; $75 per cart. Outstanding fines would be added to cost of the annual business license, Recommendations ~t is staff's recommendation that the Village Board adopt the revised shopping cart ordinance (attached) which details the amended and new policies and procedures. Public Works staff are prepared to provide written notification to appropriate merchants and implement the new administrative and collection procedures. M. Lisa Angell I concur with the above recommendation. P~r m 0 Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM T]~IE CITY USA TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS FROM: SOLID WASTE COORDINATOR DATE: MARCH 6, 2003 SUBJECT: ABANDONED SHOPPING CARTS Over the last ten (10) years the Village has administered a "highly successful", albeit costly, shopping cart maintenance program. The routine patrolling and removal of abandoned carts has significantly reduced the number of complaints on abandoned cads and helped local merchants minimize their inventory loss. However, as the following overview illustrates efforts to keep the shopping carts on store property has met with limited success. 1993 - mid 1995 Removal of abandoned shopping cads by Village staff; shopping cad owners picked up carts from Public Works. The Public Works Department amassed a large quantity of shopping cads, many of which went unclaimed. Public Works was ultimately responsible for the disposal of the carts. May 1995 Ordinance prohibiting the removal and abandonment of shopping cads; shopping cad owners subject to $15 retrieval fee; increased to $50.00 per cad if the cad was not picked up within five (5) business days. Over $300 in fines were collected from the stores, however, there was no noted decrease in the number of cads removed from store properly and subsequently abandoned, May 1995 - February 1998 The Public Works Depadment deveIoped and revised a number of methods to identify and remove abandoned shopping cads. Public Works crews expended numerous hours "managing" abandoned shopping cads without a significant reduction in the number of abandoned shopping cads. Stores became increasingly dependent on Public Works to identify cad locations. February 1998 Concerned with the ineffectiveness of these actions, Trustee Corcoran sought to resolve the problem at its source. Using a proactive approach Trustee Corcoran and Village staff designed a program that offered residents a viable alternative for transpoding their purchases from the store. Through a cooperative effort with padicipating merchants residents are now able to purchase their own shopping "toter" for $10.00. The Village and padicipating merchants subsidize the remaining balance of the $14.00 toter (The Village has contractual agreements with Dominick's, Jewel, Sun Harvest, Walgreens and Wal Mart. Approximately 10 - 12 toters are sold per year. When introduced the toter program was widely accepted by residents in senior housing adjacent to retail sites; the number of abandoned cads at or near senior housing significantly dropped. Although shopping carts are still abandoned near senior housing areas, it is nowhere near the proportion it was prior to the toter program. However, the toter program attracts very few younger residents residing in multifamily housing. The limited capacity of the toter simply does not meet their needs. The toter does not accommodate the amount of groceries purchased and/or the small children transported in the cart. AttachmentA is a summary of the number of shopping cads collected from 1998 through 2002; 2,555 and the number of hours Public Works staff have spent collecting the cads; 1,856 and the total cost in overtime; $7'0,341. [These numbers do not include the abandoned shopping cads retrieved by store employees. It is my understanding the Jewel store at Randhurst has retrieved as many as 30 carts in one day from the Boxwood area.] In return the Village has collected approximately $4,000 in total fines. Despite the fines local merchants seem content with the Village's policy and practice. Although there are several options available to stores none of the stores have implemented an effective system to keep their shopping carts on their property. With the exception of Wal Mad and Sun Harvest who routinely patrol their neighborhoods for stray cads, the most favored approach by the stores is NO ACTION. STORE OPTIONS TO CONTROL SHOPPING CART INVENTORY · No Action Shopping cart locking systems - consumer pays a refundable deposit to use cad; $0.25 - $1.00 Seems to be very effective in areas where there are no or minimal multifamily housing developments. · Barricades - limits access so shopping carts cannot be removed. Keeps cads on the property but alienates customers. Carry-out only "Custody" of the cart is removed from customer at checkout. Customers with large orders must drive up to have groceries loaded in their car by store personnel. Again, the store is successful in keeping the cads on the property but alienates their customer base. Wheel locking system The wheeling locking system essentially disables before it leaves a designated area. Several variations are on the market including, Cart-tronics, a system used by major grocery chains such as Dominick's. Effective but requires a significant financial investment that at least locally stores have been reluctant to make. Criminal charges The stores could have the individual removing the cart from store property arrested for theft. [Although most communities hold the shopping cart owner accountable, the results of a Detroit Newspaper cyber space survey revealed that 61% of the respondents thought the individual(s) removing the cad(s) should be penalized versus 12% that thought the stores should be fined.] Again, stores oppose this approach because it would alienate their customers. On the other hand the stores would like the village to enforce the ordinance that prohibits operating a shopping cart on public right-of-way. On more than one occasion Village staff have discussed the practicality of enforcing the ordinance prohibiting the removal of shopping carts from store property and operating carts on public right-of way. While it is an approach no one is eager to enforce, it may be time to send a strong message to offenders that the removal of carts will not be tolerated. The stores must also show accountability and sign the complaint. For nearly a decade the Village has dedicated considerable resources to the "management" of abandoned shopping carts. During this time the Village has implemented both punitive and proactive measures to encourage local merchants to "control and contain" shopping carts. And, while the "Shopping Toter Program" has brought limited success the Village's current practice is far from cost effective. Of course, as we all know, the only way to eliminate abandoned shopping carts is to design and implement a physical system(s) that keeps the carts on store property; barricades, wheel locks, pick-up only, armed guards, etc. However, we have also come to learn that local merchants DO NOT want shopping cart boundaries: · boundaries/barriers alienate customers · cost prohibitive [As it is unlikely local merchants would find a Village required barrier system "business friendly", implementation would need to be voluntary.] Although yet to be tested it is highly probable that ticketing individuals for the (1) removal and (2) operation of a shopping cart on public right-of-way would also be effective. In fact a recent cyber-survey conducted by the Detroit News showed that 61% of the respondents favored penalizing the offender versus 12% to penalize the store. It would seem consumers are cognizant that a store's inventory loss is buried, at least partially, in the cost of their product(s).. Again, even though Village ordinance prohibits the removal and operation of shopping carts on public right-of-way neither are enforced: · prosecution would alienate customers · couds would view punitive action as excessive In either case, implementation of a "control and containment" system may not be well received by the community. Which brings us back to the Village's "shopping cart maintenance program". If the Village continues with the current practice of patrolling and retrieving abandoned shopping carts twice a week, consideration should be given to modifying the existing fees and penalties. (Attached is a copy of the Village code.) At the very least a modification of the fees and penalties would allow the Village to recover its actual costs. · Eliminate grace period · Assess actual cost expended by Village for collection of abandoned cart(s), per cart fee. $70.00 - $85.00 per cart. · Business license - all fines must be paid prior to renewal. Please contact me if you would like additional information. M. Lisa Angell X:\US ERS\LAN GELL\WORD\SCARTMEMO2003 .doc DRA T ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 23, ARTICLE XXI 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: SECTION 1: Subsection C of Section 23.2102, entitled "Duties of Owner of' Shopping Carts," shall be amended to read as follows: C. ReclamatiOnany shoppingOf Shoppingto Cat~s: It sball be the responsibility of the ox~er/ .- of ca~l reclaim the cng, in the mmmer provided in this / mlicle, within ~'ee (3) days a~er receiving wriaen notice of the caws location. SECTION 2: Section 23.2103, entitled "Removal of Shopping CmOs fi'om Public and Private Propeay," of Chapter 23, ~icle ~I of the Village Code of the Village of Mount Prospect shall be amended by deleting in its entirety the cmxent Section 23.2103 and inse~ling in lieu thereof a new Section 23.2103, entitled "Removal of Shopping Calls from Public and Private Prope~y" to be and read as follows: 23.2103: REMOV~ OF SHOPPING C~TS FROM PUBLIC OR PRIVATE PROPERTY. ~y shopping cat~ found offthe owner's premises si~all be promptly reclaimed by the owner. ~y shopping cml located on public propeilv / shall be deemed abandoned prope~y. ~y shopping ca~ located on private [ c properly w~thout the consent of the owner or lessee of such property shall be deemed abandoned prope~y. The Village may remove and dispose of any abandoned shopping ca~ of which it has notice. SECTION 3: A new Section 23.2104, entitled "Return of Abandoned Shopping CmOs" shall be indexed after Section 23.2103 with the remaining sections to be renumbered accordingly, and shall be and read as follows: 23.2104: RETURN OF ~&NDONED SHOPPING C~TS: ~' abandoned / ~ h shopping cra% removed by the Village, may be returned to the owner, subject to ~.. the following conditions: iManage 125075 1 When any abandoned shopping cra1 is removed by the \Tillage. the Village shall maintain a log documenting the number of such shopping carts so removed. There shall be an abandmm~ent and removal fee, as set fm~,h in Appendix A, Division II of this Code, payable to the Village for each cart so abandoned and removed. This fee shall be payable upon the return of the cart to the ox~er or if unclaimed by the owner, then at the time of business license renewal as set fm~th in (C) below. C. The fee set forth in subsection B above shall be payable as follows: )d~y unpaid fees for abandoned shopping carts removed by the Village from and including December tl~rough and including November of the nex~t year shall be added to and become a part of the owner's ammal business license fee for the following year. (Example, fees for December 2002 tl='ough and including November 2003 shall be added to the 2004 mmual business license fee). The fee for carts returned to any owner, which is not licensed to conduct business in the Village, shall be invoiced to the owner as the Director of Finance Department otherwise determines appropriate. No business license shall be issued to any entity in tile \tillage if that entity also has a business in another jurisdiction and that other business has outstanding removal fees. Nothing in this a~xicle shall require the Village to take any action to identi~ the owner of any abandoned shopping cart, which does not bear the required identification. Such unidentified shopping carts are declared to be of no value and subject to disposal by the Village within 60 (sixty) days of removal. SECTION 4: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in tile mmmer provided by law. iManag¢ 125075 1 AYES: NAYES: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of ,2003. ATTEST: Vehna W. Lowe, Village Clerk Gerald L. Farley, Village President iManage 125075 1 NORTHWEST MUNICIPAL CONFERENCE 1616 East Golf Road Des Plaines, Illinois 60016 (847) 296-9200 · Fax (847) 296-9207 www. nwrnc-cog.org MEMBERS Antioch Arlington Heights Barrington Bartlett Buffalo Grove Cary Deerfield Des Plaines Elk Grove Twp. Elk Grove Village Evanston Evanston Township Fox Lake Fox River Grove Glencoe Glenvlew Grayslake Hanover Park Hawthorn Woods Highland Park Hoffman Estates Inverness Lake Barrington Lake Forest Lake Zurich Lake in the Hills Lipertyville Lincolnshire Lincolnwood Morton Grove Mount Prospect New Trier Twp. Niles Northbrook Northfleld Northfield Twp. Palatine Park Ridge Prospect Heights Roiling Meadows Roselle Schaurnburg Schaumburg Twp. Skokie Streamwood Vernon Hills Wheeling Wilrnette Winnetka President Catherine J. Melchert Bartlett A Regional Association of illinois Municipalities and Townships Representing a Population of Over One Million TO: FROM: RE: DATE: Phase I STAR Line Mayors/Presidents and Administrators/Managers Larry Bury, Transportation Director Local Funding Resolutions November 4, 2003 At the October 30 meeting the STAR Line Municipal Task Force, the members approved contracting with Schlickman and Associates for strategic policy, financial and advocacy advice to assist the municipal efforts to implement the Phase I of the Metra STAR Line. It was also agreed that the cost of this contract and any other expenses related to the STAR Line be shared by the communities along the Phase I segment between Rosemont/O'Hare and Joliet. As approved by the Task. Fome, communities directly along the Phase I segment of the STAR Line committed to working cooperatively on the planning and implementation of this project are requested pass a local resolution pledging up to $20,000 over the multi-year planning effort towards the local match. Each year, the Steering Committee will approve an annual billing for these expenses. We are initially estimating that the first year billing request will be $4,000, although the actual amount may vary depending upon how many communities pass funding commitment resolutions. The Northwest Municipal Conference will administrate this contract and handle cost sharing arrangements on behalf of the Task Force. Attached you will find an electronic copy of the model funding commitment resolution. Please contact me via email at lbur¥(3)~nwmc-co~.om to let me know whether or not your community is anticipated to approve this resolution. Ideally, we will need to have the resolutions back by late December or early January. If you have any questions or need any additional information, please contact either me or your local planning liaison. Thank you. Vice-President Elliott Hartstein Buffalo Grove Secretary Richard M. Hall Elk Grove Township Treasurer Robert L Irvin Lincolnshire Executive Director Mark L. Fowler *Affiliate Member ***MODEL RESOLUTION*** A RESOLUTION FROM THE VILLAGE~CITY OF APPROVING FINANCIAL PARTICIPATION IN THE LOCAL PLANNING EFFORT FOR THE PHASE I METRA STAR LINE WHEREAS, the communities along the Northwest Tollway corridor and Elgin, Joliet and Eastern Railroad (EJ&E) corridor are committed to working cooperatively to implement a high capacity transit solution to help alleviate traffic congestion, enhance individual mobility, improve air quality, and support economic development within the corridors; and WHEREAS, both the Northwest Transit Corridor Municipal Task Force and the EJ&E Municipal Task Force have identified the Metra Suburban Transit Access Route (STAR) Line as their locally preferred alternative; and WHEREAS, the Metra STAR Line will create a new dynamic in suburban mobility by providing a direct high capacity transit connection between growing employment and residential centers in municipalities along the STAR Line; and WHEREAS, the Phase I Metra STAR Line will run along the Northwest Tollway east fi.om Rosemont/O'Hare Airport to Prairie Stone in Hoffman Estates where it will connect with the EJ&E and run south to Joliet, with future extensions along the EJ&E southeast to the Indiana border and northeast to Waukegan; and WHEREAS, the Metra STAR Line will create opportunities to implement transit-oriented development at the station locations, increasing the number of destinations and potential riders in areas immediately adjacent to the potential station locations; and WHEREAS, the DuPage Mayors and Managers Conference, the Kane County Council of Mayors, the Northwest Municipal Conference, the South Suburban Mayors and Managers Association, and the Will County Governmental League have cooperatively established the STAR Line Municipal Task Force to cooperatively work with Metra on the planning and implementation of the STAR Line; and WHEREAS, in order to better facilitate the municipal efforts necessary for planning and implementation of the STAR Line, the Municipal Task Force at their October 30, 2003 meeting approved contracting with a consultant for strategic policy, financial and advocacy advice with the contract running in one year intervals; and WHEREAS, this consulting contract and any other incidental expenses related to the Task Force's efforts is separate from Metra and the cost is the responsibility of the STAR Line Municipal Task Force; and WHEREAS, the local cost of the consultant contract should be equally shared by all municipalities that will directly benefit from implementation of service along the Phase I Metra STAR Line; and ***MODEL RESOLUTION*** WHEREAS, the Northwest Municipal Conference will administer the contract on behalf of the Task Force; and WHEREAS, the annual amount of the local share shall be determined by the Task Force's Steering Committee and will be based upon the actual cost for the consultant's services and the number of communities that participate. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Village/City of will financially participate towards the local planning and implementation efforts by the STAR Line Municipal Task Force; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that as a member of the Task Force, the Village/City of agrees to a proportionate share of the local match at a cost not to exceed $20,000 over the multi-year timeframe of the planning and implementation efforts. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of this Resolution will be forwarded to the Northwest Municipal Conference. ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the Village/City of day of ., on this President/Mayor Attest NORTHWEST MUNICIPAL CONFERENCE 1616 East Golf Road Des Plaines, Illinois 60016 (847) 296-9200 · Fax (847) 296-9207 www. nwrnc-cog, org MEMBERS Antioch Arlington Heights Bardngton Bartlett Buffalo Grove Cary DeenSeid Des P[aines Elk Grove Twp, Elk Grove Village Evanston Fox Lake Fox River Grove Glencoe Glenview Grayslake Golf* Hanover Park Hawthorn Woods Highland Park Hoffrnan Estates Lake Bardngton Lake Forest Lake Zurich Lake in the Hills Libertyville Lincolnshire Lincolnwoed Morton Grove Mount Prospect New Tder Twp. Niles Nodhbrook Northfield Northfleld Twp, Palatine Park Ridge Prospect Heights Rolling Meadows Roselle Schaureburg $chaurnburg Twp. Skakie Strearnwood Vernon Hills Wheeling Wilreette Winnetka President Catherine J. Me,chert Bartlett ii/ ,/~ A Regional Association of Illinois Municipalities and Townships Representing a Population of Over One Million TO: FROM: RE: DATE: STAR Line Task Force Larry Bury, NWMC Transportation Director Contracting with Schlickman & Associates October 21, 2003 Background The Northwest Municipal Conference, on behalf of the Northwest Transit Corridor municipalities, has contracted with Stephen Schlickman of Schlickman & Associates since 2001 for strategic policy, financial and advocacy advice related to completing the RTA alternatives analysis and positioning the project to secure.federal and state funding. Prior to that, Mr. Schlickman was under contract with the Village of Schaumburg for the same work on this project. With the merger of the Northwest Transit Corridor and the Outer Circumferential Rail efforts, we are recommending that the services of Mr. Schlickman be retained by the STAR Line Task Fame. This recommendation is based on our belief that as we work closely with Metro to implement this project, Mr. Schlickman's state, federal and agency contacts, in depth knowledge of transit system funding and implementation, and policy analysis and advice will prove to be a valuable resource to all of the communities along the STAR Line. Recommendations We recommend contracting with Schlickman & Associates for a one year interval according to the same terms of our most recent contract: at the rate of $161 per hour for a maximum of twenty-six hours per month. We also recommend that this cost be shared by the communities along the Phase I portion of the STAR Line. We propose implementing a similar arrangement to the one that NWC municipalities utilized: each municipality along the STAR Line Phase I pass a local resolution pledging up to $20,000 for consulting and other support for the STAR Line Municipal Task Force. NWMC can serve as administrator for this process. The installment for 2004 is initially estimated to be $4,000 per municipality. The Steering Committee will determine the final amount in January. Vice-President Elliott Hartsteln Buffalo Grove Secretary Richard M. Hall Elk Grove Township The attached documentation contains detailed information about Schlickman & Associates and their work on the Northwest Transit Corridor. Mr. Schlickman will be available at the Task Force meeting to answer any questions you may have. Treasurer Robert L. Irvin Lincolnshire Executive Director Mark L. Fowler *Affiliate Member SCHI. ICKMAN & ASSOCIATES TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE POLICY, FINANCE AND ADVOCACY 203 N. Wabash T 312 920.0132 Suite 1BO0 F 312 641.5736 Chicago, IL 60601 steveschl@aol.com August 27, 2003 Mr. Larry Bury The Northwest Municipal Conference 1616 East Golf Road Des Plaines, Illinois 60016 Re: Qualifications to Serve STAR Line Communities Dear Mr. Bury: Wc have discussed thc renewal of my contract to provide strategic policy, financial and advocacy advice for thc Northwest Corridor Transit Project and adjusting it to apply to thc new STAR Line Municipal Task Feint. In that regard, you have requested a restatement of my qualifications to provide such services and thc specific scope of work that I would perform. Enclosed is a copy of my professional r~sum~ and fa'm description for reference. In sum, I have worked on the development and advancement of major transportation programs and projects for 23 years. During that time I developed a particular expertise in advising transit capital program managers on how to plan and implement their major projects in order to maximize funding through the federal, state, and local administrative and legislative processes. I also provide advice on developing and executing the strategy to obtain the necessary funding. Transit projects of similar magnitude to the STAR Line that I helped to advance in that manner include the CTA Orange Line extension to Midway in the 1980s and the City of Ch/cage Central Area Circulator project in the early 1990s. Of course, you can testify to the similar role I have played for the Northwest Corridor Transit Project since late 1998. More generally, I have been responsible for developing and implementing funding strategies for the CrA and RTA multi-billion capital programs and the City of Chicago's entire federal funding program, which included all of the transportation funding acquired in the 1991 federal ISTEA legislation. I have also advised the City of Chicago on their efforts to obtain funding from the federal TEA-21 legislation. In fact, I have worked on every federal highway and transit reauthorization initiative since 1982 through to the current T-3 activity. My federal involvement has lead to my participation in many national transportation coalitions including the New Starts Working Group, which I formed and chaired in 1994 and 1995, This is the leading advocacy organization representing the interests of New Start projects such as the STAR Line. Currently, I am the coalition manager for the National Business Coalition for Rapid Transit and the Rail Advocates for Infrastructure Legislation Coalition, both of which advocate for increased federal funding for rail projects. Of equal value is my expertise on the funding and governance structures for transit in Northeastern Illinois. I led the CTA's legislative policy team's involvement in the 1983 RTA reform legislation and subsequently provided guidance thereon to the CTA Chairman, who was the sole representative of the City of Chicago on the RTA Board while the Board implemented ugust 29, 2003 Qualifications to Serve STAR Line Communities Page 2 the new financial requirements. As the Executive Director of the Central Area Circulator Project in the early 1990s, advisor to the Chicago Department of Transportation since 1996, and advisor to the Northwest Corridor Transit Project since 1998, I have maintained a current knowledge of the region's transit capital program initiatives as well as maintained relationships with program management officials. I also have been involved in every major state highway and transit funding program initiative from 1983 through to the 1999 Illinois FIRST legislative action. I well know how such legislation can be the vehicle to fund projects such as the STAR Line. Through my work on Illinois ~'ansportation policy, finance, and advocacy, I am well known by, and have a good working relationship with, virtually all of the transportation agency chiefs in the state. I have a similar relationship with many of the state legislative leadership, including the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate. I am equally familiar with key members of Congress on transportation matters, including Senator Durbin, Congressman Lipinski and Congressman Kirk. As an adjunct assistant professor at the University of Illinois Chicago, I teach a course on Transportation Project Funding and Finance and thus stay current on the latest finance trends for all transportation modes. Given my reil project experience, I am an expert on the federal New Start Program, which will be a principal funding source for the STAR Line. The STAR Line is a major and costly transit initiative that is competing with many other transportation needs in the region, the state, and around the nation for scarce federal, state, and local funding. It is affected by the dynamics of transportation governance at every level. There is no other consultant with my expertise who is better able to advise the STAR Line municipalities on their efforts to build this project. The work scope I propose for thc contract extension is similar to the work I have been doing for the Northwest Municipal Conference: · Project policy advice and evaluation in relation to Metra's project work in meeting the STAR Line communities' objectives · Representation at project meetings · Advice on financial options in relation to Metra's project financial plan * Legislative and administrative policy advice to ensure the broadest state and federal support · Assistance in communications with key federal, state, and local officials · Advice on positioning the project in relation to other competing projects · Aid efforts to continue developing local support I have greatly enjoyed working for the Conference on its transportation needs and look forward to working on behalf of all of the STAR Line communities. Please let me know if you need additional information. Sincerely, Stephen E. Schlickman STAR Line (Suburban Transit Access Route) Creating Synergies Between Integrated Transportation Networks & Economic Development I. EXECUTIVE S~4RY Scope and Feasibility An RTA-led public planning process currently is reviewing alternatives to improve and expand transporta)!gn options solely in the northwest suburbs. These options include the construction of new bus' rapid-transit facilities, new fixed-rail services and other options. The attached STAR Line study has reviewed and evaluated feasibility for commuter rail service that goes beyond the northwest suburbs and includes a line to the west and southwest suburban region. Specifically, this report evaluates the feasibility of implementing a commuter rail service along a route from Joliet (Will County), north via Naperville (DuPage County) to Hoffman Estates (Cook County) and east through Schaumburg, Rolling Meadows, Arlin~on Heights, Elk Grove Village, and Des Pta-ifie~s to Chicago's O'Hare International AirpOrt. The potential also exists to extend service in later phases east from Joliet, north and west from Prairie Stone, and from O'Hare to Midway Airports. The STAR Line route lies within five miles of 110 cities and villages in four counties. The new ser¥ice will provide commuter rail service to many major activity and employment centers that include such familiar corporate names as Sears, Fermi Lab, Lucent Technologies, Teltabs, Nicor, Navistar, BP, SBC, IKEA, 3 Com, Pfizer, Siemens, and Motorola, to name just a few. Most significantly, the eastern end of the STAR Line route is the region's economic engine: O'Hare International Airport. Also located along the route are several corporate, research and development, and li~t industrial parks in Plainfield, Aurora, Naperville, West Chicago, Bartlett, Hoffman Estates, and Schaumburg, notably Prairie Stone (the cornerstone of the two route segments), and the DuPage County Technology Park. Finally, there are satellite campuses of several universities and junior colleges, several major hospitals and medical centers, and regional shopping malls in Joliet (Louis Joliet Mall), Aurora (Fox Valley Center) and Schaumburg (Woodfield Mall). Several previous studies have been performed to consider rail alternatives in this corridor, as described in sections of the attached report. These previous studies have been factored as a starting point for this evaluation process, which now represents the most thorough and comprehensive analysis performed to date. The STAR Line (Suburban Transit Access Route) Page 3 Market Metra estimates that in 2020 there will be 5.1 million daily vehicle trips that affect the STAR Line corridor, which is defined as five miles on either side of the proposed commuter rail line. Over 70% of these daily trips (3.7 million) will be made within the STAR Line corridor, i.e., trips that both start and end at locations that are along the route. While today nearly all of these trips are made by automobile, Metra expects that a significant portion of these individual trips can be attracted to use the STAR Line commuter rail service instead. The remainder of these daily trips (1.4 million) will have an origin or destination outside of the STAR Line corridor, i.e., trips that either start o_!r end at locations that are along the route. Metra expects that many of these individual trips can also be attracted to use the STAR Line, e.g., as a link to and from an existing Metra radial line. Providing commuter rail service within a robust, suburban service territoo, inherently requires that service providers get ahead of the demand curve. Creating growth plans for new service routes must be driven by, and aligned with, regional forecasts for growth in population, households, and employment. Under those criteria, many of the communities identified along this route in the attached feasibility, report currently are underserved and lagging in their ability to meet the demand curve in transportation as a result of growth in population, employment, and households. Table I summarizes recent and forecasted population, household and employment growth for Metra's six-county service territory (the northeast Illinois counties of Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenw and Will). Table 1, and other tables within this report, capture information for an area that extends two miles-b-~ either side of the corridor's centerline. These tables reflect forecasts for growth in population, households, and jobs by workplace location. Percent Change 1990 to 2000 2000 to 2020 Measure 1990 2000 2020 IPopulation 8 091 720 · NE Illinois Region 7,261,I76 9,044,724 1 I% 12% Suburban* 4,477,450 511951704! · 6,039,386 16% 16% · % Suburban* 62% 64% 67% Households · N~E Illinois Region 2,619,847 2,906,9251 3,376,455 11% 16% · Suburban* 1,594,673 1,844,9971 2,224,763 16% 21% · % Suburban* 61% 63%1 66% Employment ]-- t - · NE Illinois Regior _~,84>,08~ 4O39,400 5,260,MI 13% 22% · Suburban* 2,362,704 2,979,7861 3,534,846 26% 19% _. · % Suburban* 61V 69%! 67% *Sttburban indicates those areas of the six-county region exch~siYe of the City of Chicago Table l: Six-County Regional Trends The STAR Line (Suburban Transit Access Route) Page 4 The STAR Line creates a long-needed alternative to the automobile for nearly' 1.2 million employees who commute to work in area businesses. I,t provides a premium transit option for the nearly 1.6 million residents who today iive in an area that chronically is congested with highway traffic. By linking 110 communities in the southwest, west, and northwest suburban regions of northeast Illinois, the STAR Line fills a critical void for inter-suburban commuter rail service that will complement Metra's high-performing suburb-to-city model. Given the corridor's growth forecasts, the question remains: if not now, when? Beyond commuter frustration, there is real and economic cost to congestion. · A recent national transportation study by the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) found roadwork congestion costs an average Chicago-area motorist more than $1,200 a year in gas and related charges. · Congestion leads to lost productivity for the nation's corporations and businesses, averaging $26.70 per hour, per employee. · Th~{ TTI study released earlier this year quantifies the overall congestion costs in the Chicago area at more than $4 billion annually, and estimates the annual delay from congestion at more than 22i,000 per-person hours. · hi contrastl saving a single minute on each train of the Metra system would result in 5,000 passenger hours saved each weekday and over 33,000 work~'eeks saved each year. Passenger service along this existing route will provide a premium alternative to congestion and the automobile, creating commuter rail service that supports existing and future demand for inter- suburban service and reverse-commute service. Metra's service region today has strong demand for more and better service beyond the existing point-to-point suburb-to-city model. There is an established need for inter-suburban service, including service that allows for seamless access points to existing Metra routes. A national study underscores the need for more sen, ice, driven especially by migation to the suburbs and new job development in the suburbs. Today, the amount of time when motorists might experience congestion has increased from 4.5 hours per day in 1982, to 7.8 hours per day in 2002, However, there is no such thing as peak-rush hour for motorists along the 1-90 corridor; the congestion is constant. No one wants to stall economic development. There is a direct cost to economic output from congested transportation networks. The region and this corridor are forecasted for robust gTowth in new job development, new home development, and population growth. Expansion of O'Hare, alone, will result in new economic output of $8-$10 billion annually for the region and approximately 455,000 new jobs. Economic development and transportation -on the ground and in the air- are linked. The STAR Line's time is now. To fully realize the economic benefits forecasted in this region, we must offer a premium and truly integrated commuter rail transportation network to feed area businesses and economies. The STAR Line proposed alignment and station locations are shown on Figure I on the following page. The STAR Line (Suburban Transit Access Route) Page 5 Figure ] - STAR Line (Suburban Transit Access Route) Alignment and Stations The STAR Line (Suburban Transit Access Route) Page 6 Village of Mount p ospect Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER WILLIAM J. COONEY, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MICHAEL W. JACOBS, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT~ DECEMBER 3, 2003 POTENTIAL CODE AMENDMENTS & RELATED ISSUES This past September staff forwarded a number of potential code/policy amendments to the Board of Trustees in order to obtain some preliminary feedback prior to proceeding with the formal text amendment process. Following the Board's review, the Planning & Zoning Commission began to process a number of potential amendments; however, due to the holiday meeting schedule the P&Z Commission will not revisit the proposed amendments until January. In the mean time, both staff and the P&Z Commission have identified some additional amendments that warrant consideration. In response, staff would like to review these additional issues with the Board and then combine them with the other amendments currently under consideration. Staff would like to review these issues with the Board during their Committee of the Whole meeting on December 9th. Development Code Issue Issue: Administrative Subdivisions - Staff occasionally encounters properties that may appear as a single lot, but in actuality they consist of two or more parcels (see attached Plat of Survey as an example). When reviewing any type of development proposal for these properties, including building additions, decks garages, etc., it is often difficult for staff to apply the required setbacks due to the property's configuration. Due to these circumstances Staff has traditionally required that the property owner apply for a Plat of Consolidation that would create a single lot of record from the existing multiple lots. The Plat of Consolidation process; however, currently requires review and recommendation by the Planning & Zoning Commission and final approval by the Board of Trustees. This review and approval process can often create delays and additional expenses for the property owner. As a result Staff is suggesting that the Village's Development Code be amended to allow administrative subdivisions under specific circumstances. This process would still require the preparation and recordation of a Plat of Consolidation, but, under certain circumstances, would eliminate the need for review by the P&Z Commission and approval by the Board. The existing regulations and proposed amendments are outlined below: Existing Regulations: Preliminary Plat/Final Plat approvals require review and recommendation by the Village's Planning and Zoning Commission and final action by the Board of Trustees. Proposed Amendments: Definition: Administrative Subdivision - A subdivision that may be approved by the Director of Community Development and does not require a public meeting before the Planning & Zoning Commission or approval by the Board of Trustees. Potential Text Amendments Page 2 Administrative Subdivision - An Administrative Subdivision shall be permitted in the following instances: a. An adjustment of a lot line between two (2) adjoining lots; and b. The consolidation of two (2) or more lots, parcels or tracts of land, either in whole or part, into a single lot of record, when all of the properties are under the same ownership. With respect to the above, an Administrative Subdivision is permissible only if: (i) no non-conformities are created with respect to these regulations; and (ii) the entire length of the subdivision fronts on an existing street. Building Code Issue Issue: Conversion of Gara~,es Into Livin~ Space - The Village continues to see the occasional proposal to convert an existing attached garage into living space. In reviewing these requests the homeowner is currently not required to remove the garage door, provided all applicable building and health safety regulations are met. For those that choose to maintain the existing garage door it can often result in a poor design and an unattractive exterior appearance. As a result, Staff recommends the Building Code be amended to require removal of the garage door and the use of exterior building materials that are consistent in both material and color with the remaining portion of the home's exterior. Existing Regulations: Proposed Amendment: None. Conversion of Attached Garage to Living Space - For any attached garage that is to be converted into living space, the garage door must be removed and replaced with materials that are consistent in color and material with the exterior of the existing home. Zoning Code Issues Issue: Commercial Trailers in Residential Districts - As you may be aware, the Village Code currently contains specific regulations regarding the storage of commercial vehicles and trailers within residential zoning districts. Staff is recommending that the Village Code be amended to specifically prohibit the outdoor storage of commercial trailers within any of the Village's residential zoning districts. To help clarify the regulations, Staff is also recommending specific definitions for both Commercial Vehicles and Commercial Trailers. If the proposed amendment were supported, the Village Code Would then allow the outdoor storage of no more than one (1) commercial vehicle within a residential zoning district and prohibit the outdoor storage of commercial trailers. Existing Regulations: Trailers or other attachments shall be prohibited on tbe rear of a commercial vehicle when parked in a residential district. Proposed Amendments: All commercial trailers parked or stored on a zoning lot in a residential district shall, at all times, be parked in a fully enclosed garage. Potential Text Amendments Page 3 Definition: Commercial Trailer - Any trailer, (1) carrying work equipment such as ladders, snowplows, hand or mechanical tools; (2) carrying work machinery on or affixed to the outside of the trailer; (3) containing a refrigeration unit or other motorized compressor; or (4) being used for storage shall be considered commercial trailers. None of the following shall be considered a commercial trailer: (a) a recreation trailer that is not included within the above categories; (b) Government trailers; or (c) police or fire trailers. Issue: Arbors & Trellises - The Village Code does not contain any regulations regarding arbors or trellises. Although the Code does not specifically address this issue, there have been several requests in the past to install various types of arbors/trellises within residential properties. In reviewing these proposals staff is often forced to fall back on the existing fence regulations because no specific regulations for arbors/trellises exist. This approach; however, often does not adequately address the issue given that the Code's maximum fence height is five (5) feet. Most proposals for arbors/trellis often exceed seven (7) feet in height because the arbor/trellis is incorporated into a gate/entrance feature, thus requiring a minimum clearance of 7 feet. To address this issue staff recommends that Village Code be amended to include specific regulations that allow arbors/trellises, but limits their size and location: Existing Regulations: None Proposed Amendment: D. Regulations for Fences and Walls 1. Height and Location: j. Arbors/Trellises - A maximum of one arbor or trellis, not exceeding eight (8) feet in height or ten (10) feet in width, shall be permitted except in any required front yard. Issue: FAR and Related Definitions - The Village of Mount Prospect continues to see a tremendous amount of construction activity related to single-family dwellings (including additions and construction Of neTM single-family homes). The recent trend in development has been to maximize the amount of living space within single-family homes, often pushing the edge on a variety of bulk regulations (including setbacks, height and FAR). As a result we have found some items within the Village Code that should be reviewed to ensure our regulations are resulting in the desired limitations on the size of single-family homes. The following is a summary of some of the Village's current definitions and regulations as they relate to controlling the size of single-family homes within the community: Attic: Tile space between the ceiling beams of the top story, and tile roof rafters, and containing no habitable room. Basement: That portion ora building which is partly or completely below grade. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): Determined by dividing the number of square feet of gross floor area of living space in all buildings on a lot by the square feet of area of that lot. Potential Text Amendments Page 4 Floor Area (Gross): The sum of the gross horizontal living space of all floors of a building, including principal and accessory uses and storage areas as measured from the exterior walls. Gross floor area shall exclude: A. Areas used for storage of building, mechanical and HVAC equipment; B. Interior parking areas; C. Interior loading docks; and D. Basements and garages in single-family dwellings. Habitable Room: A room designed and intended for use and/or occupied by one or more persons for living, sleeping, eating or cooking; includes kitchens serving dwelling units, but does not include bathrooms, water closet compartments, laundries, pantries, storage rooms or below grade recreation rooms. Height: The vertical distance, measured in feet, from the base grade to the average height of a flat, mansard or gambrel roof or the midpoint of a hip or gable roof. Story: That portion of a building included between the upper surface of a floor and the upper surface of the floor or roof next above. In reviewing these existing definitions/regulations Staff believes consideration should be given to the following issues: 1) Definition of Gross Floor Area: As noted in the definition of Gross Floor Area, garages and basements are specifically excluded when calculating the Gross Floor Area for a single family home. The exclusion of garages can have a noticeable impact on the overall size of a home that is permitted within the Village's single-family residential zoning districts. To help illustrate the impact that excluding garages from the FAR limitations can have on the overall size of a home, Staff has prepared the attached table that compares two different development scenarios. As outlined in the table, Scenario I illustrates the potential maximum development of a new home in the R-1 District when garages are excluded from the FAR calculation, while Scenario 2 includes the garage area when calculating the total FAR of the house. To address this issue Staff recommends the following amendments to the existing definition of Gross Floor Area: Floor Area (Gross): The sum of the gross horizontal living space of all floors of a building, including principal and accessory uses and storage areas as measured from the exterior wails. Gross floor area shall exclude: a. Areas used for storage of building, mechanical and HVAC equipment; b. !ntericrparking areas; c. Interior loading docks; d. Unenclosed porches; and e. Basements mint-garages in single-family dwellings. otential Text Amendments Page 5 2) 3) Definition of Basement & Related Issues: The Village Code currently defines a basement as "that portion of a building which is partly or completely below grade." This definition does not differentiate between a typical basement that is almost entirely below grade and an "English Basement" which bas a substantial portion of its living area above gradei With the specific exclusion of basements from the definition of gross floor area, a home with an English Basement or a split-level home could contain a significant amount of living area that would not be included when calculating FAR. To address this issue Staff recommends the following definition: BASEMENT: That portion of a building having more than half (1/2) of its floor-to-ceiling height below the average level of the adjoining finished grade. Definition of Story & Related Issues: As noted above, the Village's existing definition of story is "that portion of a building included between the upper surface of a floor and the upper surface of the floor or roof next. above?' Based on this definition one could argue that a typical 2-story home with an attic could actually be considered a 3-story home. This interpretation would then conflict with the Village Code's existing height limitations and the manner in which they are applied. Another related issue is the recent desire to include living space (such as a rec/play room or finished storage area) within the "attic" of a home. In reviewing these proposals the Village's existing regulations do not specifically address this issue. To address these "story" related issues staff suggests the Board consider the following definitions: STORY: That portion of a building, excluding attics and basements, included betWeen the upper surface of a floor and the upper surface of the floor or roof next above. ATTIC: The space betWeen the ceiling beams of the top story, and the roof rafters, and containing habitable rzz~ area over no more than 50% of the floor area. CONCLUSION: Staff looks forward to reviewing these various issues with the Board of Trustees during the December 9 Committee of the Whole meeting. In addition to the attached exhibits, we will also present additional information to help clarify the various issues outlined above. · Cooney, D[rector Administrative Subdivision Example Existing property consists of Lot 6 & the north half of Lot 7. Proposed amendment would allow the consolidation of the two existing lots into a single lot without requiring review by the Planning & Zoning Commission and approval by the Board of Trustees. ~.......~ · .:~ · 29.79 -- Dividing line between Lots 6 & 7 75.00 FAR Analysis: Excluding Garages vs. Including Garages Scenario I Scenario 2 Zoning! District R-1 R-1 Maximum FAR 0.5 iexcluding garage) 0.5 (including garage) Lot Area 8,125 sq. ft. 8,12,5,. sq. ft. LOt Dimensions .65' wide x 125' deep 65' wide x 125' deep Maximum Home Size 4,062.5 sq. ft. (excluding ,,garage) 4,062.5 sq. ft. (including garage) Proposed 2-stor)/Home ~with 3;car ~ara~e)~ Livin~ Area 4,062.5 sq. ft. 3,314.5 sq. ft. 3-Car Garage (22' x 34') 748 sq. ft. 748 sq. ft. Total 4,810.5 scI, ff. 4,062.5 scI. ft. Lot Coverage Issues :':-,, ~: i':.,,:?, ' , ~.~, i:" ,,~ ' ::~ .:' Maximum Lot Coverage (45%) 3,656.25 sq. ft. 3,656.25 sq. ft. Building foot-print (1/2 of total home size) 2,405.25 sq. ft. 2,031.25 sq. ff. Remainin~l Potential Paved Area 1,251 scl. ff. 1,625 scl. ft. AdditionalPaVed Areas~ :~" :~ :,~::~ :,,= ,. ~, ~ Driveway (26' wide x 30' Ion~) 780 sq. ft. 780 scI, ff. Patio/Deck 175 sq. ff. (10' x 17.5') 550 sq. ft. (22' x 25') Front Stoop 40 sq. fl. (5' x 8') 40 sq. ft. (5' x 8') Rear Stoop 15 sq. ft. (5' x 3') 15 scI. ff. (5' x 3') Service Walk 240 sq. ff. (3' x 80') 240 sq. ff. (3' x 80') Total 1,250 sq. fi, 1,625 sq, ft. Totals?,' Living Area 4,062.5 sq. ft. 3,314.5 scI. ft. Gara~le 748 sq. ff. 748 scI. ft. Paved Areas 1,250 sq. ft. 1,625 sq. ft. Note: Scenario 1 - Based on existing definition of gross floor area which excludes garages when calculating FAR Scenario 2 - Based on proposed definition of gross floor area which would include garages when calculating FAR Glen R. Andler Deputy Director Scan R Dorsey Village Engineer Jeffrey A. Wulbecker M. Lisa Angell Mount Prospect Public Works Department 1700 W. Central Road, Mount Prospect, Illinois 80056-2229 Phone 847/870-5640 Fax 847/253-9377 Water/$e~er Superintendent Roderick ~ D'Denovan Streets/Buildings Superin~enden~ Paul C. Bures Fores~y/Grounds Superintenden~ Sandra M. Clark Vehicle/Equipment Superintendent James E. Guenther TDD 847/392- 1235 SAFETY COMMISSION AGENDA MEETING LOCATION: Public Works Building ]700 W. Central Road Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 MEETING DATE AND TIME: Monday gecember $, 2003 7:00 p.m. vi. Call to Order Roll Call Approval of Minutes Citizens to be Heard Old Business A. Request for Traffic Control Signs at the Intersection of Albert Street & Lincoln Street New Business A. We-Go Trail Improvements B. Request for Traffic Control Signs at the Intersection of Hi-Lust Street & Milburn Avenue Commission Issues 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, 847/392-6000, EXTENSION 5327, TDD 847/392-6064. *~****** TO ALL COMMISSION MEMBERS ******** ******** IF YOU CANNOT ATTEND THE SAFETY COMMISSION MEETING ******** ******** PLEASE CALL MATT LAWRIE (847-870-5640) IN ADVANCE ******** ******************************************************************************************** Recycled Paper - Printed with Soy Ink Glen R Andler Deputy Director Sean R [30rsey Village Engineer Jeffrey A Wulbecker Solid Waste Coordinator M Lisa Angell Water/Sewer Superintendent Roderick T O'O0n0van Streets/Buildings Superintendent Pau! C Bures Forestry/Grounds Superintendent Saqdra M. Vehicle/Equipment Superintendent James E. Gueqther Mount Prospect Public Works Department 1700 W. Central Ro~d, Mount ProsF:ect, Illinois 60056-2229 Phone 847/870-5640 Fax 847/253-9377 TDD 847/392-1295 MINUTES OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT SAFETY COMMISSION DRAFT CALL TO ORDER The Regular Meeting of the Mount Prospect Safety Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, November 10, 2003. R()i.l. (-'ALi. Present upon roll call: Chuck Bencic John Keane Joan Bjork Carol Tortorello John Dahlberg Buz Livingston Paul Bures Matt Lawrie Chairman Vice Chairman Commissioner Commissioner Police Department Fire Department Public Works Public Works/Engineering Division Absent: Susan Amdt Commissioner Kevin Grouwinkel Commissioner Others in Attendance: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Keane, seconded by Commissioner Tortorello, moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Safety Commission held on September 8, 2003. The minutes were approved by a vote of 7-0. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD No citizens came forth to discuss any topics that were not on the current agenda. ! Recycled Paper - Printed with Soy Ink BUSINESS No old business was discussed by the Commission. BUSINESS REQUEST FOR PARKING RESTRICTION CHANGES ALONG 300 BLOCK OF S. I-OKA AVENUE 1) Background Information Per a request from St. Raymond Church. some church and school related meetings last longer than the two-hour limit posted on the east side of S. I-Oka Avenue. The parking lot is barricaded at tile no~-th and south entrances after 9:00am as students use a ma.lority of the lot during the daf' as a playground. Therefore. St. Raymond Church is looking for long-term on-street parking by requesting that there be no parking restrictions along the east side of the street. St. Raymond's school and church properly is bounded by Milburn Avenue to the north, Lincoln Street to the south. S. Elmhurst Avenue to the east and S. I-Oka Avenue to the west. There is a large parking lot south of Lincoln Street that also serves as a playground for students during the schoo! day'. Parking restrictions exist on many Village streets surrounding St. Raymond's. The street along the 300 block of S. I-Oka Avenue is 28' wide. Parking is prohibited along the west side of the street at all times. Parking along the east side of the street is prohibited near the intersection of Milburn Avenue from 7:00am-8:30am, limited along this same area to 2 hours from 8:30am-6:00pm, and limited to 2 hours from 7:00am-6:00pm along the remaining east side of the street· The parking restrictions on the west side of the street and the 2-hour limit on the east side of the street appear to have been enacted a long time ago. The only document found on these restrictions is minutes from a 1984 Village Board Meeting· It appears that the 2-hour restrictions were reviewed and voted to be retained. The prohibited parking area along the east side of the street near Milbum Avenue was enacted in 1993. It appears this was approved in order to provide needed drop-off and pick-up space for parents· The other parking restrictions were ah'eady in place. Staff Study Several site visits were made by Staff from October 13-24, 2003. Approximately 40 vehicles park at the north end of the school lot each day. Short-term and tong-term parking is evident throughout the day on Village streets surrounding the school. 5-10 vehicles are often seen on the east side of Elmhurst Avenue in front of the school and another 5~10 vehicles north of Milburn Avenue. 2-4 cars are often seen on Milbum Avenue east of Eln-thurst Avenue, 5-10 vehicles on the south side in front of the school and 4-6 vehicles west of Milburn Avenue. 8-10 are consistently seen on the north side of Lincoln Street in front of the school. 6-12 vehicles are often seen on the east side of I-Oka Avenue in front of the school and another 1 ~3 vehicles north of Milburn Average. School begins shortly after 8:00am. During the drop-off period, parents primarily use the parking lot, the east side of Elmhurst Avenue in front of the school and the west side north of 3~ Mitbum Avenue to drop-off their child. The west side of Elmhurst Avenue in fl-ont of the school is blocked-off to all traffic and Milburn Avenue is restricted to drop-off of preschool children only. As a result of these restrictions set up by St. Raymond School, I-Oka Avenue near Lin'coin Street and near Milburn Avenue are used by parents as a drop-off area. During this time, teachers are able to park in the parMng lot. Buses are not used at St. Raymond School. School ends just before 3:00pm. Parents are able to line up in the parking lot to pick-up their child. Also, many of the same Village streets used for drop-offare used ibr pick-up. In addition. the south side of Milburn Avenue in front of the school is available to parents for pick-up. I-Oka Avenue is busy with vehicle traffic during this time period. According to St. Raymond Church, approximately 20 people per day visit the church or school afier 9:00am and stay more than 2 hours. Since the parking lot is closed, they look for on-street parking. The church offices are near I-Oka Avenue and Milbum Avenue and, therefore, most of the vehicles park near this intersection. 1 I surveys were sent to the residents along the 300 block of S. I-Oka Avenue as well as St. Raymond Church to solicit their opinions on this issue. 5 surveys (45%) were returned to the Village including the one sent to the church. St. Raymond Church is m tarot of changing thc parking restrictions and residents oppose the request. RcCOmlnqendations Stuff believes changing the parking restrictions along the east side of S. I-Oka Avenue is not the best decision at this time for a few reasons. First, St. Raymond should explore options to better utilize their parking lot rather than looking for long-term on-street parking. With any typical development in the Village, the owner is to be able to provide sufficient off-street parking so as to not inundate Village streets with tong-term parking. Often times with schools, however. parking lots are small and Village streets experience parking problems. Staffthen has to manage the problems given the off-street parking limitations. In this case, there is a large parking lot that is available. St. Raymond, however, has decided to barricade the entrances during the school day to prevent the potential for vehicle/pedestrian accidents since the lot also serves as a playground. As a result, there is a si=maificant amount of parking (both short-term and long-term) throughout tine school day on Village streets. Sr. Raymond has cited student safety as the reason to close both entrances to the parking lot during the school day. Student safety is important to the Village as welll however. Staff believes there may be opportunities to better utilize the parking lot xvithout compromising safety. One consideration is to barricade the south entrance and two-thirds of the lot. The playground can be sa (ely contained in this area. The north entrance can remain open and the north one-third of the lot used for parking. Long-term parking can then be provided off-street leaving more space for drop-off and pick-up near the school. This may also provide more space for short-terrn resident parking on Village streets. A second reason the parking restrictions ought not to change is a concern for generating more traffic along the block. By eliminating the parking restrictions along the block, motorists who may normally park on surrounding streets may be inclined to park on S. I-Oka Avenue. On streets where there are currently no parking restrictions, motorists may want to move closer to the school. On streets where there are time limits on parking, motorists may move to S. I-Oka 4) Avenue so they don't have to worry about moving their vchicle. For teachers who normally park in the lot, some may move to S. I-Oka Avenue to be closer to the building. Should long-term parldng be approved and more traffic is generated as a result, the potential for accidents, do~{ble- parking during drop-off and pick-up, and traffic congestion also becomes greater. As the records show, some additional parking restrictions were enabted in 1993 in order to provide drop-off and pick-up space around St. Raymond School and to ease traffic congestion along S. I-Oka Avenue. Since St. Raymond School closes southbound Elmhurst Avenue in front c~f the school during drop-off and pick-up, and Milburn Avenue in front of the school is limited to drop-off of preschool children only in the mornings, S. I-Oka Avenue becomes a desired location for parents to use for drop-off and pick-up. Allowing long-term parking on S. I-Oka Avenue may reduce the availability of drop-off and pick-up space along the street. Another reason for leaving the current parking restrictions is precedent. Earlier this year, some or' the businesses along Prospect Avenue near the downtown area asked that the 2-hour parking limit be changed to provide long-term parking for visitors. After discussion, Staff decided to not cb. ange the restrictions. Long-term parking was to be provided on-site or other off-street locations such as a public parking lot. Also, a few weeks ago, St. Mark Church asked that the 2- hour parking limit on Evert,~reen Avenue be changed to provide long-term parking for employees. They have a parking lot nearby but apparently is not convenient for some employees. This request, too, was denied. The Village Traffic Engineer recommends: denial of any changes to the parking restrictions along the east side of the 300 block of S. I- Oka Avenue, Discussion C}~airman Bencic opened up the discussion to the petitioner, Ed Dowling of St. Raymond Church. Mr. Dowling explained that earlier this year, the school decided to close the parking lot during school hours in an attempt to improve safety of the students playing in the lot during the day. Because of this, there is a need for long-term parking on the street. St. Raymond Church has no issue with the parking restrictions on Elmhurst Avenue, Lincoln Street and Milburn Avenue. However, they have requested the parking restrictions be removed on the east side of I- Oka Avenue to provide long-term parking. Chah-man Bencic asked if there were any questions for the petitioner from the Commission. Commissioner Bjork questioned if the school had considered installing a gate to the parking lot at the north end for students and leaving ihe entrance solely for cars. Mr. Dowling responded that in the past there were some incidents involving motorists who did not follow this set-up that caused safety concerns for students. Mr. Bures asked if the school needed the entire parking lot for physical education or could a section of the lot be secured and provide parking. Mr. Dowling responded that all school staff currently parks in the lot. Chairman Bencic asked if physical education activities could be moved indoors to the new gymnasium. Mr. Dowling said that they prefer to have the students outside for some activities while tt'.ere is warm weather. During cold or rainy weather, activities are done inside. The gym, however, is not large enough to serve all the classes during the day. Commissioner Tortorello asked if the school would consider separating the lot with barricades to separate parking and physical education. Mr. Dowling said that had been done in the past but some motorists removed the barricades and drove through the playground area. Chairman Bencic opened up the discussion to anyone in the audience ~vho wished to speak on this issue. George Luteri, 302 S. I-Oka Avenue, is opposed to the request to remove the parking restrictions. He does not want to see any more traffic on the street and believes the school should use the parking lot for long-term parking. He believes more traffic will affect student safety on an already busy street. Commissioner Tortorello ageed with Mr. Luteri's position and also questioned if the school has the authority to close southbound Elmhurst Avenue in front of the school. Deputy Chief Dahlberg is not aware of any ordinance that allows the school to do this. At'ret some more discussiom Chairman Bencic asked Traffic Engineer Lawrie to provide an overview of StafI's report to the Commission. Traffic Engineer Lawrie shared Stafffs observations and recommendation to not remove the parking restrictions. Commissioner Keane wondered if parking should be prohibited on the both sides of I-Oka Avenue if there is a safety concern with students walking between cars. Commissioner Tortoretlo thought more strict parking restrictions were not necessary but did support leaving the cnrrent parking restrictions. Deputy Chief Dahlberg believes that the school needs to explore ways to better utilize their parking lot rather than using Village streets for long-term parking. Chain-nan Bencie suggested that the lot be separated for physical education and parking with ban'icades that cannot be moved by parents or teachers. He, too, agreed that the parking lot should be better utilized. Commissioner Keane, seconded by Commissioner Tortorello, moved to approve the recommendations of the Village Traffic Engineer and deny the request to remove the parking restrictions along the east side of the 300 block orS. I-Oka Avenue. The motion was al)proved by a vote of 7-0. B) REQUEST FOR PARKING RESTRICTIONS ALONG 300 BLOCK OF S. CAN-DOTA AVEN~UE This item was the 3~d issue discussed by the Commission. Background Information Residents of the 300 block of Can-Dota Avenue petitioned the Village to add parking restrictions along the west side of the street in froht of Lincoln Junior High School. The petitioner, Ms. Karen Blatti, 317 S. Can-Dora Avenue, claims that parked cars on the street make it di£ficult for residents to exit their driveways. Also, she believes two-way tral'fic cannot be maintained with ca?s parked on the west side of the street. Lincoln .JLmior High School is located at the northwest corner of Lincoln Street and Can-Dora ..\venL~e. l_mcoln Street .is approximately 35' wide with curb and gutter and is classified as a col!ccto~' street. According to the Village Code~ parking is prohibited on the north side of the st~'cct t',:om Can-Dota Avenue to See-Gwun Avenue. Can-Dora Avenue is approximately 28~ wide with curb and gutter and is classified as a local street. Neat' the intersection of Lincoln Sweet. the street widens to 34'. According to the Village Code, parking is prohibited on the east side o~' the street during school hours from Lincoln Street to Milbum Avenue. Tiqere are txvo parking lots on school property. The lot with access to Lincoln Street has 32 standard parking spaces and 1 handicap space. In the back of the lot, close to the school, buses d~-op-off and pick-up the students. The lot ~vith access to Can-Dora Avenue has 26 standard parking spaces and I handicap space. There are aisc 2 off-street bus lanes. Parents use the bus lane off of Lincoln Street to drop-off and pickmp students. The bus lane with access to Can- Dora Avenue sees little use. A bus for special education students is parked in the bus lane in the afteFnoon but does not leave until well after school is out. Staff Study %c~cra] site visits were made by Staff from October 13-24, 2003. It was observed that bot]~ i>at'l<ing lots were full throughout the day. Also, vehicles were parked on Village streets as a ~'cscfit ct' dqe lots being full. 2-4 vehicles were routinely parked on the sout.h side of Lincoln Street between Can-Dora Avenue and Na-Wa-Ta Avenue all day. 10-20 vehicles were often seen op. the west side of Can-Dora Avenue between Lincoln Street and Milbum Avenue. Half the vehicles were ti:ere ali day while the other half for a short period of time. Also, 1-3 vehicles x~ere routinely parked on Milbum Avenue east of Can-Dora Avenue ali day. School begins shortly after 8:00am. During the drop-off period, both parking lots are nearly full or completely fuI1. On-street parking is already evident. A majority of parents drop-off their child on Lincoln Street with a few using Can-Dora Avenue. Many students were observed walking or riding bikes to school. The amount of vehicular activity appears to be less than typically seen at an elementary school. This, along with Lincoln Street being a wide street, does not appear to cause significant traffic congestion. Two-way traffic is maintained on both Lincoln Street and Can-Dora Avenue. School ends shortly after 3:00pm. Both parking lots are full. Buses pick-up students in the back of the parking lot off of Lincoln Street. A majority of parents pick-up their child using the bus lane o lTof Lincoln Street or on both sides of Lincoln Street. A few parents pick-up their child on ('an-Dora Avenue. Very little traffic congestion was observed. 'l'l~e junior high school shares its facility with a preschool. This is located at the northeast corner of the building. The preschool begins late morning and ends before 3:00pm. Parents were observed parking on Can-Dora Avenue and Milbum Avenue to drop-off and pick-up their children. Approximately 10-15 vehicles associated with the preschool were parked on Village streets during drop-offand pick-up time. Village Code prohibits parking within 30' upon approach to a Stop sign. Typically. signs are only posted to enforce this when a problem persists. There are no such signs posted at any oftlne legs of tlne intersection of Lincoln Street and Can-Dota Avenue. tll s~trveys were sent to the residents along the 300 block of Can-Dora Avenue as xxell as the sci~ool to solicit their opinions on this issue. 3 surveys (30%) were retc~rned to the Village. Tine residents are in favor of the additional parking restrictions as indicated on tb.e attacl~ed co~nnnacnts. Based on a conversation Staff had with Lincoln Junior tligl~ School, they oppose the rcqttcst. Rccornn~endations Comments received fi'om residents focused on two issues. First, it is difficult for residents to exit rlneir driveway with vehicles parked on the west side of the street. Can-Dora Avenue is of standard width for a local street. The situation of backing out cfa driveway has little difference when compared to other local streets in Mount Prospect. The only difference is that the l'rcquency of vehicles parked across from a driveway is greater. Regardless, residents should be able to safely negotiate exiting their driveway. According to Police Department records, there has been one accident associated with residents backing out of their driveway along the 300 block of Can-Dora Avenue within the past five years. 5;ccond, residents contend two-way traffic cannot be maintained. A vast majoriLv of local streets n~ :Mount Prospect allow parking on both sides. Should two vehicles park opposite each orb. er. txxo-way ti'at'fie cannot be maintained. In most cases, however, this situation is not seen over an entire block involving many vehicles. Therefore, there is not a significant concern or history xxith enqergency vehicles being affected. Along the 300 block of Can-Dota Avenue. parking is prolnJbited on the east side of the street. Many years ago, the Village realized that with parking on both sides of this street two-way traffic could not be maintained. Since this affected an entire block throughout the day, parking restrictions were enacted so that two-way traffic could be maintained. On the days Staff observed traffic, vehicles were parked on one side of the street and this did not hinder two-way traffic. Based on these two resident issues alone, Staff would not recommend additional parking restrictions. Enacting parking restrictions because a difficulty with exiting a driveway on a typical local street would set a precedent for future complaints. Also, Staff believes two-way traffic can be maintained as long as motorists obey the cun'ent parking restrictions. From a Staff standpoint, we examined whether the current on-street parking situation affects salL'ty in a manner that would warrant additional parking restrictions. Ideally, the school slnould be able to provide enough parking on their property so that on-street parking for an extended period ol"time is not necessary. There does appear to be green space xvest of tine school in whicln thc parking lot could be extended to provide additional spaces. By doing so, this ,aould provide some rctief for tine residents along Can-Dora Avenue. From a conversation Staff had with District 57~ six parking spaces were added to the parking lot at the beginning of the school year and another five spaces are expected to be added in November. This will help to reduce long- tcmn on-street parking around the school and free up space for drop-off and pick-up in front of tho school. Whether or not the school adds anymore parking spaces in fine lot, allowing parking on the west side of the street does not appear to compromise pedestrian safety. Since vehicles are not allowed to park on the east side of the street, students were not observed crossing the sire& at non-crosswalk locations. Also, the current lack of parking restrictions on the west side of the sit'eel alloxx s students to be safely dropped*offand picked-up in front of the school. I--~om a vehicle safety standpoint, Staff observed whether allowing on-street parking makes ~t di fficult t'o~- motorists exiting the lot fi'om seeing vehicles traveling on Can-Dora Avenue. From o~t~' obscrxations, only one bus rises the bus lane off of Can-Dora ~\vencte. This bcls does not leave until well after school ends and does not appear to have difficulty exitmg the lot. With respect to teachers exiting the lot, they too do not typically leave until well after school ends. By leaving later, teachers are not in conflict witln parents picking-up their clnildren or sit, dents xxalking home from school. When teachers do leave, the few remaining vehicles parked on Can- Dora Avenue and the low volume of traffic does not appear to cause teachers difficulty exiting tl~e tot. According to Police Department records, there have not been any accidents associated witln vehicles exiting the parking lot. Staff visited four elementary schools (Lions Park, Robert Frost South, John Jay and Forest View) and one junior high school (Holmes) to see if other Village streets have parking restrictions adjacent to parking lots as a result of teachers or parents having difficulty exiting a school lot. An inspection of the schools shows that tlne Village does not have parking restrictions on tlqe port,on of street adjacent to the parking lots except along School Street at Lions Park Elementary School. He~'e, because of the large number of parents who drop-off and pick-up their c/nild, on- sit'cci pa~q-aing adjacent to the parking lot is limited to drop-off and pick-t~p only from 8:30- 9:3t)an: and 3:00-4:00pm. At other times of the day, parking is allowed. l lnti] more parking spaces are added on school property, long-term on-street parking will remain. B?.' Cnactnqg more parking restrictions, on-street parking will simply move to other Village streets possibly creating ne,,,,' problems. New problems include forcing teachers and parents to park t!u'ther from tine school generating complaints ti'om the school and creating traffic congestion on otlTer streets generating complaints from residents. Since tine potential problems created with displacing 5-15 vehicles (depending on the limits of any new parking restrictions) appear to o~tweigh the inconvenience experienced by a few with allowing parking, it does not seem in the Village's best interests to make any changes at this time except for one. The distance from tlne Stop sign on Can-Dora Avenue at Lincoln Street to the southern most school driveway is approximately 30'. On occasion, a vehicle will park here even though it is prohibited. A posted sim~ at this location should help to keep this area free fl'ora parked veNcles improving the visibility tbr other motorists to see pedestrians at this intersection. The Village Traffic Engineer recommends: · denial of reqnest for additional parking restrictions along the west side of the 300 block of S. Can-Dota Avenue; · approval of No ParMug Here to Corner sign at a point 30' from the Stop sign for southbound Can-Dora Avenne at Lincoln Street; · periodic Police enforcement of the current parking restrictions; · request Lincoln Junior High School to review their parking needs and expand their parking lot if necessary to provide a suttlcient amount of spaces to relieve Village streets of long-term parking. 8 Discussion I'hcre was no one in the audience to speak on this issue. Chairman Bencic asked Traffic Engineer Lawrie to provide a brief overview of Staffs report. Traffic Engineer Lawrie shared Stuffs observations and recommendation to not add parking restrictions. '~)mmissioner Bjork asked if teachers and principals share with parents the parking restrictiims the schools in their newsletters. Traffic Engineer Lawrie is aware of one school and ChiefDahlberg is aware of another. Chan'man Bencic expressed a concern xvith allowing parking on the west side of Can-Dora .\x'ctlt~c between the two school driveways. Pulling out the driveway, he said it was difficult to sec moving cars on Can-Dora Avenue because of the parked cars on the street. Traffic Engineer Lawrie said Staff did consider recommending parking restrictions between the two driveways. However, parents and buses do not use this lot to pick-up or drop~off students. Only teaches use tlnis lot and by the time they leave school most of the parked cars on Can-Dora Avenue are gone and there isn't a visibility concern. There was some discussion about the area that would be affected with posting a 3'0 Parkh~g Here ~o Cot, er sigm 30' from the Stop sign at Lincoln Street. Village Code already prohibits parking xxithin 30' on approach to a Stop si~. Traffic Engineer Lawrie it would essentially eliminate parking on the west side of the street from Lincoln Street to the school's southern driveway. ('ommissioner Keane, seconded by 51r. Bures, moved to approve the recommendations of Iht Village Traffic Engineer and deny the request to add parking restrictions along the west side of the 300 block of S. Can-Dota Avenue except to install a No Parkiug Here to ('or, er sign per an existing ordinance. The motion was approved by a vote of 7-0. I{EQUEST FOR TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF ALBERT STREET & LINCOLN STREET This item was the 2nd issue discussed by the Commission. Background [n~brmation Residents petitioned the Village to consider installing Stop or Yield signs at the intersection .-\it>crt Street and Lincoln Street. Ms. Susan Eyles, 320 S. Albert Street, Iix;es near this uncontrolled intersection and believes it is unsafe. She called the Village after a recent accident at tlqe intersection and is concerned for the safety' of motorists and pedestrians in the area. Sta IT Study The Engineering Staff performed a traffic study. The findings are as follows: a) Accidents A search of the accident reports indicated: 5"eat' 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 (Oct) Number of Accidents 0 0 2 0 0 1 b) Speed Study Representative speed surveys were performed at all four legs of the intersection between October 21~t and 28~. The average and 85th percentile speeds are as follows: Northbound Albert Street Southbound Albert Street Eastbound Lincoln Street Westbound Lincoln Street Average 85~h % 23 mph 29 mph 23 mph 28 mph 23 mph 28 mph 25 mph 29 mph The speed limit on Albert Street and Lincoln Street is 25mph. Based on tine results, there doesn't appear to be an overall speeding problem, ltowever, the data did show some motorists did drive above tine speed limit as is evident on most residentia! streets. 'l'ratTic Volume d) TratTic volume data was gathered in October. Based on the results, there are approximately 480 vehicles per day that enter the intersection. 250 vehicles travel on Albert Street and 230 vehicles on Lincoln Street. The peak hour of the day (typically 5pm-6pm) experiences approximately 60 vehicles that enter the intersection. Survey Results A total of 20 surveys were sent out in October 2003 to collect the residents' comments on this request. 6 surveys (30%) ~vere returned to the Village. Many of the responses indicated there are many motorists who cut through the neighborhood to avoid the traffic signals at Nit. Prospect Road and Northwest Highway. ]0 c) Existing TraiTic Control Signs TralTic control signs adjacent to the intersection are as follows: Albert Street & Milbum Avenue (north) - uncontrolled Albert Street & Northwest HxW. (south) - 1-way Stop sign on Albert Street Lincoln Street & Mt. Prospect Rd. (east) - 1-way Stop sign on Albert Street l,incoln Street & George Street (west) - uncontrolled i') Sight Obstructions Based on an inspection of the area, only the northeast corner has landscaping (evergreen trces) close to the intersection that may cause a sight obstruction for motorists (2 of the 3 accidents involved a southbound vehicle and xvestbound vehicle). The lowest branches are approximately 3' above the ground. Since this is an uncontrolled intersection, there is to be sufficien1 stopping sight distance for ali four legs of the intersection. Stopping sight distance is the distance a vehicle travels from the point ',,,'hen a motorist sees an approaching vehicle on the cross street, reacts and comes to a full stop. A motorist should have enough clear vision to be able to stop, if necessary, before reaching the intersection. Landscaping near the homes and even the homes themselves at the intersection do nor provide sufficient stopping sight distance for motorists. Therefore. Stop or Yield signs would assist in clarifying the right-of-way and possibly reduce the potential accident. I,[ccommctndations 4-,,var Stop signs are normally wan'anted at intersections where there is a condition of severely restricted v~ew, accidents or a significant amount of vehicles and pedestrians. Based on an tnq)ection, there are no sight obstructions immediately at the intersection that would cause a Fkdl stop to be necessary for alt four directions. In addition, there have been 3 accidents over the pas~ 3 years. In order to meet the criterion for a multiway stop si~ installation, there is to be 5 accidents in a 12-month period. Finally, the peak hour of the day experiences approximately 60 vehicles entering the intersection. In order to meet the criterion, the volume entering the intersection from the major street approaches (total of both approaches) is to average 300 vehicles per hour for any 8 hours of the day and 200 vehicles per hour for the same 8 hours fi'om thc minor street approaches. Based on the data, 4-way Stop signs are not warranted at this imersection. 2-\Var Stop Si,.zns 2-xx ay Stop signs are normally warranted at intersections where the criteria for a 4-way Stop sign i~<!allation is not met but xxhere a full stop is necessary at all times on one street in order to clari(v the right-of-way. As stated above, there are evergreen trees located near the northeast c~,rner of' the intersection. The bases of the trees are on private property but some of tlne 5ranches overhang the parkway. When considering 2-way Stop or Yield signs, typical c~'~gineering practice is to determine the safe approach speed for the direction to be controlled. It' ]! a motorist must slow down to lower than 15mph when approaching an intersection because of a sight obstruction, Stop signs should be used rather than Yield signs. Else, Yield signs should be Llscd. For this case, a portion of the evergreen tree falls within the area that is to be tree of any sight obstructions for a westbound motorist traveling at 15mph. Either the sight obstruction must be removed or 2-way Stop signs should be installed. The portion of evergreen tree that falls within thc siglnt obstruction area are the branches tlnat overhang the parkway. Village Code requires branches that overhang the public righr-ot'-way be a minimum of 8' above the ground. Since tine ,}un-ertl: condition of the tree does not connply, a letter will be sent to tlne homeo~xner requiring lr~mming w/thin 30 days. If no action is taken, the Village Forestry Division will remove the hFanches at the cost of tine homeowner. Once this work is completed, there will be sul'Ticient si,,_,hI distance for westbound motorists approaching tine intersection to not warrant Stop signs. Ticld Signs \t intersections where a full stop is not necessary at ali times, consideration should be g~x-en to using less restrictive measures such as Yield signs. Yield signs assign right-of-way to traffic when tine normal right-of-way rule appears to not be effective. 3 acc/dents in the past 3 years reveal this may be the case. Also, the speed data shows that because of the proximity of the i~omes and landscaping to the intersection, motorists may not have enough time to see other vehicles on the cross street, react and stop before reaching the intersection. Motorists controlled by Yield signs would need to slow down before reaching the intersection resulting in a shorter distance to come to a full stop if necessary. Finally, when installed, Yield signs should be placed on rl~e minor street. Since the traffic volume is similar on both streets, Staffreviex~ ed the traffic control signs on adjacent intersections and the recorded speeds on both streets to determme the appropriate street to be given the right-of-way. Based on Staft's analysis. Yield signs on Lincoln 5tFcct are recommended at this intersection. Thc Village Traffic Eugineer recommends: removal of sight obstruction at the northeast Corner al~(I approval of Yield signs on Lincoln Street at Albert Street. Discussion Chairman Bencic opened up the discussion to the audience. Ms. Susan Eyles, 320 S. Albert Street, said she contacted the Village after a recent accident. The residents in the area would like to see either Stop or Yield sig~s at the intersection to control the cars traveling through the intersection. Chairman Bencic asked the Commission if there were any questions .for the petitioner. There \\CFC llOlnC, Chairman Bencic asked if there were anyone in tlne audience who would like to speak m opposition to tiao request. There were none. Chairman Benc ic asked that Traffic Engineer Lawrie provide a brief overview of Staffs report to thc Conwnission. Traffic Engineer Lawrie explained the results of the study. He also said that his recomrnendation at this time was different from the report, tIis recommendation xxas to first work with the lnomeowner at 1000 E. Lincoln Street to remove the low branches of the evergreen tree near fine intersection. Based on the amount of trimming done by' the homeowner, gta:T would then be in a position to recommend either 2-way Stop or Yield signs on Lincoln Street. Ms. Eyles expressed a concern with tine speeding that occurs on the street. Traffic Engineer Lawrie explained that the Village does not install Stop or Yield signs to address a speeding problem. The signs serve to clarify the right-of-way at an intersection and do not necessarily have an affect on drivers' speeds near the intersection. He explained that Police enforcement is used to address a speeding concern. Mr. Hans Lira, 324 S. Albert Street, expressed a concern with motorists who do not slow down when entering this uncontrolled intersection. Deputy ChiefDahlberg explained the efforts of the Police Department controlling speeding along Albert Street near Central Road. He is willing to have an officer perform speed enforcement in the area as time allows. Commissioner Keane, seconded by 5Ir. Bures, moved to approve the recommendations of the Village Traffic Engineer and work ~vith the homeowner at 1000 E. Lincoln Street over the next month to remove the sight obstruction and then bring this issue back to Safety Commission for a final decision as to whether Stop or Yield signs are recommended. The motion was approved by a vote of 7-0. D) I) REQUEST FOR SPEED LIMIT CHANGE ALONG EUCLID AVENUE Background Information In January 2003, the Village received a complaint from a resident concerning safer>, around Euclid Elementary School. The Village contacted the Cook County High~vay Department (CCHD) as they have jurisdiction of the road and requested they perform a speed study. They agreed to and then hired a consultant to do the study. Euclid Avenue is a 4-lane cross-section with left turn left turn lanes at Wheeling Road. Crabtree Lane. Sycamore Lane and Wolf Road. The area bordered by this portion of Euclid Avenue is primarily residential. Rob Roy Golf Course and Woodland Trails Park borders the north side of the road. Also, Euclid Elementary School is located at the corner of Euclid Avenue and Wheeling Road. The Village Code currently reflects the speed limit along this stretch of the road to be 45rnph. West of Wheeling Road, the speed limit is 40mph. East of Wolf Road, the speed limit is 35mph. The Village recently received ~vord that the CCHD completed a speed study this month and determined that the speed limit should be lowered to 40mph. Staff supports this speed limit reduction since it is more consistent with the speed limit east and ~vest. In addition, even though there are school speed limit signs posted near the elementary school, a lower speed limit may cause drivers to be more cautious when traveling near the elementary school and park when pedestrians are present at times when school is not in session. 13 Accot'ding to the CCHD, the lower speed limit is to be formally approved by the County Board at their December 2. 2003 meeting. Signs reflecting the new speed limit are expected to be installed mid-December, In order to be consistent, the Village Code needs to be modifie~l to reflect this change. 2 ) l/.ceommendation Based on the study performed by the CCHD and Staff's observations, Thc Village Traffic Engineer recommends: approval of lowering the speed limit along Euclid Avenue bet~cen \Vhceling P, oad and \Volf P, oad from 45ml)h to 40mph. I'hcre was no one ii1 the attdience to speak on this issue. Chain-nan Be;tic asked Traffic l!nginecr Lawrie to provide a brief overview of Staff's report. Traffic Engineer Lawrie provided overview and recommended to approve the 40mph speed limit. Nit'. Bures asked if the CCHD would install the new speed limit signs. Traffic Engineer Lawrie said they would. Commissioner Tortorello, seconded by Deputy Chief Dahlberg, moved to approve the recommendations of the Village Traflic Engineer and lower the speed limit along Euclid Avenue between Wheeling Road and YVolf Road from 45mph to 40mph. The motion was approved by a vote of 7-0. (',:mmtssioner Tortorello brought up an issue with the parking restriction signs along Milburn .\vcncte between Elmhurst Avenue and Main Street. The north side of the street has signs that ~,tatc No /htr/ci~zg A~O: Time. The Village Code. however, indicates :Vo P~,'/ci,g o, &malays ~'30c,~-].'30~m. The current signs have been up for many years. Captain Livingston supported oral,' allowing parking on one side of the street in the event emergency vehicles needed to travel down the street. After some discussion, the consensus was the Village Code should be updated to reflect the existing signage. Staff will look to take this issue to a future Village Board Meeting. Commissioner Keane n'tade the Commission aware that he has noticed new speed humps installed as traffic calming measures in Park Ridge. ]4 \'it1~ no l'~rther business to discuss, the Safety Commission voted 7-0 to adjot, ll'rl at 8:45 p.~7~. Ltpo~ tl~e motion of Commissioner Bjork. Deputy ChiefDahlberg sec0~ded the motion. Respectfully subn~itted, Matthew P. Lawrie, P.E. Traffic Engineer 15 MAYOR Gerald L. Farley TRUSTEES Timothy J. Corcoran Paul Wm. Hoe£ert Richard M. Lohrstorfer Michaele W. Skowron Irvana K. Wilks Michael A. Zadel Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 VILLAGE MANAGER Michael E, Janonis VILLAGE CLERK Velma W. Lowe Phone: 847/818-5328 Fax: 847/818-5329 TDD: 847/392-6064 AGENDA DOWNTOWN AD HOC COMMITTEE MEETING LOCATION: 2nd Floor Conference Room Village Hall 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, IL 60056 MEETING DATE & TIME: Thursday December 11, 2003 3:30 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - December 4, 2003 IV. OLD BUSINESS V. NEW BUSINESS A. Sub Area #1 VI. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT VII. ADJOURNMENT 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. C:~Docaments and SettingsqC. D ewls .DOMArN~Local Settings\Temporary Internet FiI¢$\OLK2\I 2-11-03 agenda.doc MAYOR Gerald L. Farley TRUSTEES Timothy J. Corcoran Paul Wm. Hoefert R/chard M. Lohrstorfer Michaele Skowron Irvana K. Wilks Michael A. Zadel Village of Mount Prospect VILLAGE MfaNAGER Michael E. Janonis VILLAGE CLERK Velma W. Lowe Community DevelOpment Department Phone:847/818-5328 Fax: 847/818-5329 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 T~)r):847/392-6064 AGENDA MEETING LOCATION: Mt. Prospect Park District Community Center 1000 W. Central Road Mount Prospect, IL 60056 MOUNT PROSPECT PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING DATE & TIME: Thursday December 11, 2003 7:30 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER H. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 13, 2003 MEETING A. PZ-35-02/901 Edgewood Lane / Rezone, Subdivision, Lot Depth Exception. B. PZ-27-03 / Jewel Express, Randhurst Shopping Center / Conditional Use / Amend PUD. C. PZ-42-03 / Enterprise Rental / 1550 S. Elmhurst Road / Conditional Use/Amend PUD. D. PZ-43-03 / 709 N. Main Street / Conditional Use. E. PZ-44-03 / 1005 N. Burning Bush / Variation. F. PZ-45-03 / Arlington Heights Park District / Melas Park / Conditional Use & Variation. OLD BUSINESS A. PZ-36-03 / Kiddie Corps / 1699 Wall Street Suite 105 / Conditional Use (Day Care). NOTE: This case is Village Board Final. (Continued to January 22~a). V. NEW BUSINESS A. PZ-46-03 / AM Pinnacle Holding Co. / 321 E. Rand Rd. / Rezone from R1 Single Family to R2 Attached Single Family to allow construction of a 4-unit townhouse development. NOTE: This case is Village Board Final. B. PZ-48-03 / The Mount Prospect Historical Society/103 S. Maple Street / Conditional Use to relocate the Central School building to the property located directly south of the existing Historical Society Building and operate a museum on the Subject Property. NOTE: This case is Village Board Final. VI. QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS · PZ-35-02/901 Edgewood Lane - Village Board approved 12/2 and waived second reading. · PZ-27-03 / Jewel Express - Village Board reviewed 12/2; second reading 12/16/03. · PZ-42-03 / Enterprise Rental - Village Board approved 12/2 and waived second reading. · PZ-43-03 / 709 N. Main Street - Village Board reviewed 12/2; second reading is 12/16/03. · PZ-45-03 / A. H. Park District - Village Board reviewed 12/2; second reading 12/16/03. VII. ADJOURNMENT 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 PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-35-02 Hearing Date: November 13, 2003 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 901 Edgewood Lane PETITIONER: PUBLICATION DATE: Larry McKone 493 E. Haven St. Arlington Hts., IL 60005 October 29, 2003 PIN #: 08-14-107-001 REQUEST: Map Amendment, Resubdivision, and Development Code Exception MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Rogers, Chair Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Keith Youngquist MEMBERS ABSENT: Arlene Juracek Merrill Cotten Matthew Sledz STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner Michael Jacobs, Deputy Director of Community Development INTERESTED PARTIES: Chairperson Richard Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. Joseph Donnelly made a motion to approve the minutes of the October 23 meeting, seconded by Leo Floros. The minutes were approved 3-0, with one abstention by Keith Youngquist. At 8:25, Mr. Rogers introduced Case No. PZ-35-02, a request for a Map Amendment, Resubdivision, and Development Code Exception and noted that the requests would be Village Board final. Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, presented the case. She said that the Subject Property is located on the east side of Edgewood Lane between L onnquist Boulevard and Golf Road a nd contains a single-family residence with related improvements. The Subject Property is zoned RX Single Family Residence and is bordered by the tLX district to the north and west and the Ri Single Family Residence to the south and east. The Petitioner proposes to rezone 901 Edgewood Lane and the vacated Sunset Road right-of-way from RX to RI. The RX district requires a minimum lot size of 17,500 square feet while the Ri district requires 8,125 square feet. The Petitioner would like to demolish the existing residence and resubdivide the Subject Property, including the vacated right-of-way, into a two-lot subdivision. The proposed lots would exceed the R1 minimum lot size requirements, and the homes would meet the applicable zoning regulations. However, due to the manner in which the surrounding lots were developed and the existing shallo;v lot depth, the proposed lots would not meet the minimum required lot depth of' 120 feet and would instead measure slightly less than 119 feet, 118.81'. The Village's Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map designate the Subject Property as Single Family Residence. The Petitioner's proposed Map Amendment and Resubdivision are in keeping with the Village's designation. The Engineering Division had no objections to the rezoning and Development Code exception. They found that the plat ~vas prepared in accordance with Village Codes. In order to approve the requests, the project must meet the standards for each requested action: The standards for Map Amendments, which are listed in the Zoning Ordinance, relate to: compatibility with existing uses and zoning classifications of property within the general area of the property in question; the compatibility of the surrounding lanning & Zoning Commission PZ-35-02 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 2 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; 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 plat was prepared in accordance with the Development Code requirements, but the Petitioner is seeking relief from the Development Code regulations for the lot depth. Exceptions to Development Code regulations may be approved in cases of hardship, "caused by conditions uniquely attributable to the land under consideration, would be imposed upon an applicant by compliance with these regulations and upon a finding that there are alternate feasible means of fulfilling the purpose and spirit of the regulations to protect the public health, safety and welfare...".The Subject Property is adjacent to existing single-family residences and the proposed rezoning will be in keeping with the surrounding area. Although the proposed lot depth is less than the minimum code requirements, it is in keeping with the lot depths of the adjacent properties. The proposal meets the standards for a Map Amendment because it is compatible with existing properties within the general area of the Subject Property. While this section of Edgewood Lane is zoned ILK and R1 and it has varying front setbacks, the proposal is consistent with recent development trends and meets the Village's Comprehensive Plan requirements. The proposed Subject Properties would exceed the minimum lot size requirements of the R1 zoning district. Due to the manner in which the adjacent properties were subdivided, it is physically impossible for the proposed lots to meet the required 120-foot depth requirement. The proposed lot depths would not have a detrimental impact on the public health, safety or general welfare. The proposed lot depth would not adversely affect the character of the surrounding neighborhood or utility provision and it would be in compliance with the Village's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission make a recommendation to the Village Board to approve a Map Amendment, Plat of Resubdivision, and Development Code exception for the property located at 901 Edgewood Lane, Case No. PZ-35-02. The Village Board's decision is final for this case. Larry McKone was sworn in and testified he plans to build two homes 3,600 -4,000 sq.ft, that will be sold for $750,000 to $900,000. He said he is president of Gettysburg Homes and built homes 3 lots to the north of these lots about 8-9 yrs ago. He has been building homes for 30 years.. Chairperson Rogers closed the hearing at 8:32pm. Joe Donnelly made a motion to make a recommendation to the Village Board to approve a Map Amendment, Plat of Resubdivision, and Development Code exception for the property located at 901 Edgewood Lane, Case No. PZ-35-02. Leo Floros seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: Motion was approved 4-0. AYES: Floros, Donnelly, Rogers, and Youngquist NAYS: None At 9:55 p.m, Joseph Donnetly made motion to adjourn, seconded by Keith Youngquist. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Michael Jacobs, AICP Deputy Director, Community Development Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner C \Documents and Settings\KDewi~ DOMAIN\Local Settings;Temporary Interact FiIes\OLK2\pz-35-02-901 Edgewood Lndo¢ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-27-03 Hearing Date: November 13, 2003 PETITIONER: Robert Stack, 1955 W. North Ave., Bldg. F. Melrose Park, IL 60160 Jewel Food Services, Inc. (c/o Albertson's Inc.) PUBLICATION DATE: October 29, 2003 PIN #: 03-27-401-266 REQUEST: Conditional Use -amend a PUD to construct a gas station and convenience center MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Rogers, Chair Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Keith Youngquist MEMBERS ABSENT: Arlene Juracek Merrill Cotten Matthew Sledz STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner Michael Jacobs, Deputy Director of Community Development INTERESTED PARTIES: Chair Richard Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. Joseph Donnelly made a motion to approve the minutes of the October 23 meeting, seconded by Leo Floros. The minutes were approved 3-0, with one abstention by K eith Y oungquist. At 7:38, Mr. Rogers introduced Case N ol P Z-27-03, a request for a C onditional U se t o amend a PUD to construct a gas station and convenience center and noted that the request would be Village Board final. Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, presented the case. She said that the Petitioner has requested an amendment to the Planned Unit Development for Randhurst Mall, which requires Conditional Use approval. The proposed amendment would allow the development of a Jewel Express facility, consisting of a convenience store, fuel station, and car wash, on an existing mall outlot. The P&Z hearing was properly noticed in the October 29, 2003 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. The Subject Property, Randhurst Mall, is located at the northeast comer of Rand and Elmhurst Roads and contains a regional shopping mall with multiple outlots. The Subject Property is zoned B3 Community Shopping PUD and is bordered by residential and commercial Districts. The Petitioner's proposal specifically involves the outlot located near the comer of the mall's northern vehicular entrance/exit from Euclid Avenue, between the existing Steak & Shake restaurant and the Jewel grocery store. The outlot, located just south of the existing detention basin, contains some parking while the remaining portion of the lot is vacant. The Petitioner is seeking to construct a Jewel Express facility consisting of a fuel center, mini-mart convenience store and a car wash, on the outlot that is located just west of the existing Randhurst Jewel grocery store. The facility is not limited to just Jewel customers. The Jewel Express building materials were designed to match the existing Jewel Osco Store. The facility would include a freestanding building consisting of a 1,989 square-foot mini-mart convenience store and an attached 852 Planning & Zoning Commission ,Arlene Juracek, Chairperson PZ-27-03 Page 2 square-foot drive thru car wash. The fuel pump canopy includes brick columns that would also match the Jewel Osco and Jewel Express materials. The site design is not pedestrian-friendly as its intended user is a consumer in a vehicle. The Petitioner has revised the site plan multiple times in an effort to address StafFs concerns regarding accessing the site safely, minimizing traffic conflicts, and having the Jewel Express 'fit' within the context of the existing uses. The Petitioner submitted a photometric plan that indicates lighting levels for the Jewel Express area. The plan indicates that the maximum lighting level for the canopy would not exceed 28 foot- candles, which is in keeping with the recently adopted lighting regulations. However, the Petitioner needs to recalculate the lighting levels and exclude the canopy lights to demonstrate that the new parking lot lights comply with Village regulations. The proposed development includes access from Shopping Center Drive, which is south of Euclid Avenue, and the existing Jewel Osco parking lot. Per the Petitioner's Traffic Planning Study, 65% of the fuel center trips may be from 'pass-by' traffic, which would include Jewel shoppers who pass-by the site on their way home from work. The Petitioner proposes to provide 15 parking stalls for the Jewel Express facility. As part of the project, a parking area physically connected to the Jewel Express site, but used by mall employees, would be improved in conjunction with the Jewel Express project. Ms. Conn011y pointed out that the Petitioner's exhibit indicates that a total of 415 spaces will be provided for Jewel Osco shoppers and Jewel Express consumers. The overall parking ratio of 6.2 parking spaces/1,000 square-feet complies with Village's parking regulations. The Petitioner proposes to install wall signs on the front elevation of the mini-mart convenience store and the rear elevation of the car wash. In addition, the canopy over the fuel pumps would include signage on all four elevations. The size of the wail signs complies with the Village's Sign Code regulations. It should be noted that the proposed facility i s also s ubj ect to t he m MFs own s ignage regulations, which w outd require review a nd approval by t he property owner. The Size and location of the proposed monument sign complies with Village regulations as well. The Petitioner's landscape plan indicates that the Jewel Express area will include a variety of plants, trees, and shrubs. The plan indicates that additional landscaping will be planted along the north elevation of the existing Jewel Food Store. Minimal landscaping has been indicated for the detention area, however; including landscaping within the detention area could adversely impact the storm water management system. The Village's Comprehensive P lan designates the R andhurst S hopping C enter for community commercial uses. Mall management is currently implementing site and structural changes to improve the appearance of the mall and attract additional shoppers to Randhurst. However, the Jewel Express facility includes elements such as a car wash that are not appropriate uses within a regional mall and may detract from existing and future uses within the mall and surrounding outlots. Ms. Connolly said Staff feels that, as one of the last remaining outlots within the shopping center as well as the close proximity to the single-family residential neighborhoods, the site would be more appropriate for a restaurant or retail use. The standards for conditional uses are listed in the Zoning Ordinance and relate to: 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. The Petitioner proposes to use one of the last remaining outlots to construct a Jewel Express facility that includes a mini-mart, car wash, and fuel pumps. While the proposed development was designed to provide a safe and cohesive means of accessing the site, the use conflicts with the expectation of a regional mall. Based on the above analysis, the proposed Jewel Express is notan appropriate use for a regional mall. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission make a recommendation to the Village Board to deny Planning & Zoning Commission Arlene Juracek, Chairperson PZ-27-03 Page 3 an amendment to the Planned Unit Development approval for the Randhurst Shopping Mall to allo~v the construction of a Jewel Express. However, if the P&Z does recommend approval, Staff suggests including the following list of conditions of approval: 1. Development of the site in conformance with the site plan and landscape plan prepared by CT Architecture & Engineering revised October 23, 2003; 2. Development of the site in conformance with the elevations prepared by CT Architecture & Engineering dated January 20, 2003; 3. Submittal of final building plans meeting all applicable Building and Fire Code requirements; and approval of appropriate permits by I.D.O.T. and M.W.R.D. Mr. Floros asked why staff had recommended approval of a gas facility for Costco at Randhurst and not for the Jewel Express. Ms. Connolly responded that the Costco facility would have been exclusively for members, would not have included a car wash, and this is the last remaining outtot and would have a negative impact on the overall redevelopment. Mike Jacobs noted that the Costco gas facility will be located on the former Wards' automotive site, thus it will be replacing a similar use, while in contrast the proposed Jewel Express facility would be located near recently developed and successful commercial uses including the movie theater and Steak & Shake. Rick Skrodzki, Attorney for Albertson's, Inc. presented the Commission with a list of witnesses xvho would be available to speak at the hearing and copies of renderings and exhibits to be presented and responses to the conditions imposed by staff. He gave an overview of what they were requesting to do and said they had originally asked to have the fuel center closer to Euclid but Staff had asked to have the facility further away from residential use and into the center. He stated this will not be a typical gas station but a more tow-key and subtly lit facility designed for Jewel and shopping center customers. He stated he feels this facility fills a community commercial use. He then introduced the project architect, Peter Theodore. Mr. Rogers s~vore in all speakers at this time. Mr. Theodore said Jewel is making this multi-million dollar investment not to compete with Costco and Dom/nick's but to provide convenience and savings to their customers. He said it also takes traffic off the roads when customers buy gas where they buy groceries. He pointed out they have no photometric or noise effect on the neighbors and have an all masonry building and have increased the landscaping around the roadway system. Mr. Skrodzki came to the podium again and explained his packet of exhibits more fully to the Commission and asked for questions. Mr. Rogers asked about the appropriateness of the car wash. Mr. Theodore said the car wash is a necessity. It is usually a "freebie" and where they have not included one in other projects, customers have asked for it. Hours of operation have not been established for the car wash. Mr. Rogers complimented them on architectural design and landscaping. Mr. Donnelly asked about the other stores who offer gas sales to food customers. Mr. Scrodzki said all the food chains and Wat~Mart, Target, Me/ers, etc. are offering gas facilities and quoted an article in Southtown newspaper as saying food stores who don't offer customers service stations will lose 12% business in 2004 and by 2010 will be losing 35% business. He pointed out the car wash entrance is well screened and the wash cycle will only take 5 minutes. Ben Bussman, 207 S. Naperville, Wheaton, IL, Landscape Architect, clarified that the berm in front of the car wash would be 3 feet in height to screen the headlights and the area will be heavily landscaped with year-round materials. Chairperson Rogers closed the hearing at 8:15 pm. Mr. Floros complimented Jewel on their excellent presentation and said he thought it would be unfair to withhold permission for a gasoline station to Jewel after giving permission to Costco, a newcomer to the area. The other Commission members also made favorable comments about the project. Joe Donnelly made a motion to recommend approval of the requested Conditional Use to allow amendment to the Planned Unit Development to allow the construction of a Jewel Express. gas station and convenience center for lanning & Zoning Commission PZ-27-03 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 4 Case No. PZ-27-03, 999 Elmhurst Road with the four conditions imposed by Staff. motion. UPON ROLL CALL: Leo Floros seconded the AYES: Floros, Donnelly, Rogers, and Youngquist NAYS: None Motion was approved 4-0. At 9:55 p.m, Joseph Donnelly made motion to adjourn, seconded by Keith Youngquist. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Michael Jacobs, AICP Deputy Director, Community Development Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner H:~PLAN~Plamlmg & Zoning COMM\P&Z 2003\M/nutes\PZ-27-03 Jewel Express- Rasdhm'st doc MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-42-03 Hearing Date: November 13, 2003 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1550 S. Elmhurst Road PETITIONER: Sandra Sassano Enterprise Rent-A-Car 1050 Lombard Lombard, IL 60148 PUBLICATION DATE: October 29, 2003 PIN #: 08-14-403-027 REQUEST: Conditional Use -amend a PUD to permit on-site truck rental MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Rogers, Acting Chair Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Keith Youngquist MEMBERS ABSENT: Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Merrill Cotten Matthew Sledz STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner Michael Jacobs, Deputy Director of Community Development INTERESTED PARTIES: Chairperson Richard Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. Joseph Donnelly made a motion to approve the minutes of the October 23 meeting, seconded by Leo Floros. The minutes were approved 3-0, with one abstention by Keith Youngquist. At 8:38, Mr. Rogers introduced Case No. PZ-42-03, a request for a Conditional Use to amend a PUD to permit on-site truck rental and noted that the request would be Village Board final. Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, presented the case. She said that the Subject Property is located on the west side of Elmhurst Road between Golf Road and Dempster Street and contains a retail/commercial shopping center with related improvements. The Subject Property is zoned B4* Corridor Commercial Planned Unit Development and is bordered by the Conservation Recreation district to the west, Rec Plex, RX Single Family, which is the CornEd easement, and B4 Corridor Commercial to the north, R4* Multi-Family Residence Planned Unit Development to the south, and a residential development in Des Plaines to the east. The Petitioner currently operates a car rental facility within the existing shopping center. In conjunction with the recent improvements to the center, which include the opening of Kohl's within the former K-Mart store, the property owner is looking to introduce a new tenant in the Petitioner's existing space and relocate the Petitioner's use to the south end of the building, facing Dempster. The Zoning Ordinance lists truck sales, rental, and repair as a Conditional Use in the B4 District. The Petitioner's existing car rental agency is permitted as part of the Subject Property's overall Planned Unit Development. Therefore the Petitioner is seeking to amend the original Planned Unit Development, which requires Conditional Use approval, to permit on-site truck rentals. The Petitioner's rental agency office would be relocated to the Dempster Street frontage and their lease limits the total number of rental vehicles to no more than 30 vehicles at one time, including both cars and trucks. In addition, the Petitioner's lease allows a maximum of seven 14-foot trucks to be parked along the Dempster Street frontage and requires all 24-foot trucks to be parked at the northwest comer of the site. The maximum number of trucks parked on- Planning & Zoning Commission PZ-42-03 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 2 site would not exceed 14 trucks and the maximum size of the trucks parked on-site would not exceed 24'. The standards for Conditional Uses are listed in the Zoning Ordinance and relate to: the Conditional Use will not have a detrimental impact 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, 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. Staff conducted a site inspection as part of the zoning review and found that some of the existing landscaping would not adequately screen trucks parked along the Dempster Street frontage. Also, the proposed truck rental use would not be i n keeping with t he recent site renovations unless t he trucks a re parked a long t he north 1 ot 1 ine a nd additional landscape screening is provided along the Dempster Street frontage. However, Staff found that parking the rental trucks in the proposed, locations shown on the Petitioner's site plan would reduce the rental agency's impact on the shopping center because the .preferred parking spaces, in front of the stores, would remain available to shoppers. In addition, limiting the maximum number of rental vehicles to no more than the proposed 30, including a maximum of 14 trucks, would have minimal impact on the center and would not create a parking deficiency. Therefore, the proposed truck rental operation would not adversely affect the character of the surrounding neighborhood, utility provision or public streets a nd the proposed Conditional Use w ill b e i n compliance with the Village's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. However, it is important that the Petitioner parks the vehicles as indicated on the site plan and that additional landscaping and security lighting is installed to maintain the level of improvements recently undertaken at the shopping center as well as to ensure the safety and security of the shopping center. The proposed truck rental agency meets the Conditional Use standards listed in the Zoning Ordinance subject to complying ;vith the following conditions: 1. Submit a landscape plan for Staffreview and approval that provides year-round landscape screening for the parking areas that will include truck rental parking; 2. Submit a photometric plan for review and approval by the Police Department that indicates the location and light levels of the proposed security lighting; 3. Park all rental vehicles in the parking spaces indicated on the Petitioner's Site Plan received November 4, 2003; 4. The maximum number ofrentat trucks stored on-site cannot exceed 14; 5. The maximum total number of rental vehicles stored on-site cannot exceed 30. Based on this analysis and compliance with the above conditions, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission make a recommendation to the Village Board to approve a Conditional Use to permit truck rentals at the property located at 1550 S. Elmhurst Road, Case No. PZ-42-03. The Village Board's decision is final for this case. Chairperson Rogers swore in Petitioners. A representative of Enterprise noted that their Waukegan facility served as the cmxent return location for many customers from the Mount Prospect area. After reviewing the issue further they elected to pursue the required steps to include truck leasing at their existing South Elmhurst Road location. They plan to have no more than 14 trucks, ;vith just 5-10 trucks generally parked on the lot at one time. It was noted that the proposed facility is for commercial customers only, and that truck rental to the general public is not available. Due to the nature of the business the truck rental business accounts for approximately 5 transactions a day. Greg Toste, 708 Arlington Avenue, Naperville, IL, testified that several months ago their landlord, Kirnco, approached them regarding their plans to redevelop the shopping center at which they currently operate a car rental facility. They determined that due to their established clientele they did not need to maintain an Elmhurst Road frontage for their business. He noted that the 24' trucks are a small part of the rental fleet and cannot be seen when driving south on Elmhurst. He also indicated that the cargo vans, smaller trucks and other vehicles would be parked along the lanning & Zoning Commission PZ-42-03 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 3 Dempster Street frontage. Sandy Sassano, 6812 Joliet Road, Indian Head Park, pointed out where Enterprise would be located in relation to Kohl's on the site drawing. She pointed out the two bays and where the other tenants would be. Mr. Toste said the stucco and other materials were designed to match the Kohl's colors and materials. Joe Donnelly asked about the lighting scheme and would the lighting be kept toward the facility for security reasons and not away from the building. Mr. Toste agreed it would. Mr. Donnelly said it would be best to keep the trucks behind the berm adjacent to their facility. Mr. Toste agreed. Mr. Floros asked if all their signage would be on Dempster and not on Elmhurst Road. Mr. Toste said yes, Enterprise would only be on the monument sign on Elmhurst Road. Mike Jacobs noted that the Village received a letter from the homeowners association of a nearby residential development indicating opposition to the requested Conditional Use. The letter did not contain any specific information as to why they opposed the proposed car and truck rental facility. Chairperson Rogers closed the hearing at 8:57pm. Keith Youngquist made a motion to recommend the Village Board approve a Conditional Use to permit truck rentals at the property located at 1550 S. Elmhurst Road, Case No. PZ-42-03 with the five conditions listed in the Staff report and the following additional conditions: 1) lighting scheme directs lights away from residents; 2) there will be no vehicle repairs done on-site; 3) to better screen the vehicle parking area along Dempster Street, the proposed storage area should be adjusted as necessary to fall directly behind the highest point of the existing berm; and 4) landscaping shall be added at the northern corner of the lot. Joe Donnelly seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Floros, Donnelly, Rogers, and Youngquist NAYS: None Motion was approved 4-0. At 9:55 p.m, Joseph Donnelly made motion to adjourn, seconded by Keith Youngquist. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Michael Jacobs, AICP Deputy Director, Community Development Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-43-03 Hearing Date: November 13, 2003 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 709 N. Main St. PETITIONER: Henry Elizar PUBLICATION DATE: October 29, 2003 PIN #: 03-34-200-051 REQUEST: Conditional Use to operate an auto repair facility MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Rogers, Chair Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Keith Youngquist MEMBERS ABSENT: Arlene Juracek Merrill Cotten Matthew Sledz STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner Michael Jacobs, Deputy Director of Community Development INTERESTED PARTIES: Chairperson Richard Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. Joseph Donnelly made a motion to approve the minutes of the October 23 meeting, seconded by. Leo Floros. The minutes were approved 3-0, with one abstention by Keith Youngquist. At 9:01, Mr. Rogers introduced Case No. PZ-43-03, a request for a Conditional Use to operate an auto repair facility and noted that the request would be Village Board final. Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, presented the case. She said that the Subject Property is located on the east side of Main Street between Kensington Road and Highland Street and contains a commercial building with related improvements. The Subject Property is zoned B3 Community Shopping and is bordered by the B3 district to the north, south, and east and by the R1 Single Family Residence to the ;vest. The building was an auto repair shop at one time, but was converted to an office use, 303 Taxi. The Petitioner owns the Subject Property as well as the existing 303 Taxi business. The Petitioner is in the process of relocating the taxi business to another location and ;vould tike to convert the existing building into an auto repair facility. The Zoning Ordinance lists auto repair and service stations as Conditional Uses in the B3 Zoning District. It should be noted that, although the Subject Property previously contained an auto repair shop, the Petitioner's proposal to convert the building from an office use to an auto repair facility requires Conditional Use approval. The Petitioner's exhibits illustrate the proposed site improvements. In addition to closing one of the driveways and installing additional landscaping along the Main Street frontage, the Petitioner proposes minor fagade improvements. As part of the project, the Petitioner proposes to install another bay door, for a total of three service bays, ali of which would be accessible from Main Street. In an effort to improve the aesthetics of the property and comply with the Village's Corridor Design Guidelines, the Petitioner proposes to install additional landscaping along the Main Street elevation. In doing so, the Petitioner will eliminate parking spaces in front of the building. The Zoning Ordinance requires 1 parking space per employee, plus 5 parking spaces per service bay. The Petitioner's site plan indicates 16 parking spaces would be provided Planning & Zoning Commission Arlene Juracek, Chairperson PZ-43-03 Page 2 plus 3 spaces inside the building, the service bays, that could be used for parking. The proposal would meet zoning regulations for the minimum number 'of required parking spaces if the service bays were included in the parking count. In addition, the Petitioner's application states that no more than two employees would work at the facility and that the operator would not accept more vehicles than the site could park. The Petitioner stated in the application that approximately 10 vehicles would exit/enter the site on a daily basis. The Engineering Division found t hat t he proposed traffic volume does not w arrant a 3 6-foot wide driveway a s shown on the site plan and requires the driveway width to be narrowed to 24'. Also, the Police Department found that the proposed layout and use might create a "target rich environment" for auto burglars. Therefore, they require the installation of adequate lighting, especially for the rear parking area. In addition, the building must be improved so it meets current Building and Fire Code requirements because it is a change in use and occupancy classification. This will require the installation of automatic sprinklers and a fire alarm system. Furthermore, vehicles not in working order may not be stored outside, visible to the Main Street frontage. The standards for approving a Conditional Use request are listed in the Zoning Ordinance and relate to: the Conditional Use will not have a detrimental impact 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, 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. The Petitioner does not propose significant modifications to the building. However, the proposed site improvements would be an asset to the Rt. 83 commercial corridor and an .improvement to the Subject Property's current conditions. In addition, limiting the number of vehicles that may be serviced at one time will ensure the site would not be over parked and create unsafe access to/from the site or adversely impact the neighborhood. Therefore, the proposed auto repair facility would not adversely affect the character of the surrounding neighborhood, utility provision or public streets and the proposed Conditional Use will be in compliance with the Village's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. However, it is important that the Petitioner park the vehicles as indicated on the site plan, that additional landscaping and security lighting is installed, and that the building meet all Building and Fire Code requirements, The proposed auto repair facility meets the Conditional Use standards listed in the Zoning Ordinance subject to complying with the following conditions: l. Development of the site in accordance with the site plan prepared by Sergei Safonov, Architect, date stamped November 4, 2003 but revised to reflect one, 24-foot wide driveway designed as recommended by the Village's Engineering Division; 2. Submit a photometric plan for review and approval by the Police Department that indicates the location and light levels of the proposed security lighting; 3. Vehicles may only be parked in the parking spaces indicated on the Petitioner's Site Plan date stamped November 4, 2003. 4. The maximum number of vehicles stored on-site/to be repaired cannot exceed 15 vehicles; 5. Develop the site in accordance with all applicable Village Codes and requirements, including, but not limited to, Fire Prevention Code regulations, lighting regulations, Sign Code regulations; and building regulations; 6. Obtain permits from MWRD, IDOT, and any other applicable agency as may be required to develop the site as proposed; and 7. Should the S ubj ect Property b e p laced under contract for s ale as a n auto repair facility, prior t o t he prospective buyer obtaining a Real Estate Transfer Stamp, the Petitioner shall provide documenta'tion to the prospective buyer stating that all terms and conditions of the Conditional Use permit have been met lanning & Zoning Commission PZ-43-03 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 3 and/or a notarized affidavit from the prospective buyer stating that they understand they are responsible for improving the site to operate an auto repair facility as approved by the Village of Mount Prospect. Based on this analysis and compliance with the above conditions, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission make a recommendation to the Village Board to approve a Conditional Use to permit an auto repair facility at the property located at 709 N. Main Street, Case No. PZ-43-03. The Village Board's decision is final for this case. Henry Elizar, 4315 Lindenwood Lane, Northbrook, IL, and Sergio Safonov, Architect, 661 Hampshire Lane, Buffalo Grove, IL, were sworn in. Mr. Elizar said he has attempted to sell the property for 3 years and thinks he will be able to sell it if he can return it to its original auto repair use. He said they would move the taxi business when they sell the present location. Autos will not be sold at this location. Chairperson Rogers closed the hearing at 9:15 pm. Joe Donnelly made a motion to recommend to the Village Board to approve a Conditional Use to permit an auto repair facility at the property located at 709 N. Main Street, Case No. PZ-43-03, with the seven conditions listed in Staff's repost. Keith Youngquist seconded the motion. UPON ROLLCALL: AYES: Floros, Donnelly, Rogers, and Youngquist NAYS: None Motion was approved 4-0. At 9:55 p.m, Joseph Donnelly made motion to adjourn, seconded by Keith Youngquist. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Michael Jacobs, AICP Deputy Director, Community Development Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner H:\PLAN\Planning & Zoning COMM\?&Z 2003\Minutes\PZ-43-03 709 N Main St Henry Eliza'doc MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-44-03 Hearing Date: November 13, 2003 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1005 Burning Bush Lane PETITIONER: David & Lisa Merel PUBLICATION DATE: October 29, 2003 PIN #: 03-25-403-033 REQUEST: Variation to construct an addition in a required setback MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Rogers, Chair Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Keith Youngquist MEMBERS ABSENT: Arlene Juracek Merrill Cotten Matthew Sledz STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Judy Connotly, AICP, Senior Planner Michael Jacobs, Deputy Director of Community Development INTERESTED PARTIES: Chairperson Richard Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. Joseph Donnelly made a motion to approve the minutes of the October 23 meeting, seconded by Leo Floros. The minutes were approved 3-0, with one abstention by Keith Youngquist. At 9:18, Mr. Rogers introduced Case No. PZ-44-03, a request for a Variation to allow a 21' rear yard setback along the south property line as proposed on the Petitioner's site plan and noted that the request would be P&Z final. Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, presented the case. She said that the Subject Property is located on the east side of Burning Bush Lane, south of Ivy Lane, and contains a single-family residence with related improvements. The Subject Property is zoned R1 Single Family Residence and is bordered on all sides by the R1 District. The Subject Property has an irregular shape and currently has an attached two-car garage. The Petitioner would like to remodel the interior of the existing house and add on to it. The Petitioner's plans for the project include expanding the garage and enlarging the second story of the house. Due to the irregular shape of the Subject Property, a portion of the project requires relief from zoning regulations since the garage addition and a section of the second story addition would encroach four-feet into the required 25 -foot rear yard. The Petitioner worked extensively with an architect to design an addition that would comply with zoning regulations. However, the shape of the lot precluded them from arriving at a design that meets setback regulations. The proposed addition was designed to match the existing building materials so the addition would appear as original construction. The existing home does not comply with zoning regulations because the structure encroaches into the required front and exterior yards. However, it is a legal nonconforming situation and is allowed to remain in its current state. An 1 l-linear foot section of the proposed addition would encroach 4-feet into the required 25-foot rear yard. The remainder of the project would comply with all other zoning regulations and the addition would be constructed according to Village Code. The table in the Staff Report details the Petitioner's proposal to the Ri Single Family Residence district's bulk requirements. Planning & Zoning Commission Arlene Juracek, Chairperson PZ-44-03 Page 2 In order to approve the request, the P&Z must find that the request meets the standards listed in the Zoning Ordinance, which relate to: a hardship due to the physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of a specific property, not generally applicable to other properties in the same zoning district and not created by any person presently having an interest in the property; lack of desire to increase financial gain; and protection of the public welfare, other property, and neighborhood character. The Petitioner is proposing to renovate the existing home to create additional living space and to accommodate a larger vehicle. The Petitioner explored different options for the addition, but found that the irregular shape of the Subject Property prevents them from adding onto the existing garage in the manner that best suits their living requirements. The Zoning Ordinance requires a 25' rear yard. However if the Petitioner were to construct a detached garage, the Zoning Ordinance would require a 5' setback. The difference in the setback regulations is based on aesthetics, drainage, and ensuring an adequate buffer between living space. In this case, constructing a detached garage that met zoning regulations would require more pavement than the amount proposed by the submitted plan. However, the Petitioner's request for a 3-car garage is more of a convenience than a hardship as defined by the Zoning Ordinance. While the aesthetics of the proposed addition, including the 3-car garage, would not be out of character of the neighborhood, the request fails to meet the standards of a hardship as defined by the Zoning Ordinance. Although the Subject Property has an irregular shape, a 3-car garage is more of a convenience than a hardship as defined by the Zoning Ordinance. Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission deny a Variation to allow a 21' rear yard setback along the south property line as proposed on the Petitioner's site plan for the residence at 1005 Burning Bush Lane, Case No. PZ-44-03. The Planning & Zoning Commission's decision is final for this case. Richard Rogers pointed out that this house had been built under Cook County codes and annexed into Mount Prospect so none of the setbacks actually conformed. Joe Donnelly ascertained that the petitioner could have a 3-car garage but not in the area they were proposing to place itl Ms. Connolly said yes, it could not be justified as a hardship where the petitioner wanted the garage. David Merel ;vas sworn in and said the lot is very irregular in shape. He noted that they had previous plans to construct a screened in patio but at the time ;vere told that the other side of the house was actually the rear yard. He said other homes in the neighborhood have added a third car garage so their proposal would be in keeping with the area. Mr. Rogers asked how many drivers are in the home and Mr. Merel said just his wife and himself. His son is 10-yrs. old and they have one car and one van. Mr. Donnelly asked if he had any intentions of turning garage space into living space. Mr. Merel said he did not. Mr. Rogers. asked if the neighbor to the south had any objection to the plan and Mr. Merel said he did not. Chairperson Rogers closed the hearing at 9:31 pm. Joe Donnelly made a motion to recommend approval of the requested Variation to allow a 21' rear yard setback along the south property line as proposed on the Petitioner's site plan for the residence at 1005 Burning Bush Lane, Case No. PZ-44-03, with the condition that the garage cannot be converted into living space. Keith Youngquist seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: Motion was approved 4-0. AYES: Floros, Donnelly, Rogers, and Youngquist NAYS: None lanning & Zoning Commission PZ-44-03 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 3 At 9:55 p.m, Joseph Donnelly made motion to adjourn, seconded by Keith Youngquist. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Michael Jacobs, AICP Deputy Director, Community Development Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner H:\PkANr/Plann/ng & Zoning COMM~P&Z 2003\Minutes\PZ-44-03 1005 Burning Bush Lane Merci doc MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-45-03 Hearing Date: November 13, 2003 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1500 Central Road (Melas Park) PETITIONER: John Robinson for Arlington Heights Park District 410 N. Arlington Heights Road Arlington Hats., IL. 60004 PUBLICATION DATE: October 29, 2003 PIN #: 03-33-300-076 REQUEST: Variation & Conditional Use to construct a lighted ball field and install light standards that exceed the 30' height limitation MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Rogers, Chair Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Keith Youngquist MEMBERS ABSENT: Arlene Juracek Merrill Cotten Matthew Sledz STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner Michael Jacobs, Deputy Director of Community Development INTERESTED PARTIES: Chairperson Richard Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. Joseph Donnelly made a motion to approve the minutes of the October 23 meeting, seconded by Leo Floros. The minutes were approved 3-0, with one abstention by Keith Youngquist. At 9:33, Mr. Rogers introduced Case No. PZ-45-03, a request for a Variation & Conditional Use to construct a lighted ball field and install light standards that exceed the 30' height limitation and noted that the request would be Village Board final. Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, presented the case. She said that the Subject Property is located on the north side of Central Road between Busse Road and Kenilworth Avenue and contains a park with related improvements. The specific project area is located north of the existing softball fields, west of the North Parking Lot, and approximately 40-feet from the Skil BOSCH property. The Subject Property is zoned CR Conservation Recreation and is bordered by the RA Single Family Residential district to the east, I1 Limited Industrial to the west and south, and industrial uses in another municipality to the north. The Subject Property is owned by the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District but is leased to the Village of Mount Prospect and the Mount Prospect and Arlington Heights Park Districts. The Petitioner is the Arlington Heights Park District, who proposes to remove and relocate the two existing sand volleyball courts and install a formal soccer field that would be illuminated by four (4) 60' tall lights. Although this area of the park is currently used as a soccer field, the Zoning Ordinance lists lighted ball fields as a Conditional Use. Also, the Petitioner is required to obtain a Variation to install light poles that exceed the 30' maximum height permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Planning & Zoning Commission Arlene Juracek, Chairperson PZ-45-03 Page 2 Ms. Connolly explained that the Petitioner's exhibits indicate the area the Petitioner would like to create the formal soccer field: the red line identifies the Project Area under review, the dashed blue line indicates the area of the existing field, and the dashed orange line indicates the proposed lighted soccer field area. The Petitioner does not propose any other changes to the Arlington Heights Park District area of Melas Park at this ti~. She said the proposed soccer field meets the required setbacks. While the Village's Zoning Ordinance does not include parking requirements for open field parks, the Petitioner's application lists the anticipated use for this portion of the park. The table in the Staff Report summarizes the Petitioner's information and demonstrates that there will be more parking available than they require. According to the Petitioner's application, only sanctioned Arlington Heights Park District league teams will use the softball and soccer fields. The Park District includes parking information with the league packets and the Petitioner states in the attached application that the lighted soccer field usage would generate more drop-off and pick-up activity because the field would be used primarily for children's leagues. Also, the lighted soccer field would not be used during peak softball season. Controlling the scheduling of the league teams provides the Petitioner with the ability to minimize parking conflicts. The Police Department reviewed the proposal and had several concerns regarding the unofficial use of the proposed soccer field. After meeting with Village Staff, the Petitioner modified their application to address issues identified by the Police Department. For example, the Petitioner identified steps such a s posting bi- lingual signs and hiring bi-lingual staff and/or a security firm to minimize unauthorized use of the soccer field. Also, the restrooms will be open when the fields are in use for league/sanctioned use, etc. The Police felt that the lighted soccer field would have minimal impact on the neighborhood and community if the Petitioner's steps were implemented and would offset potential problems. In order to approve the lighted field, the request has to meet the standards for a Conditional Use, which are listed in the Zoning Ordinance. The standards relate to: the Conditional Use will not have a detrimental impact 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, 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. In order to approve the 60-foot light poles, the request has to meet the standards for a Variation, which are listed in t he Zoning Ordinance. These standards r elate t o: a hardship due t o t he physical surroundings, s tape, o r topographical conditions of a specific property not generally applicable to other properties in the same zoning d/strict and not created by any person presently having an interest in the property; lack of desire to increase financial gain; and protection of the public welfare, other property, and neighborhood character. The Petitioner' proposal and additional information demonstrate that a lighted ball field would not adversely impact the adjacent properties. The proposed location of the lighted soccer field is north of the existing lighted softball fields and the height of the proposed lights would be the same height as the existing softball field lights. Although taller light standards does not meet the definition of a hardship as defined by the Zoning Ordinance, the taller poles would minimize the impact on the adjacent properties by requiring fewer poles and allow the light fixtures to be directed downward. The design would be in keeping with the character of the park's existing facilities. Therefore, the proposed lighted soccer field and taller light standards would not adversely affect the character of the surrounding neighborhood, utility provision or public streets and the proposed Conditional Use will be in compliance with the Village's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. However, it is important that the Petitioner implement the steps identified in their application to ensure the lighted field does not have an adverse impact on the adjacent properties. Planning & Zoning Commission PZ-45-03 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 3 The proposed lighted ball field meets the Conditional Use and Variation standards listed in the Village's Zoning Ordinance subject to complying with the following conditions: 1 ) The Petitioner shall schedule games according to the seasons and participation level listed in the letter to the Planning & Zoning Committee dated October 29, 2003; 2) The Petitioner shall posts bi-lingual signs s!ating appropriate field usage; 3) Should the Police Department determine a problem exists from unauthorized field usage, the Petitioner shall lock the goals together and hire a security firm to keep non-permitted teams from using the fields; 4) The Petitioner shall turn the lights off no more than 15 minutes after the completion of all scheduled games and practices; 5) The Petitioner shall unlock the restrooms during authorized use of the fields and supplement with portable facilities if Village Staff determines there is a need for additional facilities; 6) Should Village Staff determine that a parking deficiency is created as a result of the lighted soccer field, the Petitioner shall explore the possibility of entering into a shared parking agreement with the property owner west of the Project Area (1800 W. Central Road) and make the appropriate modifications to allow access to/from the adjacent parking lot; 7) The Petitioner shall provide additional photometric information to verify that illumination levels at the property lines comply with Village regulations; and 8) The Petitioner shall shield the lights to minimize glare and spillage on to adjacent properties. Based on this analysis and compliance with the above conditions, Staff recommends the Planning & Zoning Commission make a recommendation to the Village Board to approve a Conditional Use and Variation to permit a lighted soccer field with 4-60' light standards for the project area identified on the attached exhibits for Melas Park, 1500 W. Central Road, Case No. PZ-45-03. The Village Board's decision is final for this case. Chairperson Rogers swore in all speakers for the Arlington Heights Park District. John Robinson, 410 N. Arlington Heights Road, Arlington Heights, IL spoke first. He thanked Ms. Connolly and said she was very thorough i n p resenting t he case and reiterated t he basic p oints o f the case. M r. Rogers asked i f they could comply with all the conditions imposed by staff. Mr. Robinson said yes. Joe Donnelly asked the relationship between Mount Prospect Park District and Arlington Heights Park District for Melas Park. Mr. Robinson said basically the right side of Melas Park is Mount Prospect Park District and the left side is Arlington Heights Park D/strict and all located in Mount Prospect. Michael Jacobs noted that in completing the required written notice staff viewed the entire Metas Park property as a single property and thus mailed notice to all property owners within 250 feet of the park. Mr. Rogers indicated that 2 letters were received from residents who were not opposed to the request but asked for clarification on a number of issues. The letters questioned if this proposal would bring in additional people to the park, how many other lighted ballparks there .were and if the request was not approved would earlier games be played? There were some concerns about rowdy activity and Mr. Robinson said the proposed soccer field is for youth, not adults. Mr. Robinson also outlined the typical hours for both night soccer and baseball/softball games, and noted that the existing softball/baseball leagues end later at night than the ~cheduled use of the proposed soccer field. Jim Salazar, 10 N. Kenilworth, was sworn in and said he received a letter but was unsure of what exactly was being proposed. He indicated that after hearing the presentation he did not have any specific concerns with the request. Chairperson Rogers closed the hearing at 9:53 pm. Joe Donnelly made a motion to make a recommendation to the Village Board to approve a Conditional Use and Variation to permit a lighted soccer field with four (4) 60' light standards for the project area identified on the attached exhibits for Melas Park, 1500 W. Central Road, Case No. PZ-45-03 with the eight conditions imposed by staff. Keith Youngquist seconded the motion. lanning & Zoning Commission PZ-45-03 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 4 UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Floros, Donnelly, Rogers, and Youngquist NAYS: None Motion was approved 4-0. At 9:55 p.m, Joseph Donnelly made motion to adjourn, seconded by Keith Youngquist. approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. The motion was Michael Jacobs, AICP Deputy Director, Community Development Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner H:\PLANn, Plannlng & Zoning COMM\P&Z 2003XaMinutes\PZ-45-03 Arl Hts Park D/st M¢las Park Lights doc