Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW Agenda Packet 01/27/2004 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA Meeting Location: Mt. Prospect Community Center 1000 West Central Road Meeting Date and Time: Tuesday, January 27,2004 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 REVISED MINUTES OF DECEMBER 9, 2003 ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 13, 2004 CITIZENS TO BE HEARD III. IV. STATUS OF VILLAGE-OWNED EMERSON LOTS The Village currently owns three (3) vacant lots (One-Five South Emerson Street) at the southeast corner of Central Road and Emerson Street. These lots were purchased (utilizing T.I.F. funds) by the Village over a number of years spanning the late 80s and early 90s as part of Mount Prospect's downtown redevelopment effort. The existing single-family homes were demolished shortly after purchase and the land currently consists of grass and several trees. Other than regular grass mowing and required tree maintenance to keep the property looking acceptable, the land has remained unused since its purchase by the Village. In the mid 90s, the Mount Prospect Public Library expressed interest in the lots for use as additional required parking in conjunction with an anticipated expansion of the Library facility. The 1997 Downtown Strategic Plan called for the Village-owned lots, along with the balance of the block, to be redeveloped with low density, high-quality row homes. While the 1997 Plan remains the official redevelopment blueprint for the Village, a reconstituted Ad Hoc Committee is currently reviewing and updating the 1997 Plan. The Committee's final recommendations to the Village Board are due at the end of February 2004. In the last several months, an organized effort has materialized seeking to convert the three (3) Village-owned lots into a permanent park. Calling itself Save Open Space Mount Prospect (S.O.S.M.P.), the group has begun lobbying the Village Board in that regard. In response, the Village Board has invited S.O.S. M.P. through its spokesperson, resident Bill Blaine, to attend the January 27, 2004 Committee of the Whole meeting to discuss the relative merits of reuse options for the subject property. 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 A T 100 SOUTH EMERSON, MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 60056, 847/392-6000, EXTENSION 5327, TDD #847/392-6064. V. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT VI. ANY OTHER BUSINESS VII. ADJOURNMENT CLOSED SESSION PERSONNEL 5 ILCS 120/2 (c) (1). "The appointment, employment, compensation, discipline, performance, or dismissal of specific employees of the public body, including hearing testimony on a complaint lodged against an employee to determine its validity." PROPERTY DISPOSAL 51LCS 1202 (c) (6): "The setting of a price for sale or lease of property owned by the public body." REVISED MINUTES COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE DECEMBER 9, 2003 I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:04 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 C9rcoran, Paul Hoefert, Michaele Skowron, Irvana Wilks and Michael Zadel. Absent from the meeting was Trustee Richard Lohrstorfer. Staff members present included: Village Manager Michael Janonis, Assistant Village Manager David Strahl, Village Attorney Everette Hill, Community Development Director William Cooney, Deputy Community Development Director Michael Jacobs, Public Works Director Glen Andler, and Solid Waste Coordinator Lisa Angell. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of Minutes from November 25, 2003. Motion made by Trustee Hoefert and Seconded by Trustee Skowron. Minutes were approved. III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD None. IV. PRIMECO INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE FEE (lMF) LITIGATION Village Manager Michael Janonis stated that in 1997, the State adopted legislation to address Franchise Fee agreements among towns and phone service providers. The IMF is a rental fee for the use of public right-of-way. The law was challenged by the wireless providers and was overturned by the Illinois Supreme Court. Landline providers are also preparing to challenge the legislation at this time. The Village has an opportunity to participate in a consolidated defense of a Class Action Suit with members from the Northwest Municipal Conference. The proposal for the cost of the defense for the Village would be approximately $14,000. Village Attorney Hill stated that the Village would not prevail with the wireless providers since the case is quite specific and on point but there is a need to deal with the landline carriers. He stated the legislation is related to the municipalities obtaining a fee for the use of the right-of-way of these providers. He stated the majority of the revenue to the Village is from the landline companies. He stated the Village would have to defend itself to protect the revenue that it has already collected so it would make sense to participate in the Class Action Suit with other municipalities. He stated the costs are assigned on a per capita basis and this amount is only the initial contribution. He stated the Village is not bound to pay additional fees throughout the case unless so desired. He stated the Village would have the opportunity to reconsider participation when future fee requests are made. Village Manager stated the revenues previously collected have been in escrow since the challenge was made by the wireless providers. 1 Consensus of the Village Board was to approve participation in the legal defense fund with the Northwest Municipal Conference. V. ABANDONED SHOPPING CART AMENDMENT Village Manager Janonis stated the Village has incurred approximately $80,000 in expenses picking up shopping carts over the years and has undertaken several different approaches to address the problem. He stated there still does not appear to be any end in sight regarding the need to change behavior in order to avoid this expense. He feels that nothing short of drastic action would address the problem and there is a need for a harsher response. He stated there is alsò an unusual situation by an out of town business that borders Mount Prospect and the need to try and get enforcement with such an out of town business. He stated the legal research has yielded an opportunity to withhold the Business License from the corporate entity in an effort to force compliance of the business on the Village border. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: It was suggested that abandoned shopping carts should be treated the same as abandoned cars and there is a need to get more serious with the enforcement. General consensus of the Village Board was to consider an Ordinance requiring compliance with stiffer penalties as proposed by staff at a future Village Board meeting. VI. STAR LINE CONSULTING CONTRACT Village Manager Janonis stated that discussions have been underway for several years to expand the train line from the Blue Line in Rosemont out to Hoffman Estates along the Northwest Corridor and connect to the outer circumference railroad commonly known as the EJ and E Railway. He stated the project would need to coordinate land acquisition and the actual plans which are being coordinated through the Northwest Municipal Conference. He stated the Village would need to consider committing approximately $20,000 over a four- year period with $4,000 committed for 2004. He stated the project is at least ten years out from any kind of construction work starting with the proposed corridor running adjacent or very near the Northwest Tollway corridor. He said the Village would benefit from a station on the south end of town and would assist in the economic viability of the south end of the community. He stated there would be opportunities in the future to determine future financial commitments. Village representatives have participated in the Task Force process to date and have been involved in the planning stages. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: It was mentioned that this is an opportunity to improve the transportation modes between suburbs without the expansion of existing roads, which does not always address the volume issues. Consensus of the Village Board was to participate in the funding request in the amount of $4,000 for 2004. 2 VII. POTENTIAL CODE AMENDMENTS Community Development Director Bill Cooney stated this discussion is a continuation of the previous Code potpourri discussion which took place almost two months ago. Administrative Subdivisions Staff occasionally encounters properties that may appear to be a single lot but in actuality they consist of two or more parcels. When reviewing any type of development proposal for these properties including additions, deck projects, 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 and Zoning Commission and final approval by the Board of Trustees. This review and approval process can create delays and additional expenses for the property owner. As a result, staff is requesting the Village's Development Code be amended to allow administrative subdivisions under specific circumstances. The process would still require the preparation and recordation of the Plat of Consolidation but under certain circumstances would eliminate the need for review by the Planning and Zoning Commission and approval by the Village Board. The existing regulations and proposed amendments are as follows: Existinq ReQulations 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 Staff proposes that an Administrative Subdivision is a subdivision that may be approved by the Director of Community Development and does not require a public meeting before the Planning and Zoning Commission or approval by the Village Board of Trustees. The definition of Administrative Subdivision is: Administrative Subdivision shall be: A. An adjustment of a lot line between two (2) adjoining lots; and B. The consolidation of two 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 Administrative Subdivision be permitted, it shall be permitted only if; (1) no non-conformities are created with respect to these regulations; and (2) the entire length of the subdivision fronts on an existing street. 3 Consensus of the Village Board was to accept staff recommendation for Administrative Subdivision review. Conversion of Garaqes into Livinq Space It is not uncommon to see property owners convert garages into living spaces. In reviewing the requests for conversion, it was found that there are no provisions to remove the garage door as long as all applicable building and health safety regulations are met. Staff is recommending that 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. Previous discussion included the possibility of driveway pad removal, however, there would be coordination issues necessary as documented by staff. Consensus of the Village Board was to accept staff recommendation for conversion of attached garages into living space. Commercial Trailers in Residential Districts Village Code currently contains specific regulations regarding the storage of commercial vehicles and trailers within Residential Zoning Districts. Staff is recommending 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. The proposed amendment would allow for outdoor storage of no more than one commercial vehicle within a residential zoning district and prohibit the outdoor storage of commercial trailers. The definition of a commercial trailer is any trailer (1) containing work equipment such as ladders, snow plows and/or mechanical tools to carrying of 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) recreational trailer that is not included within the above categories, (b) government trailers, or (c) police or fire trailers. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: It was suggested that staff consider utilizing an envelope size for consideration of trailer size similar to what is utilized for commercial vehicles and residential properties. Consensus of the Village Board was to direct staff to create a definition defining trailers within a specific measurement envelope. Arbors and Trellises The Village Code currently does not contain any regulations regarding arbors or trellises. Currently, staff is utilizing fence regulations and applying Code requirements to installation of arbors and trellises. Staff is proposing specific regulations defining arbors and trellises which also limits their size and location. Staff is requesting arbors and trellises be a maximum one arbor or trellis not exceeding eight feet in height or ten feet in width and shall be permitted except in any required front yard. 4 General comments from Village Board members included the following item: There was a question whether trellises should be even considered for a regulation. It was also suggested that a clearer definition separating what is a fence from what is a trellis should be considered. It was also suggested that additional location elements be considered and specific materials. Consensus of the Village Board was to request additional staff review to further hone the definitions for clarification purposes. FAR and Related Definitions Staff continues to see a large amount of construction activity related to single-family dwellings including additions and construction of new 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 floor- area-ratio (FAR). Part of the clarification necessary is the need to consider the entire bulk on the property along with the entire footprint upon the property. Such definition would include garages, basements and attics. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: It was suggested that since the basement is part of the living space, it should be considered in the overall bulk square footage for the property based on the ceiling height of the basement. It was also suggested that there is a need to address the massing of the house including the porch as part of the FAR. It was questioned whether the basement should be part of the FAR since it is already part of the building mass even though it is below grade. There were comments that there would still need to be some kind of regulation on the depth of the basement. There was also discussion regarding the definition of an attic and story within the building as determined by usable livable space now or in the future. Consensus of the Village Board was to direct staff to consider a porch as part of the FAR possibly at a reduced percentage of the total and get additional Planning and Zoning Commission input. The Village Board further directed staff to review basement and story (attic definitions) to address massing concerns. VIII. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT Village Manager Janonis stated that Winter Festival Parade on December 6 was successful and the next Coffee with Council is December 13. IX. ANY OTHER BUSINESS Trustee Wilks commented on the recent passing of former Senator Paul Simon and requested the Village Board consider a Resolution of Condolences to the family. 5 x. DS/rcc ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:03 p.m. Respectfully submitted, / /J ~~ ~.£U DAVID STRAHL Assistant Village Manager 6 MINUTES COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE JAN UARY 13, 2004 I. 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 Irvana Wilks. Absent from the meeting was Trustee Michael Zadel. Staff members present included: Assistant Village Manager David Strahl and Village Attorney Everette Hill. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of Minutes from December 9, 2003. Mayor Farley requested a modification to the Minutes to include acknowledgment of discussion of removal of driveway pads where garages were converted to living space. Minutes were deferred until this modification could be made. III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD None. IV. 2004 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE DISCUSSION TOPICS Assistant Village Manager David Strahl provided an overview of each topic as submitted by staff and Village Board. The topics that were approved for consideration for 2004 are as follows: 1. Long-Range Financial Plan discussion. Staff intends to put together the balance of the research necessary for this discussion through the month of February for discussion during the month of March with the Village Board. 2. Consideration of a Village of Mount Prospect Foundation for charitable donations for community events as an opportunity for citizens to contribute on a tax-free basis. 3. Discuss the Ordinance regulating running or walking in street areas where sidewalks are available. 4. Village branding policy discussion with the Village Board. This is intended as further follow up and discussion as to uniformity of identification for Village appearance standardization. 5. Consideration of licensing cats to monitor ownership and immunization of cats in a similar manner as dogs. 6. Downtown Redevelopment Ad Hoc Committee report. This is the second phase for the remaining part of the downtown redevelopment discussion within the current TIF area prior to expiration of TI F. 1 7. Jurisdictional transfer discussion. This discussion is for determination of policy regarding roads currently owned by other jurisdictions and their eventual need for repair and assumption of future repair and maintenance. 8. Com Ed tree trimming agreement discussion. This item is intended to obtain Village Board direction regarding the implementation of a tree trimming agreement which has been proposed by ComEdo 9. 2004 Capital Project update and state-of-the-streets discussion. This is an informational meeting to give the Board and the public information on the upcoming street repair and construction season in addition to pending capital projects expected for 2004 and scheduling related to those projects. 10. Storm sewer inventory discussion relating to the national pollutant discharge elimination system. This will be a status report by staff and the possibility of Ordinance changes relating to study findings. 11. Liability insurance discussion. This is to discuss the possibility of alternative funding or self-insurance programs available to the Village Board for liability purposes. 12. J.U.L.I.E. locate discussion. Discussion of control of pavement markings and sidewalk markings for utility locations. 13. Discussion of non-conforming mailboxes and other obstructions in rights-of-way and the possible direction from Village Board relating to possible enforcement. 14. Consideration of utilizing professional advice to assist Village Board in planning and development of policy for placement of public art and recognition plaques throughout the new Village Hall. 15. Refuse hauling contract renewal discussion and commercial refuse hauling opportunities. This will be a discussion of the renewal of the solid waste contract and the possible addition of commercial refuse franchise. 16. Discussion of residential traffic control and speeding and the use of stop/yield signs for traffic calming purposes. 17. Combined Sewer Study final report. This will be a presentation of a study that is currently underway which would be provided to the Village Board for discussion and planning purposes for future funding and possible repairs related to study findings. 18. Police Department law enforcement staffing discussion. This will be a discussion regarding traffic unit and the value of additional of Officers for designated traffic enforcement. 19. Residential driveway widths and parking pads. maximum driveway width and parking pad. This is a discussion regarding the 20. Discussion and consideration of lean management practices to provide direction and evaluation of Village services. It was recommended this likely start off as a workshop session. 2 21. Consideration of licensing all landlords and patterning an enforcement program similar to the Village of Schaumburg's landlord program. 22. Discussion of residential tear down regulations. Discussion of trends and the potential impact on the neighborhood community and consider regulations to maintain community character. 23. Discussion of requiring single-family homes to have garages as part of any new construction or renovation. 24. Consideration of a dedicated gang, crime, drug addiction and suppression unit of the Police Department of Officers dedicated specifically for drug enforcement activities. 25. Sanitary sewer services repair discussion. This discussion would be related to potential assistance to residents for replacement and repair of service line between the sewer main and the dwelling. Staff stated they will take these topics and assign manpower resources for research and investigation as required to bring the topics forward within general timeframes as suggested by the requestors. However, there may be some variation in timing depending on available resources and availability of Trustees. v. MAYOR PRO TEM DISCUSSION Mayor Farley introduced the topic by providing some general background and stating that this topic has been under discussion for a period of time. He stated since the last discussion, Trustees Wilks and Corcoran have put together suggested elements to the selection process of Mayor Pro Tem. He invited each Trustee to provide an overview of their suggestions for discussion among the Board members. Trustee Wilks provided a detailed discussion of her suggestion for selection of Mayor Pro Tem. The suggested selection process includes several nomination rounds with a final round if a consensus cannot be reached in any of the first two rounds. Another component of the process is all discussion and voting is in open session. She also stated that the Mayor is the initiator of the nomination for consideration. Trustee Corcoran provided an overview of his selection process whereby the focus was on the qualifications of the individual to be selected. He also included minimum service requirements and a specific term in the case of the sitting Pro Tem running for higher office. He also felt the discussion regarding the candidates available for consideration should take place in closed session. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: There was extensive discussion regarding both proposals in addition to clarification of when it would be appropriate for the person running for Village Board seat and its impact on the Mayor Pro Tem position. There was also a discussion regarding the use of closed session for discussion of Trustees for ultimate consideration in open session. 3 Village Attorney Hill stated that the Board may use the closed session to discuss the selection but all action votes must take place in open session. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: There was a discussion regarding the mechanism for placing names in nomination. There was also a discussion regarding potential escape clause where there were a majority of Trustees that were either running or new members that did not meet the minimum criteria for selection consideration. It was also mentioned there would be a need to coordinate the selection of Mayor Pro Tem and the possible selection of a permanent Acting Mayor to fill out the remaining term. There was extensive discussion regarding the person making the nominations whether it is the Mayor or Trustees. There was also discussion about the possibility of a nominated individual not obtaining a second for consideration in open discussion. Attorney Hill stated as long as there is no change to how the Acting Mayor is selected for completion of existing term there is no State Statute provision impacting this process. He also stated that random selection is just to consider the actual order. It cannot be used for voting purposes or nomination purposes. All votes must be called with no secret ballots. Consensus of the Village Board was to direct staff and Village Attorney to formulate revised Ordinance provisions to include open nomination process and the use of Closed Session for discussion of potential candidates. Also include a provision for the term beginning and termination at the point of Petition filing. Also there should be an exclusion for elected officials without appropriate tenure with options to alter eligible Trustees for circumstances where the minimum qualifications excludes a majority of those to be considered. Staff would prepare an additional draft for Board discussion in the near future. VI. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT None. VII. ANY OTHER BUSINESS None. VIII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:47 p.m. Respectfully submitted, DS/rcc ~ A':):5'tU DAVID ~L Assistant Village Manager 4 Ivn~UTES VILLAGE OF l\lOUNT PROSPECT COFFEE 'VITH COUNCIL SATURDAY, JANUARY 10,2004 9:00 a.m. Village Hall 2nd Floor Conference Room The Coffee with Council lv1eeting convened at 9:00 a.m. Present i"v!ayor Gera]d L. Fadey Trustee Irvana K. Wilks Trustee Timothy J. Corcoran Trustee Nrichaele W. Skowron Tl1lstee Richard ].,,1. Lohrstorfer Trustee Michael A. ladeI Tl1lstee Paul Wm. Hoefer! Assistant Vil1age Manager Dave Strahl Chief of Police Richard Eddington Residents In Attendance Kevin BoIger Ramon Rubio Lee \Vi]]iams Kate & Bert Hanson Jean Shrzynski John Heidkamp Josh Lentini Carol TonoreJ1o I'vrargaret Lannen Larry Braus Donald Olsen Cathy Laschober Donna Heidkal11p Blair Heidkamp David Schein Debbie Watson & Bill Schwerin 510 N. Prospect \hnor 4l21\'onh Elmhurst Avenue 70 North Albert Street l03 Eastwood 1 DO N. Elmhurst 100 S. We-Go 100 N. Wille 223 South Elmhurst A venue 999 N. Elmhurst A venue 612 W. Dempster 403 S. We-Go Trail 401 S. Na-Wa-Ta 400 S. We-Go 400 S. \^i e-Go Trail 512 Na-Wa-Ta Trail 407 S. We-Go Trail Kevin BoJger, 510 :\. Prospect !\lanor. came to Coffee with Council for two reasons. Thefìrst had to do with scooters. He realizes the Yi]]age passed an ordinance prohibiting the use of scooters on public property. He is waiting until the warm \veather to see how well the prohibition wil] work. Mr. Bolger reques\ed that the Village prohibit sales of both electric and gas scooters at retad establishments. The Vi11age Board members were not inclined to pursue retail prohibition. Mr. Bolger's sec.ond issue was insufiìcient seating at the train station. He attended the November Coffee with Council to discuss this matter. Mr. Bolger felt that the square footage would not be profitable for the food vendor, and the Village should consider that the primary function of a train station is to provide shelter to train passengers. Ramon Rubio, ~ 12 1\. Elmhurst, cume to Coffee with Council to visit with his friends and wish everyone U Happy New Year. Lee \Vi jams, 70 N. A.lbert, came to Coffee with Council to advise that there were no CUJTCn1 Issues in his neighborhood and to stay infoJll1ed about events in the \li11age. Katy & Bert Hanson, 103 Eastwood. attended Coffee with Counci1 to express their cìlSJppointmcm in the cominuing poor rebtionship with their neighbor. They belie\'c the neighbor's garJge is used as a business. On hoJidays he \vorks in his garage, s1ecps three or four hours and rcturns to work in his garage, Lastly, the nelghbor was spot \\clding in his drivcway and there was no Vil1age response. The Hanson's did not cu11 and complain about it. The Hanson's \\ere encouraged by members or the Board and the Police Chief to call when thae is an activity of concern to them, The \li11agc is unable to provide enough resources to constantly surveiJ their neighbors' property. Katy Hanson mentioned that she was a ma11 walker and was p1eased at how c1ean Randhurst \Vas during the renovation, but was concel11ed at the number of empty stores, 1'v1argaret Lannen, the lvfanagcr of Randhurst, thanked Katy Hansen for her comments on the cleanliness of the ma]] and went on to address Ì\.fs, Hansen's concern about the number of vacant retaiJ stores, Margaret Lannen explained that retaIl sales are cyclic. If stores do not display profitability during the Christmas Season, it is not unusu::ll for them to go out of business in January or February, This is a cyc1e that the retail malls are familiar with and have developed strategies to mitigate thes.e circumstances. John Heidkamp, 400 S. We-Go. attended Council with Coffee to express concerns about the widening of We-Go, The discussion points brought up by John Heidkamp \vere reinforced by the next speaker Don Olson, 403 We-Go. came to Coffee with Council to discuss the proposed widening of We-Go, He reemphasized that it \Vas a beautiful street and questioned the need for universal conformity to other streets in the Vi11age. This allO\\Cd the Vil1age Board to address several issues. including application of code>; and the setting of precedents. Trustee Corcoran recognized and commended staffs \\'1llingness to bring contrO\ersial issues to the Board's attention so that the Board could respond directly to cltizen's needs und concel11s. Josh Lentini, 100 N. \Ville. was concerned about his observation of the voJume of traffic near his home He believed thut the bank parking Jot and cut through trafTic \vere contributors Several proposa1s were discussed, IJ¡s name and number wi]] be forwarded to the trafíìc engineer to determine if any traffic counts can be done l!1 the area to detenl11ne if they support Mr. Lentini's observation. Carol Tortorello, 223 S. Elmhurst Avenue, wanted the Village Board to be aware of the possib1e closure of Fannie !\'1ae Cmdies and hoped that a replacement 7-[1even or Con\'Cnient store could be lined up for the CUJTent Fannie ;vlae location. Also, Carol Tortore]10 had questions on the changes in the ?--Jiagara property. Da\'e Strahl was able to provide background ini()('mation on this matter l\Iargan:t Lannen, 999 Elmhurst. Ms. Lannen, the Manager of Randhurst, provided an update on construction. The Costco pad is ahead of schedu]c. She believes the pad wi]! be turned o\'cr to Coslco sometime in April. Costco's time1ine is 110 days from taking possession of the pad. Ms. Lannen gave an overview of recent property deve]opmcnts regarding the JeweJ Food St.ore and the occupancy rate at Bank One, All members of the \liJlage Board expressed an appreciation for Ms. Lannen's commitment to the Vi]]age by her allendance at Conte wIth Council and other Village functions, Larry Braus, 612 W. Dempster, attended Coffee with Council to represent the Jaycees. He advised that the Jaycee membership decided to co-sponsor the Winter Parade. The Jaycees committed S2,OOO and 2 " would invite other service organiLations in the Village to do the S3me. Rn)' Rubio, representing the Ljon~ Club, advised that the Lions had also reacJled a similar conclusion and were committing 52,000 to co- sponsor the Winter Parade. Cathy Laschober, 402 S. :\'a-\Va- Ta, came to discuss sewer issues. She outlined the colJapse of sewer pipes, both in her yard and parkway. She wanted the Vil1age Board to consider whether or not they would change the policy and pay for sewer coJJapses on the parkway. Further, if the tree planting program continued encouragement of planting trees on parkways, homeowners should be aware of the possible ramific3tions of tree roots in their sewer Jines. There were several responses to \1s, Laschober's request, incJuding the cost could have been contained had the homeowner been advised of the doub1e colJapse at the outset of the project. There were also discussions of maintenance and the recognition that tile drainpipes in 50-year-old houses wiJJ eventually fail. The issue of the cost ofa ViJlage \vide program was identified and deemed to be too expensive to consider. Donna Hcidkal11p, 400 S. We-Go, came to discuss the widening of We-Go with the Board. Debbie Watson and Bill Schwerin, 407 S. We-Go, also came to discuss the We-Go Trail widening. Several issues were discussed: safety related issues on a 19-foot street, the relationship of the go]f course to Vie-Go, and P.U.D. issues. A baJancing of a11 concerns would be addressed by the ViIJage Board's finaJ decision on January 20, 2004. ;vlayor Gerald Farley adjoull1ed the meeting at 10:45 a.m. R"'R..~tfUllV Subm;ttcd. RIchard Eddington Chief of Pol ice REidr 3 \]A YOR (jerëld L Farley VILLAGE lVIAi\AGER Michael E. Janonis TRL'STEES Ti:r.o:Ì1y J. Corcoran hdl \\'111. Hoeten Rich~rd .\'1. LohrslOrfer Md¡;Jck \\' Skowron ¡rvana K. \VJJks \lichacl A Zadel Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, I1linois 60056 VILLAGE CLERK Velma W. Lo\\'c Phone: Fax: TOO: 847/818-5328 847/818-5329 847/392-6064 AGENDA DO'VNTOWN AD HOC COMMITTEE MEETING LOCATION: 2nd Floor Conference Room Village Hall 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, IL 60056 MEETING DATE & TIME: Thursday January 29,2004 3:30 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - January 22,2004 IV. OLD BUSINESS A. TIF Financials V. NEW BUSINESS A. 1/31/04 Public Meeting Presentation 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, l\lount Prospect, IL 60056, 847-392-6000, Ext. 5328, TDD #847-392-6064. C' DoC' "",'11" ,lid Sell'ng>'.KD<wisDO~1"\¡:"\Local Sett;lIgs\Tel11porary IntemeJ Fites\OLK2\1-29-04 agellda.doc