The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutVB Agenda Packet 04/18/2000 -NOTE TIME AND LOCATION- ORDER OF BUSINESS SPECIAL MEETING Meeting Location: ' Meeting Date and Time: Mount Prospect Village Hall, 2"d Floor Tuesday 100 South Emerson Street April 18, 2000 Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 6:30 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL Mayor Gerald "Skip" Farley Trustee Timothy Corcoran Trustee Dennis Prikkel Trustee Paul Hoefert Trustee Michaele Skowron Trustee Richard Lohrstorfer Trustee Irvana Wilks III. CLOSED SESSION LITIGATION 5 ILCS 120/2 (c) (11) - Litigation, when an action against, affecting or on behalf of the particular public body has been filed and is pending before a court or administrative tribunal, or when the public body finds that an action is probable or imminent, in which case the basis for the finding shall be recorded and entered into the minutes of the closed meeting. IV. ADJOURNMENT Next Ordinance No. 5101 Next Resolution No. 18-00 ORDER OF BUSINESS REGULAR MEETING Meeting Location: Meeting Date and Time: Mount Prospect Senior Center Tuesday 50 South Emerson Street April 18, 2000 Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 7:30 P.M~ I. CALL TO ORDER I1. ROLL CALL Mayor Gerald "Skip" Farley Trustee Timothy Corcoran Trustee Dennis Prikkel Trustee Paul Hoefert Trustee Michaele Skowron Trustee Richard Lohrstorfer Trustee Irvana Wilks II1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Trustee Wilks IV. INVOCATION: Trustee Lohrstorfer V. APPROVE MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 4, 2000 VI. APPROVE BILLS AND FINANCIAL REPORT VII. MAYOR'S REPORT A. PROCLAMATION: CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION MONTH, April, 2000 B. PROCLAMATION: DAYS OF REMEMBRANCE, Apdl.30-May 7,.2000 C. PRESENTATION: Gid Scouts-Illinois Crossroads Council Will make a presentation to the Village Board D. Appointments ANY INDMDUAL WITH A 'DISABILITY WHO'WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND THIS MEETING SHOULD CONTACT THE - VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE AT lO0 SOUTH EMERSON STREET, 847/392-6000, TDD 847/392-6064~ VIII. COMMUNICATIONS AND PETITIONS - CITIZENS TO BE HEARD IX. OLD BUSINESS A. ZBA 06-00, 204 S. I-Oka Avenue 1st reading of AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE FOR PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 204 S. I-OKA AVENUE (Exhibit A) This ordinance grants a Conditional Use permit to construct an unenclosed front porch that encroaches five feet into a required front yard setback. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended approval by a vote of 5-0. 1. (Deferred from the April 4 Village Board meeting) The petitioner is appealing the denial,~ by the Zoning Board of Appeals, of a request for a variation to increase the permitted lot coverage from 50% to 55%. The Zoning Board of Appeals has final authority on this matter, but Village Code allows for an appeal to the Village Board. The Zoning Board of Appeals voted 3-2 to deny the request. B. ZBA 37-99, Phase 1B Downtown Redevelopment, Norwood Builders (Deferred from the April 4 Village Board meeting) 2nd reading of AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS PHASE 1B OF DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT, AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF NORTHWEST HIGHWAY AND MAIN STREET (Exhibit B) This ordinance grants a Conditional Use perm.it for a Planned Unit Development at the northeast corner of Northwest Highway and Main Street, for t9,380 square ' feet of retail space and 34 condominium units with underground and surface parking. The Zoning Board of Appeals has recommended approval bya vote of 5-0. C. ZBA 07-00, 1 East Rand Road, CVS Pharmacy 1st reading of AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE AND VARIATIONS FOR PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 1 EAST RAND ROAD This ordinance grants a Conditional Use permit and variations for the construction of a 23,880 sq. ft. multi-tenant retail building, including a drug store with drive-through service. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended approval by a vote of 5-0. (Exhibit C) D. ZBA 04-2000, 307 E. Kensington Road, Jules Hot Dogs is~ reading of AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE FOR PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 307 E. KENSINGTON ROAD This ordinance grants a Conditional Use permit to construct a 2,914 square foot fast food restaurant with drive through. The ZBA recommended approval by a vote of 5-0. (Exhibit D) D. 1st reading of AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE VII OF CHAPTER 18 OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT VILLAGE CODE This ordinance amends Chapter 18 (Traffic) by authorizing parking restrictions on the east side of N. Louis Street from a point 425' to a point 433' north of the centedine of E. Thayer Street and along the north side of Prospect Avenue between Kenilworth Avenue and Lancaster Street on Prospect Avenue. The s~ifetycommisston tecbmmended appr~vaiofb0th;.by:~ivo!e of 5-0~ - (Extilblt E) X. NEW BUSINESS A. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A GRANT OF LICENSE WITH THE MOUNT PROSPECT LIONS CLUB TO CONDUCT A FARMERS MARKET FOR THE YEAR 2000 (Exhibit F) B. 1st reading of AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 5095 ESTABLISHING A SISTER CITIES COMMISSION This ordinance amends the ordinance that established the Sister Cities Commission, relative to Village Trustees serving as members. (Exhibit G) C, PC 08-99, I West Rand Road The petitioner is requesting an exception to the Development Code requirements to locate a storm water detention facility closer than twenty-five feet (25') from the occupied building. The Plan Commission voted 4-1 in favor of recommending approval, however, five (5) votes are required for approval. D. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AN AMENDED AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT AND THE ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (Exhibit H) This resolution authorizes the Mayor to sign an amended agreement relative to ~ roadwork on Route 83 from Golf Road to the tollway. E. A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 16-95 DESIGNATING PERSONS WHO SHALL BE EXEMPT FROM FEES FOR MOUNT PROSPECT MOTOR VEHICLE LICENSES (Exhibit I) Xl. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT A. Bid results: 1. 2000 Street Reconstruction Program B. Request to purchase nine (9) radio modems and nine (9) in-car laptop computers for the Mount Prospect Police Department C. status Report Xll. ANY OTHER BUSINESS XIII, ADJOURNMENT MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT APRIL 4. 2000 CALL CALL TO ORDER TO ORDER Mayor Farley called the meeting to order at 7:37 p.m. ROLL CALL ROLL CALL Present upon roll call: Mayor Gerald Farley Trustee Timothy Corcoran Trustee Paul Hoefert Trustee Dennis Prikkel Trustee Michaele Skowron Trustee Irvana Wilks Absent: Trustee Richard Lohrstorfer PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PLEDGE Trustee Skowron led the Pledge of Allegiance INVOCATION INVOCATION Mayor Farley gave the invocation. MINUTES APPROVAL OF MINUTES Trustee Hoefert. seconded by Trustee Wil.ks. moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held March 22. 2000. Upon roll call: Ayes: Corcoran. Prlkkel. Skowron. Wilks Nays: None Pass: Hoefert Mot[on carriecl. BILLS APPROVAL OF BILLS Trustee HoeferL seconded by Trustee Wilks, moved to approve payment of the foliowinc~ bills: General Fund $ 385.433 Refuse Disposal Func 110.602 Motor Fuel Tax Fund 122.200 Community Development Block Grant Fund 1.900 Debt Service Funds Capital Improvement Fund 64.208 Capital Improvement Construction Func 1.648 Downtown Redevelopment Const. Fund 144.267 Street Improvement Construction Fund 48.850 Flood Control Construction Fund 1.860 Water & Sewer Fund 18.226 Parking System Revenue Fund 11 Vehicle Maintenance Fund 19.176 Yehicle Replacement Fund Computer Replacement Fund 1.079 Risk Management Fund 43.002 Police Pension Fund 23.794 Fire Pension Fund 20,906 Flexcomp Trust Fund Escrow Deposit Fund 19.829 Benefit Trust Funds ~-~- $1.027,535 UpOn roll call: Ayes: - Corcoran. Hoefert~ Pdkkel. Skowron. Wilks Nays: None Motion carried. MAYOR'S REPORT MAYOR'S Mayor Farley proclaimed April 22 as Earth Day, and April 28 as Arbor Day; Laura Fowle, REPORT: Mount Prospect Forestry Assistant, accepted both proclamations, and invited the public to attend the annual Arbor Day tree planting at Euclid School on Friday, April 28. She EARTH DAY also stated that the Village recently was recognized as a certified Tree City, and was presented with the distinctive Growth Award, as well as an Urban Forestry Public ARBOR DAY Education Award.. Mayor Farley proclaimed the month of April as Alcohol Awareness Month, and ALCOHOL recognized May 6-7 as the designated days for the American Cancer Society's "Relay for AWARENESS Life." MONTH Fire Chief Mike Figolah and Mayor Farley presented Lieutenant Clarence F. Lehmann CLARENCE with a plaque acknowledging his retirement after 31 years with the Mount Prospect LEHMANN: Volunteer Fire Department. RETIREMENT Mayor Farley recommended the following individuals for appointment to the newly APPTS. established Sister Cities Commission, the Plan Commission, and the Special Events Commission: SPECIAL SISTER CITIES COMMISSION EVENTS Name Initial Aooointment COMMISSION Barbara Persenaire, Chair 5 years Carole Bloomquist 5 years Tokiko Blaine 4 Melanie Kamen 4 J.L. Scott 4 Paul Sells 4 Irvana Wilks. Trustee 3 Adelaide Thulin 3 Dorothy Kucera 3 Larry Durso 2 Janice Farley 2 Lii Floros 2 Jud Strickland 1 Gerald Farley, Mayor, Ex Officio member Maura Jandris, Staff Liason PLAN PLAN COMMISSION COMMISSION Name Term to Excite Matthew E. Sledz May 2004; to fill expired term of Louis Velasco SPECIAL EVENTS SPECIAL EVENTS COMMISSION COMMISSION Name T._~ Della Baldwin. reappointment May 2004 Village Board members exoresse(3 support for the above appointments, however, the consensus of the Board was that the ordinance approved on April 4, establishing the Sister Cities Commission. should include specific language relative to a Village trustee serving on the Commission. An ordinance will be presented for first reading at the April 18, 2000 meeting, amending the existing Sister Cities Commission ordinance to include "one Village trustee" in the list of members. CITIZENS CITIZENS TO BE HEARD None. Page 2 - April 4, 2000 ZBA 02-00 OLD BUSINESS 120 N. YATES ZBA 02-00 120 N. Yates Lane LANE An ordinance was presented for first reading to grant a Conditional Use and variation to reconstruct an existing a wood deck that encroaches three feet (3'1 into a required 7.5 foot side yard setback; the existing deck was built by me previous owner without a building permit. Trustee Hoefert, seconded by Trustee Skowron, moved to waive the rule requiring two readings of an ordinance. Upon roll call: Ayes: Corcoran, Hoefert. Prikkel. Skowron, Wilks Nays: None Motion carried. ORD. Trustee Hoefert. seconded by Trustee Corcoran, moved for approval of Ordinance NO. 5098 No. 5098: AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE AND VARIATION FOR PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 120 NORTH YATES LANE Upon roll call: Ayes: Corcoran, Hoefert, Prikkel, Skowron, Wilks Nays: None Motion carried. PC 01-00 PC 01-00, 301 S. I-Oka Avenue, St. Raymond's Parish 301 S. I-OKA An ordinance was presented to grant exceptions from the Development Code for storm AVENUE water detention for a building addition, and for street light installation. Trustee Corcoran seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved to waive the rule requiring two readings of an ordinance. Upon roll call: Ayes: Corcoran, Hoefert, Prikkel. Skowron, Wilks Nays: None Motion carried, Trustee Corcoren seconded by Trustee Skowron, moved for approval of Ordinance ORD. No, 5099: ~10. 5099 AN ORDINANCE GRANTING EXCEPTIONS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT 301 SOUTH I-OKA AVENUE Upon roll call: Ayes: Corcoran, Hoefert, Prikkel, Skowron, Wilks Nays: None Motion carried. ZBA 37-99 ZBA 37-9g Phase lB Downtown Redevelopment, Norwood Builders PHASE 1B An ordinance was presented for second reading for a Conditional Use permit for a DOWNTOWN Planned Unit Development at the northeast corner of Northwest Highway and Main REDEVELOP- Street. MENT William Cooney, Director of Community Development, asked the Board to consider deferral of this case to the April 18 meeting, as details relative to parking for the development have not been finalized. Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Skowron, moved to defer the second reading of an ordinance for ZBA 37-99 to the April 18, 2000 Village Board meeting. Upon roll call: Ayes: Corcorart. Hoefert, Prikkel, Skowron, Wilks Nays: None Motion carried. Page 3 - April 4, 2000 This Ordinance will be presented fOr second reading at the April 18, 2000 meeting. ZBA 05~00 ZBA 05-00, Text Amendment, Village of Mount PrOspect TEXT Village Manager Michael Janonis stated that staff haS requested that ZBA 05-00 be AMENDMENT withdrawn. Trustee Skowron, seconded by Trustee Corcoran, moved to approve the withdrawal of ZBA 05-00. Upon roll calk: Ayes: Corcoran, Hoefert, Prikkel, Skowron, Wilks Nays: None Motion carried. AMEND CH. 22: An ordinance was presented for second reading, which would amend Chapter 22 of the WATER & Village Code by authorizing an !ncrease in water and sewer rates. SEWER Trustee HOefert, seconded by Trustee Corcoran, moved for approval of Ordinance RATES No. 5100: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND ARTICLE V ENTITLED "METERS AND RATES" OF CHAPTER 22 OF THE VILLAGE CODE Upon roll call: Ayes: Corcoran, Hoefert, Prikkel, Skowron, Wilks Nays: None MotiOn carried. ZBA 06-00 NEW BUSINESS 204 S. I-OKA ZBA 06-00, 204 S. I-Oka Avenue AVENUE The petitioner presented a request for a Conditional Use permit to construct an unenclosed front porch that would encroach five feet (5') into a required front yard setback. The Zoning Board of Appeals had recommended approval by a vote of 5-0. The petitioner also appealed the March 23 denial, by the Zoning Board of Appeals, of a request for a variation to increase the permitted lot Coverage from 50% to 55%. The denial was based on the lack of proof of hardship. The Zoning Board had voted 3-2 to deny the request, and has final authority on the matter, however, the Village Code does allow for an appeal to the Village Board. Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Skowron, moved to concur with the recommendation of the Zoning Board of Appeals for approval of a Conditional Use permit requested in ZBA 06-00. Upon roll call: Ayes: Corcoran, Hoefert, Prikkel, Skowron, Wilks Nays: None Motion carried. Board members engaged in a lengthy discussion with the petitioners, expressing concerns relative to, primarily, water retention and setting precedence by approving a case of this nature. The Board suggested that the lot coverage issue be deferred to the April 18 meeting, to a!low the petitioner the opportunity to revise his plan to reduce the proposed lot coverage. Trustee Hoefert, seconded by Trustee Prikkel, movedto defer ZBA 06-00 to the April '18, 2000 Millage Board meeting.' Upon roll calh Ayes: Corcoran, Hoefert, Prikkel,' Skowron, Wilks Nays:. None Motion carried. · Page 4 - April 4, 2000 ZBA 07-00 ZBA 07-00. 1 E. Rand Roa(~ CVS Pharmacy 1 E. RAND A request was presented for a Conditional Use permit and variations to construct a multi- tenant retail building, formerly Heilig Meyers Furniture Store, which will include a drug ROAD store with drive-through service The Zoning Board of Appeals had recommended approval by a vote of 5-0, AS part of the discussion, it was emphasized that the petitioner must be willing to adhere to future corridor design recommendations that m~ght affect the subject property, and that language to that effect should be included in the ordinance. Trustee HoeferL seconded by Trustee Corcoran, moved to concur with the recommendation of the Zoning E~oard of Appeals to grant a Conditional Use permit and variations requested in ZBA 07-00. Upon roll call: Ayes: Corcoran, Hoefert. Prikkel, Skowron, Wilks Nays: None Motion carried. An ordinance will be presentea for first reading at the April 18 Village Board meeting. ZBA 04-00 307 E. RAND ZBA 04-00, 307 E. Kensington Road. Jules Hot Dogs ROAD A request was presented for a Conditional Use permit to construct a fast food restaurant, with drive-through facility. The Zoning Board of Appeals had recommended approval by a vote of 5-0, Board members expressed concerns relative to noise and/or lights creating a nuisance for neighboring properties; it was established that a condition of the ordinance should be that the ordedmenu board should not emanate onto the surrounding properties. There was also discussion regarding the use of masonry brick, rather than the proposed split face block, for the structure, with Mayor Fadey and Trustee Prikkel indicating they have no problem with the petitioner's choice of building materials. Other members stated a preference for brick instead of split face block. Trustee Corcoran. seconded by Trustee Wilks. moved to concur with the recommendation of the Zoning Board of Appeals to grant the Conditional Use permit, with conditions relative to the building material and location of the order/menu board. reques[eo in ZBA 04-00. Uoon roll call: Ayes: Corcoran, Hoefert, Skowron. Wilks Nays: Prikkel, Fadey Motion carried. An ordinance will be presented for first reading at the April 18 Village Board meeting. SAFETY Matt Lawrie, Project Engineer, presented the Board with the following recommendations COMMISSION: from the Safety Commission: 1. No Parking Any Time on ihe east side of N. Louis Street from a point 425 feet to a point 433 feet north of the centerline of E. Thayer Street; NO PARKING 2. No Parking Any Time along the north side of Prospect Avenue between RESTRIC- Kenilworth Avenue and Lancaster Street, TIONS The Safety Commission had recommended approval of both requests by votes of 5-0. Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Skowron, moved to concur with the above recommendations of the Safety Commission. Upon rolt call: Ayes: Corcoran, Hoefert, Prikkel, Skowron, Wilks Nays: None Motion carried.. Page 5 - April 4, 2000 An ordinance will be presented for first reading at the April 18 Village Board meeting. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT BiD RESULTS: Village Manager Michael Janonis presented bid results for the year 2000 Concrete RestOration Program: CONCRETE PROGRAM BIDDER TOTAL BID G & M, Inc. $14,770 GlObe Construction, Inc. 18,400 Schroeder & Schroeder, Inc. 23,600 REJECT BIDS In error, Mr. Janonis indicated that staff had recommended the rejection of all bids (See Material Testing Program below). Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved to concur with the recommendation of staff to reject all bids submitted for the 2000 Concrete Restoration Program. Upon roll cali: Ayesl Corcoran, Hoefed, Prikkel, Skowron, Wilks Nays: None Motion carried. A proposal from KAM Engineering, Inc. was presented for the construction of street lights as part of the Route 83 improvements between Golf Road and Prospect Avenue. Trustee Hoefert, seconded by TruStee Corcoran, moved to concur with the ROUTE 83 recommendation of staff to accept the proposal submitted by KAM Engineering, Inc. for STREET the design of the Route 83 Street Light improvement Project, with an amount not to LIGHTS exceed $41,588. Upon roll call: Ayes: Corcaran, Hoefert, Prikkel, Skowron, Wilks Nays: None KAM Motion carried. ENGINEERING iNC. At this time, Mr. Janonis noted that the earlier recommendation to reject bids for the 2000 Concrete Restoration Program was presented in error. TruStee HOefert, Seconded by Trustee Prikkel, moved to rescind the earlier motion to reject bids on the concrete restoration project, and accept the bid submitted by G & M, RESCIND Inc. for an amount not to exceed $20,000. MOTION Upon roll call: Ayes: Corcoran, Hoefert, Prikkel, Skowron~ Wilks Nays: None Motion carried. MATERIAL Eleven proposals (attached) were received for the year 2000 Material Testing Program TESTING for street resurfacing and reconstruction. As ail proposals were higher than the budgeted PROGRAM amount, staff recommended rejecting all eleven, and accepting the lowest, which was submitted by Professional Services Industries (PSI) bids in an amount not to exceed $57,000. TruStee Hoefert, seconded by Trustee Prikkel, moved to reject ali bids that were received for the 2000 Material Testing Program. Upon roll call: AyeS: Corcoran, Hoefert, Prikkel, Skowron~ Wilks Nays: None Motion carried. Page 6 - April 4, 2000 PROFES- Trustee Hoefen, seconaea by Trustee Skowron, moved to grant a contract to Professional Services Industries (PSI) for the 2000 Material Testing Program. in an SIONAL amount not to exceed $57.000. SERVICES NDUSTRIES Upon roll call: Ayes: Corcoran, Hoefert, Prikkel Skowron, Wilks (PSI) Nays: None Motion carrie(: OTHER ANY OTHER BUSINESS BUSINESS Mr. Janonis reminded the audience that the "floating" Coffee with Council was scheduled for Saturday, April 8, with St. Emily Catholic Church being the host location for the latter portion. CLOSED CLOSED SESSION SESSION There was no need for a Closed Session listed on the agenda, ADJOURN ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:13 o.m. Velma W. Lowe Village Clerk Page 7 -April4, 2000 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT BUDGET REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE SUMMARIES January 1 - March 31, 2000 o4/~/2ooo VILLAGE OF MOUNT pROSPECT 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed ~:07,26 Budget Revenue Summary 9 Months { 79.0% ) Remaining 01/01/00 = 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unreceived Unreceived Received Received Budget ' Balance Percent REVENUE BY CLASSIFICATION PROPERTY TAXES 3,009,333 3,842,873 9,752,255 9,909,382 60.6 OTHER TAXES 4,136,338 4,714,594 16,475,226 11,760,632 71.4 LICENSES, PERMITS & FEES 477,248 1,129,236 2,987,400 1,858,164 62.2 INTERGOVERMENT REV. 1,101,308 1,738,887 8,269,200 6,530,313 79.0 CHARGES FOR SERVICE 1,269,087 2,942,835 12,179,620 9,2~6,785 75.8 FINES AND FORFEITS 84,565 135,607 531,500 395,893 74.5 INVESTMENT INCOME 1,5~0,721 2,277,878 4,948,162 2,670,284 54.0 REIMBURSEMENTS 784,723 809,590 788,300 -21,290 -2.7 OTBER REVENUE 342,837 808,948 2,893,955 2,085,007 72.0 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 139,906 188,896 5,136,500 4,947,604 96.3 Total All Funds 12,886,086 18,889,844 68,962,118 45,372,774 70.9 04/~3~2o00 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining ~:o7:~ Budget Revenue Suaunary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unreceived Unreceived Received Received Budget ' Balance Percent SSA #7 WHITE OAK/MEIER CONST 0 0 0 0 FLOOD CONTROL CONST FU~ 344,542 352,378 3,156,850 2,804,472 88.8 WATER AND SEWER FUND 1,231,879 2,037,359 7,599,200 5,561,841 73.2 PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE FUND 19,797 54,115 216,900 162,785 75.1 VEHICLE MAINTEN~d~CE F~IND 92,670 277,797 1,110,392 832,595 75.0 VEHICLE REPLACEMENT FUND 93,711 324, 862 1,082,981 758,119 70.0 COMPUTER REPLACEMENT FUND 10,654 31,918 121,733 89,815 73.8 RISK MANAGEMENT FUND 1,957,020 1,621,630 3,415,394 1,793,764 52.5 POLICE PENSION FUND 909,657 1,249,888 2,777,520 1,527,632 55.0 FIRE PENSION FUND 704,253 1,050,423 2,812,560 1,762,137 62.7 BENEFIT TRUST #2 FUND 509 1,488 6,000 4,512 75.2 FLEXCOMP ESCROW FUND 0 0 0 0 ESCROW DEPOSIT FUND 0 0 0 0 SSA #1 PROSPECT MEADOWS B&I 66 188 0 -188 SSA #6 GEORGE/ALBERT B&I 13,848 17,887 39,125 21,238 54.3 SSA #7 WHITE OAK/MEIER B & I 0 0 0 0 Total All F%hnds 12,886,036 18,589,344 63,962,118 45,372,774 70.9 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed 11:11:31 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRBRR03 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT SUM021 Budget Revenue by category within Fund Su~-~Lary 01/01/00 03/31/00 Cur Mo Y-T-D 2000 Unreceived Unreceived Received Received Budget Balance Percent GENERAL FUND 40 PROPERTY TAXES 2,113,390 2,690,466 6,685,955 3,995,489 59.8 41 OTHER TAXES 2,395,508 2,651,362 9,954,800 7,303,438 73.4 42 LICENSES, pERMITS & FEES 435,115 1,029,427 2,750,500 1,721,073 62.6 43 IMTERGOVERMENT REV. 678,449 1,176,873 5,000,800 3,823,927 76.5 44 C}A~RGEB FOR SERVICE 44,270 164,758 600,920 436,162 72.6 45 FINES AND FORFEITS ~ 84,565 135,607 531,500 395,893 74.5 48 iNVESTMENT INCOME 47,455 120,555 360,000 239,445 66.5 47 REIMBURSEMENTS 32,819 67,361 275,300 207,939 75.5 48 OTHER REVEMUE 9,538 119,090 155,475 36,385 23.4 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 0 0 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 5,841,109 8,155,499 26,315,250 18,159,751 69.0 REFUSE DISPOSAL FUND 40 PROPERT~ TAXES 706,011 907,975 2,419,300 1,511,325 62.5 44 CHANGES FOR SERVICE 56,886 156,422 791,700 635,278 80.2 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 11,000 21,376 50,000 28,624 57.2 48 OTHER REVENUE 0 0 0 0 TOTAL REFUSE DISPOSAL FIfND 773,897 1,085,773 3,261,000 2,175,227 66.7 MOTOR FUEL TAX FUND 43 INTERGOVERMENT REV. 222,859 362,014 1,380,700 1,018,686 73.8 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 4,136 11,070 40,000 28,930 72.3 47 REIMBURSEMENTS 0 -12,669 0 12,669 TOTAL MOTOR FUEL TAX FUND 226,995 360,415 1,420,700 ~ 1,060,285 74.6 LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GPJ~NT 43 IHTERGOVERMENT REV. 0 · 0 0 0 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 18 38 0 -38 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed 11:11:32 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRBRR03 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT SUM021 Budget Revenue by Category within Fund Summary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur Mo Y-T-D 2000 Unreceived Unreceived Received Received Budget Balance Percent TOTAL LOCAL LAW ENF BLOCK GRANT 1996 0 0 0 0 PUBLIC WORKS FACILTY B&I 1987A 40 PROPERTY TAXES 12,889 16,959 48,000 31,041 64.7 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 85 993 1,046 53 5.1 TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS FACILTY B&I 1987A · 12,974 17,952 49,046 31,094 63.4 PUBLIC WORKS FACILTY B&I 1987B 40 PROPERTY TAXES 0 0 0 0 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 0 0 0 0 TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS FACILTY B&I 1987B 0 0 0 0 POLICE & FIRE BLDG B&I 1991A 40 PROPERTY TAXES 0 0 0 0 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 0 0 0 0 TOTA~LPOLICE & FIRE BLDO B&I 1991A 0 0 0 0 REFUND 87B & 9lA B&I 1993B 40 PROPERTY TAXES 177,043 227,473 599,000 371,527 62.0 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 2,313 5,335 22,089 16,754 75.8 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 0 0 TOT ALHEF~ 87B a 9lA BaI 1993B 179,356 232,808 621,089 388,281 62.5 DOWNTOWN REDEVLOPMNT B&I 1992B 41 OTHER TAXES 0 0 0 0 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 0 0 0 0 TOTAL DOWNTOWN REDEVLOPMNT B&I 1992B 0 0 0 0 DOWNTOWN REDEVLOPMNT B&I 1993A 41 OTHER TAXES 124,215 156,396 340,000 183,614 54.0 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 2,148 5,553 15,390 9,837 63.9 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 0 0 TOTAL DOWNTOWN REDEVLOPMNT B&I 1993A 126,363 161,939 355,390 193,451 54.4 DOWNTOWN EEDEVLOPWNT B&I 1994B 41 OTNER TAXES 0 0 0 0 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 0 0 0 0 TOTAL DOWNTOWN REDEVLOPMNT B&I 1994B 0 0 0 0 DOWNTOWN REDEVLOPMNT B&I 1996B 41 OTHER TAXES 45,668 57,955 125,000 67.045 53.6 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 450 1,022 2,332 1,310 56,2 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed 11:11:32 ' 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRBRR03 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT SUM021 Budget Revenue by Category within Fund Summary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur Mo Y-T-D 2000 Unreceived Unreceived Received Received Budget Balance Percent DOWNTOWN REDEVL B & I 1998B 41 OTRER TA/~ES 1,461 1,860 4,000 2,140 53.5 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 14 32 95 63 66.3 TOTAL DOWNTOWN REDEVL B & I 1998B 1,475 1,892 4,095 2,203 53.8 DOWNTOWN REDEVL B & I 1999 41 OTHER TAXES 0 0 0 0 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 4,185 12,997 39,406 26,409 67.0 48 OTHER REVENUE 0 0 0 0 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 500,000 500,000 100.0 TOT~DOWNTOWN REDEVL B & I 1999 4,185 12,997 539,406 526,409 97.6 FLOOD CONTROL B&I 1991A 41 OTEER TAXES 0 0 0 0 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 0 0 0 0 TOTAL FLOOD CONTROL B&I 1991A 0 0 0 0 FLOOD CONTROL B&I 1992A 41 OTHER TAXES 62,458 62,458 200,510 138,052 68.9 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 742 1,799 10,087 8,288 82.2 TOTAL FLOOD CONTROL B&I 1992A 63,200 64,257 210,597 146,340 69.5 REFUNDING FLOOD 9lA B&I 1993B 41 OTHER TAXES 84,104 84,104 270,000 185,896 68.9 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 975 2,375 12,426 10,051 80.9 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 0 0 TOTAL REFUNDINO FLOOD 91A B&I 1993B 85,079 86,479 282,426 195,947 69.4 FLOOD CONTROL B&I 1994A 41 OTEER TAXES 52,892 52,892 169,800 116,908 68.9 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 454 1,032 6,370 5,338 83.8 TOTAL FLOOD CONTROL B&I 1994A 63,346 53,924 176,170 122,246 69.4'~ FLOOD CONTROL B&I 1996A 41 OTHER TANES 64,480 64.480 207,000 142,520 68.9 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 480 1,054 6.958 5,904 84.9 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 0 0 TOTAL FLOOD CONTROL E&I 1996A 64,960 65,534 213,958 148,424 69.4 FLOOD CONTROL - 1998A B & I 41 OTHER TA/~ES 20,247 20.247 65,000 44,753 68.9 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 44 57 1,024 967 94.4 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 0 0 TOTAL FLOOD ~ONTROL - 1998A ~ a I 20,291 20,$04 66,024 43,?20 69.2 04/13/2000 9 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed 11:11:32 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRBRR03 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT su~021 Budget Revenue by Category within Fund Summary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unreceived Unreceived Received Received Budget Balance Percent DOWNTOWN REDEVELOP 1998C B & I 41 OTHER TAXES 55,751 69,907 152,600 82,693 54.2 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 353 677 748 71 9.5 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 0 0 TOTAL DOWNTOWN REDEVELOP 1998C B & I 56,104 70,584 153,348 82,764 54.0 EPA FLOOD LOAN B&I 41 OTHER TAXES 154,191 154,191 495,000 340,809 68.9 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 1,245 2,786 7,565 4,779 63.2 TOTAL EPA FLOOD LOAN B&I 155,436 156,977 502,565 345,588 68.8 FLOOD CONTROL 2000 B & I 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 0 0 6,000 6,000 100.0 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 238,150 238,150 100.0 TOTAL FLOOD CONTROL 2000 E & I 0 0 244,150 244,150 100.0 STREET IMPROVEMENT B&I 1994A 41 OTEEE TA/fES 161,528 161,528 510,000 348,472 68.3 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 2,409 6,082 28,851 22,769 78.9 TOTAL BTREET IMPROVEMENT B&I 1994A 163,937 167,610 538,851 371,241 68.9 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS B&I 1996A 41 OTHER TAXES 34,206 34,206 108,000 73,794 68.3 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 497 1,244 6,034 4,790 79.4 TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS B&I 1996A 34,703 35,450 114,084 78,584 68.9 STREET IMPROVB & I 1998A 41 OTHER TAXES 48,458 48,458 153,000 104,542 68.3 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 93 272 741 469 63.3 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 0 0 TOTAL ETREET IMPROVB & I 1998A 48,551 48,730 153,741 105,011 68.3 STREET IMPROV CONSTR 1998A 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 0 0 0 0 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 0 0 TOTAL STREET IMPROV CONSTE 1998A 0 0 0 0 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 41 OTHER TAXES '0 0 0 0 43 INTERGOVERMENT REV. 0 0 380,000 380,000 100.0 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 16,468 36,536 45,000 8,464 18.8 47 REIMBURSEMENTS 0 0. 0 0 48 OTHER REVENUE 0 0 135,000 135,000 100.0 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 1,024,000 1,024,000 100.0 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed 11:11:32 9 Months ( 7S.0% ) Remaining FRRBRR03 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT SUM021 Budget Revenue by Category within Fund Sxn%~LLary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur Mo Y-T-D 2000 Unreceived Unreceived Received Received Budget Balance Percent TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 16,488 36,586 1,584,000 1,547,464 97.7 POLICE & FIRE BLDG CONET FUND 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 255 723 0 -723 TOTAL POLICE & FIRE BLDG CONST FUND 255 723 0 -723 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT CONST FUND 43 INTERGOVEBMBNT REV. 0 0 0 0 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 809 1,951 0 -1,951 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 0 0 TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT CONST FUND 809 1,951 0 -1,951 DOWNTOWN RBDEVLPMNT CONST 1998 46 I~VESTMENT INCOME 0 0 0 0 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 0 0 TOTAL DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMNT CONST 1998 0 0 0 0 DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMNT CONST 41 OTHER TAXES 26,849 34,171 73,491 39,320 53.5 42 LICENSES, PERMITS & FEES 0 0 0 0 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 7,460 17,271 40,000 22,729 56.8 47 REIMBURSEMENTS 0 0 450,000 450,000 100.0 48 OTHER REVENUE 0 0 0 0 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 1,387,500 1,387,500 100.0 TOTAL DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMNT CONST 34,309 51,442 1,950,991 1,899,849 97.4 STREET iMPROVEMENT CONSTFUND 41 OTHER TAXES 333,575 453,984 2,063,600 1,609,616 78.0 42 -LICENSES, PERMITS & FEES 41,833 98,909 233,000 134,091 57.5 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 22,034 51,440 75,000 23,560 31.4 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 0 0 TOTAL STREET IMPROVEMENT CONST FUND 397,442 604,333 2,371,600 1,767,267 74.5~ FLOOD CONTROL CONST 1998A 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 21 59 0 -59 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 0 0 TOTAL FLOOD CONTROL CONST 1998A 21 59 0 -59 SSA ~7 WHITE OAK/MEIER CONST 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 0 0 0 0 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 0 0 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed 11:11:32 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRBRR03 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT SUM021 Budget Revenue by Category within Fund Summary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unreceived Unreceived Received Received Budget Balance Percent FLOOD CONTROL CONST FUND 43 INTERGOVERMENT REV. 200,000 200,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 83.3 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 4,636 12,472 30,000 17,528 58.4 47 REIMBURSEMENTS 0 0 0 0 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 139,906 139,906 1,926,850 1,786,944 92.7 TOTAL FLOOD CONTROL CONST FU~D 344,542 352,378 3,156,850 2,804,472 88.8 WATER AND SEWER FUND 41 OTHER TAXES 457,077 588,903 1,545,300 956,397 61.9 44 C~IARGES FOR SERVICE 757,545 1,395,613 5,869,900 4,474,287 76.2 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 17,253 42,456 175,000 132,544 75.7 47 REIMBURSEMENTS 0 0 3,000 3,000 100.0 48 OTHER REVENUE 4 10,387 6,000 -4,387 -73.1 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 0 0 TOTAL WATER AND SEWER FUND 1,231,879 2,037,359 7,599,200 5,561,841 73.2 pA/~KING SYSTEM REVENUE FUND 42 'LICENSES, PERMITS & FEES 300 900 3,900 3,000 76.9 44 CF=ARGES FOR SERVICE 16,244 43,896 178,000 134,104 75.3 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 3,253 9,319 35,000 25,681 73.4 48 OTHER REVENUE 0 0 0 0 49 OTHER FIN~CING SOURCES 0 0 0 0 TOTAL PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE FUND 19,797 54,115 216,900 162,785 75.1 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE FUND 44 CHARGES FOR SERVICE 92,035 276,099 1,104,392 828,293 75.0 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 635 1,698 6,000 4,302 71.7 47 REIMBURSEMENTS 0 0 0 0 48 OTHER REVENUE 0 0 0 0 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 0 0 TOTAL VEHICLE MAINTENANCE FUND 92,670 277,797 1,110,392 832,595 75.0 VEHICLE REPL4%CEMENT FUND ,% 44 C~L~ROES FOR SERVICE 68,883 205,747 822,981 617,234 75.0 46 IN~;ESTMENT INCOME 25,128 70,125 200,000 129,875 64.9 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 48,990 60,000 11,010 18.4 TOTAL VHHICLE REPLACEMENT FUND 93,711 324,862 1,082,981 758,L19 70.0 COMPUTER REPLACEMENT FUND 44 CHARGES FOR SERVICE 9478 28.435 113,733 85.298 75.0 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 1,176 3,483 8,000 4,517 56.5 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 0 0 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25,0% ) Completed 11:11:33 8 Months ( 75.0% ) Remainin~ FRRBRR03 VILLAGE OF ~OUNT PROSPECT SUM021 Budget Revenue by Category within Fund Summary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unreceived Unreceived Received Received Budget Balance Percent RISK MANAGEMENT FUND 44 CHARGES FOR SERVICE 224,016 671,865 2,697,994 2,026,129 75.1 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 17,974 46,183 140,000 93,817 67.0 47 REIMBURSEMENTS 751,904 754,898 60,000 -694,898 ****.* 48 OTHER REVENUE 63,126 148,684 517,400 368,716 71.3 TOTAL RISK M~NAGEMENT FUND 1,067,020 1,621,630 3,415,394 1,793,764 52.5 POLICE PENSION FUND 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 771,274 982,544 1,720,000 737,456 42.9 48 OTHER REVENUE 138,383 267,344 1,057,520 790,176 74.7 TOTAL POLICE PENSION FUND 909,657 1,249,888 2,777,520 1,527,632 55.0 FIRE PENSION FUND 46 INVESTMENT iNCOME 572,467 803,171 1,850,000 1,046,829 56.6 48 OTHER REVENUE 131,786 247,252 962,560 715,308 74.3 TOTAL FIRE PENSION FUND 704,253 1,050,423 2,812,560 1,762,137 62.7 BENEFIT TRUST #2 FUND 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 509 1,488 6,000 4,512 75.2 TOTAL BENEFIT TRUST ~2 FUND 509 1,488 6,000 4,512 75.2 PLEXCOMP ESCROW FUND 48 OTHER REVENUE 0 0 0 0 TOT~,LFLEXCOMP ESCROW FD-ND 0 0 0 0 ESCROW DEPOSIT FUND 46 INVESTMENT'INCOME 0 0 0 0 48 OTHER REVENUE 0 0 0 0 TOTAL ESCROW DEPOSIT FUND 0 0 0 0 SSA ~1 PROSPECT MEADOWS B&I 41 OTHER TAXES 0 0 0 0 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 66 188 0 -188 TOTAL SSA #1 PROSPECT MEADOWS B&I 66 188 0 -188 SSA #6 GEORGE/ALBERT B&I 41 OTHER TAXES 13,670 17,502 38 125 20.623 54.1 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 178 385 1 000 615 61.5 TOTAL SSA ~6 GEORgE/ALBERT B&I 13,848 17,887 99,125 21,238 54.3 SSA #7 WHITE OAK/MEIER B & I 41 OTHER TAXES 0 0 0 0 46 INVESTMENT INCOME 0 0 0 0 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 0 0 04/12/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed 11:11:33 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRBRR03 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT SUM02~ Budget Revenue by Category within Fund Summary 01/01/00 03/31/00 Cur Mo Y-T-D 2000 Unreceived Unreceived Received Received Budget Balance Percent TOTAL SSA #7 WHITE OAK/MEIER B & I 0 0 0 0 MOUNT PROSPECT LIBRARY FUND 49 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 0 0 4,311,000 4,311,000 100.0 TOTAL MOUNT PROSPECT LIBRARY FUND 0 0 4,311,000 4,311,000 100.0 o4/i3/2000 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT ~ Months ( 25.0% ) Completed ~:06:37 Budget Expenditure Sunmnary 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining 01/01/00 ~ 03/31/00 Cur Mo Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed Budget Expenditure Summary 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur Mo Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS B&I 1996A 0 0 157,634 157,634 100.0 STREET IMPROV B & I 1998A 0 0 102,900 102,900 100.0 STREET IMPROV CONSTR 1998A 0 0 0 0 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FL~D 65,248 94,021 1,771,653 1,677,632 94.7 POLICE & FIRE BLDG CONST FUND 0 0 52,030 52,030 100.0 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT CONST FUND 1,648 1,648 13,850 12,202 88.1 DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMNT CONST 1998 0 0 0 0 DOWNTOW~ REDEVLPMNT CONST ~94,280 782,826 2,116,000 1,333,174 63.0 STREET IMPROVEMENT CONST FD-ND 44,850 44,850 2,929,717 2,884,867 98.5 FLOOD CONTROL CONST 1998A 0 0 0 0 SSA #7 WHITE OAK/MEIER CONST 0 0 0 0 FLOOD CONTROL CONST FUND 2,260 3,680 3,301,117 3,297,437 99.9 WATER ~D SEWER FU~ 449,255 1,292,227 7,998,218 6,705,991 83.8 PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE FUND 12,558 41,084 274,551 233,467 85.0 VEHICLE MAINTEND/qCE FUND 90,459 229,428 1,103,331 873,903 79.2 VERICLE REPLACEMENT FUND 3,645 3,751 838,800 835,049 99.6 COMPUTER REPLACEMENT FUND 18,832 33,182 36,250 3,068 '8.5 RISK MA. NAGEMENT FUND 1,307,~69 1,826,324 3,213,743 1,587,419 49.4 POLICE PENSION FU~ 129,755 385,215 1,699,730 1,314,515 77.3 FIRE PENSION FUND 131,796 420,051 1,513,035 1,092,984 72.2 BENEFIT TRUST #2 FUND 2,953 8,680 34,800 26,120 75.1 SSA #1 PROSPECT MEADOWS B&I 0 0 0 0 SSA #6 GEORGE/ALBERT B&I 0 0 39,155 39,155 100.0 SSA #7 WEITE OAK/MEIER B & I 0 0 0 0 Total All Funds 5,110,051 12,016,354 63,812,353 51,795,999 81.2 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed n~o8:39 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT ~ Months ( 75.0% ) Remainin9 FRRDBR01 SUM03~ Department Budget Expenditure Summary 01/01/00 03/31/00 Cur Mo Y~T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpehded PUBLIC REPRESENTATION Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed 11:08:40 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRDBR01 SUM03~ Department Budget Expenditure Summary 01/01/00 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed n:oo:4o VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRDBR01 SUM031 Department Budget Expenditure Summary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended TV SERVICES DIVISION Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent PROGRAM TOTALS 02 TELEVISION SERVICES 14,538 52,587 193,184 140,597 72.8 03 OTHER SERVICES 0 0 5,000 5,000 100.0 Totals 14,538 52,587 198,184 145,597 73.5 EXPENDITURE CLASSIFICATION 50 PERSONAL SERVICES 6,946 18,955 98,846 79,591 80.8 51 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 2,564 7,383 32,938 25,556 77.6 52 OTHER EMPLOYEE COSTS 0 145 3,550 3,405 95.9 54 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 618 2,670 19,700 17,030 86.4 55 UTILITIES 408 595 3,150 2,555 81.1 57 COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES 1,630 3,425 8,300 4,875 58.7 67 OTHER EQUIPMENT 2,372 19,415 32,000 12,885 39.3 Totals 14,538 82,887 198,184 145,597 73.8 SOURCE OF FUNDS 001 GENERAL FUND 14,538 52,587 198,184 145,597 73.5 Totals 14,538 52,587 198,184 145,597 73.5 3 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed ~:08:40 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remainin9 FRRDBR01 SUM031 Department Budget Expenditure Summary 01/01/00 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended VILLAGE CLERK'S OFFICE Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent PROG~3~M TOTALS 02 VILLAGE CLERK'S OFFICE 12,919 34,103 137,342 103,239 75.2 03 VILLAGE NEWSLETTER 0 8,350 0 -8,350 Totals 12,919 42,453 137,342 94,889 69.1 EXPENDITURE CLASSIFICATION 50 PERSONAL SERVICES 6,897 18,195 76,238 58,043 76.1 51 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 2,024 5,703 23,596 17,898 75.8 52 OTHER EMPLOYEE COSTS 95 142 2,000 1,858 92.9 54 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,971 16,677 25,958 9,281 35.8 55 UTILITIES 204 296 1,600 1,304 81.5 57 COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES 728 1,440 7,950 6,510 81.9 Totals 12,919 42,453 137,342 94,889 69.1 SOURCE OF FUNDS 001 GENERAL FL~qD 12,919 42,453 137,342 94,889 89.1 Totals 12,919 42,453 137,342 94,889 69.1 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed n:08:40 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRDBR01 SUM031 Department Budget EXpenditure Summary 01/01/00 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended FINANCE DEPARTMENT Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent PRO~RAMTOTALS 01 FINANCE ADMINISTRATION 21,215 52,027 216,415 164,388 76.0 02 ACCOIINTING 21,702 63,714 283,652 219,938 77.5 03 DATA PROCESSING 15,684 58,726 197,931 139,205 70.3 04 DUPLICATING SERVICES 1,368 2,622 11,300 8,678 76.8 05 INSURANCE PROGRAMS 16,868 50,439 205,895 155,456 75.5 06 CUSTOMER SERVICES · 25,181 81,142 307,028 225,881 73.6 07 CASH MANAGEMENT 2,623 7,713 34,940 27,227 77.9 Totals 104,641 316,383 1,257,156 940,778 74.8 EXPENDITURE CLASSIFICATION 50 PERSONAL SERVICES 59,876 170,122 717 07~, 546,951 76.3 51 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 15,827 46,237 I90,2~6 144,019 75.7 52 OTHER EMPLOYEE COSTS 182 1,437 8,550 7,113 83.2 54 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 13,393 54,058 155,014 100,956 65.1 55 UTILITIES 776 1,131 5,000 3,869 77.4 56 INSURANCE 12,576 37,729 150,913 113,184 75.0 57 COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES 2,011 4,757 28,~50 23,693 83.3 65 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 0 912 1,900 988 52.0 Totals 104,641 316,383 1,257,156 940,773 74.8 SOURCE OF FUNDS 001 GENERAL FLrA]D 104,641 316,383 1,287,156 940,773 74.8 Totals 104,641 316,383 1,257,156 948,778 74.8 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed 11:08:4o VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRDBR01 SUMo81 Department Budget Expenditure Surmnary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended COMMtTNI TY DEVELOPMENT EXpended Expended Budget Balance Percent PROGRAM TOTALS 01 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADMIN 13,867 41,331 175,345 134,014 76.4 02 PL~%ATNING & ZONING 16,414 47,074 223,060 175,986 78.9 03 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 4,080 13,223 69,388 56,165 80.9 05 BUILDING INSPECTIONS 41,498 124,581 547,541 422,960 77.2 06 HOUSING INSPECTIONS 13,598 44,634 248,347 203,713 82.0 07 BEALTH INSPECTIONS 8,451 22,280 99,164 76,884 77.5 Totals 97,908 293,123 1,362,845 1,069,722 78.8 EXPENDITURE CLASSIFICATION 50 PERSONAL SERVICES 65,227 199,965 914,624 714,659 78.1 51 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 20,292 61,735 362,574 200,839 76.5 52 OTEEH EMPLOYEE COSTS 1,963 6,505 20,735 14,230 68.6 54 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 7,730 20,963 132,117 111,154 84.1 55 UTILITIES 1,925 2,659 17,475 14,816 84.8 57 COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES 771 1,296 15,320 14,024 91.5 65 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 0 0 0 0 Totals 97,908 293,123 1,362,845 1,069,722 78.5 SOURCE OF FUNDS 001 GENERAL FUND 97,908 293,123 1,361,845 1,068,722 78.5 510 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 0 0 0 0 550 DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMNT CONST 0 0 1,000 1,000 100.0 Totals 97,908 293,123 1,362,845 1,069,722 78.5 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed 11:08:40 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 9 Months < 75.0% I Re~alning FRRDBR01 SUMO3~ Department Budget Expenditure Summary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - CDBG Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed VILLAGE v-~ MOUNT PROSPECT 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRDBR01 SUM03~ Department Budget Expenditure Suavm%ary 01/01/00 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended PIUMAN SERVICES Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed 11:0.:~0 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Re~aini~g FRRDBR01 SUM031 Department Budget Expenditure Summary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended POLICE Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed ~:o8:4~ VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT~ Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRDBR01 SUMo31 Depar~n. ent Budget Expenditure Su..mmar'-lr ol/o~/oo o3/3~/oo Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 UneXpended Unexpended FIRE Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent SOURCE OF FD-ND$ 001 GENEP~AL FU~D 636,735 1,670,957 7,095,790 5,424,833 76.5 Totals 636,735 1,670,957 7,095,790 5,424,833 76.5 04/i3/2000 3 Months 25.0% ) Completed n~08:4~ VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSP~.CT 9 Months 75.0% ) Remaining FRRDBR01 SUM091 Department Budget Expenditure Summary 01/01/00 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended PUBLIC WORKS - ADMINISTRATION Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent PROGRAM TOTALS 01 PUBLIC WORKS ADMINSTRATION 77,600 217,513 921,976 704,463 76.4 Totals 77,600 217,513 921,976 704,469 76.4 EXPENDITURE CLASSIFICATION 50 PERSONAL SERVICES 15,235 40,390 184,281 143,891 78.1 51 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 8,932 25,395 101,340 75,945 74.9 52 OTHER EMPLOYEE COSTS 434 1,312 20,000 18,688 93.4 54 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 47,592 142,086 586,055 443,969 75.8 55 UTILITIES 3,378 4,690 14,370 9,680 67.4 57 COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES 2,029 2,970 10,080 7,110 70.5 65 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 0 0 3,000 3,000 100.0 67 OTRER EQUIPMENT 0 670 2,850 2,180 76.5 Totals 77,600 217,513 921,976 704,463 76.4 SOURCE OF FUNDS 001 GENERAL FLTND 77,600 217,513 921,976 704,463 76.4 Totals 77,600 217,513 921,976 704,463 76.4 04/13/2000 3 Months { 25.0% ) Completed ~:08:4~ VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT ~ Months { 75.0% ) Remaining FRRDBR01 SUM03~ Department Budget Expenditure Summary 01/01/00 03/31/00 Cur Mo Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended PUBLIC WORKS - STREETS/BLDGS Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed ~:08:4~ VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 9 Months ( 7s.0~ ) Re~ining FRRDBR01 SUMo31 Depar~ent Budget Expenditure Summary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended PUBLIC WORKS - FORESTRY/GRNDS Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent PROGRAM TOTALS 01 FORESTRY DIVISION ADMIN 12,606 32,817 162,167 129,350 79.8 02 MAINTENANCE OF GROUND 12,415 34,991 297,309 262,318 88.2 03 FORESTRY PROGRAM 50,051 90,744 631,257 540,513 85.6 04 PUBLIC GROUNDS B~AUTIFICATIOM 158 470 48,599 48,129 99.0 ~ Totals 75,230 159,022 1,139,332 980,310 86.0 EXPENDITURE C~ASSIFICATION 50 PERSONAL SERVICES 39,313 99,784 580,864 481,080 82.8 51 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 11,213 33,010 145,568 112,558 77.3 52 OTHER EMPLOYEE COSTS -78 918 1,240 322 26.0 54 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 24,784 24,972 362,270 337,298 93.1 57 COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES -2 338 37,960 37,622 99.1 66 MOBILE EQUIPMENT 0 0 0 0 67 OTHER EQUIPMENT 0 0 11,430 11,430 100.0 Totals 75,230 159,022 1,139,332 980,310 86.0 SOURCE OF FUNDS 001 GENERAL FUND 75,230 159,032 1,129,432 970,410 85.9 690 RISE MANAGEMENT FUND 0 0 9,900 9,900 100.0 Totals 75,230 159,022 1,139,332 980,310 86.0 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed ~1:08:41 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRDBR01 SUM031 Department Budget Expenditure Su~nary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent PROGRAM TOTALS 01 ENGINEERING SERVICES 44,120 113,884 586,810 472,926 80.6 05 TRAFFIC CNTRL & STREET LGHTNG 25,927 45,023 413,643 368,620 89.1 Totals 70,047 158,907 1,000,453 841,546 84.1 EXPENDITURE CLASSIFICATION 50 PERSONAL SERVICES 33,450 86,314 453,293 366,979 81.0 51 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 8,534 23,490 109,659 86,169 78.6 52 OTHER EMPLOYEE COSTS 158 773 5,400 4,627 85.7 54 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 7,593 26,691 156,361 129,670 82.9 55 UTILITIES 19,913 19,913 160,530 140,617 87.6 57 COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES 399 1,726 14,110 12,384 87.8 65 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 0 0 4,000 4,000 100.0 67 OTHER EQUIPMENT 0 0 2,100 2,100 100.0 69 INFRASTRUCTURE 0 0 95,000 95,000 100.0 Totals 70,047 158,907 1,000,453 841,546 84.1 001 GENERAL FUND 69,247 148,086 798,453 650,367 81.5 050 MOTOR FUEL TAX FUND 800 10,821 202,000 191,179 94.6 Totals 70,047 158,907 1,000,453 841,546 84.1 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed ~:06:4~ VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRDBR01 SUMo31 Department Budget Expenditure Suaunary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended PUBLIC WORKS - WATER/SEWER Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent PROGRAM TOT~LS 01 WATER & SEWER DIVISION ADMIN 91,803 244,038 1,321,695 1,077,657 81.5 02 MAINTENANCE OF BUILDINGS 2,495 8,162 85,438 77,276 90.4 03 MAINTENANCE OF GROUNDS 264 1,088 78,023 76,935 98.6 04 WATER SUPPLY MAINT & REPAIR 25,503 68,613 616,811 548 198 88.9 08 WATER DISTRBT MAINT & REPAIR 19,250 90,235 640,173 549 938 85.9 06 WATER VALVE/H~qDP~T MAINT & REP . 13,887 25,609 294,907 269 298 91.3 07 WATER METER MAINT & REPL 12,805 36,702 278,926 242 224 86.8 08 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 42,737 128,211 512,842 384 631 75.0 09 SANITARY SEWER MAINT & REPAIR 15,143 39,313 344,395 305 082 88.6 10 WATER & SEWER SYSTEM iMPROV 9,985 16,285 831,028 814 743 98.0 12 LAKE MICHIGAN WATER SUPPLY 215,383 633,971 2, 993,980 2,360,009 78.8 Totals 449,255 1,292,227 7,998,218 6,705,991 83.8 EXPENDITURE CLASSIFICATION 50 PERSONAL SERVICES 87,459 243,434 1,297,037 1,053,603 81.2 51 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 28,823 83,857 374,933 291,076 77.6 52 OTHER EMPLOYEE COSTS 1,875 3,886 24,755 80,869 84.3 54 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 300,457 870,502 4,731,017 3,860,515 81.6 55 UTILITIES 8,813 15,168 133,180 118,012 88.6 56 INSURANCE 7,265 21,786 87,171 65,385 75.0 57 COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES 13,288 18,313 240,080 221,767 92.4 59 OTHER EXPENDITURES 0 0 28,017 28,017 100.0 65 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 0 6,416 7,900 1,484 18.8 67 OTHER EQUIPMENT 1,575 22,565 161,600 139,035 86.0 68 DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 0 6,300 803,628 797,328 99.2 71 BOND PRINCIPAL 0 0 108,900 108,900 100.0 Totals 449,255 1,292,227 7,998,218 6,705,991 88.8 SOURCE OF F~-NDS 510 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 0 0 0 0 580 SSA ~7 WHITE OAK/MEIER CONST 0 0 0 0 610 WATER AND SEWER FUND 449,259 1,292,227 7,998,218 6,705,991 83.8 Totals 449,255 1,292,227 7,998,218 6,705,991 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed ~:o8:4~ VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRDBR01 Department Budget Expenditure Summary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended PUBLIC WORKS - REFUSE DISPOSAL Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 2S.0% ) Completed ~:o~:4~ VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT9 Months ( 75.0% } Remaining FRRDBR01 su~031 Department Budget Expenditure Summary o~/o~/oo o3/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended PUBLIC WORKS - VEHICLE MAINT Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent 01 VEHICLE DIVISION ADMINSTRATION 16,043 36,833 149,357 112,524 75.3 02 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM 74,416 192,595 953,974 761,379 79.8 Totals 90,459 229,428 1,103,331 873,903 79.2 EXPENDITURE CLASSIFICATION 50 PERSONAL SERVICES 41,934 111,890 518,788 406,898 78.4 51 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 11,946 34,314 145,043 110,729 76.3 52 OTHER EMPLOYEE COSTS 0 0 2,800 2,800 100.0 54 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 9,003 12,550 51,750 39,200 75.7 55 UTILITIES 306 446 930 484 52.0 57 COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES 87,270 69,450 387,400 287,950 80.6 99 OTHER EXPENDITURES 0 0 0 0 65 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 0 0 2,000 2,000 100.0 67 OTNER EQUIPMENT 0 778 24,620 23,848 96.8 Totals 90,459 229,428 1,103,331 873,903 79.2 SOURCE OF FUNDS 660 VEBICLE MAINTENANCE FUND 90,459 229,428 1,103,331 873,903 79.2 Totals 90,459 229,428 1,103,331 873,903 79.2 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed n:08:4~ VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRDBR01 SUM031 Department Budget Expenditure Summary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended COMMUNITY SERVICE PROGRAMS Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent PROG~AMTOTALS 02 COMMUNITY GROUPS & MISC 16,232 31,772 91,900 60,128 65.4 03 4TR OF JULY & CIVIC EVENT$,ETC 7,003 12,763 87,579 74,816 88.4 04 HOLIDAY DECORATIONS 53 294 67,157 66,863 99.6 05 BLOOD DONOR PROGP3LM 221 679 2,546 1,867 73.3 Totals 23,509 45,508 249,182 203,674 81.7 EXPENDITUNE CLASSIFICATION 50 PERSONAL SERVICES 154 461 30,079 29,618 98.5 51 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 65 194 4,823 4,629 96.0 54 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 23,135 42,675 181,280 138,605 76.5 55 UTILITIES 0 0 1,150 1,150 100.0 57 COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES 55 2,078 21,850 19,772 90.5 59 OTHER EXPENDITURES 100 100 10,000 9,900 99.0 Totals 23,509 45,508 249,182 205,674 81.7 SOURCE OF FUNDS 001 GENERAL FUND 23,509 45,508 249,182 203,674 81.7 Totals 23,509 45,508 249,182 203,674 81.7 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed ~:o8,42 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRDBR01 SUMO31 Department Budget Expenditure Sunm%ary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Expended Expended Budget Bala/%ce Percent PROGRAM TOTALS 01 VILLAGE IMPROVEMENTS & EQUIP 65,248 94,021 629,533 535,512 85.1 02 COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 1,648 1,648 1,065,000 1,063,352 99.8 03 DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT CONST 194,280 782,826 2,115,000 1,332,174 63.0 04 FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS 2,260 3,680 3,301,117 3,297,437 99.9 06 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 167,050 167,050 4,144,237 3,977,187 96.0 07 POLICE/FIRE BUILDING CONST 0 0 0 0 09 MOTOR EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 3,645 3,751 838,800 835,049 99.6 10 COMPUTER REPLACEMENT 18,832 33,182 36,250 3,068 8.5 11 CAPITAL TR~SFERS 0 0 0 0 Totals 452,963 1,086,158 12,129,937 11,043,779 91.0 EXPENDITURE CLASSIFICATION 54 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 14 15,263 171,520 156,257 91.1 59 OTHER EXPENDITURES. 188,'236 762,953 1,525,000 762,047 50.0 62 LA~D IMPROVEMENTS 1,648 1,648 190,000 188,352 99.1 63 BUILDINGS 0 0 0 0 64 BUILDIN~ IMPROVEMENTS 1,921 13,784 93,000 79,216 85.2 65 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 19,429 41,770 ·267,750 225,980 84.4 66 MOBILE EQUIPMENT 3,645 3,751 838,800 835,049 99.6 67 OTHER EQUIPMENT 62,730 71,649 305,033 233,384 76.5 69 INFRASTRUCTURE 175,340 175,340 8,738,834 8,563,494 98.0 80 INTERFUND TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 Totals 492,963 1,086,158 12,129,937 11,043,779 91.0 SOURCE OF FUNDS 001 GENERAL FUND 0 0 0 0 050 MOTOR FUEL TAX FUND 122,200 122,200 1,071,520 949,320 88,6 060 LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT 0 0 0 0 070 coMMUNITY DEVELPMNT BLOCK GP~ 0 0 0 0 080 ASSET SEIZURE FUND 0 0 0 0 500 STREET IMPROV CONETR 1998A 0 0 0 ~ 910 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 65,248 94,021 1,771,653 1,677,632 94.7 520 POLICE & FIRE'BLDG CONST FUND 0 0 52,030 52,030 100.0 530 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT CONST FUND 1,648 1,648 13,850 12,202 88.1' 540 DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMET CONST 1998 0 0 0 0 550 DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMNT CONST 194,280 782,826 2,115,000 1,332,174 63.0 560 STREET IMPROVEMENT CONST FUND 44,850 44,850 2,929,717 2,884,867 98.5 570 FLOOD CONTROL CONST 1998A 0 0 0 0 S80 SSA #7 WHITE OAK/MEIER CONST 0 0 0 0 590 FLOOD CONTROL CONST FUND 2~260 3 680 3,301,117 3,297,437 99.9 630 PARKING SYSTEM REX~NDE FUND 0 0 0 0 670 VEHICLE REPLACEMENT FUND 3,645 3.751 838,800 835,049 99.6 680 COMPUTER REPLACEMENT FUND 18 832 33.182 36,250 3,068 8.5 690 RISK MANAGEMENT FUND ) 0 O. 0 Totals 452,963 1,086~1E8 12,129,'937 11,043,779 91.0 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed n:08:42 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT . Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRDBR01 Department Budget Expenditure Summary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended DEBT SERVICE Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed ~:08:42 VILe,AGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRDBR01 S0M031 Department Budget Expenditure Summary 01/01/00 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended RETIREE PENSIONS Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent PROGRAM TOTALS 01 MISCELLJ~NEOUS PENSIONS 4,595 13,606 55,300 41,694 75.4 02 POLICE PENSIONS 129,755 385,215 1,699,730 1,314,515 77.3 03 FIRE PENSIONS 131,796 420,051 1,513,035 1,092,984 72.2 Totals 266,146 818,872 3,268,065 2,449,193 74.9 EXPENDITURE CLASSIFICATION 53 PENSION BENEFITS 265,908 818,517 3,261,465 2,442,948 74.9 54 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 238 355 6,600 6,245 94.6 Totals 266,146 818,872 3,268,065 2,449,193 74.9 SOURCE OF FUNDS 001 GENERAL FI/ND 1,642 4,926 20,600 15,574 76.0 710 POLICE PENSION FUND 129,755 385,315 1,699,730 1,314,515 77.3 720 FIRE PENSION FUND 131,796 420,051 1,513,035 1,092,984 72.2 730 BENEFIT TRUST #2 FUND 2,953 8,680 34,800 26,120 75.1 Totals 266,146 818,872 3,268,065 2,448,193 74.9 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed ~:08:42 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 8 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRDBR01 SUMo31 Department Budget Expenditure Summary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended RISK MANAGEMENT Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent PROGRAM TOTALS 01 CASUALTY & PROPERTY INSURANCE 1,131,344 1,238,170 781,371 -483,799 -58.1 02 MEDICAL INSURANCE 176,425 39t,154 2,422,472 2,031,318 83.9 Totals 1,307,769 1,626,324 3,203,843 1,577,519 49.2 EXPENDITURE CLASSIFICATION 54 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 0 0 41,900 41,900 100.0 56 INSUR3~CE 1,307,769 1,626,324 3,161,943 1,535,619 48.6 80 INTERFUND TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 Totals 1,307,769 1,626,324 3,203,843 1,577,519 49.2 SOURCE OF FUNDS 690 RISK MANAGEMENT FUND 1,307,769 1,626,324 3,203,843 1,577,819 49.2 Totals 1,~07,769 1,626,324 3,203,843 1,577,519 49.2 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed ~:08:42 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 9 Months ( 75.0% ) Remaining FRRDBR01 Department Budget Expenditure Sua~mary 01/01/00 - 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended NON-DEPARTMENTAL Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent 23 04/13/2000 3 Months ( 25.0% ) Completed n:08:42 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT ~ Months ( 75.0% ) Remainin9 FRRDBR01 SUM031 Department Budget Expenditure Summary 01/01/00 03/31/00 Cur MO Y-T-D 2000 Unexpended Unexpended ~{OUNT PROSPECT LIBRARY Expended Expended Budget Balance Percent PROGRAM TOTALS 02 LIBRARY SERVICES 0 0 4,311,000 4,311,000 100.0 Totals 0 0 4,311,000 4,311,000 100.0 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT CASH POSITION 13-Apr-00 Cash & Invs~,;~{ Receipts Disbursements Other Cash & Invstmt Balance 04/01100 Per Attached Creditsl Balance 04/0'1/00 04/13100 List of Bills Debits 04/13100 General Fund 8,407,831 1,400,299 391,925 9,416,205 Special Revenue Funds Refuse Disposal Fund 1,716,573 203,336 114,696 1,805,213 Motor Fuel Tax Fund 777,766 157,586 935,352 Commun'~y Development BIk Grant Fund 45,931 25,025 1,329 69,627 Local Law Enfrcmt BIk Grant Fd 1997 11,623 11,623 Debt Service Funds 3,710,307 286,426 168,629 3,828,104 Capital Proiects Funds Capital Improvement Fund 2,112,261 7,610 2,104,651 Police & Fire Building Construction Fund 53,433 53,433 Capital Improvement Construction Fund 178,218 178,218 Downtown Redevelopment Const Fund 366,517 8,253 5,417 369,353 S~'eet Improvement Construction Fund 3,694,741 62,378 3,757,119 1998A Flood Control Construction Fund 4,654 4,654 Flood Control Construction Fund 1,195,359 700 1,194,659 Enterprise Funds Water & Sewer Fund 3,091,530 318,298 258,304 3,151,524 Parking System Revenue Fund 698,184 4,286 702,470 Internal Service Funds Vehicle Maintenance Fund 170,367 6,661 ' 163;706 Vehicle Replacement Fund 5,122,544 5,122,544 Computer Replacement Fund 237,333 930 236,403 Risk Management Fund 3,035,369 23,364 283,650 2,775,083~~ Trust & Aqency Funds Police Pension Fund 31,431,051 135,909 31,566,960 Fire Pension Fund 32,360,731 128,092 32,488,823 Flexcomp Trust Fund 11,557 8,708 3,023 17,242 Escrow Deposit Fund 1,404,346 30,359 26,640 1,408,065 Benefit Trust Funds * 102,691 102,691 99~940~917 2~792~3'19 1~269~614 101~463~722 ~PENT: APBOARDRPT GENERATED: 5 NOV 99 15:58 BEN: THURSDAY APM300 15:37 PAGE RELE~E ID : VILLAGE OF MOGNT PROSPECT LIST OF BILLS PRKSF~TED TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES ~RC~ ~9/{CH 31 2000 TO APRIL 13 2000 ~E~ VENDOR NBR V~N~OR NAME INVOICE DRSCRI~ION ~ENNT ~N-DEPART}~ENTAL 04324 BANK ONE RKTI~5~ENT-SYLVIA 250.00 04815 CAEN~AOGH, MICRKLE RL~L ESTATE TRANSFER 478.00 01102 CITIBANK, N.A. RM~ OF INS. CLAIMS 6347.25 RMT INS CL~L~S 102615.80 108963.05 01118 CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT C~T PAYROLL FOR - 040600 700.00 PAYROLL FOR - 040600 190.00 890.00 00307 CLOGS, GEORGE A. TAP-EXPENSES i49.90 04008 C(~{{~NITY P~SBY~ERIA~ CNUKCN PERMIT ~E 30.00 01274 DI~CTOR OF ILL STATE POLICE FORFEITED ~]NDS 2982.00 04016 DREGS, SNAEN O~ERPAYMENT 160.00 04821 ~O, PASQUALE REAL F~TATE TRANSFRK TAX 700.00 00102 UIRK PENSION FUND PAYROLL FOR - 040600 12269.04 01405 FIRST C(i~9{ENGALTN RMPLOYEE DE~ PLAN 3023.41 00121 FI~T NATIO~ ~K OF CHI~ SAVINGS BONDS 450.00 00106 I~ ~t~ TRENT - 40I PAYROLL ~R - 040600 316.93 08107 I~ ~I~ TRUST - 457 PAYROLL ~ - 040600 t5193.10 00108 ILLINOIS DEP~ OF ~ PAYRO~ DR - 040600 15888.I3 01044 ILLINOIS STATE DISB~ ~IT PAYROLL FOR - 040600 300.00 PAYROLL FOR - 040600 42.64 PAYROLL DR - 040600 5t9.23 PAYROLL ~R - 040600 t95.50 PAYROLL FOR - 040600 192.29 PAYROLL ~ - 040600 126.00 PAYROLL FOR- 040600 60.00 1435.66 01719 ~ P~I~ ~R ~L 246.00 04817 ~L~, ~D ~D 36.00 02072 ~ ~ ~LIC LIB~ ~P~ T~ 10917.25 REPORT: APBOARDRDT GENERATED: 5 NOV 99 15:58 KUN: THURSDAY APR1300 15:37 PAGE 2 EELS%RE ID : VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT LIST OF' BILLS PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES FROM MARCH 31 2000 TO APRIL t3 2000 DE~T ~NOOR NBR V~NDOR NAME % INVOICE RESCRI~?IOM AMOENT ............................................................................................................................... r.-- 04818 MYSLAK, PIOTR REFUND 72.00 04820 ORTEGA, DELIA REFUND 36.00 04824 PAYDAY CHECK ADVANCE INC. REFUND 6.46 REFUND 0.68 7.14 00123 PEBNEO RAYRDLL FOR - 040600 17100.98 04822 RIOTRD~SKI, DARFRSZ REAL ESTATE TRANSFER 346.00 00124 POLICE PHHSIONFUND PAYHOLL FOR- 040600 14871.45 04673 SA~ BEENAR. DIRD COUNTY CNTLO SUPPORT PAY}~.ENTS PAYROLL ~OE - 040600 211.85 04823 SADRIOL, GERARD RENIORFATE 24.00 00125 SEIN LOCAL 73 PAYROLL FOR - 040600 513.50 04825 SMITH, DERRICK OVERPAYMENT 18.00 02623 STATE OF ILLINOIS LIQUOR RECORD CHECK 38.00 04826 S~OLZ~, GEORGE RRFUNE 4.63 REFUi~D 0.41 0.04 02689 THIRD DISTRICT CIRCUIT COUNT BOND MONEY 2455.00 BOND MONEY 1001.00 MA~8 RDNDMOMNT 656.00 APRt RDRDMONEY 1245.00 BOND MONEY 1528.00 6885.00 00127 ~ITEOWAY PAYEOLLPOR - 040600 373.38 00128 VILLAGE OFMOUNT PROSPECT PAYROLL FOR- 040600 17667.14 DISBURDEMENT 4517.50 22184.64 04314 TIL~GE OP MOONT PROSREC? - PAYROLL ~IRD8 PAYROLL ~ - 040600 126147.3'8 PAYROLL FOR ' 040600 18224.53 PAYROLL FOR- 040600 12240.43 156612.34 04828 ¥ONG, lOt%NE NEFUND 72.00 04011 ~.~NE& ~UG~ NE~I~ 12.00 02886 ~ISCOMSL~ NEE. OF ~ ~I INCOME T~ 186~03 REPORT: APBOANDRPT GENERATED: 5 NOV 99 15:58 RUN: THURSDAY APR1300 15:37 PAGE RELEASE ID : VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT LIST OF HILLS PRESENTED TO TEE BOARD OF TROSTRES FEUN MARCH 31 2000 TO APRIL 13 2000 DE~T ~?~N~OR NER VF/~0OR NM I~OICE DHSUNI~TION k~OUNT ................................................................. ? TOTAL 394752.82 ~5IC REPRESENTATION 02270 AT&T TDLEPDONE DILL 3.37 01008 BNEEN'S F~ONERS & Gt~TS FLUNERE 262.00 04839 DONOFEIO, NICHOLAS SUBPOENA FEE 30.00 02196 NORTHWEST ~ICFEAL CONFERENCE LENCD/NTG 59.60 02301 PETTY CASH - FINANCE DER. PETTY CASH 88.05 02364 PROSPECT HIGH SCHOOL AD IN PRO,RAN 50.00 TOTAL 493.02 VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE 02270 AT&T TELEPHONE DILL 11.3i 04324 BANK ONE RET IRLVAT~T-SYLVIA 350.00 RETIDL~{ENT GI~T CHECKS 1050.00 1400.00 01279 DISTINCTIVE BUSINESS PRODUCTS MAINT AGREE/C~T 333.75 00353 JANUNIS, MICHAEL E. LUNCH REETENG 38.70 01827 NEEIN, THOR~E AND JENKINE,LTD. LEGAL SREVICES 17446.95 04322 MIDOLETON, JOAN REINEU~EF~/{T ~OR MCEN EXAM 100.00 02249 OTTO~EN TREVARTHEN BRITZ DOOLET & PROFESSIONAL SERV 2t0.00 02301 PETTY CNEH - FINANCE DRET. MINE EXPENSES 12.09 03941 WIENONE NT MAGAZINE RENEWAL ~OR EXCHANGE 99.00 TOTAL 19651.80 TV SERVICES DIVISION 02270 AT&T TELEPHONE BILL 22.61 02405 S & H PHOTO, VIDEO AUDIO MIXER 437.45 VgD 2101.10 02301 FEllY CASH - FINANCg ogrf. PATTY CASH 8.98 PATTY CASH 29.90 38.88 02719 TREETOP ~:ffOTIUNS, ENC. JENETS 1139.03 REPORT: AFEOARDNVT GENE~TED: 5 NOV 99 15:58 RUN: THURSDAY APR1300 15:37 RAGE 4 RELEASE ID : VILLAGE OF MO0~ PROSRECT LIST OF BILLS PRESENTED TO THE HOARD OF TRUSTEES FR~ MARCH 31 2000 TO APRIL 13 2000 DERT VENDOR NNR VENDOR NAM~ INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT TOTAL 3789.07 VILLAGE CLERK'S OFFICE 02270 AT&T TELEPHONE RILL 11.31 02028 MIGHTY MITES AWARDS & SONS PLAQUES 178.42 02301 PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT. PATTY C~H 22.63 TOTAL 212.36 FINANCE DE PARTI~.~NT 02270 AT&T TELEPHONE HILL 42.97 04807 CAPITAL SUPPLY TONER 238.71 02285 PEDERSEN & HOUPT TRANSFER TAX 100.00 02301 PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT. MISC E~FENFES 6.80 MISC ~RNNSES 6.00 PATTY CASH 11.36 PATTY CASH 7.10 31.26 04831 ROBERTS, A.E. S~INAR 298.00 02639 STIVRES TNNPORAMY PERSONNEL SERVICES 406.80 04838 THIREMILLENNIUMASSOC.IHC. INV2105 &2197 8481.57 TOTAL 9599.31 CC~9~3NITY DEVELOPMENT 01518 AMBASSADOR OFFICH EQUIP., INC. MICRORICNN CARTRIDGE 236.tl 01840 ANDERSON REST CONTROL SAMINAR 81.00 02270 AT&T TELERNONN BILL I1.3I TELEPHONE BILL 16.96 TELEPHONE BILL 29.40 TELERHONE BILL 9.05 TELERHONE BILL 9.05 75.77 01008 BUHRE'H f%O~RS & GIPTB F~tY~R ARRANGNN~/{T 42.00 01279 DISTINCTIVE BUSINESS PRODUCTS MAINT AGRE~LME~T 333.75 01369 RAIREIEW. FRIRTI~G SERVICE SUBRLIES 79.00 01731 INT'L RESOC.OF F~LECT. INSP. IAEI MENNEREHIR DOES 60.00 ~ 12~.00 185.00 REPORT: APBOARDRPT GENERATED: 5 NOV 99 15:58 RUN: THURSDAY APRI300 15:37 PAGE RELF. tSE ID : VILLAGE OF MOGNT PROSPECT LIST OF BILLS PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES FRUM MARCH 3t 2000 TO APRIL 13 2000 DEPT VENDOR NBR VENDOR NAME INVOICB DESCRIPTION AMOONV. 01744 IF1RENATIONAL COUNCIL OF BBOPING CEiTIBRS DUBS 100.00 02301 PETTY CASH - FINAMNCE DEBT. RISC EXPENSES 24.00 MISC EXPENSES 12.00 RIS~ EXPENSES 7.57 RISC EXPENSES 12.00 PATTY CASH 3.20 58.77 02334 POSTMASTER BUSINESS REPLY MAIL ~69 t00.00 02378 QUICK PRI~ PLUS, INC. BURIRRSS CARDS 35.00 00416 ROELS, ROBBRT J. SENINAR 33.00 02867 MBEELING REPRODDCYIORS ZONING MAPS 205.70 02903 XEROX CORPOBATION XEROX DRUM PART 164.99 TOTAL : 1730.09 CC{~R~JNITY DEVELOPML'F~ - 04102 DAB, MISTY REIMB.CUMFEMBNCE 108.87 00335 FOLEY, APRIL B. MENVOR PROGRAM SUPPLIES 46.05 02052 MORAN, MICHAEL J. SINGLE FAMILY PROGRAM 100.00 04827 TAITBL, CURTIS REIMBURSEMENT 1075.5I TOTAL : 1329.43 HUMAN SERVICES 01561 AMERICAN CHARGE ENRVICB SENIOR TAXI RIDES I79.70 01994 ~ REENREIU{EFP SERVICES COFFEE SUPP 176.60 02270 ATiT TELEPHONE BILL 40.70 02472 RAMENAIEN, IRENE HEN REIMB. 30.00 02602 BAZAR, LEOAiqEN W. HDR REIRB. 48.00 01329 ELDINARY, SAID HUM REtMB. 27.00 01470 GLTTA$. MICHEALE }{DM REI/{B 12.00 01480 GIALIGAM, FRANK HUM REIMB. 15.00 01495 GLEN, JOHN AND MARGE HUM RE~. 21.00 · 04836 HEALTH ED LLC. REGIOTEB]MO~ 120.00 01605 MOEG, DONALD HUM REIMB. 30.00 04360 DOLTZ, RAY BUM RE~. 27.00 REPORT: APBOARDRPT GENERATED: 5 NOV 99 15:58 RUN: THURSDAY APR1300 I5:37 PAGE 6 REL~E ID : VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT LIST OF BILLS PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES FRUN ~CN 31 2000 TO APRIL 13 2000 EMPT VENDOR NBR VENDOR Nk~ INVOICE DESCRIPTION 01774 JIRAK, JIM REM REIMD. 21.00 01846 MUSE, ORVILLE HDM REIMB. 6.00 01915 LUNDIN, RAY HDM REIMS. 63.00 01950 MANN, DEAN HUN REIMS. 39.00 01989 MCKEEXAN, DOROTHY HEX REIMS 12.00 04810 MIND ~?EXRS SE~INARE REGISTER/A.POLEY 62.00 REGISTRATION 62.00 124.00 02047 MO~APP, DORIS HEM REIMS. 9.00 02301 PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT. PATTY CASH 19.99 02858 PIREA, RATHI HEX REIMB. 36.00 02339 EXCRAL, ARLENE HEM REIMB. 33.00 04058 SZANVOR, JIM HEM REIMiL 21.00 04189 WITTEREURG, ROTN HEM REIRE 33.00 04226 WOSICK, CLEM HEM REIMS. 27.00 TOTAL : I179.99 POLICE 02557 ABM, INC. MAINTEN~CE AGREEMENT 215.00 02270 AT&T TELEPHONE BILL 229.53 01102 CITIBANK, N.A. AOL ON-LIRE SERV 45.05 04809 COOK C(YJNTY SHERIFF'S TRAINING INST. RECRUIT TRAINING 2510.00 00323 ETEEXO, MICEAEL REIMBURSE EXPENSES 30.00 00336 FOLI~ff~R, TNEMAN REIMBURSE ~PENRES 19.65 01558 HANSEX ANSDOIATES NUNTNLY SENVUCE 482.62 MONTHLY MERVUCE 254.98 MO~TNL~ RERV~CR 100,00 837.60 00106 ICMA RETI~ TRUST ' 401 ICM4Ol PLAN 425:63 01680 II, LEXOIS FIRE ~ POLICE {I{~{. ASSOC. REGIUTER/C.RENZ I§§.00 REGISTER/i'{CKIIiOP 150.00 310.00 APBOARDRPT GENERATED: 5 NOV 99 15:88 RUN: THURSDAY ANN1300 15:37 PAGE RELEASE ID : VILLARE OF MOUNT PROSPECT LIST OF BILLS PRESENTED TO THE 0OARD OF TRUSTEES FRC~ MARCH 31 2000 TO APRIL 13 2000 VENDOR NBR VENDOR NAME INVOICE DESCRIFrION AMOUNT 01753 IPELRA REGISTER 200.00 01783 JOURNAL & TOPICS NEWSPAPERS SUBSCRIPTION RENEWAL 25.00 01794 KALE UNIFORi~S, INC. NEIFONE SUPPLIES 103.95 CLOTHING SUPPLIES 94.50 198.45 01894 LEXIS PUBLISHING TRAFFIC MANUALS 60.65 03090 MCKILLOP, ROBERT ~ODOtNG EXPENSES 211.20 02145 NELSON, WILLIAM REIMBURSE EXPENSES 35.00 02155 NE~(TEL CO~fONICATIONS CELLULAR S~VICE 1297.27 02170 NORTH EAST ~LTI REGIONAL TRNG 2000/2001 MI~BERSHIP 6075.00 02182 NORTHERN ILLINOIS POLICE ~ SYST~ M~BERSNIP 5730.00 02189 NORTHWEST CENTRAL DISPATCH SYS SERVICES RENDERED 28122.34 02396 RAY}~ARN OFFICE PROD & RNRN ONE FIRE/BON~/ARSON STAMP 22.95 OFFICE SUPPLIES 525.35 548.30 02408 REID AMD RSDOCIATRS, JOHN E. ~PL TESTING 175.00 P/T NECORNE CLERE TESTING 125.00 300.00 · 00429 SE~NEU, MICHARL J. RNIi~B EXPRERES 1162.22 02544 SHRED FIRST INC. SHREDDER BAGS 96.60 02620 STATE APPELLATE PROSECb~OR 1999 CONPLAIN BOOKS 245.00 02698 TJ CONENERA'S, INC. k~UNITION 1226.90 02713 TRAFFIC INSTITUTE REGISTRATION t150.00 REGISTER/SC~IDT 800.00 I950.00 02722 TRI-STATE EREA'~RONIC CO~ CONiC)TEN NE%5~O~ PARTS 25.75 02736 U.S IDE~TINTfATION ~AL MANUAl 72.50 02835 NEREHO~EB DINECT OFFIC~ SUPPLIES 310.32 OFFICE BUPLIES 125.55 ~135.87 02895 I(OLF CiT. e~qA, INC. ~LAi~)IB 'I'MIN FIAM 95.96 REPORT: APBOARDRPT GENERATED: 5 NOV 99 15:58 RUN: THURSDAY APK1300 15:37 PAGE 8 ~LEASE ID : VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT LIST OF EILLS PKESENTED TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES FRLM MARCH 31 2000 TO APRIL 13 2000 DE~T VENDOR NBR VENDOR Nk~E INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT PHOTO PROCESSING 98.12 FILM 271.54 460.62 TOTAL : 51106.13 PIE 02820 ACCESS CONTROL SOLUTIONS, INC. PARTS 38.35 01246 AIRGAS NORTH CENTRAL OXYGEN 162.94 01518 AMBASSADOR OFFICE EQUIP., INC. QTLY MAINT 802.02 02270 AT&T TELEPHONE HILL 225.00 01049 CUNDOVEHi~,fENT, INC CD WRITER 237.92 01222 DAILY HERALD SUBSCRIPTION 33.60 04833 DODT~ BLAINE EXPOSES 27.85 01431 FOSTER COACH SALES INC. BATTERY CHARGER 262.74 01502 GLOBAL FIE EQUIPMENT, INC. PARTS 1648.19 01511 GUNHYEAR SERVICE STORES REPAIR FLAT TIRE 193.39 01683 ILLINOIS FIRE CHIEFS SECR.ASSN MEMBERSHIP/NELSON 40.00 FAV~ERSHIP 40.00 80.00 01685 ILLINOIS FIRE INSPECTORS ASSN. REGUSTER/DOURDK 235.00 01734 I~'L. ASSN. OF F~RD CHIEFS ' MEY, ERSEtP 120.00 01785 JULIA~O, JA~S J. PROPANE 25.98 02155 EXTEL CO}{V~NICATIONS NFi'~EL REUSES 406.00 EXTEL BNOi{ES & SERVICRE 821.31 1227.31 02189 NORTIfWENT CF~TRAL DISPATCH SYS SERVICES RENDERED 7030.58 02137 NSEFO 14EY~BERSHB/VAZENTINE 35.00 02303 PETTY CASH - FIRE DEPT. MRETIEGS,TRAININO, SUEP 49.75 MENTINGS,YRAINING, SUPP 44.80 E~IINGS,TRAINING,SURE 9.92 MRDTINGS,TP, AINING, SUPP 18.37 F;.A'NTNGS,YBAINING,SUPF 3.08 191ETINGS,Y1U~INING, EUBP 2.98 ~ETINGS,TRAINING,EUPP 47.12 176.53 ~FOKT: AREOARORPT GENERATED: 5 NOV 99 15:58 RUN: FUOBSDAY APR1300 15:37 PAGE RELEASE ID : VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT LIST OF BILLS PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES FRON MARCH 31 2000 TO APRIL 13 2000 DER VENDOR NBR VF2{DOR NAME INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 02327 POWP'S TIRE SERVICE, INC. INSTALL 2 NEW BUD NHRELS 803.60 02396 EAYMARK OFFICE PROD &FORN OFFICE SUPPLIES 347.05 02418 RESCUE SYSTEMS INC. RSI TRISTLINK 123.00 04835 SPPB CHICAC-D CHAPTER ANNUAL/~E~'ING 125.00 04139 NTAMARD & ASSOUIATES CANDIDATE TESTING 350.00 04598 TAt,LGRASS SYSTEMS LTD. KEYBOARD 349.00 02604 TERRACE SUPPLY COWPANY HISC.RAINT & MATERIALS 290.20 02802 VILLAKE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS REGISTRATION I800.00 02084 RIRFS INDUSTRIES, INC. REPAIR Ai:AL RIRING REPAIR 093.00 TO~AL : 17643.33 PUBLIC WORES - ADMIRISTR 02219 ARVEY PAPER & SUPPLIES PLANNING SUPPLIES 11.I8 02270 AT&T TELEPHONE BILL 144.73 04814 BRZOSTOWSKI, JERRY REIREUESH2~.J{T 50.00 01056 CENTRAL CONTINEN'fAL BAKERY FULL SHEET CAK~ 104.51 0109'7 CINTAS CORP UNIFORM RF2FrAL CLEANING 523.06 01850 ~IK KOUY PRC~NTIOblkL PONTKES 450.80 04810 NAYLOR, HERIMAN REINBURS~2g~{T FOR CDL 50.00 02308 RE?IY CASH - PUBLIC WORKS TEAVEL/SOPP 26.85 TRAVEL/SUPP t.87 28.42 04655 RILEY, JIM REIMB CDL 50.00 02835 WAREHOUSE DIRECT MISC.OFUICE SUPPLIES 362.88 TOTAL : I778.25 FOBLIC WOP, KS - S'fREETS/B 02937 BONEN ~ CO SUPPLIES FOR STRIPPING 16.47 01069 CHEM RIlE PRODUCTS COWPAMY .CLEANING PRD 51.32 BEAMING PRD 51.33 · CLEA}IING PRO 4'79.63 S82.28 {)4882 K~RO KOWCRR'fE, INC. ENOW REI{OV~ 6360.00 REPORT: AREOARUNPT GENERATED: 5 NOV 99 15:58 RUN: THURSDAY APRi300 15:37 PAGE 10 RELEASE ID : VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT LIST OF BILLS PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES FRUN MARCH 31 2000 TO APRIL 13 2000 DE~ V~NDOR NBR VENDOR NA~ INVOICE DESCRIPTION AROVNT 01918 LUNOSTROH'S H~RSERY PARHWAY RESTOR. 3000.00 02011 MICROFL~X MEDICAL CORPORATION LATEX GLOVES 63.00 02144 MELSON-HARKINS INDUSTRIES 3 INTERIOR SIGNS I04.46 04431 RANEIN FORTA~LE COOLING COOLING UNITS 800.00 02429 RIC MAR INDUSTRIES, INC. SEEN MIST DEODORIZER 142.93 REEEN MIST DEOOORIZER 142.93 KLEHW MIST DEODORIZER I42.94 428.80 02008 ROGER MEYER & SON NATL HAULING SARD/GHAV 4041.52 NATL HAULING SARD/GEAV 2256.75 HATL NAULINO SARD/GHAV 1335.00 7633.27 02490 SARGE'S RANGE SERVICE REMOVAL OF LEAD 550.00 04813 UNITED MENTAL HIGHWAY TECHNOLOGIES SERVICE 30020 01522 W.W. GRAINGHW INC. SUPPLIES 383.21 TOTAL 20221.69 PUELIC NORKS - EORESTRI/ 01838 KP, AMER TREE SPECIALISTS ST~P RE~OVAL 6817.00 01918 LUNDSTRO~'S NU~ERY IANUSCARE NAINT 580.00 02109 NATIONAL ARBOR DaY FOUNDATION 2000 M~)IBEREBIP DUES 15.00 TOTAL 7412.00 ~UBLIC WORKS - ENGINEEXI 00470 BREBOB, LEA~NE ADVANCE-L.BEXNOB I51.64 01353 ENR SUBSCRI~IUN RENHWAL 74.00 04710 MID,gET LASEK R~PAIRS L~SER PLANE 251.28 00452 VASKO, SCOTT CLOTHING ALLOW 200.00 00464 ~'LBNOEXR, J~FFR~Y CLOTHING ALL(Y~i~i~CE 51.94 TOTAL 728.86 ~UNLIC ~P,I/E - ~'~FWS~ . 01700 AE~ITECH SERVICE 23.25 ~M70 ~ ~&T T~EPH(I'~E BI~ 301,89 02451 ~ ~TEM INO . 14b'TER 0~ ~ 88.04 EXPORT: APEOARDRST GENERATED: 5 NOV 99 15:58 RUN: THURSDAY AFR1300 I5:37 PAGE 11 EXL~SE ID : VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT LIST OF BILLS PRESENTED TO TEE BOARD OF TRUSTEES FROM MARCH 31 0000 TO APRIL 13 2000 DE~T VENDOR NBR VENDOR NAME INVOICE DRSC~,IFTtON AROIt~T TRACE MODULES 2012.25 2100.29 03758 BUREAU OF EDSIRESS PRACTICE SURSCRSPTION RENEWAL 84.19 01097 CINTEX CORP ~IPOEX EXNTAL CLEANING 523.06 01377 FRDERAL REPRESS CORE COURIER C~GRS 159.39 01544 HER MATER METER SERVICE LABOR/MATLS I180.80 IAROU~TLS 408.00 1646.00 01783 JO~EXAL & TOPICS NEWSPAPERS SUBSCRIPTION RSME~ALS 50.00 01946 MANAG 5'g,2lT CONCEPTS ANALYSIS 5894.33 02011 MICROFREX MEDICAL CORPORATION LATEX GLOVES 63.00 02027 MID~EST MATERPROOFING CRACK SEALING 2390.00 02042 MIN~TDfaR PP, ERS WORK ORDERS 839.64 02305 PETTY CASH - PUBLIC WORKS TRAVEL/SUPP 3.78 TRAVEUENTP 150.00 153.78 02008 ROGER MEYER & SON MATL RAULING SARD/GRAV 2204.09 04497 THE NATIONAL INPOEXATION DAT~ CTR 2000 ZIP CODE DIRECTORY 46.90 02773 U.S. BANK TRUST MATER 111152.00 PO~g~R 12006.00 O & M 25032.00 FIXED 92840.00 241030.00 02775 USA BLUEROOK FI~G CARRIER 68.35 01522 W.W. GRAINGER I[tC. SUPPLIRS 319.62 SUPPLIES 29.95 349.57 02035 MAREHO~SE DIRECT MESC.OFFIOM SOPPLIRS 362.86 TOTA~ : 258291.39 REPORT: APBOARDRST GENERATED: 5 NOV 99 15:58 RUN: THURSDAY APR1300 15:37 PAGE 12 RELEASE ID : VILLAGE OF MDONI PKOSPECT LIST OF BILLS PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES ~ON MARCH 31 2000 TO APRIL 13 2000 0EPT VENDOR NEE VENDOR NAME INVOICE DESCRIPTION ARONNT 02270 AT&T TELEPHONE BILL 4.52 TOTAL 114695.84 PUBLIC WORKS - VEHICLE M 02270 AT&T TELEPHONE BILL 16.96 02310 a~o CLUTCH FRAR FILTERS 48.72 FRAR FILTERS I391.72 1440.44 02023 BILL'S ~ & PONER PARTS 24.64 01069 CH~ RITE PRODUCTS C~PANY CLEARING PRE 42.50 01289 ~O~GLAS TRUCK PARTS PARTS 49.95 01872 LATTOF CHEVROLET, INC. AC DELCO FILTERS 1552.84 04832 MA~EC INDUSTRIAL RACING JACK 703.60 02011 MICROFLEX MEDICAL CORPORATION LATEX GLOVES 252.00 04416 MSC INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO. SHOP SUPPLIES 228.75 02355 PRO FINISH CAR CLEAN PRD 246.12 02525 SECRETARY OF STATE STICKER RENEWAL 78.00 02575 SNAP-ON INDUSTRIAL SCANNER UDORADRS 835.84 04101 SPI DISTRIBNTION INC. AC DELCO RADIATOR 186.97 02684 TERRACE' SUPPLY CC~PARY GAS CYLINDER RENVAL 3.00 3M MAI~ PRE 228.03 231.03 02769 UPTOWN A~TO SUPPLY REPAIR PANTS 506.11 02793 VE~KER-ILLINOIS, INC SENVICE 31.71 028~1 ~ST SIDE TRACTOR SALES REPAIR P~TS 233.96 TOTAL 6661.42 CC~tUNITY SEUICE PRONRA 08301 PETTY CASH - FINARCE DEF~= MISC EXPENSES 67.67 04837 VILLAGE TROLLEY & ~ 'DEDO~iT-$INT~ CITIE~ TO~ 200.00 TOTAL 267.67 CAPITAL I~{H~OV~g, NT PROJ 01049 DD~ C~;F, RNMENV, INC DIGITAL ~ 930.23 .REPORT: APBOANUNPT GENERATED: 5 NOV 99 15:58 RUN: THURSDAY APR1300 15:37 PAGE 13 RELEASE ID : VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT LIST OF BILLS PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES FRUN MARCH 31 2000 TO APRIL 13 2000 UNiT VENDOR NBN VENDOR NA~E INVOICE DESCRI~TIUN k~OUNT 01445 FUJITSU BNSINB8S CCM~. SY8T~S EQNIP/INS?L 1099.00 EQUIP/INSTL 6511.I3 7610.13 04834 GREDELL, KATBRYN FLOOD REBATE 700.00 04258 SPACECO INC SURVEY 5416.89 TOTAL 14657.25 SENT SERVICE 04830 ILL ENVIR PROT. AGENCY FOR~RF 270 EPA LOANS 79110.94 EPA LOANS 49141.95 ERA LOANS 24089.24 EPA LOANS 16287.05 168629.18 TOTAL 168629.18 RISK MANAGEMENT 01306 DRUG CARD, INC. CARD CLAIMS 13177.59 01275 EI~R &AMBULATORY CANE CONSULT INJURY 95.00 01737 INTERGOVERi~4ENTAL PER.BEN.COOP LIFE INS 2082.80 MO ILL 50700.71 ~ED INS 101256.74 AUNIN FEES 6871.98 160912.23 01872 LATTOF CHEVROLET, INC. REPAIRS P-8 501.6t TOTAL 174686.43 GRAND TOTAL 1269514.33 ~REPORT: APBOARDRPT GENERATED: 5 NOV 99 15:58 RUN: THURSDAY APR1300 15:37 PAGE 14 P, ELEASE ID : VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT LIST OF BILLS PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES FROW MARCH 31 2000 TO APRIL 13 2000 S~{ARY BY F~ND ............................................................................................................................... 001 GENERAL ~UND 391925.07 030 RE~SE DISPOSAL FUND 114695.84 070 CC~f~NITY D~VELRg~T BLOCK GRNT 1329.43 380 EPa FLOOD LOAN B&I 168629218 510 CAPITAL I~PROVE~LT~ ~UND 7610.13 550 DO~9~TO~N ~EDEVLPMNT CONST 5416.89 590 FLOOD CONTROL CONST F~D 700.00 610 WATER A~D SEWER FUND 258303.57 660 VEHICLE ~INTENANCE FOND 6661.42 680 COWPNTER REPLAC~NT POWD 930.23 690 P, ISK ~%NAGEF~m~T FOND 283649.48 770 FLEXCOWP ESCROW MD 3023.4t 790 ESCROW DEPOSIT F~ND 26639.68 TOTAL: 1269514.33 PROCLAMATION CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION MONTH April Blue Bow Campaign WHEREAS, child abuse prevention is a community problem and finding solutions depends on involvement among people throughout the community, including the courts; and WHEREAS, the effects of child abuse are felt by entire communities, and need to be addressed by the entire community; and WHEREAS, the effective child abuse prevention pm~'ams succeed because of partnerships created among the courts, social service agencies, schools, religious organizations, law enforcement agencies, and the business community; and WHEREAS, Parents Care & Share, prevention program offering positive alternatives to help break the cycle of abuse, is sponsoring Illinois' Blue Bow Campaign to heighten awareness of the need to support families; and WltEREAS, all citizens should become more awre of child abuse and its prevention within the community, and to become involved in supporting parents to raise their children in a safe, nurturing environment. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Gerald L. Farley, Mayor of the Village of Mount Prospect, do hereby proclaim the month of April as CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION MONTH in the Village of Moant Prospect, and call upon all citizens to increase their participation in efforts to prevent child abuse, thereby strengthening the communities in which we live and work. Gerald L. Farley Mayor ATTEST: Velma W. Lowe Village Clerk Dated tkis 18t~ day of April, 2000. PROCLAMATION DAYS OF REMEMBRANCE APRIL 30 - May 7, 2000 WHEREAS, the Holocaust was the state-sponsored, systematic persecution and annihilation of European Sewry by Nazi Germany and its collaborators between 1933 and 1945, with six million Jews being the primary victims; and WHEREAS, gypsies, the handicapped, Poles, homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Soviet prisoners of war and political dissidents were also targeted for des~'uction or decimation and suffered grievous oppression and death under Nazi tyranny; and WHEREAS, the history of the Holocaust offers an opportunity to reflect on the moral responsibilities of individuals, societies, and govemments; and WHEREAS, everyone across this great nation should always remember the terfibl~ events of the Holocaust and remain vigilant against hatred, persecution, and tyranny; and WHEREAS, we should actively rededicate ourselves to the principles of individual freedom in a just society; and WHEREAS, the Days of Remembrance have been set aside for the people of the Village of Mount Prospect to remember the victims of the Holocaust as well as to reflect on the need for respect of all peoples; and WHEREAS, pursuant to an Act of Congress' (Public Law 96-388, October 7, 1980), the United States Holocaust Memorial Council designates the Days of Remembrance of the victims of the Holocaust to be Sunday, April 30 through Sunday, May 7, 2000, including the international Day of Remembrance known as Yom Hashoah, May 2. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Gerald L. Farley, Mayor of the Village of Mount Prospect, do hereby proclaim the week of April 30 throug~a May 7, 2000 as DAYs OF REMEMBRANCE in memory of the victims of the Holocaust, and in honor of the survivors, as well as the rescuers and liberators, and do further proclaim that we, as citizens of the Village of Mount Prospect, should. strive to overcome intolerance and indifference through learning and remembrance., . Gerald L. Farley Mayor ATTEST: Velma W. Lowe Village Clerk Dated this 18~ day of April, 2000. VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: MICHAEL JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER DATE: MARCH 29, 2000 HEARING DATE: APPalL 4, 2000 SUBJECT: ZBA-06-2000- 204 S. I-OKA AVENU~ CONDITIONAL USE FOR A FRONT PORCH ENCROACHING 5' INTO THE REQUIRED FRONT SETBACK AND A VARIATION TO ALLOW 55% LOT COVERAGE JAMES AND DEBORAH MCGOUGH (APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS) The Zoning Board of Appeals Iransmits their recommendation to approve a Conditional Use to permit construction of a front porch encroaching five feet into the required front yard setback at 204 S. I-Oka. The subject property is an existing 1½- story home located on a single-family lot encroaching by approximately one inch into the required minimum front setback. The home has an existing bay window extending approximately 5 inches into the front setback and a stoop extending 4 feet into the front setback. The house also has a non-conforming side setback of approximately 4.5' from the south property line (5 feet is required). That applicant proposes to constmnt a 726 s.f. first floor addition, a 1,492 s.f. second story addition, a new two-ear garage, front and rear porches, a driveway extension and a paver-block patio. The building addition and the two porches would continue the current non-conforming interior side setback along the south property line (and would not require a variation). The garage and driveway will meet all setback requirements, however, the proposed additions would increase the proposed lot coverage on the property to 55% (a maximum of 50% permitted). The applicant's rationale the Conditional Use is primarily related to the aesthetics of the proposed structure. The Variation request comes from not wanting to leave "dead space" behind the garage and from safety concerns about such an area. ZBA members were impressed by the quality of the proposed addition and very supportive of the Conditional Use o request. However, they were concerned that the 55~A lot coverage would set a precedent for such variations and lead to increased storm water flooding problems. The ZBA suggested that the petitioner at least move closer to the required 50% lot coverage requirement. Based on their consideration of the facts, the Zoning Board of Appeals votec[ 5-0 to recommend approval for a Conditional Use for a covered, unenclosed porch to encroach 5' into the required front setback. They also denied the O proposed Variation to permit an increase to the maximum lot coverage requirement to 55 ~A for the residence at 204 S. I-Oka Avenue, Case No. ZBA-06-~000. The Village Board's decision is final for the Conditional Use. While the ZBA's decision is final for the requested variation, the petitioner has exercised their right to appeal that decision to the Village Board (letter attached). They will be presenting that appeal, along with their Conditional Use request, at the April 4, 2000 Village Boards meeting. . .~,\ .V~.V02~EPiK:OMDEVXC. fl~IXPLN{~ZBA~BA 2000Xlv~ ~-06-2000 ~eor~) m~] r~noxlo~ ' · . - .. ' 03/28:00 15:30 FAX I 847 253 3063 TINAGLIA DESIGN [~02 TINAGLIA DESIGN GROUP, INC. ARCHITECTS DESIGNERS PLANNERS RE: MeOough ReSidence Addilion and Renovation 2O4 South l-Oka, Mourn Prospect WC a~ ~b'millJng this va'i~cn ~OtlCe On b~haIf of ]airac ~nd I:~bie McGough to 7n.i.g Board (p~ytag om, r~ fm an incmas~ in the aHov~ab~¢ 1~ a~a cove-age. C~. T"~Lrsday, Mm~ 23, we xequest~l a va~lt~r,e at' 5% of the allowable Iol 0ov~crag~ and ~ ..~,~i,:d by 1h~ go,ting Board. Please forward this information to the Villag~ Boa~ so that we may be heard at na~_inE m ~ an apponl on ~ ~ ~ GROUP, ~C. VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT Community Development Deparlxnent MEMORANDUM TO: MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ART,F, NE JURACEK, CHAIRPERSON FROM: JEFF PERKINS, PLANNER DATE: MARCH 17, 2000 HEARING DATE: MARCH23,2000 SUBJECT: ZBA-06-2000 - 204 S. I-OKA AVENUE CONDITIONAL USE FOR A FRONT PORCH ENCROACHING 5' INTO ~ REQUIRED FRONT SETBACK AND A LOT COVERAGE VARIATION TO PER.MIT A BUII,I~ING AND GARAGE ADDITION BACKGROUND INFORMATION Petitioner: James and Deborah McGough 204 S. I-Oka Avenue Mount Prospect, IL 60056 Status of Petitioner: Owners of the Property Parcel Number: 08-11-212-015 Lot Size: 7,779 square feet Existing Zoning: RA Single Family Residence Existing Land Use: Single Family Residence Lot Coverage: 32% existing 55% proposed 50% maximum per RA district Requested Action: BACKGROUND AND PROPOSAL The subject property is an existing l~A-story home located on a single-family lot on a residential street. The home is currently set back 29.86' from the front lot line and enereaches by approximately one inch into the required minimum front setback. The home has an existing bay window extending approximately 5 inches into the front setback and a stoop extending 4 feet into the front'setbaek. The existing house has a non-conforming side setback of approximately 4.5' from the south property line. The applicant proposes to consUuct a 726 s.f. first floor addition, a 1,492 s.~ second story addition, a new two-ear garage, front and rear p0rehes,a driveway extension; and a paver-bleck patio. The garage and driveway will meet all s~tback requirements. The building addition and the two porches would continue the current non-conforming interior sido setback along the south property line and the front porch, would encroach, into the required front yard setback by. 5". The.proposed additi0ns would ina'6ase the proposed lot covecage on the property to $5%. Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting of March 23, 2000 ZBA-06-2000 Page 2 The petitioner is seeking a Conditional Use to allow the front pomh addition to encroach 5' into the required front yard. The proposed additions would also require a Variation to increase the maximum lot coverage form 50% to 55%~ Section 14.402.B of the Zoning Codes permits additions to single family residences with non-conforming side or rear setbacks that extend the structure with the established non-conforming setback. Thus, the proposal does not require a Variation for the extension of the non-conforming side yard setback. The proposal does not increase the extent of the non-conforming front yard setback and can, therefore, be permitted according to Section 14.401.B. The petitioner's rationale for the Conditional Use is primarily related to the aesthetics of the proposed structure. The porch addition would improve the appearance of the hou§e and increase its "street appeal." The applicant's Variation request is related to their desire to move their garage as farto the back of the lot. Placing the garage farther forward on the lot would leave a sizeable "dead space" between the garage and the rear lot line. They have safety concerns with this area, dueto its lack of visibility from the house. They also feel that bringing the garage forward will diminish the usefulness of their rear yard. To conduct its analysis of the proposed Conditional Use and Variation, staff reviewed the petitioner's plat of survey and site plan and visited the site. REQUn2ED FINDINGS Conditional Use Standards The standards for Conditional Uses are listed in Section 14.203.F.8 of the Village Zoning Ordinance. The section contains seven specific findings that must be made in order to approve a Conditional Use. These standards relate to: n The Conditional Use will not have a detrimental effect on the public health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare; c~ The Conditional Use will not be injurious to the use, enjoyment, or value other properties in the vicinity or impede the orderly development of those properties; ~n Adequate provision of utilities and drainage and design of access and egress to minimize congestion on Village streets; and n Compliance of the Conditional Use with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, and other Village Ordinances. The subject parcel for the proposed Conditional Use is a 7,779 square foot parcel developed with a single family home. The applicant proposes an addition consisting of an addition to the rear of the house, a second story, a garage, front and rear porches, and a patio. Other than the front porch, all of the proposed additions can be permitted under current setback requirements. The porch encroachment into the front setback is listed as a Conditional Use in the R1 district and meets all other zoning requirements, except lot coverage, which is discussed below. The proposed porch is part of a large addition to the existing structure that will enhance its appearance and value. The proposal would have limited negative impacts on the adjacent area, utility provision or public streets. The proposed Conditional Use will bein compliance will the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance requirements, except lot coverage. The essential character of the neighborhood - a shagle-family residential area - would not be affected by the proposed Conditional Use and the Conditional Use would not have a negative effect on the public welfare. Variation Standards · Required findings for' 'all variations are'contained in Section 141203.C.9 of the Village of Mount Prospect Zoning Code; The seetion.conta'ms seven specific findings that must be made in Order to approve a variation. These standards relate to: n .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; ' ount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals M~ting of March 23, 2000 ZBA-06-2000 Page 3 r~ lack of desire to increase financial gain; and r~ protection of the public welfare, other property, and neighborhood character. The subject parcel for the proposed Conditional Use is a 7,779 square foot parcel developed with a single family home with an attached single-ear garage. The applicant proposes a large addition to the house, a two-car garage, a driveway extension, front and rear porches, and a patio. The proposed improvements cause the lot to exceed the maximum lot coverage requirement for the RA Zoning District. The applicant's stated reasons for the proposed variation are related to safety concerns and maintaining the usefulness of their rear yard. However, no particular condition of the tot, makes the proposed Variation necessary. The petitioner has several options to meet the 50% lot coverage requirement, and still have all of the proposed improvements. The proposal exceeds the maximtun lot coverage requirement by 368 s.f. The applicant can meet the lot coverage by moving the garage closer to the house and making small adjustments to the other proposed improvements. There is not sufficient justification for a Variation by the above hardship standards. Lack of hardship notwithstanding, the proposal would not be likely to have a negative effect on the character of the existing single-family residential area or on the public welfare. In fact, the proposed improvements will be likely to have a significant positive effect. RECOMMENDATION The proposed porch addition enhances the existing home and the Conditional Use request meets the Conditional Use standards contained in Section 14.203.F.8 of the Zoning Ordinance. Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the ZBA make a recommendation to the Village Board to approve a Conditional Use for a covered, unenclosed porch to encroach 5' into the required front setback for the residence at 204 S. I-Oka Avenue, Case No. ZBA-06-2000 The Village Board's decision is final for this item. Although the proposed variation would not have a significant effect on neighborhood character, the submittal does not support a finding of hardship, as required by the Variation standards in Section 14.203.C.9 of the Zoning Ordinance. Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the ZBA deny the proposed Variation to permit an increase to the maximum lot requirement for the residence at 204 S. I-Oka Avenue, Case No. ZBA-06-2000. The ZBA's decision is final for this item. I concur: William J. Cooney, AICP, Director of Co unity Development lip H:x, GEICPLNG~BA~ZBA 200~qlaffM~A-1~2000 {McGough).doc ~ ~ ~. Wa ~eHa Avenue /~' Hi Lusi Avenue ~ ,~ ~ I Oka Avenue ~' ~ Elmhurst Avenue Wffie Street I-Oil. AVENUE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT ZON~qG BOARD OF APPEALS CASE NO. ZBA-06-2000 Hearing Date: March 23, 2000 PETITIONER: James and Deborah McGough SUBJECT PROPERTY: 204 S. I-Oka Avenue PUBLICATION DATE: March 8, 2000 DAILY HERALD REQUEST: Conditional Use 'and Variation to allow construction of a front porch encroaching 5' into the required front yard setback and lot coverage Variation. MEMBERS PRESENT: Merrill Cotten Leo Floros Richard Rogers Keith Youngquist Arlene Juracek, Chairperson MEMBERS ABSENT: Elizabeth Luxem STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Blue, AICP, Deputy Director of Community Development INTERESTED PARTIES: lames and Deborah McGough lames Tinaglia Chairperson Arlene Juracek called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. Minutes of the February 24, 2000 meeting were approved with corrections. At 8:00 p.m., after heating one case under Old Business, Ms. Juracek introduced Case ZBA-06-2000, 204 S. I-Oka. Michael Blue, Deputy Director of Community Development introduced the case, staling that notice had been provided in the newspaper, mailed notices, and through signage on the property. He indicated that the Case was a Conditional Use request for an unenclosed front porch and variation request for lot coverage. The subject property is an existing 1½-story home located on a single-family lot currently set back 29.86' from the front lot line, encroaching by approximately one inch into the required minimum front setback. The home has an existing bay window extending approximately 5 inches into the front setback and a stoop extending 4 feet into the front setback. The house aisc has a non-conforming side setback of approximately 4.5' from the south property line, five feet is required. Mr. Blue explained that applicant proposes to construct a 726 s.f. first floor addition, a 1,492 s.f. second story addition, a new two-ear garage, front and rear porches, a driveway extension, and a paver-block patio. The garage and driveway will meet ail setback requirements. The building addition and the two porches would continue the current non-conforming interior side setback along the south property line (and would not require a variation) and the front porch would encroach into the required front yard setback by 5'. The proposed additions would increase tba' proposed lot coverage on the property to 55%, requiring a Variation as 50% is required. Mr. Blue continued, saying that the petitioner's rationale for the Conditional Use is prunarily related to the aesthetics of the proposed structure. The Variation request isbasedon the petitioners desire to not leave "dead space" behind the garage and having safety concerns about that area. As for review findings regardingthe proposed Conditional Use,. Mr. Blue.not*xt that the pomh would enhancq the home and. the surrounding area, and that the proposal did meet ail other zoning requirements except lot eo~verage. As for the variation, where s hardship unique to the property must be shown~ it was noted.that while the request.would.. Zoning Board of Appeals ZBA-06-2000 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 2 have limited negative impact on the area, there were alternatives that could reduce or eliminate the need for a variation. So the standard set by the zoning ordinance for variations is not met in this ease. Therefore, Staff recommends that the ZBA make a recommendation to the Village Board to approve a Conditional Use for a covered, unenclosed porch to encroach 5' into the required front setback and deny the proposed Variation to permit an increase to the maximum lot coverage requirement to 55% for the residence at 204 S. I-Oka Avenue, Case No. ZBA-06-2000. Mr. Blue noted that the Village Board's decision is final for the Conditional Use, and that the ZBA's decision is final for the requested variation. Merrill Cotten asked if the handrail around the porch was' within the proposed 5' encroachment or in addition to the 5' floor of the porch. Jim Tinaglia, architect, was sworn in and responded to Mr. Cotten's question that the handrail is within the 5' encroachment. Ms. Juracek asked if the petitioner wanted to speak. James and Deborah McGough were sworn in. Mr. McGough explained he was asking for a Conditional Use and Variation to allow construction of a front porch encroaching 5' into the required front yard setback. He said they needed more space and, after looking at surrounding communities over the past year, decided they wanted to stay in their present neighborhood. Ms. Juracek told the petitioner that the proposed addition was very attractive but the Board does not easily grant requests to exceed lot coverage requirements and they are requesting 5% over the Code specifications. She said granting such requests leads to future problems with flooding. She asked the petitioner if they had considered any alternatives. Mr. McGough said they had considered cutting down the size of the patio and entranceway, putting a center strip of grass down the driveway, eliminating the back porch or bringing the garage forward. They did not want to have a space behind the garage because their children would be enticed to that area and get into mischief. He said they were willing to grade the land to minimize any water problems. Ms. Juracek asked if the Board had questions of the petitioner or if anyone in the audience wished to speak. Ms. Juracek closed the Public Hearing at 8:15 p.m. and brought the request back to the Board. Leo Flores said he had visited the site and wanted to commend and congratulate the petitioners for planning this ambitious project. He said the porch would significantly enhance the home and the area and he would support the petitioner's request. Keith Youngquist also complimented the petitioners on the project but said that while the lot coverage issue sounded trivial it could have a snowball effect. He asked the petitioners to consider making changes that would stay within the 50% lot coverage. Mr. Rogers said he also would request the petitioners to make some accommodations and hold to · 50% coverage. Mr. Flores made a motion to recommend approval for a Conditional Use to allow a front porch to encroach 5' into the required front setback at 204 S. I-Ok-a. Mr. Yunngquist seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Cotten, Floros,'Youngquist, Rogers, and Juracek NAYS: None Mofion.wasapproved,5.-,O. -.',,~ ~,:.~,,- ~, oning Board of Appeals ZBA-06-2000 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 3 Mr. Rogers made a motion to recommend approval for a lot coverage Variation to permit a building and garage addition at the same address. Mr. Cot'ten seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Cotten, Floros NAYS: Youngquist, Rogers, and Juracek Motion was denied 3-2. At 9:20 p.m., at,er two more cases were heard under New Business, Mr. Floras made motion to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Youngquist. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Barbara Swiatek, Planning Secretary Michael glue ~ Deputy Director of Communi~ Development 4/07/00 FRI 15:49 FAX 847 295 0016 NINTY ONE EAST ~00! April 7, 2000 C~~ Mr. Bill Cooney Director of Community Development, Village of Mt. Prospect D~ Bffi: At the April 18~ Village Bo~ Meeting, ~e ~st reading of ~e o~nm~ pemining m the ~ndifional use to add a front ~rch m om home at 2~ S, l-Oka aven~ wffi be made. We would li~ m fo~ly r~uest that ~e second ~a~ng ~ ~s~nsed with ~d th~fore, that final approv~ of~e front p~eh ~ provided during ~e Ap~ 18~ session_ Of ~, if you have any co~ents~ questions, or n~d f~ addition~ infomafion ~om us, pleam feel ff~ to contact ~ at my office at (847) 77 I-5116 or at o~ home at (847) ~9-9438. Sincerely, ~C. McGongh vwl 4/6/00 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY KNOWN AS 204 SOUTH I-OKA AVENUF WHEREAS, James and Deborah McGough (hereinafter referred to as "Petitioner") have filed a petition for a Conditional Use permit with respect to property located at 204 South I-Oka Avenue, (hereinafter referred to as the Subject Property) and legally described as follows: Lot 186 in H. Roy Berry Company's Colonial Manor, being a subdivision of part of the Northeast quarter of Section 11, and part of the Northwest quarter of Section 12,all in Township 41 North, Range 11 East of the Third Principal Meridian, in Cook County Illinois; and WHEREAS, the Petitioner seeks a Conditional Use to construct a front porch encroaching five-feet (5') into the required front yard setback; and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held on the request for Conditional Use being the subject of ZBA Case No. 06-2000 before the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 23rd day of March, 2000, pursuant to proper legal notice having been published in the Mount Prospect Daily Herald on the 8th day of March, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals has submitted its findings and recommendations to the President and Board of Trustees in support of the request being the subject of ZBA 06-2000; and WHEREAS, the President and Board of Trustees of'the Village of Mount Prospect have given consideration to the request herein and have determined that the same meets the standards of the Village and that the granting of the proposed Conditional Use would be in the best interest of the Village. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: SECTION ONE: The recitals set forth hereinabove are incorporated as findings of fact by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect. SECTION TWO: The President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect do hereby grant a Conditional Use, as provided for in Section 14.203.F.8 of the Village Code, to allow the construction of an. unenclosed porch encroaching five-feet (5') into the required front yard setback, as shown on the Site Plan, a copy of which is attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof as Exhibit "A.' Page 2/2 204 S. I-Oka Avenue SECTION THREE: That the Village Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to record a certified copy of this Ordinance with the Recorder of Deeds of Cook County. SECTION FOUR: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of ,2000. Gerald L. Farley Village President ATTEST: Velma W. Lowe Village Clerk v~4/ 3/15/00 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE NATURE OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS PHASE lB OF DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF NORTHWEST HIGHWAY AND MAIN STREET WHEREAS, Norwood Builders (hereinafter referred to as Petitioner), has filed a petition for a Conditional Use in the nature of a Planned Unit Development with respect to property generally known as the northeast comer of Northwest Highway and Main Street, Phase lB of downtown redevelopment) (hereinafter referred to as Subject Property); and WHEREAS, the Subject Property is legally described as follows: Lots 6-10, inclusive, in Block 13 in Busse and Wille's Resubdivision in Mount Prospect, in the West half of Section 12, Township 41 North, Range 11 East of the Third Principal Meridian, and the West 22' of Lot 8 and all of Lots 9 and 10 in Mount Prospect ' Subdivision of part of the NW¼ North of railroad in the NE1/~ of Section 12, Township 41 North, Range 11 East of the Third Principal Meridian, according to the plat thereof recorded September 2, 1874 as Document Number 188460, all in Cook County, Illinois; and WHEREAS, Petitioner desires to create a Planned Unit Development providing for the construction of a mixed-use structure containing 22,700 sq. ft. of commercial space, and 34 condominium units, with thirty-two (32) on-site surface parking spaces, eighteen (18) on-street spaces, and fifty-one (51) underground parking spaces, as provided in Section 14.904 and Section 14.502 of the Village Code; and ' WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held on the request for a Conditional Use permit, designated as ZBA Case No. 37-99, before the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 24~ day of February, 2000, pursuant to due and proper notice thereof having been published in the Mount Prospect Daily Herald on the 9th day of February, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals has submitted its findings and recommendation to the' President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect; and WHEREAS, the President and .Board of.Trustees of the .Village of Mount Prospect have considered the request being the subject of ZBA 37-99 and has determined that the best interests of the Village of Mount Prospect would be served by granting to the Subject Property the'Conditional Use in the nature'of a Planned Unit Development as requested in ZBA 37,99. Page 2 of 3 Norwood, Phase lB NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: SECTION ONE: That the recitals set forth hereinabove are incorporated herein as findings of fact by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect. SECTION TVVO: That the Conditional Use.in the nature of a Planned Unit Development being the subject of this Ordinance is subject to the following conditions: 1. Development of the site in conformance with the site plan prepared by Haylock Design; Inc., dated January 31, 2000 (Attachment 1), Basement Garage Plan prepared by Haylock Design, Inc., dated January 24, 2000 (Attachment 2), and colored elevations prepared by HKM Architects + Planners, Inc., dated April 26, 1999 (attached). 2. Submission of samples of all proposed building materials and approval of such building materials by the Village Board. 3. Provide a year-round dining area in place of the proposed outside dining area, and extend the second and third floor living units and the building fac,.ade over that area. 4. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the Village of Mount Prospect to ensure that the tenant mix of the building's commercial space fulfils the requirements of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan. 5. Approval by the Plan Commission and Village Board of a Plat of Subdivision for the subject property, including all required easements, prior to issuance of a building permit. 6. Provision of appropriate agreements to allow for Village enforcement of parking regulations in surface parking areas. 7. Provision of appropriate easements to allow for Village maintenance of streetscape areas on private property and to ensure public access to streetscape areas. 8. Redesign the parking bay to the rear of the commercial building south of the Sakura Restaurant (105 S. Main Street) to comply with staff comments in the parking section of this report. 9. Submission of a final landscape plan meeting all requirements of Article XXlII · · Landscape Code of the Village of Mount Prospect Zoning Code and providing for appropriate foundation planting areas and landscape features such as tree plantings and raised planter boxes to accent on-sit pedestrian areas. 10; The applicant shall participate financially in the design and selection of appropriate · focal points, such as public art, Street furniture, or public gathering spaces at the. comers of Emerson Street and Northwest Highway and Main Street and Northwest Highway. . Page 3 of 3 Norwood, NW Hwy & Main 11. Submittal and approval of final Engineering Plans meeting all Development Code requirements and/or approval by the Plan Commission and Village Board of any necessary Development Code Exceptions. 12. Provision of an executed parking agreement with a nearby property to provide an additional 32 parking spaces to meet the site parking requirement. 13, Submittal of final building plans meeting, all applicable Building Code and Fire Code requirements. 14. Approval of appropriate permits by I.D.O.T. and M.W.R.D. SECTION THREE: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED andAPPROVEDthis dayof ,2000. Gerald L. Farley. Village President ATTEST: Velma W. Lowe Village Clerk VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: MICHAEL JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: D CTOR OF DEW OP N DATE: MARCH 29, 2000 HEARING DATE: APRIL 4, 2000 SUBJECT: ZBA-07-2000- 1 E. RAND ROAD CONDITIONAL USE APPKOVAL TO PERMIT A 10,800 SQUARE FOOT DRUG STORE WITH DRIVE-'ITIKOUGH AND ASSOCIATED VARIATION JOHN WOJTILA OF THE ZAKEMBA GROUP (PETITIOiNER AND CONTRACT PURCHASER) The Zoning Board of Appeals transmits their recommendation to approve a Conditional Use and associated Variation for a drag store with drive-through and retail space at the southeast comer of Kensington Road and Elmhurst Road. The site is about two acres in size and contains a vacant commercial structure (the former Heilig Meyers store). The applicant proposes to construct a 10,880 square foot C.V.S. Pharmacy and 10,000 square feet of additional retail space. The site would include 85 parking spaces and associated landscaping. The drive through facility, which is a Conditional Use in the B-3 Community Shopping District, is on the west side of the building and is set back 30 feet from the exterior side property line. The Variation is requested for a required landscape setback on the west side of the property. The Staff and ZBA reviews considered potential impacts of the ring road system being considered by IDOT. The reviews also considered the Corridor Design Guidelines currently under development by the Village. This site is a key opportunity to improve the appearance of the intersection, as identified by the Village's urban design consultant. Staff has been working with the applicant to provide appropriate landscaping for the area. In discussing the proposal, the ZBA noted that the development would be an improvement to the site and the area. They also noted that the impacts on the surrounding area, which is currently a very busy commercial district, would be minimal. Based on that discussion and the facts of this case, the ZBA recommended approval of the proposed Conditional Use and Variation to permit the establishment of a CVS Pharmacy with drive-through and 10,000 square feet of additional retail space at 1 E..Rand Road, Case No. ZBA-07-2000, with the conditions listed below: 1. Development of the site in general conformance with the site plan prepared by the Sear-Brown Group, dated February I0, 2000 and revised March 15, 2000 (Attachment 1). 2. Submission of a final landscape plan in general conformance with the preliminary landscape plan prepared by the Sear-Brown Group, dated February 23, 2000 and revised March 15, 2000, .revised to meet all requirements of Article 23 of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. Development of the building in general conformance with elevations prepared by Retail Architecture dated February 21, 2000 and revised March 15, 2000. 4. Submittal and approval of final engineering plans meeting all Development Code requirements. 5. Submittal Of final building plans meeting all applicable Building Code and Fire Code requirements. 6. Approval of appropriate permits by I.D.O.T. and M.W.K.D. \\VH~V02XDEP'I~OOMD~~A'~Z~A 2000'vMF. J ~A-O7-2000 (CVS) mej memo.doc VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ARLENE JURACEIC, CHAIRPERSON FROM: JEFF PERKINS, PLANNER DATE: MARCH 17,2000 HEARING DATE: MARCH 23, 2000 SUBJECT: ZBA-07-2000-1 E. RAND ROAD CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL TO PERMIT A 10,800 SQUARE FOOT DRUG STORE WITH DRIVE-THROUGH AND ASSOCIATED VARIATION BACKGROUND INFORMATION Petitioner: John M. Wojtila, P.E. Zeremba Group, L.L.C. 14600 Detroit Avenue Lakewood, O~ 44107 Status of Petitioner: Contract Purchaser of the Property Parcel Number: 03-34-200-001 Lot Size: 2.07 acres Existing Zoning: B3 Community Commercial Existing Land Use: Vacant Retail Building Lot Coverage: 97% existing 74.7% proposed 75% maximum per B3 district Requested Action: Conditional Use Approval to Permit a 10,880 s.f. Drag Store with Drive-Through and 10,000 s.f. of additional retail space, with one associated Variation. BACKGROUND The subject property is an existing 2.07 acre parcel containing a vacant commercial structure, located at the southeast comer of Kensington Road and Elmhurst Road. The applicant proposes to construct a 20,880 square foot retail structure to contain a 10,880 square foot C.V.S. Pharmacy and 10,000 square feet of additional retail space. The site would be served by 85 parking spaces~ The petitioner is seeking to construct a drive through facility to serve the pharmacy. As illustrated on the attached site plan, the drive-through would be located on'the west side of the building and set back 30 feet from the exterior side property line. The drlve-through facilitYrequires'appmval. 0f a Conditional Use. The: site plan, as proposed, would require a Vari/~tion for a required, landsCape.setback..... .. . ... To conduct its analysis, of the proposed Conditional Use and Vbxiation, staff reviewed the petiti6n~r's plat of survey' and site plan and visited the site. Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Meet~g of Mamh 23, 2000 ZBA-07-2000 Page 2 ANALYSIS Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses: North: B-3 Community Shopping District / Service Station, Randimrst Mall, Vacant Restaurant South: B-3 Community Shopping District/Taxi Company, Vacant, Auto Service Uses East: B-3 Community Shopping District / Vacant Restaurant West: R-1 Single Family Residential B-4 Business Retail & Service / Auto Sales Approval Process The subject site is in the B-3 Community Shopping District. "Drag Stores" are listed as Permitted Uses in the B-3 district. "Drive-through and drive in establishments" are listed as Conditional Uses in the B-3 district. The proposed drag store with drive-through will require a Conditional Use approval by the Village Board, following a public hearing and recommendation by the Zoning Board of Appeals. The site, as proposed, will also require a Variation to Zoning Code requirements for a required landscape setback. Comprehensive Plan Designation The Village's Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property for general commercial and office uses. The proposed drug store is an appropriate use within this designation. The Rand Road Corridor Study does not make specific recommendations regarding this parcel. In general, the plan calls for improvements in the visual appearance of commercial properties in the corridor. The Village is currently preparing design guidelines for its commercial corridors. The proposed site and landscape plans would make significant improvements to the site's perimeter landscaping. The adequacy of those improvements will be discussed later in this report. The subject property is also in the area considered for future development of the Rand/Elmhurst "Ring Road" system to alleviate congestion in the area. The properties directly to the south of the subject property are three 150-foot wide parcels that could accommodate one of the roadways that would make up the ring road system. Development of the "Ring Road" concept may require some minor modifications to the subject property. However, the proposal has been designed in such a manner to allow for a possible extension of the center if the "Ring Road" plan comes to fmkion. Based on the above analysis, the proposed development is consistent with the Rand Road Corridor Plan. Structure and Elevations The proposed structure is a 20,880 s.f. retail building that would be constructed primarily of a brown brick. The elevations include a brick parapet and canopies. The canopies also include some small areas of E.I.F.S. The ZBA and Village Board both have long standing policies of requiring masonry construction for new buildings in the Village (Steak and Shake, Borders, Country Inns and Suites, Menard's, etc.). As the E.I.F.S. material is used only as an accent material in the sign band, the proposed structure meets the intent oftbe policy. Landscape Plan The applicant has submitted a preliminary Landscape Plan for the property. 'The plan includes a minimum 14' landscape buffer adjacont.to all rights-of-way. The buffer inclUdes shrubs and'trees along the west proPerty line, but ' 'shrubs only along the north and: east property line. Trees with a maximum 75? 9pacing must be added to those landscaPe areas. This item 'can be addressed with the.building Permit submission. The 1.0' perimeter buffer on the · south side of the property includes one shade tree, clusters of ornamental trees, and shrubs, Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Meetiag of March 23, 2000 ZBA-07-2000 Page 3 The applicant has provided for interior parking lot landscaping well in excess of the minimum 5% requirement. Materials in those areas are primarily shade trees and sod. Foundation plantings are provided along the north, west, and east sides of the building. The north side planting of the building ineludas shade trees in landscape islands. The west side of the building is screened with a 5' landscape area containing shrubs. The foundation planting for the east side of the building consists of three triangular landscape areas containing shrubs and ornamental trees and shade trees in landscape islands. The Zoning Code requirement is a 10' area around all structures. However the Zoning Code Landscape Requirements allow for an administrative reduction of this requirement when the intentof the requirement is met. In this case, the applicant has provided for perimeter buffers exceeding code requirements in all areas, except for the proposed Variation and interior parking lot landscaping in excess of minimum requirements. The applicant has also provided materials in foundation planting areas in excess of minimum requirements. Based on those facts, the reduction of foundation planting width can be supported. No species are identified on the submitted preliminary landscape plans. Identification of proposed species will be required at the time of building permit submission. A final issue related to the landscape plan is the width of the perimeter landscape buffer at the north end of the site. The current proposal is a 12' wide area with an additional 2' in the form of sod in the 2' parking space overhang. Staff's review comments from the initial proposal required the applicant to add 6' to this area to allow for the maximum possible landscape area. This would require the elimination of two parking spaces. Instead, the applicant has provided a 6' (plus a 2' sod overhang) landscape island interior to the lot. Although the proposed island helps allow for better circulation on site, the ZBA is asked to consider making relocation of the 6' of landscaping to the perimeter a condition of approval. That would help the site meet the intent of the Village's upcoming Corridor Design Guidelines. Setbacks The proposed structure is set back at least 30 feet from all property lines and, therefore, meets all required building setbacks. Parking lots in the B-3 District must be set back a minimum of 10' from any property line where the site is adjaeant to non-residential property. The proposed parking lots meet the 10' setback requirements adjaeant to non- residential property. A parking lot in the B-3 District must be set back 30' where the lot abuts residential property. The site is adjacent to R-1 zoned properties, developed with single-family residences for the south 161 feet of the west prope~3~ line. The proposed drive-through lane encroaches to between 15' and 24' from that property line and the applicant has requested a Variation for that item. Parking and Stacking Section 14.2224 lists a parking requirement for retail centers of less than 30,000 square feet as 4 spaces per 1,000 square fcet of gross floor area. As proposed, the site would consist of a 20,880 square foot retail structure, requiring 84 parking spaces. The proposal includes 85 parking spaces. The Zoning Code does not specify a minimum stacking requirement for pharmacy drive-through lanes, but requires 5 stacking spaces for bank drive-through windows. The proposal includes 6 stacking spaces for each of the two drive-through lan~s. Thus, the site meets its requirements for parking spaces and stacking. The site has only one parking space in excess of the minimum requirement to accommodate uses with greater parking requirements. Thus, if the site is to accommodate restaurant uses, additional off-site parking must be obtained. The one-way flow of the south driveway will encourage, cut-through traffic and appears to complicate truck aecoss to the CVS loading area. Reversing the proposed direction of that access is recommended. The proposal includes addition of a~right-in/right-out Curb cut to the Elmharst Road frontage of the. site~ The curb cut is . necessary to allow for effective circulation, of~fiic flom.Blmhurst Road to the drive-through.' Using.only, e~, curb cuts, vehicle~'from Elmhu~ Road would have to turn onto Kensington Road and Rand Road, complicating Oaffic problems at that intersection, to access the drive-hhrough. Addition of ~he curb cut will require approval by LD.O.T. Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting of March 23, 2000 ZBA-07-2000 Page 4 Note that the proposed development will be subject to all Development Code requirements. These requirements need not be addressed at this time, however, the final engineering plans cannot be approved, nor can a building permit be issued until all Development Code requirements are satisfied. REQUIRED FINDINGS Conditional Use Standards The standards for Conditional Uses are listed in Section. 14.203.F.8 of the Village Zoning Ordinance. The section contains seven specific findings that must be made in order to approve a Conditional Use. These standards relate to: n 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 other properties in the vicinity or impede the orderly development of those properties; cl Adequate provision of utilities and drainage and design of access and egress to minimize congestion on Village streets; and cl Compliance of the Conditional Use with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, and other Village Ordinances. The subject parcel for the proposed Conditional Use contains a vacant commemial structure in poor condition, with insufficient parking for most commercial uses and minimal landscaping. The property is at an important intersection within an established commercial area. The applicant proposes to construct a new commercial structure that includes a drive-through on the parcel. The proposal would bring the property into compliance with all applicable zoning requirements, except for the one Variation item. The proposal will greatly improve the appearance of this comer, in terms of the structure and parking lot and especially in terms of landscaping. The proposed commercial structure and drive-through will be similar in intensity to the surrounding area and in compliance with the provisions of the Rand Road Corridor Plan. Based on the above, the proposal would have little or no negative impact on the adjacent area, utility provision or public streets and would significantly improve the area's appearance. The proposal does add one new curb cut to Elmhurst Road, but that curb out will be limited to right-in/right-out only. Thus, the proposal would have little negative impact on circulation in the area. The proposed Conditional Use will comply with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance requirements, with the exception of the one proposed Variation. The essential character of the area - a sub-regional commercial center - would not be affected by the proposed Conditional Use and the Conditional Use would not have any significant effect on the public welfare. Variation Standards Required findings for all variations are contained in Section 14.203.C.9 of the Village of Mount Prospect Zoning Code. The section contains seven specific findings that must be made in order to approve a variation. These standards 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; cl lack of desire to increase financial gain; and Q protection of the public welfare, other property, and neighborhood character. The applicant has requested a Variation for ~oning Code Section 14.2217~B, which requires a 30~ landscape setback for'the south 161 ' of th6 west property line. The applicant'~ stated reasons for the proposed variation are related to the small area affected by Section 14.2217.B and its affect on the proposed site plan. The proposed buffei' eoi~lains all required landscape materials. Thus'the 6' to 15' addition to the proposed landscape area would add only additional ount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting of March 23, 2000 ZBA-07-2000 Page 5 sod area to the buffer and would require elimination of the proposed drive-through bypass lane. That change would negatively affect the efficiency of on-site circulation, while providing minimal benefit to adjacent residents. The petitioner also cites the unusual shape of the subject parcel to help support a finding of hardship for the proposed Variation. The proposal would not have a negative effect on the adjacent single-family residential area or on the public welfare. In fact, the proposal would replace an existing parking area with a minimal setback and no landscape improvements with a well-landscaped 15' to 24' wide buffer. Thus, the proposal would be likely to have a significant positive effect on the neighborhood. RECO1VI3'IENDATION The proposed Conditional Use meets the required Conditional Use standards in Section 14.203.F.8 of the Zoning Ordinance and the Variation Standards Section 14.203.C.9 of the Zoning Ordinance. Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the ZBA recommend to the Village Board approval of the proposed Conditional Use and Variation to permit the establishment of a pharmacy with drive-through at 1 E. Rand Road, Case No. ZBA-07-2000, with the conditions listed below. The Village Board's decision is final for this case. The conditions of approval are: 1. Development of the site in general conformance with the site plan prepared by the Sear-Brown Group, dated February I0, 2000 and revised March 15, 2000 (Attachment 1). 2. Submission of a final landscape plan in general conformance with the preliminary landscape plan prepared by the Sear-Brown Group, dated February 23, 2000 and revised March 15, 2000, revised to meet all requirements of Article 23 of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. Development of the building in general conformance with elevations prepared by Retail Architecture dated February 21, 2000 and revised March 15, 2000. 4. Submittal and approval of final engineering plans meeting all Development Code requirements. 5. Submittal of final building plans meeting all applicable Building Code and Fire Code requirements. 6. Approval of appropriate permits by I.D.O.T. and M.W.R.D. 7. Reverse the proposed direction of the one-way flow of the south driveway to discourage cut-through traffic. I concur: William J C~ney, ~CP,~' 'ecl or 0~ Com~nity Development H:\GENSFLNG'~BA~ZBA 2000~t~ffMenms~ZBA4Y/-2000 (CVS).doc ~ Kensington Road m Judith Ann Drive ) Highland Street · Location Map case ~o. ZBA 07~2000 cvs Condtional Use Village of Mount Prospect Depar:.uent of Comranllity Development - Planning Division March 10, ~__~=.,,...~=.. : k, ..,,;~ ~.~. -~'-~--,~. ,'?..~'"'- ~' ~ Z >"~.~"-.~'-,~' ~' ~[ ELMHURST ROAD (S.R. 83) ,,~:~ ..? 128' ~' *'" ~ I0 M]N-U-TES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CASE NO. ZBA-07-2000 Hearing Date: March 23, 2000 PETITIONER: John Wojtila, P.E. Zeremba Group, LLC 14600 Detroit Ave. Lakewood, OH 44107 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1 E. Rand Rd. PUBLICATION DATE: March 8, 2000 DAILY HERALD REQUEST: Conditional Use approval to permit construction of a 10,880 s.f. Drug Store with drive-through and associated Variation ME1V[BERS PRESENT: Merrill Cotten Leo Floros Richard Rogers Keith Youngquist Arlene Juracek, Chairperson MEMBERS ABSENT: Elizabeth Luxem STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Blue, AICP, Deputy Director of Community Developmem INTERESTED PARTIES: John Wojtila, P.E. Camille Schofidd Susan Weems Steve Grabowski Vic Giovaunini Bob Boles Chairperson Arlene Juracek called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. Minutes of the February 24, 2000 meeting were approved with corrections. At 8:25, a~er hearing one case under Old Business and one case under New Business, Ms. Juracek introduced Case ZBA-07-2000, for CVS Pharmacies at 1 E. Rand Rd. Michael Blue, Deputy Director of Community Development introduced the ease, indicating that notice had been provided in the newspaper, mailed noticeS, and through signage on the property. He indicated this request was for Conditional Use approval to permit a drug store with drive-through, with one associated Variation for the site. The subject property is about two acres in size, is located at the southeast corner of Kensington Road and Ehnhurst Road, and contains a vacant cemmereial structure (the former Heilig Meyers store). The applicant proposes to construct a 20,880 square foot retail structure to contain a 10,880 square foot C.V.S. Pharmacy and 10,000 square feet of additional retail space. The site would include 85 parking spaces. The drive-through facility on the west side of the building, which is set back 30 feet from the exterior side properW line, Creates the need for a conditional use. Mr. Blue described how the subject site is inthe B-3 Community Shopping District. "Drug stores" are listed as permitted uses in the B-3 district. "Drive-through'and drive in establishments" are listed as Conditional Usesin th~ B-3 district. The proposeddrug store with drive-through, will require a Conditional Use apprOval by the Village Board. Also, a Variation is requested for a required landsoape setback' on the west side of the property. Zoning Board of Appeals ZBA-07-2000 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 2 Mr. Blue noted that the Village's Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property for general commercial and office uses, and that the proposed drug store is an appropriate use within this designation. Also, that the Rand Road Corridor Study does not make specific recommendations regarding this parcel, but calls for improvements in the visual appearance of the corridor. Mr. Blue described how the Village is currently preparing design guidelines for its commercial corridors (including Rand and Route 83). The proposed development site is an excellent opportunity to apply the enhanced landscaping that is being contemplated. As with the first case heard this evening, the subject site is adjacent to a portion of the possible "Ring Road" system being considered by IDOT to relieve congestion at the Rand/Elmhurst/Kensington intersection. While the "Ring Road" could require minor modifications to the subject property, the site plan would be compatible with eventual development of the "Ring Road". Mr. Blue continued by describing the structurc as a 20,880 s.f. retail building that would be constructed primarily of a brown brick and include a brick parapet and canopies. EIFS would be used as an accent in the sign bands, and the building would be consistent with the policy of requiring masonry construction for new commercial buildings in the Village. The preliminary landscape plan for the property was described as an important element of the proposal because of the site's location on two prime commercial corridors. Main characteristics of the site are that it includes a minimum of 14 feet of landscape area adjacent to all rights-of-way, a 10 foot perimeter on the south property line that includes shrubs and trees, and interior parking lot landscaping in excess of the five percent requirement. Two deficiencies with the landscape plan are that it does not include sufficient landscape materials along the north and east property line. Also, the foundation landscaping is not provided around the entire building. The lack of materials along the north and east can be addressed at time of building permit application. As for the foundation landscaping, enough landscaping material is provided along the building and in the parking lot that the intent of that requirement is met and can be approved administratively. A final landscape issue is possibly increasing the depth of the landscape area at the north end of the site. This comment was raised by staff during their initial review, and was aimed at creating the largest possible landscape area along Kensington for enhancement through the corridor design guidelines currently being developed. In redesigning the site, the applicant did not increase this area, but enlarged an interior landscape island in the north part of the lot. Mr. Blue noted that the comment was in the staff report for the ZBA's consideration, but was not intended as a condition of approval. Mr. Blue described the site as meeting required building setbacks. In addition, the parking lot meets all setback requirements - except one. Parking lots in the B-3 District must be set back 30' where the lot abuts residential property. The site is adjacent to residentially zoned and developed properties for the south 161 feet of the west property line. The proposed drive-through lane encroaches to between 15' and 24'.from that property line and the applicant has requested a Variation for that item. The parking and stacking requirements from the zoning ordinance were described by Mr. Blue. He noted that four spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area are required, and that the site would need 84 parking spaces for the 20,880 s.f. of building. Mr. Blue added that, while the zoning ordinance does not specify a minimum stacking requirement for pharmacy drive-through lanes, 5 stacking spaces are required for bank drive-through windows. The proposal, includes six stacking spaces for each of the two drive-through lanes. Thus, the site meets'its requirements for parking spaces and stacking. Regarding the on-site circulation, it was noted that traffic flow in the One-way drive along the south side of the building Should remain west tO east. The staff report recommends changing the direction. However, additional information provided by the applicant and further review by staff indicates that the flow is appropriate as proposed and staff recommendation number seven (reversing the flow) should be deleted from the lis* of approval conditions. Zoning Board of Appeals ZBA-07-2000 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 3 Regarding the Zoning Ordinance standards for Conditional Uses, which generally consider the impact on adjacent properties, Mr. Blue noted that the new structure and landscaping would be an improvement for the site and surrounding area, that it was similar in intensity to the area, was in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, and would have little or no impact on adjacent properties. As for the requested variation, Mr. Blue indicated that the petitioner noted the odd shape of the site as a part of the hardship request. He also noted that requiring the full 30' set back would not improve the buffer along adjacent residential uses, as the landscape area provided already includes adequate landscape materials. In addition, providing the full setback would negatively affect the on-site cimulation. Based on that analysis, Mr. Blue presented the staff recommendation that the ZBA recommend to the Village Board approval of the proposed Conditional Use and Variation to permit the establishment ora pharmacy with drive-through at 1 E. Rand Road, Case No. ZBA-07-2000, with the conditions listed in the staff report, except for number 7, which would require reversing the direction of the south driveway. Richard Rogers asked if requests for signs at this location would be heard by the Sign Review Board. He said there were quite a few signs shown on the drawings that were not legal. Mr. Blue answered affirmatively. Mr. Youngquist asked if there had been any preliminary engineering concerning detention and how it would be handled. Mr. Blue said not yet, but those plans would need to be reviewed and approved. Mr. Youngquist asked if the driveway on Elmhurst Road in/out had received preliminary approval from IDOT. Mr. Blue said the Village had not contacted IDOT, and that the petitioner would need to answer that question. Ms. Juracek then asked if the petitioner wanted to speak. John Wojtila, Civil Engineer with the Zaremba Group in Lakewood, Ohio, developers of this and other CVS properties; Mr. Steve Grabowski, Traffic Engineer with Metro and Camille Shofidd, Sign Coordinator with Collins Signs, were sworn in. Mr. Wojtila pointed out there is currently very little landscaping on the site and the current building is 39% larger than the proposed building. He showed the Board new drawings of the drug store with a drive-through facility and retail space. He said the plan had been tweaked from the original submission and asked that the 6' strip be allowed in the proposed area and not up towards Kensington, as they would lose two parking spaces.. He showed several drawings and said the elevation was changed slightly from the original submission of three retail stores with a CVS Pharmacy. He explained CVS was proud to come m our area and he asked the Board's support in their endeavor. Regarding the six-foot deep landscape island in the parking lot, Mr. Blue indicated that would be acceptable ff the area included landscaping and if the petitioner was willing to work with the Village to provide additional landscaping at the north end oftbe site. Mr. Wojtila said they would be willing to do that. Mr. Flores asked about the history 9f CVS stores. Mr. Wojtila said the finn's headquarters are in Rhode Island and most of the stores are east of the Mississippi, with most locations in New England, Ohio. and Michigan and the southeast; CVS has over 5,000 stores in thc eastern side of the United States. When they purchased Revco Drugs, they started expanding through the eastern part of the United States. This is their first foray into the Chicago market. Ms. Juracek asked about detention at the site. Mr. Wojtila said, although final engineering is not complete, it is their intention to do underground detention. Ms. Juracek this site and its close proximity to Border's would be a positive image for the area. She asked what type of tenants CVS was looking for; Mr. Wojtila said retail stores that would be cohesive with CVS Pharmacies. Mr. Blue pointed out a restaurant or other high-density business couldn't be accommodated because of parking limitations. Ms. Juracek asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak. Bob Boles came forward and explained he was the next door'neighbor to the pr0peC~y. He said he had spOken with his other neighbor, the owners of the 303 Cab Co. and neither they nor he have any objections to.this proposal. oning Board of Appeals ZBA-07-2000 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 4 At 9:00, Ms. Juracek closed the public hearing to the audience and asked Board members for discussion. Mr. Floros asked the size of the present building on the site. Mr. Wojtila said it was 34,369 s.f. and the new building would be about 20,000 s.f. Ms. Juracek pointed out that would be less building and more landscaping at the site than at present. Mr. Youngquist said there are three existing eurbeuts and the one additional curbent would be key to the entire layout and has IDOT approved. Mr. Blue said staffhad not been in touch with IDOT but agreed the additional eurbcnt was important. Mr. Rogers said the proposed building is far enough away from residences across the street, Rte. 83, to be no detriment to the neighbors and still be an improvement to the area. Richard Rogers made a motion to recommend approval ~o the Village Board for a Conditional Use and asseoiated Variation to permit construction of a 10,800 s.f. drug store with drive-through and 10,000 s.f. of retail space with the six conditions listed in Staff's memo to the Board, with the elimination of Condition #7. Leo Floros seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Cotten, Floros, Youngquist, Rogers, and Juracok NAYS: None Motion was approved 5-0. At 9:20 p.m., after one more case was heard under New Business, Leo Floros made motion to adjourn, seconded by Keith Youngquist. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Barbara Swiatek. Planning Secretary Michael Blue Deputy Director of Community Development / / / / VIA FACSI~fILE Zaremba April 7, 2000 Mr. JeffP~s ~GE OF MT. PROSPECT Comm~W Development 100 Sou~ Em~son S~ Mo~t Re: P~pos~ Conditional Use and Variafio~ for CVS at IE. Rnnd Road Breed oa o~ approv~ for ~e ~ferenced i~m by ~e Village Bo~d on April 4, 2000, ~ hereby re~ez~ly r~ue~ ~ second roa~g be w~ved by ~e Village Bo~ ~d fm~ a~i~ t~en at ~e April 18, 2000 meeting. If~ere ~ ~y ques6ons, ple~e con~ ~e ~dersi~ed. Tha~ you Ibr yo~ Sincerely, ZAREMBA GROUP, LLC ' cc: Gary Biales VWL 4~5~00 4/6/00 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE AND VARIATIONS FOR PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 1 EAST RAND ROAD WHEREAS, John Wojtila and the Zaremba Group L.L.C. (hereinafter referred to as "Petitioner") have filed a petition for a Cohditional Use and variations with respect to property located at 1 East Rand Road, (hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property") and legally described as follows: The North 361.6 feet of that prt of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 34, Township 42 North, Range 11 East of the Third Principal Meridian, in Cook County Illinois; and WHEREAS, the Petitioner seeks a Conditional Use permit to construct a 10,880 square feet pharmacy with a drive-through facility, as provided in Section 14.203.F.8 of the Village Code; and WHEREAS, the Petitioner seeks a variation from the landscape setback requirement of thirty feet (30'), as provided in Section 14.203.C.9 of the Village Code, to allow a landscape setback of fifteen feet (15'); and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held on the request for a Conditional Use and variations being the subject of ZBA Case No. 07-2000 before the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 23~ day of March, 2000, pursuant to proper legal notice having been pUblished in the Mount Prospect Daily Herald on the 8th day of March, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals has submitted its findings and recommendations to the President and Board of Trustees in support of the request being the subject of ZBA 07-2000; and WHEREAS, the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect have given consideration to the request herein and have determined that the same meets the standards of the Village and that the granting of the proposed Conditional Use and variations would be in the best interest .of the Village, Page 2/3 1 E. Rand Road NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: SECTION ONE: The recitals set forth hereinabove are incorporated as findings of fact by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect. SECTION TWO: The President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect do hereby grant a Conditional Use permit to allow the construction of a 10,880 square feet pharmacy with drive-through facility, as provided in Section 14.203.F.8 of the Village Code. SECTION THREE: The President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect do hereby grant a variation, as provided in Section 14.203.C.9 of the Village Code, to reduce the thirty foot (30') landscape setback requirement, as shown on the Site Plan., a copy of which is attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof as Exhibit "A." SECTION FOUR: Prior to the issuance of a building permit relative to the Conditional Use and variations, the following conditions and/or written documentation shall be fulfilled: 1. Development of the site in conformance with the site plan prepared by the Sear-Brown Group, dated February 10, 2000 and revised March 15, 2000 (Attachment 1). 2. Submission of a final landscape plan in conformance with the preliminary landscape plan prepared by the Sear-Brown Group, dated February 23, 2000 and revised March 15, 2000, revised to meet all req uirements of Article 23 of the Zoning Ordinances. 3. Development of the building in general conformance with elevations prepared by Retail Architecture dated February 21, 2000 and revised March 15, 2000. 4. Submittal and approval of final engineering plans meeting all Development Code requirements. 5. Submittal of final building plans meeting all applicable Building Code and Fire Code requirements. 6. Approval of appropriate permits by I.D.O.T. and M.W.R.D. 7. Reverse the proposed direction of the one-way flow of the south ddveway to discourage cut-through traffic, subject property and adjacent properties Page 3/3 1 E. Rand Road 8. The petitioner shall provide the Village of Mount Prospect with a landscaping easement over the north twelve feet (12') of the Subject Property to allow the Village to install landscaping and entranceway signage in keeping with the overall Corridor Improvement Program. SECTION FIVE: The Village Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to record a certified copy of this Ordinance with the Recorder of Deeds of Cook County. SECTION SIX: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of ,2000. Gerald L. Farley President ATTEST: Yelma W. Lowe Village Clerk VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: MICHAEL JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER DATE: MARCH 29, 2000 HEARING DATE: APRIL 4, 2000 SUBJECT: ZBA-04-2000- 305 E. KENSINGTON ROAD CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL TO PERMIT A 2,914 SQUARE FOOT FAST FOOD RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE-THROUGH IN A B-3 COMMERCIAL SHOPPING DISTRICT JEFF MARTINEZ (PROPERTY OWNER AND APPLICANT) The Zoning Board of Appeals transmits their recommendation to approve a Conditional Use permit to allow the establishment of a fast food restaurant with a drive-through. The subject property is about 0.6 acres in size and will include a 2,914 square foot fast food restaurant with drive-through and 32 parking spaces. The site is located directly east of the existing Loft Restaurant, and is part of a larger (1.5 acre) property being developed by the petitioner. The 0.83 acres south of the subject property will be developed as an overflow parking area for the Loft and the proposed restaurant. That portion meets all zoning requirements but will require a plat of subdivision. Staff's review and the ZBA's discussion included consideration of the potential "Ring Road" between Rand and Kensington Koads that would run immediately east of the site. While neither that potential "Ring Koad" alignment nor the timing of the construction are certain, the road being located there is a possibility and was taken into consideration with the proposed site plan. The ZBA discussed the building materials for the restaurant, which is being constructed of concrete block, dyed red and gray (the building will be accented with green and white awnings and include a parapet wall to screen rooftop mechanical equipment). There was some consideration by the ZBA that a brick structure would be more appropriate. A motion to require brick construction failed by a vote of 3-2. At the conclusion of their consideration, the Zoning Board of Appeals voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the proposed Conditional Use request to permit a fast food restaurant with drive through, ZBA 04-2000, at 305 E. Kensington Road with the following conditions: 1. Development of the site in general conformancc with the site plan prepared by Kostak and Associates dated February 29, 2000 (Attachment I). 2. Submission of a final landscape plan in general conformance with the preliminary site plan prepared by Kostak and Associates, dated February 29, 2000: a. revised to meet all requirements of Article 23 of the Zoning Ordinancc b. revised to provide shade trees at a 50' spacing and a continuous landscape buffer a minimum of 3' in height along the east property line. 3. Development of the building in general conformance with elevations prepared by Kostak and Associates dated March 2, 2000. 4. Submittal and approval of final engineering plans meeting all Development Code requirements. 5. Submittal of final building plans meeting all applicable Building Code and Fire Code requirements. 6. Approval ofapprupriate permits by I.D.O.T. and M.W.R.D. .. BA 04-2000 Conditional Use for a Restaurant with Drive though March 29, 2000 Page 2 7. Approval of a plat by the Plan Commission and recordation of that Plat of Subdivision for the subject property including the following items: a. cross-access/egress easements for all driveways crossing property lines b. a perpetual cross-parking agreement to provide a minimum of three parking spaces for use by the restaurant on Lot 2 in Lot 1 parking lots c. dedication of right of way along Kensington Road d. an easement for the sanitary service from the east lot crossing the west lot /JP VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ARLENE JURACEK, CHAIRPERSON FROM: JEFF PER~i~S, PLAN~~ DATE: MARCH 17, 2000 HEARING DATE: MARCH 23, 2000 ~ SUBJECT: ZBA-04-2000 -305 KENSINGTON ROAD CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL TO PER_MiT A 2,914 SQUARE FOOT FAST FOOD RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE-THROUGH BACKGROUND INFORMATION Petitioner: Jeff P. Martinez Kensington Land Group Inc. 303 Kensington Road Mount Prospect, IL 60056 Status of Petitioner: Owner of the Property Parcel Number: 03-34-200-011 Lot Size: 26,755 square feet Existing Zoning: B3 Community Commercial Existing Land Use: Vacant Lot Coverage: 0% existing 32% proposed 75% maximum per B3 district Requested Action: Conditional Use approval to permit a 2,914 square foot fast food restaurant with drive-through. BACKGROUND The subject property is an existing 1.5 acre vacant parcel located directly east of the existing Loft Restaurant (305 E. Kensington Road). The applicant proposes to subdivide the parcel into two separate parcels. The 0.83 acre rear parcel would be consolidated with the parcel containing the Loft and developed with additional parking for the restaurant and a drainage retention area. That parking lot will meet all zoning requirements and, therefore, does not require approval by the ZBA or Village Board. The front parcel (0.61 acres) would contain the proposed fast food restaurant. A subdivision plat to split the parcel, consolidate the rear portion with the Loft .property, and dedicate right-of-way for Kensington Road has not yet been received. Approval of a plat by the Plan Commission and recording of that Plat will be a condition of any approval for the subject property. The petitioner is seeking to construct a 2,914' square fast food restaurant with a drive-through, 32 parking spaces, and · associated laiidscape improvements on the parcel. As illUStrated on the attached site plaa, the drive'through would.be located on the east Side of thc building and set back 10 feet from tl~e interior side property line. The site plan, as proposed, will n°t require Variations. Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting of M~ch 23, 2000 ZBA-04-2000 Page 3 Landscape Plan The applicant has submitted a preliminary Landscape Plan for the property. The plan includes a large sodded retention area at the south end of lot 2, a perimeter landscape area a minimum of 10' wide around all parking lots and the perimeter of the site· Approximately 30% of the proposed site is devoted to green space. Foundation plantings are not provided around the proposed structure, except at the front of the building· Article 23~ requires a 10' foundation planting around the structure. Although this requirement may be reduced administratively, the intent of the code must be met. To do so in this. case, the applicant must enhance the proposed foundation landscape areas. Addition of planter boxes in the sidewalk area to the west of the building, adding a foundation planting area near the drive-through, adding foundation plantings at the south end of the building, and adding landscape materials such as shrubs and annual beds to the north of the building can be added to the proposal to meet the intent of this requirement. The size of the proposed perimeter and parking landscape areas meet code requirements. However, sufficient landscape materials to meet code requirements are not provided in those areas. Additional landscape materials are required in the perimeter buffers around the site. Per Zoning Code Section t4.2306.D, shrub and tree plantings a minimum of 3' in height must be provided across 50% of the entire site perimeter· Zoning Code Section 14.2308.B.1 also requires tree plantings at a maximum spacing of 75' around the entire site perimeter. The applicant recently illegally cleared the site of all existing trees. According to Zoning Code 14.2309.A, tree removal permits are required for removal of trees from vacant properties. That section also specifies that an approved site plan for a property serves as a tree removal permit for that property. Thus, this approval, and submittal of a landscape plan meeting the requirements of Article 23 would bring the site into compliance with tree preservation requirements. However, the large number of trees illegally cleared from the site warrants some remediation with this development. The east perimeter of the site is separated from residential properties by only 66' of vacant property. Therefore, the applicant should provide shade trees at a 50' spacing and a continuous landscape buffer a minimum of 3' in height along this property line to provide additional landscape materials and to better buffer the residential area. Setbacks The proposed building is set back 55' from the Kensington Road right-of way and at least 24 feet from all other property lines. Therefore, the building meets all required setbacks. Parking lots in the B-3 District must be set back a minimum of 10' from any property line where the site abuts non-residential property. The proposed lots meet the 10' setback requirements adjacent to non-residential property. Tbe site is not adjacent to any residential properties. Parking and Stacking Section 14.2224 lists a parking requirement for Fast-food Restaurants of 12 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area, plus eight stacking spaces per drive-through window. As proposed; the site would consist of a 2,914 square foot fast-food restaurant, with a drive-through lane, requiring 35 parking spaces and eight stacking spaces. The proposal includes 32 parking spaces and eight stacking spaces. Thus, the site does not meet its requirement for parking spaces on-site. The existing and proposed parking lots on the parcel to the south and serving the Loft will have an excess of spaces for the Loft itself. The applicant proposes to provide the remainder of required parking for the site by obtaining a cross parking agreement to use in the parking lot to the south of the site. The applicant also proposed to provide cross- access between the.properties with the subdivision plat. Following recordation of a subdivision plat that includes cross-parking and cross-access agreements, the site will meet its parking requirement without a Variation. Review by Other Departments The Engineering Div sion has reviewed the proposals and no~/ed the following DeveloPment Code requirements to be met for the site. These comments need not be resolve to'approve the Conditional Use, but must be addressed with the building permit submission for the development. ount ProsI~'ct Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting of M;u'ch 23.2(XX) ZBA-04-2000 Page 5 provision or public streets in the area. The proposed Conditional Use will comply with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance requirements. Thc essential character of the area - a sub-regional commercial center - would not be affected by the proposed Conditional Use and the Conditional Use would not have any significant effect on the public welfare. RECOMMENDATION The proposed Conditional Use will meet the Conditional Use standards in Section 14.203.F.8 of the Zoning Ordinance, when the conditions of approval, listed below, have been met. Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the ZBA recommend approval of the proposed Conditional Use to permit the establishment ora fast food restaurant with drive-through at 305 Kensington Road, Case No. ZBA-04-2000. The Village Board's decision is final for this case. The conditions of approval are: 1. Development of the site in general conformance with the site plan prepared by Kostak and Associates dated February 29, 2000 (Attachment 1). 2. Submission of a final landscape plan in general conformance with the preliminary site plan prepared by Kostak and Associates, dated February 29, 2000: a. revised to meet all requirements of Article 23 of the Zoning Ordinance b. revised to provide shade trees at a 50' spacing and a continuous landscape buffer a minimum of 3' in height along the east property line. 3. Development oft. he building in general conformance with elevations prepared by Kostak and Associates dated March 2, 2000. 4. Submittal and approval of final engineering plans meeting all Development Code requirements. 5. Submittal of final building plans meeting all applicable Building Code and Fire Code requirements. 6. Approval of appropriate permits by I.D.O.T. and M.W.R.D. 7. Approval of a plat by the Plan Commission and recordation of that Plat of Subdivision for the. subject property including the following items: a. cross-access/egress easements for all driveways crossing property lines b. a perpetual cross-parking agreement to provide a minimum of three parking spaces for use by the restaurant on Lot 2 in Lot 1 parking lots c. dedication of right of way along Kensington Road d. an easement for the sanitary service from the east lot crossing the west lot I concur: WilliamJ C ney, of Communk.~DevelopmentW /JP H:\GEN~LNG'~BA~7BA 2000~taff Memos~BA-04-2000 (Kensington Fa~ Fo3d).doc r2 -~, 0 KOSTAK ASSOCIATES, PROPOSED NEW 3+°° RESTAURANT ~ K~S~GTON RO~ ~. PROSPECT, .[ 6~56 . ~, PLANTING SCHEDULE SITE PLAN DATA MARK SPECIES SIZE IMPERVlOUSAREA 15% ~ 57,366 (67%) 18,727 {70%) PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN PROPOSED RESTAURANT MINUTES OF THE REGUI~AR MEETING OF TIlE MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CASE NO, ZBA-04-2000 Hearing Date: March 23, 2000 PETITIONER: Jeff Martinez SUBJECT PROPERTY: 305 Kensington Rd PUBLICATION DATE: February 9, 2000 DAILY HERALD REQUEST: Conditional Use for the establishment of a fast food restaurant with a drive- through MEMBERS PRESENT: Merrill Cotton Leo Floros Richard Rogers Keith Youngquist Arlene Juracek, Chairperson MEMBERS ABSENT: Elizabeth Luxem STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Blue, AICP, Deputy Director of Community Development INTERESTED PARTIES: Jeff Martinez Warren Kostak Chairperson Arlene Juracek called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. Minutes of the February 24, 2000 meeting were approved with corrections. Ms. Juracek introduced Case ZBA-04-2000, which had been postponed from the meeting of February 24, 2000. Michael Blue, Deputy Director of Community Development introduced the case, indicating that notice had been provided in the newspaper, mailed notices, and through signage on the property. He indicated this was a Conditional Use request for a restaurant with a drive-through and that the subject property is about 0.6 acres in size and will include an approximately 2,900 square foot fast food restaurant with drive-through and 32 parking spaces. The site is located directly east of the existing Loft Restaurant, and is part of a larger (1.5 acre) property being developed by the petitioner. The 0.83 acres south of the subject property will be developed as an overflow parking area for the Loft and the proposed restaurant. That portion meets all zoning requirements but will require a plat of anbdivision. Mr. Blue identified the property as being located in the B-3 Commercial Shopping district, which requires that the restaurant is a conditional use due to the drive through. He also indicated that no variations are required by the petitioner. The property was described as being designated for general commercial/office use in the Comprehensive Plan, and it was noted that the proposed restaurant is in keeping with that designation. The Rand Road Plan, an element of the comprehensive plan, identified the possibility of a '"'Ring Road"" system to reduce traffic at the intersection of 83fRand/Kensington. It was noted that one of the "Ring Road" options ran along the east edge of this site, and that while there are no near term plans for the "Ring Road" to be built, the proposed site plan took that possibility into account. The structure and elevation were described as being constructed of concrete block, dyed red and gray. The building is aecent*xl with green and white awnings, and includes a parapet wall to screen rooftop, mechanical equipment. Therefore, the building generally reflects the POlicy established by the Village Board and .ZBA of requiring brick construction for conditional uses, Zoning Board of Appeals ZBA-04-2000 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 2 Mr. Blue indicated that the preliminary landscape plan included a minimum of 10 feet of landscaping around all parking lots and the perimeter of the site, and that about 30% of the site was devoted to green space. He also noted that additional landscape material would be required (per code) in the perimeter landscape areas and for foundation landscaping, and that these would be resolved in the building permit process. Additional landscape materials were also recommended for the east side of the building (which is closest to the residential uses). Regarding parking and stacking, the Zoning Ordinance requires 12 spaces per 1,000 square feet (35 for this case) and eight stacking spaces. The proposal includes the eight stacking spaces and 32 parking spaces. Additional parking will be available in the shared lot to the south, and will be secured with an access easement between the two properties. Therefore, the site meets its parking and stacking requirements. As for findings regarding the Conditional Use, Mr. Blue indicated that the proposal is similar in intensity to the surrounding area, complies with the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance requirements, and would have little or no impact on the surrounding area. Therefore, Staff recommends that the ZBA recommend approval of the proposed Conditional Use to permit the establishment cfa fast food restaurant with drive-through at 305 Kensington Road, Case No. ZBA-04-2000 with the conditions listed in the staff report. He noted that the Village Board's decision is final for this case. Richard Rogers asked if this was the property where all the trees had been recently removed. Mr. Blue said it was and indicated, that to remedy the loss of so many trees, additional landscaping would be required along the east side of the site. Mr. Floros asked if the petitioner was also the owner of the Loft Restaurant. Mr. Blue answered affirmatively. Merrill Cotten asked with whom the petitioner had a cross-access parking agreement? Mr. Blue said the easement was with the Loft Restaurant. Mr. Youngquist asked about detention for the property and the Loft property. Mr. Jeff Martinez, the owner of both properties, came forward to say the proposed detention would have the capacity to serve both locations. Warren Kostak, 55 E. Euclid, was sworn in and stated he was the architect for the project and would address any concerns for the Board. Ms. Juracek asked if the plans complied with MWRD and IDOT regulations. Mr. Kostak said they did. Mr. Rogers said he did not approve of the use of stained concrete block and asked if the petitioner would consider using brick instead. Mr. Kostak said they had chosen the concrete block because it was to be a casual fast-food restaurant and block would be an effective way to project that image to the clientele. Ms. Juracek asked if there were any questions from the audience. Being none, the Public Hearing was closed at 7:52 and petition brought back to the Board. Ms. Juracek asked the Board if they wanted to make the use of brick another condition for approval of the request. Some members said if Code did not require brick, the Board should not, and some members said the brick would improve the appearance of the site, which had already been made less attractive by cutting down the trees. After discussion by the Board, Richard Rogers made a motion to recommend an additional condition that brick be used instead of stained concrete block in the construction of the restaurant. Keith Youngquist seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Youngqui'st, Rogers NAYS: Cotten, FIoros; Juraeek Motion failed 3-2. oning Board of Appeals ZBA-04-2000 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 3 Richard Rogers made a motion to recommend to the Village Board approval for a Conditional Use for the establishment of a fast food restaurant with a drive-through with the seven conditions identified in Staffs memo to the Board. Leo Floros seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Cotten, Floros, Youngquist, Rogers, and Juracck NAYS: None Motion was approved 5-0. At 9:20 p.m., aider three cases were heard under New Business, Leo Floros made motion to adjourn, seconded by Keith Youngquist. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. ~3a~bara Swiatek, Planning Secretary Deputy Director of Community Development VWL 4/6/00 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE FOR PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 307 EAST KENSINGTON ROAD WHEREAS, Jeff Martinez (hereinafter referred to as "Petitioner") has filed a petition for a Conditional Use with respect to property located at 307 East Kensington Road, (hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property") and legally described as follows: The East 140 feet of the North 500 feet of that part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 34, Township 42 North, Range 11 East of the Third Principal Meridian, in Cook County Illinois; and WHEREAS, the Petitioner seeks a Conditional Use permit to construct a fast food restaurant with a drive-through facility; and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held on the request for a Conditional Use being the subject of ZBA Case No. 04-2000 before the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 23'~ day of March, 2000, pursuant to proper legal notice having been published in the Mount Prospect Daily Herald on the 9th day of February, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals has submitted its findings and recommendations to the President and Board of Trustees in support of the request being the subject of ZBA 04-2000; and WHEREAS, the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect have given consideration to the request herein and have determined that the same meets the standards of the Village and that the granting of the proposed Conditional Use permit would be in the best interest of the Village. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: SECTION ONE: The recitals set forth hereinabove are incorporated as findings of fact by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect. SECTION TWO: The President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect do hereby grant a Conditional Use, as provided in Section 14.203.F.8 of the Village Code, to allow the construction of a fast food restaurant with a drive-through 2/3 Jules Hot Dogs facility, as shown on the Site Plan, a copy of which is attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof as Exhibit "A." SECTION THREE: Prior to the issuance of a building permit relative to the Conditional Use and variations, the following conditions and/or written documentation shall be fulfilled: 1. Development of the site in general conformance with the site plan prepared by Kostak and Associates dated February 29, 2000 (Attachment 1 ). 2. Submission of a final landscape plan in general conformance with the preliminary site plan prepared by Kostak and Associates, dated February 29, 2000: a. Revised to meet all requirements of Article 23 of the Zoning Ordinance b. Revised to provide shade trees at a 50' spacing and a continuous landscape buffer a minimum of 3' in height along the east property line. 3. Development of the building in general conformance with elevations prepared by Kostak and Associates dated March 2, 2000, however, the building shall be constructed of masonry brick material in tieu of the proposed split face block. Final colors shall be approved by the Village prior to issuance of a building permit. 4. Submittal and approval of final engineering plans meeting all Development Code requirements. 5. Submittal of final building plans meeting all applicable Building Code and Fire Code requirements. 6. Approval of appropriate permits by I.D.O.T. and M.W.R.D. 7. Approval of a plat by the Plan Commission and recordation of that Plat of Subdivision for the subject property including the following items: a. cress-access/egress easements for all driveways crossing property lines b. a perpetual cross-parking agreement to provide a minimum of three parking spaces for use by the restaurant on Lot 2 in Lot 1 parking lots c. dedication of right of way along Kensington Road d. an easement for the sanitary service from the east lot crossing the west lot 8. The petitioner shall locate the order/menu board in such a manner to ensure that noise from the speaker does not emanate onto the surrounding residential properties. Page 3/3 Jules Hot Dogs SECTION FOUR: The Village Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to record a certified copy of this Ordinance with the Recorder of Deeds of Cook County. SECTION FIVE: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of ,2000. Gerald L. Farley President ATTEST: Velma W. Lowe Village Clerk VWL 415100 ORDINANOE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE XX OF CHAPTER 18 ENTITLED 'TRAFFIC CODE' OF THE VILLAGE CODE OF MOUNT PROSPECT BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: SECTION ONE: That Section 18.2006 of "Schedule VI - No Parking Any Time" of Chapter 18 of the Village Code of Mount Prospect, as amended, is hereby further amended by adding thereto in proper alphabetical sequence "Louis - East - Btw. 425 ft. and 433 ft. north of the center line of East Thayer Street" so that hereafter said Section 16.2006 of the Village Code of Mount Prospect shall include the following: "Name of Street Side of Street Description Louis East Btw. 425 ft. and 433 ft. North of the center line of Thayer Street." SECTION TWO: That Section 18.2006 of "Schedule VI - No Parking Any Time" of Chapter 18 of the Village Code of Mount Prospect, as amended, is I'iereby further amended by adding thereto in proper alphabetical sequence "Prospect Avenue - North - Btw. Kenilworth Avenue and Lancaster Street" so that hereafter said Section 18.2006 of the Village Code of Mount Prospect shall include the following: "Name of Street Side of Street Description Prospect Avenue North Btw. Kenilworth Avenue · - and Lancaster Street." SECTION THREE: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of 2000. Gerald L. Farley, Village President ATTEST: Velma W. Lowe, Village Clerk w~l 4~6~00 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A GRANT OF LICENSE WITH THE MOUNT PROSPECT LIONS CLUB TO CONDUCT A FARMERS MARKET WHEREAS, the Village of Mount Prospect supports the annual Farmers Market held in the commuter parking lots; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect have determined that the best interests of the Village would be served by entedng into a Grant of License between the Village and the Mount Prospect Lions Club in order to conduct the annual Farmers Market. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: SECTION ONE: That the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect do hereby authorize the execution of a Grant of License to the Mount Prospect Lions Club to conduct the Farmers Market on Union Pacific Railroad property, which property is leased by the Village and under the control of said Village, a copy of said Grant of License is attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof as Exhibit "A". SECTION TWO: That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of ,2000. Gerald L Farley Mayor ATTEST: Velma W. Lowe Village Clerk F GRANT OF LICENSE The Village of Mount Prospect hereby grants a license to the MOUNT PROSPECT LIONS CLUB for the purpose of operating a Farmers Market on the parking lots located at the Union Pacific Railroad property located both east and west of Main Street/Etmhurst Road, which property is currently leased by the Village of Mount Prospect from the Union Pacific Railroad Company. This License is subject to the following conditions: 1. The term of the License shall be from June 11,2000 through October 31,2000. 2. Each vendor operating at the Farmer's Market shall possess a Certificate of Public Liability Insurance in an amount not less than $100,000 per occurrence and shall execute a Hold Harmless Agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof as Exhibit "A". 3. This License shall be revocable at any time by the corporate authorities of the Village of Mount prospect if the licensee or any vendor is in violation of state or local laws or this Grant of License. 4. The licensee must issue written rules applicable to all vendors and must certify each vendor as qualified prior to the vendor's participation in the Market. 5. Within ten (10) days of the execution of this Grant of License, the licensee shall submit to the Village Manager a pro forma revenue and expense statement setting forth certification fees and estimated revenues, expenses, management fees, if any, and the proposed disposition of potential net revenues. 6. Prior to November 30, 2000, the licensee shatl issue a written report to the Village Manager outlining the financial aspects of running the Market, problems encountered in the year 2000 season, along with proposed solutions, proposals for improving the Market and the outlook for the future of the Market. 7. The licensee shall possess a Certificate of Insurance for public liability insurance in an amount of not less that $1,000,000 per occurrence naming both the Village of Mount Prospect and the Union Pacific Railroad Company as additional insured. EXHIBIT "A" Page 2/2 Farmer Mkt. License This Grant of License is personal to the MOUNT PROSPECT LIONS CLUB and may not be transferred to any other person or entity. Dated this day of ., 2000. VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT By: Michael E. Janonis Village Manager APPROVED/ACCEPTED: for the Mount Prospect Lions Club HOLD HARMLESS WHEREAS, MOUNT PROSPECT LIONS CLUB (hereinafter referred to as "GRANTEE") has requested permission of the corporate authorities of the Village of Mount Prospect, hereinafter referred to as "GRANTOR") to operate a Farmer's Market within the parking lots located on the Union Pacific Railroad property, located both east and west of Main Street/EImhurst Road; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect did adopt Resolution No.__ on April 18, 2000, entitled "A Resolution Authorizing Execution of a License to the Mount Prospect Lions Club to Conduct the Annual Farmers Market in the Village". NOW, THEREFORE, upon the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the GRANTOR has granted a Grant of License to GRANTEE to operate a Farmers Market within the parking lots located on the Union Pacific Railroad property, located on both the east and west side of Main Street/EImhurst Road, which license is conveyed, however, subject to the following terms, covenants and conditions: 1. The GRANTOR may at any future time after the date hereof revoke the License referenced herein and without notice to the GRANTEE and without cost to either the GRANTOR or his/her successors or assigns. 2. Upon such revocation of said License by the GRANTOR, and with written notice of said revocation to the GRANTEE, the GRANTEE shall cease operation of said Farmers Market. 3. GRANTEE shall at all times, and under all circumstances, indemnify, protect, and save harmless the GRANTOR, its grantees, licensees, agents, lessees and invitees, from and against any and all damages, losses, claims, demands, actions, and causes Of action whatsoever (including any reasonable costs, expenses, and attorneys' fees which may be incurred in connection therewith) whether or not the claim, demand or other action asserted by meritorious, and which results from or is alleged to arise as a result of the activity being the subject of this Agreement. 4. GRANTOR shall not be liable to GRANTEE, her grantees, licensees, agents, lessees, or invitees for any damages or injuries (including death) to any person thereof except to the extent that injuries or damages are caused by the negligent, willful; or malicious misconduct of GRANTOR. Page 2/2 Hold Harmless 5. Any notice herein provided to be given shall be deemed properly given if in writing and delivered personally or mailed to the GRANTOR at: 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 or to the GRANTEE at: P. O. Box Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 or to such other person or address as the parties hereto may from time to time designate upon written notice. 6. This Agreement shall insure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective successors in interest. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this License Agreement to be executed by their proper officers, thereunto duly authorized and their respective seals to be affixed this day of ,2000. MOUNT PROSPECT LIONS CLUB By:. VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, a municipal corporation By: Michael E. Janonis, Village Manager ATTEST: Velma W. Lowe, Village clerk wvl 4/6/00 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 5095 ESTABLISHING A SISTER CITIES COMMISSION WHEREAS, on March 22, 2000, the corporate authorities of the Village of Mount Prospect approved the passage of Ordinance No. 5095 which establishes a Sister Cities Commission to recommend pollicies and establish programs for the Village's participation in the Sister cities International Organization. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: SECTION ONE: That Chapter 5 of the Village Code of Mount Prospect, as amended, and entitled "Creation and Membership", is hereby further amended by deleting the first paragraph of Section 5.1502 and adding a new paragraph which shall be and read as follows: "Sec. 5.1502 CREATION AND MEMBERSHIP. There is hereby created a permanent Commission, which shall be known as the Sister cities Commission of the Village, consisting of fifteen (15) members, a majority of whom shall be residents of the Village, . The members of the Sister Cities Commission shall be appointed by the Village President with the consent of the Board of Trustees. In addition, the Village President shall serve as an ex officio member of the Sister Cities Commission." SECTION TWO: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of ,2000. Gerald L. Farley, Mayor ATTEST: Velma W. Lowe, Village Clerk H:\G E N~files\WIN~ORDINANC~Amend Ch 5, Sister Cities, Apr 2000.doc Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: APRIL 14, 2000 SUBJECT: PC-08-99/DEVELOPMENT CODE EXCEPTION FOR THE LOCATION OF STORM WATER DETENTION FACILITY 1 W. RAND ROAD (RAND AND KENSINGTON ROADS) KAP-SUM PROPERTIES The petitioner, Kap-Sum Properties, proposes to construct a new retail development at the former LaSalle Bank property at 1 W. Rand Road. The development includes razing the existing building and constructing a 17,000 square foot retail development. The petitioner proposes to locate the storm water detention basin adjacent to the new structure. There would be a decorative security fence around the basin with locked gates at two points of entrance. In addition, the proposed basin would have two "escape" ramps should someone inadvertently gain access. The petitioner proposes to landscape the surrounding area in an attractive manner, but not to attract people to the detention basin. Sec. 16.405.F.1 of the Development Code requires that above ground storm water detention facilities are located at least 25-feet from the structure. The petitioner is seeking an exception from this requirement. The Plan Commission met in a regular session April 5, 2000 and discussed the petitioner's request. The Plan Commission voted 4-1 to approve an exception to the Development Code requirement for the location of the storm water detention basin and allow the petitioner to locate the basin adjacent to the building. Furthermore, there was a desire to have the petitioner work with Village staffto arrive at a landscape improvement design that screens the detention basin along Kensington Road and Route 83 in a manner that is consistent with the proposed ~Corridor Design Guidelines. Plan Commission cited the unique characteristics of the property (elevations, shallow inlet, IDOT regulations) and that the proposed design met the intent of the Development Code regulation as reasons for approving the exception. The Village Code requires the concurring vote of five (5) members of the Plan Commission to make any recommendation to the President and Board of Trustees of the Village. Therefore, the case is transmitted to .7' Village Board without a recommendation. The Village Code does not require a super majority vote for Village Board to approve the petitioner's request, as determined by the Village Attorney. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT PLAN COMMISSION April 5, 2000 CALL TO ORDER: The regular meeting of the Mount Prospect Plan Commission was called to order by Chairman Michael Zadel at 7:50 p.m. at the Village Hall, 100 South Emerson Street, Mount Prospect, Illinois. ROLL CALL: Present upon Roll Call: Michael Zadel, Chairman Gary Greuwinkel William Reddy Matt Sledz Carol Tortorello Absent: Antoinette As~reidas Frank Boege Edwin Janus Village Staff Present: Judy Connolly, AICP, Planner Chuck Lindelof, P.E., Project Engineer Others in Attendance: Jeny Brown, SRI Helen Cohen, Archideas James Kaplan, Kap-Sum Properties Jeff Miller, Amhideas Walter Graft, Gewalt Hamilton APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Chairman Zadel opened the meeting and asked for commen~s on minutes from March 15, 2000. Carol Tortorello said that the minutes should be amended to show that Jim Tinaglia, Ben Trapani, Ed Dowling, and Mark Lattner were the only "Others in Attendance" and that it was incorrect to use the numeral "1" for the name of Bank One. Chairman Zadel agreed and asked if there were additional comments. As there were none, Carol Tortorello moved to approve the minutes as amended and Bill Reddy seconded the motion. The motioned carried 4-0 with Matt Sledz abstaining. SUBDMSIONS: NONE OLD BUSINESS: NONE NEW BUSINESS: PC-08-99/Development Code Exception/1 W. Rand Road {'Rand and Kensin~on Roads) Chairman Zadel introduced the first item of business and asked Judy Connolly to review the ease. Ms. Connoliy said thai tho property owner proposes to razo the existing LaSalle Bank t6 c6nstruct a retail dex~elopment at I W. Rand Road. The petitioner is requesting relief from the MOUNT PROSPECT PLAN COMMISSION Minutes of April 5, 2000 Meeting Page 2 Development Code to locate the detention facility closer than the minimum distance required by code. Ms. Connolly said the intent of the code requirement was to avoid foundation saturation, which may lead to structural defects, and to create a safer development by keeping dramatic grade changes and standing water away from building users. She said that the Development Code was changed in 1996, previously requiring a 75-foot setback from the building and now allowed a 25- foot setback. She said that this change reflected the Village's ability to be flexible to developers' needs without compromising safety concerns. Ms. Connolly said that the petitioner's property fronts onto two IDOT roads and that IDOT requires detention facilities to be located ten feet, plus 1.5 times the depth of the detention basin, from an IDOT right-of-way. Ms, Connolly said that to meet this standard, the petitioner proposes to locate the detention area behind the building, directly adjacent to the structure. She said that the petitioner is seeking relief from Village requirements because the property is located between two IDOT roads that have the potential to be widened. Locating the detention facility according to Village requirements, in close proximity to the IDOT right-of-way could create an unsafe situation if either of the roads is widened. She said that the property at 1 W. Rand Road is difficult to develop because the adjacent angled roads create an unusual shaped lot, the site slopes slightly downward along the southwest property line, and the receiving sewer has a shallow depth. These factors limit the location of the detention facility, its depth, and size because the new detention facility has to be consistent with the existing site conditions and compatible with the existing sewer infrastructure. Ms. Connolly said that Village staff met with the petitioner, the architect, and the engineer for the project and reviewed several different storm water detention facility designs. She said that the Village's Engineering Division reviewed the petitioner's request and found that there was an alternative way to design the site that meets IDOT and Village codes without requiring an exception to the Village's Development Code requirements. Ms. Connolly explained that the petitioner stated that. the design that meets Development Code regulations is impractical to maintain and requires installing over 500 feet of three-foot by nine- foot concrete box sections. The low height of the concrete boxes could reduce the effectiveness of the sewer system if sediment and debris enter the storage pipes. She said that the Development Code requires that the petitioner show that there are no alternate feasible means of fulfilling the Development Code regulations and that approving the exception will not impact the health, safety, and welfare of the community. She said that the petitioner explored alternative designs with Village staff. Ms. ConnoIly said that the proposed design that requires an exception to the Developmeht Code can be implemented in a manner that is in keeping with the intent of Development Code regulations. Ms. Connolly said that the Engineering Division and the Building Commissioner reviewed the petitioner's design and found that it meets the intent of the Development Code requirements and does not pose a safety hazard to the neighborhood or the building. She said that additional hydrostatic pressure calculations are required for a building permit and will be provided before the Village can issue a building permit. Ms. Connolly said that the Development Code exception request provides an opportunity to create an enhancement to this property. She said it is feasible, although not a eondition of approval,..for the Village to re~lUast that the petitioner's landscape plan be designed and MOUNT PROSPECT PLAN COMMISSION Minutes of April 5. 2000 Meeting Page 3 implemented in a manner that is consistent with the proposed Corridor Design Guidelines and exceeds the minimum amount of landscaping required by Village code. She said that the petitioner's request for an exception to locate a detention facility closer than the minimum distance required by Village code meets the standards for an exception because the proposed design is feasible and fulfills the purpose of the regulations. The proposed storm water detention facility will be designed in a manner that does not impact the structural integrity of the building and includes safety provisions, such as a fence and "escape" ramps. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the petitioners request to locate the detention facility closer than 25 feet from the structure, for the property located at I W. Rand Road, Case No. PC-08-99 and that the petitioner's landscape plan is designed in a manner that is consistent with the Village's proposed Corridor Design Guidelines. Ms. Connolly said that the petitioner, his architect, engineer, and structural engineer were available to answer any questions about the project. Chairman Zadel asked the petitioner questions about the design of the existing sewers, sewer capacity, and the impact of having a three-foot tall concrete box under the parking lot. Jeff Miller said that they examined an underground storage design but that the existing inlet that they have to hook into is extremely shallow. This requires using a wide box to accommodate the storage. The size of the box makes the underground storage design difficult to maintain and requires that a person physically enter the box to clean it out because the box cannot be "flushed out" and sediment would remain on the bottom. There was detailed discussion about the underground storage design, the size of existing pipes, sewer flow and capacity, and why the petitioner felt that underground storage was not appropriate for this site. There was discussion about the design of the proposed detention basin. Mr. Miller clarified that the building is a slab on grade and would not have a basement or a crawl space. He said that earth on the backside of the retaining wall is supporting the hydraulic pressure of the detention wall. The hydraulic pressure of the water in the pond is opposed by the soil pressure and that the detention basin walls below grade is solid concrete. Walter Graft and Jerry Brown explained in detail the design of the walls 'of the detention basin and the proposed materials. Mr Graft said that the walls that are visible would be made of a landscape retaining wall material, using keystone blocks that are either 12" or 24" deep, depending on the geo-grid design. The Plan Commission asked questions about storm water overflow, the traffic flow of the development, and the landscaping requirements. The Plan Commission asked for examples where the petitioner used the keystone design. Mr. Graft said that they used this design at Lutheran General Hospital in a retention system and at Barrington High School for an 1 l-foot tall keystone wall, connecting two levels. He said that they put a fence and guard rail there for safety reasons. Mr. Miller said that the Container Store in Oak Brook used a two tier keystone wall. There was discussion about the track record of the keystone material and design and that it was a proven system, structurally and esthetically. There was discussion about the safety of the proposed design and that the fence should be vertical to discourage people from climbing the fence and to make it more difficult to access the site unless entered through the gate. Plan Commission agreed that the petitioner took reasonable precaution in'designing the detention basin. Chairman Zadel said that it was Plan Commission's responsibility to ensure that codes are met. -He said that .in this case the' Plan Commission has evidence that this code requirement could be met by a different design, but that design posed 1~ hardship. He explained that the hardship may not meet the strictest Development Code definition, but that the elevations of the property posed OUNT PROSPECT PLAN COMMISSION Minutes of April 5, 2000 Meeting Page 4 significant difficulty in implementing an underground storage detention design. There was discussion that this property was unique because it fronted onto two IDOT regulated roads, was triangular shaped, and included atypical existing drainage features and elevations. There was discussion about the impacts of setting a precedent by granting this request. The Plan Commission noted that the need for exceptions to redevelop specific properties should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Gary Grouwinkel moved to approve the Development Code exception because of the unique characteristics of the property (elevations, shallow inlet, IDOT regulations), that the proposed design met the intent of the Development Code regulation, and that the site would be landscaped in a manner consistent with the proposed Corridor Design Guidelines. Carol Tonorello seconded the motion, which was approved 4-I. Bill Re'tidy asked that the minutes reflect that he voted against the Development Code exception because he supported the underground detention design. Plan Commission Training Workshop Chairman Zadel presented the next item of business, an APA facilitated the workshop that he and Carol Tortorello attended April 1, 2000. He said that representatives from NIPC presented information on storm water management design. He said that the discussion focused on the ~mpacts of drainage and was presented for an audience of citizen planners. Chairman Zadel said another part of the workshop focused on law and ethics, specifically the Open Meetings Act. A hand out was distributed to the Plan Commission members to review at their convenience. There was discussion on new ethics legislation. Chairman Zadel and Ms. Tortorello summarized the workshop information materials on detention ponds, the impacts of using different plant materials in and around the ponds, and how to discourage geese from congregating around the pond. COMMENTS AND OTHER BUSINESS: There was general discussion on the Corridor Design Guidelines presentation at the March 28 Committee of the Whole meeting. Plan Commission discussed the materials presented to Village Board and how the design was revised for the COW meeting. They reviewed the items that Village Board and Plan Commission agreed on and discussed the next steps for the project. There was discussion on tear-downs and the effects of large-scale second story additions on the neighborhood. Plan Commission asked for information on the potential of creating a section of the Development Code that addresses how' new residences or 'additions should be designed to minimize the impact on the neighborhood. There was discussion about creating an Architectural Review Board or having Plan Commission's responsibilities include this aspect of review. Plan Commission requested that this be an agenda item for a future meeting. Gary Grouwinkel moved to adjourn the meeting and Bill Reddy seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0 and the meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. J~di~h M.'C(Snn~lly, AiCP, Planner \ ~ Village of Mount prospect Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: MOUNT PROSPECT PLAN COMMISSION MICHAEL ZADEL, CHAIRMAN JUDY CONNOLLY, AICP, PLANNEi(~ FROM: DATE: MARCH 30, 2000 SUBJECT: PC-08-99/DEVELOPMENT AT RAND & KENSINGTON (1 W, RAND ROAD) Background Petitioner: KAP-SUM Properties, LLC 1770 First Street, Suite 201 Highland Park, Illinois 60035 Property Owner: same Requested Actions: Exception to Sec. 16.405.F. 1 Detention Requirements Locate storm water detention facility closer than 25 feet from building to be occupied. Lot coverage: Proposed Lot Coverage: 72% (approximately) Permitted lot Coverage: 75% Analysis The property owner is in the process of designing a retail development at 1 W. Rand Road (northwest comer of Rand and Kensington Roads), the now vacant LaSalle Bank building. The development entails razing the existing structure and constructing a 17,000 (app~'oximate) square foot shopping center. Village Code requires that all new developments meet current codes and regulations. The site fronts on two IDOT regulated roads and also is required to meet IDOT regulations in addition to Village cedes. The petitioner is seeking an exception to the Village's Development Code for the location of storm water detention. An analysis of the request is provided below. Background The Village's storm water detention location ·requirement was created to avoid foundation saturation, which may lead to structural defects. In addition, the setback creates an overall safer development by keeping dramatic grade changes and standing water away from building users. Similarly, IDOTs setback requirements for above ground storm water :detention structures were created to address safety needs, which include preventing vehicles from driving into the detention facilities located along IDOT rights-of-way. 'The Village amended the Development Code in 1996 to permit stOrm water detention facilities 25-feet from a structure. Before the revision; the code required a'75-foot separation from the structure. 'At the time the 75-foot separation was required, wet detention basins (structures filled with water year-round) were frequently used as part of the storm water detention facility. The intent behind the 75-foot separation was to locate the detention baSin aWay from pedestrian activity (the building) to reduce the potential.of un accident. DEtrb0ttom basins are more cemmon.und hold water during'heavy rains. The practice has since changed to usitg, dry-bottom detention · basins. In un effortto ensure adequate safety measures while balancing the challenges 6fin-fill development and. Mount Prospect Plan Commission PC-08-99/Development at Rand & Kensington Roads (Development Code Exception) Page 2 redevelopment, the Village modified code requirements to permit a 25-foot separation between the storm water detention basin and the building. The reduced separation reflected the Village's ability to be flexible to developers' needs without compromising safety concerns. In the past few years, the Village has experienced more in-fill growth, posing challenges for redevelopment sites. Recently, several developers have constructed new, large scale commemial or retail facilities. Several of these facilities am located on IDOT roads and had to meet IDOT, Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD), and other regulatory agencies' regulations. Developing the new retail/commemial facilities was complex and at times, required resoumefulness to ensure that the site met code requirements. These new developments were required to meet Village code requirements or receive relief from regulations. A case in point is the Menards Home Improvement Center where a combination of above and below ground storage was used to store storm water. Another example is the Northwest Electric store under construction at 600 E. Rand Road. Northwest Electric is using large (8-foot) diameter pipes to store storm water underground. In comparison, the property at I W. Rand Road is difficult to develop because the adjacent angled roads create an unusual shaped lot. Furthermore the site slopes slightly downward (one-foot difference from the highest to the lowest point) along the southwest property and the receiving sewer has a shallow depth. These factors limit the location of the detention facility, its depth, and size because the detention facility has to be consistent with the existing site conditions and be compatible with the existing sewer infrastructure. Therefore, the petitioner is seeking an exception to the Development Code requirement for the location of the storm water detention facility. The petitioner is not seeking relief from the amount of detention required or the manner in which the facility needs to be constructed. Exception to the Development Code Request IDOT requires that detention facilities are located ten feet, plus 1.5 times the depth of the detention basin, from an IDOT right-of-way. To meet this standard, the petitioner proposes to locate the detention area behind the building, but closer than the Villa. ge's minimum requirement (25 feet from a structure). The proposed detention area is directly adjacent to the structure. The petitioner is seeking an exception to the Village's twenty-five foot requirement to meet IDOT's setback regulations. The petitioner is seeking relief from Village requirements because the subject property is located between two IDOT roads that have the potential to be widened. Therefore, it is unlikely that IDOT would approve a request to locate the detention facility in close proximity to the existing right-of-way because it would create an un:safe situation if either of the roads is widened. Village staff has met with the petitioner, the architect, and the engineer for the project. Several different storm water detention facility designs were reviewed and evaluated before coming to the conclusion that the petitioner's proposed design is the most appropriate design for the site; The Village's Engineering Division reviewed the petitioner's request and found that there is an alternative way to design the site that meets IDOT and Village codes without requiring an exception to the Village's Development Code requirements. The petitioner has stated that the design that meets Development Code regulations is impractical to maintain and requires installing over 500 feet ofthree~foot by nine-foot concrete box sections. The design (specifically the low height of the concrete boxes) has the potential to reduce the effectiveness of the sewer system if sediment and debris enter the storage pipes. Extensive maintenance and several catch basins are necessary to make this design effective. Otherwise, the code-complying storm water 'detention facility will not work as intended, perhaps not having the capacity to handle mn-off effectively and consequently create defects to the overall sewer system. Development Code Exception In order for the Village to. ~pprove an exception to Development Code requirements, per. Sec. 16.111 of the Development Code, the petitioner 'is required to show that there are alternate feasible means of fulfilling .tho · Development Code. regulations and that approving the exception will not impact the health,:safety, and'welfare of ount Prospect Plan Commission PC-08-99/Development at Rand & Kensington ROadg (Development Code Exception) Page 3 the community. The petitioner has explored alternative designs with Village staff. The consensus was that the storm water detention facility design that meets code is difficult to maintain, while the proposed design that requires an exception to the Development Code can be implemented in a manner that is in keeping with the intent of Development Code regulations. This has prompted the Planning staff to evaluate the necessity of Sec. 16.405.F. 1, the location for above ground storm water detention facilities. The Engineering Division reviewed the petitioner's design and found that it meets the intent of the Development Code requirements and does not pose a safety hazard to the neighborhood or the building. Therefore, the proposed storm water detention facility is acceptable and appropriate for 1 W. Rand Road. Furthermore, the Building Commissioner reviewed the petitioner's proposed design and concurred with their Structural Engineer's findings that it is easily possible to construct the retail center in the manner presented, and that the foundation will not be impacted by the adjacent storm water detention facility. Additional hydrostatic pressure calculations are required for a building permit and will be provided at the appropriate time. Corridor Improvements Consistent with previous requests for relief from code requirements, this case provides the Village with an opportunity to work with the petitioner to create an enhancement to this property. In this ease, the property is visible from several major thoroughfares and is located in a high-profile commercial area. The petitioner is already working with a design firm to create a landscape plan for 1 W. Rand Road that is compatible with the Village's proposed Corridor Design Guidelines. Therefore, it is feasible, although not a condition of approval, for the Village to request that the petitioner's landscape plan be designed and implemented in a manner that is 6onsistent with the proposed Corridor Design Guidelines and exceed the minimum amount of landscaping required by Village code. Recommendation The standards for an exception listed in the Development Code require that the petitioner arrive at alternative feasible means of fulfilling the purpose of the regulations. Furthermore, the Plan Commission and Village Board may approve and grant an exception if the spirit of the code is met and the alternative does not affect the public health, safety and welfare. The petitioner's request for an exception to Sec. 16.405.F.1 of the Development Code to !ocate a detention facility closer than the minimum distance required by Village code meets the standards for an exception because the proposed design is feasible and fulfills the purpose of the regulations. The petitioner has adequately explored alternate development designs for the property, supporting the need for an exception to the Development Code. The proposed storm water detention facility will be designed in a manner that does not impact the strUctural integrity of the building and includes safety provisions, i.e. decorative 48" tall fence and "escape" ramp. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the petitioner's request to locate the detention facility closer than 25 feet from the structure, for the property located at 1 W. Rand Road, Case No. PC-08-99 and that the petitioner's landscape plan is designed in a manner that is consistent with the Village's proposed Corridor Design Guidelines. I concur:. Director of Community Development . INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM 'r~ ~'r~ t~ TO: PLANNER JUDY CONNOLLY FROM: PROJECT ENGINEER CHUCK LINDELOF DATE: MARCH 22, 2000 SUBJECT: PC-8-99; EXCEPTION FOR DETENTION POND LOCATION (KENSINGTON ROAD & RAND ROAD) We have completed our review of the latest response to our comments concerning PC- 8-99. The applicant is requesting an exception from the Development Code requirement that stormwater detention ponds be located at least 25' from any structure (Section 16.405.F.1). As in previous submittals, the applicant has submitted a plan showing a detention pond against the side of the proposed structure. In fact, the wall of the building acts as the wall of the pond. Previous review comments have stated that alternative designs are available, and that the requested Code exception is not warranted. The information contained in the current submittal reflects discussions held with the engineer, Mr. Walter Graft of Gewalt Hamiltoa Associates, Inc., on February 28 and March 9, 2000. At those meetings, Mr, Graft explained the difficulties of providing stormwater detention on site at least 25' from the proposed building, as required by the Development Code. These difficulties are summarized below: 1. The site is small, so there is not a lot of area to locate a detention pond on site. 2. The site is triangular with two of the sides bordered by roads under the jurisdiction of the Illinois DePartment of Transportation (IDOT). IDOT has specific requirements concerning the offset of detention ponds from their dghts of · .. way, so the available area for the pond is further reduced. 3;The depth of the receiving sewer is~'elatively shallowl limiting the depth of a pond or the size of any underground storage pipe. Mr. Graft claims that these difficulties create a hardship that prevent the applicant from . meeting'the 25' detention pond setback requirement. In Our review comments dated January 18, 2000, we suggested one'poSsib e.alterna, te. design. 'This design would maximize the storage of the detention pOnd wliile meeting Page 2 PC-8-99 March 22, 2000 the 25' pond setback requirement. The remainder of the storage would be located in 4' tall concrete box sections. Apparently, the survey information provided in eadier submittals was in error. The invert of the receiving sewer is higher than first indicated, so the 4' tall concrete box section we suggested will not work. According to Mr. Graft, the tallest section that can be installed is 3' tall. In the meeting on February 28, Mr. Graft explained that installing 3' tall concrete box sections would be prohibitively expensive, and would create a severe maintenance problem. We concur with Mr. Graft that reducing the pond to meet the Code and installing 3' tall box sections to provide the required storage would be expensive; we estimate that approximately 525' of 3' x 9' concrete box sections would be required. We do not concur with Mr. Graft's assessment of the maintenance problems. Additional catch basins could be installed to trap any sediment and debris before entering the storage pipes, greatly reducing the maintenance problem. Thus, the only hardship appears to be the cost of the box sections. In our review comments dated December 17, 1999, we stated that the reasons behind the 25' setback of detention ponds from buildings are twofold: 1. The detention pond will, obviously, collect all stormwater from the site. Therefore, the ground in and near the pond will be prone to be saturated to a greater degree and a greater frequency than ground away from the pond. This saturated ground can exert increased hydrostatic forces on the foundation. Also, excessive settlement may occur in soils where the water table rises and falls frequently. Locating the pond away from any structure will reduce any adverse effects of the soil near the pond being saturated frequently. The proposed design actually used the building foundation wall as one wall of the pond. Consequently, significant hydrostatic pressures would act directly on the wall during every heavy rain event. 2. A safety hazard may be created if a pond is located near an exit from a building. However, it was pointed out in the meeting on March 9 that the proposed pond could by designed to address these two (2) concerns. The hydrostatic forces of the water acting on the wall of the proposed building could be accurately predicted and compensated for in the design. Steps can be taken to minimize any settlement of the soil caused be fluctuations in the water table. Also, the proposed pond is little different from a swimming pool. As such, appropriate safety measures could be taken to insure that the pond is not a safety hazard. These · measures would include installing a fence along the perimeter of the pond, and a.ramp along.the west side of the pond. The ·fence would provide a barrier to keep people out age 3 PC-8-99 March 22, 2000 of the pond, while the ramp would provide an accessible way out of the pond for those who intentionally climb over the fence. The site plans submitted show the "escape ramp" in the pond, and note the fence around the pond. The architectural plans also cleady show a 48" tall fence around the pond. No structural plans or calculations were provided to verify that the hydrostatic forces have been accounted for in the proposed design. (Please note that a more detailed review of the proposed structure will be performed when the applicant submits for a building permit.) Summary Section 16.405.F.1 of the Development Code states that detention ponds must be located at least 25' from any structure. This requirement was adopted to protect structures from damage, and prevent the pond from posing a safety hazard to anyone exiting the structure. While the proposed design does not meet the setback requirement, it does accomplish the two objectives of the setback requirement. The Engineering Staff has no objection to granting the Development Code exception based upon engineering issues. It should be pointed out, however, that since a detention system could be designed to comply with the Village Codes, the only hardship demonstrated is a financial hardship due to the increased cost for the underground storage areas. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call, Chuck Lindelof \~PUBLICWORIGSYS2~FILES~ENGINEER~REV-ENG\lWRand~PC-8-99\Com-3.doc, Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department - Building Division MEMORANDUM TO: JUDY CONNOLLY, AICP, PLANNER FROM: WILLIAM G. GEORGE, BUILDING COMMISSIONER ~' DATE: MARCH 20, 2000 SUBJECT: PC-08-99/DEVELOPMENT CODE EXCEPTION / 1 W. RAND ROAD The Building Division does not have any comments regarding this project at this time, however be advised that detailed engineering plans will be required for the issuance of the building permit. In theory this detention should not pose a problem to the proposed foundation. We will look at structural calculations for the hydrostatic pressure that will be placed against the foundation walls at kigh water level. /bg Document2 3/15/2000 12:10 ~303578~0 STRUCTURAL RESOURCES 311 W. Sup~icr Suit410 c~aa~ ~L f:~l 0 Re: Mo~P~s~l~aH GEWALToHAMILTON ASSOCIATES, INC. SHEET NO, OF 850 Forest Edge Drive VERNON HILLS, ILLINOIS 6006[ C^LCU~T~O~V (847) 478-9700 FAX (847) 478-9701 C,~CK~Da¥ GEWALT-HAMILTON ASSOCIATES, INC, 850 Forest Edge Drive SHE~T.D VERNON HILLS, ILLINOIS 6006]. C^LCULArEDS¥ (847) 478-9700 FAX (847) 478-9701 C, EC~SDS¥ OAT~. SCALE Gewalt - Hamilton Associates PROJECT # 2991.000 SURFACE DETENTION DATE: 01-04-00 Surface Detention MOUNT PROSPECT RETAIL Mount Prospect, Illinois 2991 SURFACE DET EOF - 671.55 Structure Area Depth EOF Volume Volume to structure (sq. ft) (ft) (cf) (Ac.R) CB#9 950 0.55 174 0.00~ MH#8 2430 0.55 446 0.010 MI-I#7 1740 0.55 319 0.007 CB#5 780 0.35 91 0.002 EX MI-I 1400 0.63 294 0.007 TOTAL 1324 0.030 2991 SLrRFACE DE3' GHA DETENTION M~fRD CALCULATIONS PROJECT: Mount Prospect Retail DATE: 1/4/00 Village of Mount Prospect PROJECT NO: 2991.000 TOTAL PROPERTY, EXISTING AND PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE DESCRIPTION User Input Program Output BASIN AREA 1.95 ACRES TIME OF CONCENTRATION 0.20 CFS/ACRE ALLOWABLE RELEASE RATE 0.39 CFS AREA @ 0,25 0.00 ACRES AREA @ 0.50 0.55 ACRES AREA @ 0.95 1.40 ACRES AREA @ 1.00 0.00 ACRES DEV. C FACTOR 0.823 FACTOR TIME I00 YR RATE * FLOW IN STORAGE RATE STORAGE DEPTH 0.17 10.02 8.247 8.047 1.368 0.33 7.3 6.008 5.808 1.917 0.5 5.6 4.609 4.409 2.205 0.67 4.65 3.827 3.627 2.430 0.83 4 3.292 3.092 2.567 1 3.56 2.930 2.730 2.730 1.5 2.7 2.222 2.022 3.033 2 2.24 1.844 1.644 3.287 3 1.62 1 333 1.133 3.400 4 1.3 1.070 0.870 3.480 5 1.1 0.905 0.705 3.527 6 0.95 0.782 0.582 3.492 7 0.84 0.691 0.491 3.440 8 0.76 0,626 0,426 3.404 9 0.69 0.568 0.368 3 311 10 0.64 0,527 0.327 3.268 MAXIiVIUM DETENTION DEPTH CUSER TRANSFERRED DATA) 3.527 INCHES TOTAL DETENTION VOLUME (PROGRAM RESULT) 0.573 ACRE-FEET 24956 CUBIC FEET · Source: Illinois State Bulletin 70 COMM~G- LN I Offsite detention release routed through project site I DESIGN AN OI~ICE AS A RESTRICTOR MSD BASED C'd FACTORS User Input Program Output HI WATER ELEV 673.68 FEET INVERT/LWL 669.86 FEET C'd SEE BELOW 0.82 FACTOR' RESTRICT. DIA 3 INCHES Q ALLOWABLE 0.280 CFS FOR SITE SYSTEM HEAD 3.69 VERTICAL FEET ORFICE AREA 0.022 SQ. FT. 3.19 SQ. IN. ORFICE DIA. 2.0 IN. DIA. SELECTED DIAMETER 3.00 IN. DIA. ACTUAL RELEASE 0.621 CFS RELEASE FACTORS FOR C'd RELEASE PATES BASED ON MSD CRITERIA Q = C'd * A * (,54.4 * Head)'0.5 Square Edged 0.79-0.82 Round Edged 0.93-0.98 Sharp Edged 0.58-0.64 Projecting Edge 0.50 GOING - OUT DESIGN AN ORFICE AS A RESTRICTOR MSD BASED C'd FACTORS User Input Program Output HI WATER ELEV 671.55 FEET INVERT/LWL 665.46 FEET C'd SEE BELOW 0.82 FACTOR RESTRICT. DIA 3 INCHES Q ALLOWABLE 0.280 CFS FOR SITE SYSTEM HEAD 5.96 VERTICAL FEET ORFICE AREA 0.017 SQ. FT. 2.5I SQ. IN. ORFICE DIA. 1.8 IN. DIA. SELECTED DIAMETER 3.00 IN. DIA. COMBINED RELEASE 0.789 CFS RELEASE FACTORS FOR C'd RELEASE RATES BASED ON MSD CRITERIA Q = C'd * A * (64.4 * Head)~0.5 Square Edged 0.79-0.82 Rouad Edged 0.9343.98 Sharp Edged 0.58-0.64 Projecting Edge 0.50 Combined Site Release 0.789 CFS Offsite Bypass Release 0.621 CFS Actual Site Release 0.168 CFS Okay, less than allowable 0.28 CFS release KENSINGTON ROAD 0 Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM FROM: VILLAGE ENGINEER DATE: APRIL 12, 2000 SUBJECT: ROUTE 83 CONSTRUCTION, GOLF ROAD TO THE TOLLWAY REVISED JOINT AGREEMENT On July 8, 1998, the Village signed an Agreement with IDOT pertaining to the construction of the subject improvements. The agreement stipulated that the Village would pay for the required improvements to our facilities necessitated by the road construction, such as: water valve vault and manhole adjustments, traffic signal cost participation and emergency vehicle preemption relocation. The agreement also covers the cost to adjust water valve structures owned by JAWA. JAWA then agreed to fully reimburse the Village for this cost. Construction began in 1999 and is in the process of being completed. It was discovered during construction that the JAWA vaults did not have adequate support and required reconstruction. JAWA has reviewed the cost of those structures and has approved them. The Village previously approved the Joint Agreement in the amount of $:[6,272 of which $:[3,272 was the direct cost to the Village. The remainder was to be reimbursed to the Village by JAWA. This revised Joint Agreement increases the total amount to $64,734 while the Village share remains $13,272. T recommend that the Village Board approve this Supplemental Agreement, and authorize execution by the Mayor. endation. Glen R. An~ler ' Public Works Director cc: Joseph G. Fennel, Executive Director JAWA x:\files\engineer\idot\projects\rt83\golf-toll\su pjointag VWL 4/'13~00 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AN AMENDED AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT AND THE ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION WHEREAS, on July 8, 1998, the corporate authorities of the Village of Mount Prospect determined that it was in the best interest of the Village to participate in sharing specific costs in conjunction with the improvement of Elmhurst Road (Route 83) from Golf Road to the Northwest Tollway; and WHEREAS, it was further determined that it would be in the best interest of all concerned to enter into an Agreement to share the cost of such construction project, in the amount of $16,272, with $13,272 to be a direct cost to the Village and the remainder to be reimbursed to the Village by the Joint Action Water Agency (JAWA); and WHEREAS, the Agreement originally approved has subsequently been amended to include the cost of reconstruction of certain water valve vaults owned by (JAWA), thereby increasing the total amount to $64,734, with the Village's direct cost remaining at $13,272; and WHEREAS, the Agreement being the subject of this Resolution specifies the portion, of the cost that will be paid by the Village of Mount Prospect. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: · SECTION ONE: That the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign and the Clerk is authorized to attest his signature on the revised Agreement between the Village of Mount Prospect and the Illinois Department of Transportation, being the subject of this Resolution. A copy of said Agreement is attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof as Exhibit "A". Page 2/2 Revised Rt. 83 agrmt. SECTION TWO: That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of , 2000. Gerald L. Fadey Mayor ATTEST: Velma W. Lowe Village Clerk H:\G E N\files\W[N~RES~Aut hodze signature, IDOT amended,doc 3/00 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 16-95 DESIGNATING PERSONS WHO SHALL BE EXEMPT FROM FEES FOR MOUNT PROSPECT MOTOR VEHICLE LICENSES WHEREAS, the corporate authorities of the Village of Mount Prospect have for many years issued motor vehicle license stickers or plates to certain persons in recognition of the public service rendered by them; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect desire to continue this practice, but to limit it primarily to individuals associated with the government of Mount Prospect and as specified herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLiNOiS: SECTION ONE: That Resolution No. 16-95 is hereby repealed in its entirety. SECTION TVVO: That the following persons shall receive a Mount Prospect motor vehicle sticker or plate without payment of the fee therefor, as established in Chapter 17 of the Village Code of Mount Prospect, as amended, subject to the conditions set forth in SECTION FIVE of this Resolution: Disabled Veterans of the Armed Services of the United States of America, whose motor vehicle bears registration plates issued pursuant to Section 625 ILCS 5/3-623 of "The Illinois Vehicle Code"; Economic Development Commission; Emergency Services Disaster Agency, being a Bureau of the Fire Department; Ex-Prisoner of War, whose'motor vehicle bears registration plates issued pursuant to Section 625 ILCS 5/3-620 of "The Illinois Vehicle Code"; Finance Commission; · Board of Fire and P.olice Commissioners; Firemen's Pension Fund Board; Board of Library Trustees; Page 2/3 Vehicle Sticker Exemptions Physically Handicapped Person, whose motor vehicle bears registration plates issued pursuant to Section 625 ILCS 5/3-616 of "The Illinois Vehicle Code," or who has an identification card duly authorized by a governmental agency indicating the person to whom the card is issued is permanently disabled; Plan Commission; Police Pension Fund Board; Safety Commission; Sister Cities Commission; Solid Waste Commission; Special Events Commission; Volunteer Fire Department; Youth Commission; Zoning Board of Appeals; and as may be set forth in the Illinois Compiled Statutes. SECTION THREE: That the ViJlage of Mount Prospect, the Mount Prospect Park District, the River Trails Park District, and School Districts 21, 26, 57, 59 and 214, as well as ali other vehicles having Illinois State license plates with the "School Bus" designation thereon shall be issued a Mount Prospect motor vehicle license sticker or plate for each vehicle owned and operated by such body, provided such vehicle is registered within the corporate limits of the Village of Mount Prospect. · Upon the receipt of such license for such vehicle by such governmental agency, no fee, as .~' established under the aforementioned Chapter 17 shall be paid therefor. SECTION FOUR: That any not-for-profit organization shall receive a Mount Prospect motor vehicle sticker or plate without payment of the fee therefor established under Chapter 17 of the Village Code of Mount Prospect for all vehicles beadng Illinois State license ~)lates with the "School Bus" designation, pi'ovided that such vehicle is registered within the corporate limits of the Village of Mount Prospect. It is further provided that any not-for-profit organization shall receive no more than one (1) Mount Prospect motor vehicle sticker or plate without payment of the fee therefor, as established under the aforementioned Chapter 17 for a vehicle beadng Illinois State license ~lates with the "CV" designation, provided that such vehicle is registered within the corporate limits of the Village of Mount Prospect. Page 3/3 Vehicle Sticker Exemptions SECTION FIVE: That no person shall receive a motor vehicle license plate without charge as provided in this Resolution, unless such person resides within the corporate limits of the Village of Mount Prospect and the motor vehicle for which the license sticker or plate is issued is registered within the corporate limits of said Village. No person shall by virtue of this Resolution receive more than one (1) such vehicle license sticker or plate. SECTION SIX: That the households of members of the Youth Commission shall be entitled to one (1) vehicle sticker subject to the conditions outlined above. SECTION SEVEN: That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of ,2000. Gerald L. Farley Mayor · . ATTEST; Velma W. Lowe Village Clerk Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS FROM: PROJECT ENGINEER DATE: APRIL 12, 2000 SUBJECT: 2000 STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAM On April 1 lth, at 10:00 A.M. sealed bids were received for The 2000 Street Reconstruction Program. At this time, the sealed bids were publicly opened and read aloud. Project Scope This project includes the reconstruction of 410 miles of Viliage streets. This represents the fourth year of the street reconstruction component of the ten year accelerated street improvement program. Bids Received A notice to bidders was published in a local newspape~r. Five contractors obtained contract documents and four contractors submitted bids. The bids range~:l from a low of $2,856,940.85 by Arrow Road Construction Company to a high of$3,911,930.85 by Alliance Contractors, Inc. The Engineer's estimate for the project was $3,295,546.60. A copy of the bid tab is attached. Analysis of Bids All bidders submitted IDOT Local Agency Bid Bonds in the amount of 5% of their total bids as required by the Contract Documents. All bids were checked for their accuracy. No errors were found. All bidders correctly signed their bids and bid bonds. Below is a summary of the bids. Bidders Total Bid Arrow Road Constmetiun Co. $2,856,940.85 Johnson Paving Co. $3,219,247.15 Plote, Inc. $3,367,812.35 Alliance Contractors, Inc. $3,911,930.85 Engineer's Estimate $3,295,545.60 Qualification of Low Bidder The low bidder Arrow Road Construction Co. has previously completed street improvements for the Village ineIuding the 1998 and 1999 Street Reconstruction Programs and their work has been acceptable. age 2 2000 Street Resurfacing Program April 12, 20O0 Recommendation Funding for this project is shown on Page 288 of the 2000 budget where $2,929,717.00 is allocated under Account Code No. 5607706-690094. I recommend that the low bidder Arrow Road Construction Co. be awarded the contract for the 2000 Street Reconstruction Program in the amount not to exceed $2,856,940.85. I concur with the above recommendation. Public Works Directtor Glen Andler Attachments: Bid Tabulation Project Map X:~FILES\ENGINEER\P. ECONST~Recon2000\CorrcsWIEMO_JAN.DOC 2000 Reconstruction Program 2000' Street Reconstruction Program ' ~--~'"~' ' :'""",--,.," ~" MOUNT PROSPECT POLICE DEPARTMENT FORMAL MEMORANDUM CHF 99-27 CONTROL NUMBER TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER "]11 ~- FROM: CHIEF OF POLICE ~ 2 SUBJECT: REQUEST TO PURCHJrSE NINE (9) MOTOROLA RADIO MODEMS AND NINE (9) PANASONIC IN-CAR LAPTOP COMPUTERS DATE: MARCH 24, 2000 Police department staff is making two requests in this memorandum. First, staff is requesting a waiver of the bid process to purchase nine (9) Motorola VRM 650 radio modems. Second, staff is requesting authorization to purchase nine (9) Panasonic Toughbook 27 i'n-car mggedized laptop computers under a current State of Illinois award. These two components are the main elements of the computer workstations .the department recommends installing in the remaining patrol and investigative squad cars that are not equipped with in-car computer technology. These purchases would serve to continue the department's mobile data terminal replacement program. With this purchase the department will have obtained 26 of the 28 in-car laptop computer workstations needed to equip all patrol and investigative vehicles. Background Information In 1984 the department installed mobile data terminals (MDT's)in the patrol squad cars to serve as the in-car componem of the Northwest Central Dispatch System (NWCDS) Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system. NwcDs uses the CAD system to dispatch non-emergency 9-1-1 calls and routine information to the patrol beat carS. Patrol officers mainly use the MDT's to check the status of license plates and driver's licenses, to provide some data input on their police calls, and for car-to-car messaging. In 1997 the department began replacing the obsolete mobile data terminals with Motorola 520 (M520) in-car laptop computer workstations. To date, the department has purchased 17 M520 workstations. Overall, the department has been satisfied with the performance of the M520 workstations. The workstations have proven to be more efficient and reliable than the MDT's, while also providing officers with an in-car report writing capability. The M520 workstation is an integrated system; the radio modem and the laptop computer are not separate elements, As ~uch, the'laptop computer aspect of the M520 cannot be removed fxom the squad.car.. Staff is recommending purchasing computer workstations that use separate modems and laptop computers for the [emaining in-ear computer workstations that will be installed in the detective'and supergisors cars. This would allow the laptop' computer elements Of the in,ear ' ' ' Page 1 of 1 MOUNT PROSPECT POLICE DEPARTMENT CHF99-27 FORMAL MEMORANDUM CONTROL NUMBER workstations to be removed from the cars for use in other situations consistent with the job requirements of the patrol supervisors and the investigators. Equipment - Radio Modem The NWCDS mobile data system is a proprietary system. As such, only Motorola communications protocols can be used. This means Motorola is the sole vendor for the modem and so~%vare elements of the in-car laptop computer workstation configuration the department is proposing. The only radio modem that can be u.sed is the Motorola VRM-650 radio modem. Equipment - Laptop Computer The second element of the proposed configuration is a ruggedized laptop computer. After examining several options, police staff is recommending the purchase of the Panasonic Toughbook 27 laptop computer. The Panasonic laptop computer is in use in other NWCDS member agencies and has been found to be flexible, durable and dependable. It offers more speed and memory than competing models and includes a touch screen capability. Also, the Panasonic has been determined to operate over a greater temperature range than competing models. Finally, the Panasonic Toughbook 27 is available from CDS Office Technologies under a current State of Illinois contract that was awarded through a competitive bid process. Recommendation The department is requesting a waiver of the bid process to purchase nine (9) Motorola VRM 650 radio modems at a total cost not to exceed $2,861 per unit, or $25,749 in total. The department also is requesting authorization to purchase nine (9) Panasonic Toughbook 27 laptop computers from CDS Office Technologies under the current State contract at a cost not to exceed $3,948 per unit, or $35,532 in total. The total cost of both purchases would be $61,281. Funds are available in the 2000 budget from the following .source: 5107701 - 670072 Mobile Data Terminals - Police (page 284) $69,153' * = Remaining funds will be used to purchase mounting hardware, programming equipment and word processing software for the new workstations. This amount includes the police department's remmning 1998 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant funds. Attachments RWP/rr cc: Deputy Chief Daley Deputy Chief Richardson . /toughbook27 notebook PCs for mobile professionals Now with s.c.,,ty ~o.t ..... P~sswor~ sec~.~y: S.pe~v,so,. use,. Co;~e~ ~,~;~, 300MHz CPU Wa,,,.~ · 3 veer , m,teo warranty, pa,ts & labor ' TAKEI1.'--' - C~D Network. * CF-WMED271CDP ' 1-800-662-3537 · M~o,~ c~ w~.panason c.com/toughbook Pentium* ii ~nhgufabons (SDRAM} Papasonlc DEC 08 '99 11:44 FR MOTOROLA TO 93921070 Do0ombor ~, 1999 To: Ron Ri¢~d~on D~Tuty Mt. Pro~ Police Ymm: ~y Hill - Mot~la Ron: ~ fo~g ~o~ ~e ~c~ w~ ~ reg~g ~c ~$ ~20 mob~e dam ~8~ ~d~ ~ 650 M~ Plebe questi~. ~ob~e Work $~o~ 233 ~ ~t~] Pen~ Pr~sor 3 Wa~ ~m~ ~o m~m w/35 w~ power ~plifier 32 ~g ~M 3.2 GB ~d D~ W~d~ws In~ PCMC~ S1o~{2 ~e Color H~ D~k ~w ~te~ Heaer Extem~! Floppy D~k D~ve Pow~ ~ble 13~ ~ Di~a~ C~6~) Wav~ 100 ~mulation ~ 650 Mod~ ~ 650 r~o m~- ~cl~s; $~,8~1.00 · MC$ 2000 ra~0 · ~ 6~0 mo~ · ~ (3db ~ ~ low 1o~ c~le) EC 08 '99 11:45 FR MOTOROLA TO 939210?0 P.03 Mt, Pro~p~ De~ombcr 8, 1999 Page 2 Notes: I- Mounting bardwarc is not ~el~ howvv~ m~y co~g~aflo~ ~e av~le. 2- h~Mla~on is not ~clu&~ 3- pw~mlng ~d op~i~on of~e MWS 520 ~ ~e ~M 6~0 Modem ~ ~clud~ ~ ~cse pdce~ ~ i~ the 1~ of~e applie~on ~ o~ ~o ~S 520 ~ ~c l~ptop th~ you ~ ~ ~ m~ ~ Del{~ is ~pro~a~ly 8-10 w~ ~ ~ ti~ ~ o~ is r~eiv~ at ~e Sinc~ly, Ray~lI g~or Acco~t No.em Divi~iun MAR-~3-2~O 16:39 / P,O~xO~ Sales 800-367.1508 r ' Service 800-247.6771 ~ ~m~'~= Fax 217-753.6536 Date 3/8/2000 Customer Account # MT PROSPECT PD Quote Numben BILL TO AODRESS SHIP TO ADDRESS Company MT PROSPECT POLICE DEPT SAME Customer OFFICER STEVE BURRELL Address1 112 EAST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY Address2 City MT PROSPECT, IL 60056 Phons # 847-870-5669 Customer P.O. # Account RepresentatiVe: Darrell Cross CDS # Mfg ti Description Price Extended B PNC-R-t0225 CF-27EA6GCAM TOUGHBOOK 27 PI1300 8GB 64MB 10.4TFT $3480.00 $27840.00 (WINDOWS 95 ONLY) 8 PNC-E-50075 CF-WMBA7164 64MB EDO MEM MOD PNC #CF- BA6164 CF-62 CF-25 CF-35 $175,00 $1400.0C ~ ....,. ~'~', ~.21 - ~2831 ,~ ;',CP. CCC,"T. CT ~.%NCAP.~ CFF',Cr' LIC~'N'C~. .... ~ '~ · ~- 8 PNC-1-10335 CF-WMKB271 BACKLIT KEYBOARD $293.00 $2344.0( ~L PRODUCT SHIPPED IN.'CARTON. THANK YOU, DARRELL CROSS Subtotal $33605.[ ShiPping Service ~0.~ ~al~s Tax '$0.( . "· · SprinStleld:.. 612 So, DirksenPa~t~ay. Springfield, IL 62703 - Ph: (2i?) 528:893~ MAYOR ~ Gerald L. Farley VILLAGE MANAGER Michael E. Janonis TRUSTEES VILLAGE CLERK Timothy J. Corcoraa Velrna Lowe Wm. oefe. Village of Mount Prospect Richard M, Lokrstor fer Michaele W. Skowron Community Development Department ~ho~e: 847/818-5328 Dennis G. Prikkel Fax: 847/818-5329 Irvana K. Wilks 100 South Emerson Street Mount ProsPect, Illinois 60056 TDD: 847/392-6064 AGENDA MOUNT PROSPECT SIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING LOCATION: MEETING DATE & TIME: 2nd Floor Conference Room Monday Village Hall April 17, 2000 I00 South Emerson Street 7:30 p.m. Mount Prospect, IL 60056 I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MiNUTES - December 20, 1999 A. SRB-07-99 / Hobby Lobby / 1480 S. Elmhurst Road iV. NEW BUSiNESS A. SRB-01-2000 / 609 N. Main Street/Request for a Special Use Permit for the addition of an electronic message center to a free-standing sign at Rand Medical Center V. QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS VI. 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 MOUNT PROSPECT SIGN REVIEW BOARD CASE NO. SRB-07-99 Hearing Date: December 20, 1999 PETITIONER: Signs of Distinction, Inc. 149 S. Wheeling Road Wheeling, IL 60090 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1480 S. Elmhurst Road PUBLICATION DATE: Wednesday, December 15, 1999/DAILY HERALD REQUEST: Variation to increase the size of the wall sign from 150 square feet to 351 square feet (Sec. 7.305.B.2.b), MEMBERS PRESENT: Adelaide Thulin, Chairperson Elizabeth A. Luxem Richard Rogers Philip Stephenson MEMBERS ABSENT: John McDermott Warren E. Kostak STAFF PRESENT: Jeff Perkins, Planner INTERESTED PARTIES: William McDonald, Signs of Distinction, Inc. The regular meeting of the Mount Prospect Sign Review Board was called to order by Chairperson Adelaide Thulin at 7:55 p.m. at the Village Hall, 100 South Emerson Street, Mount Prospect, Illinois. Chairperson Thulin asked if there were any questions or comments on the minutes from October 18, 1999. As there were none, Phillip Stephenson made a motion to approve. Richard Rogers seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0. Chairperson Thulin introduced Case SRB-07-99, a request by Hobby Lobby for a variation to increase the size ora proposed wall sign. She asked the petitioner, William McDonald, to make his presentation. Mr. McDonald reviewed his client's request, to increase the Hobby Lobby canopy sign to 351 square feet. Mr. McDonald explained that his client had requested the larger sign to properly identify the business, as it is set back approximately 400 feet from the Elmhurst Road right-of-way. Mr. Perkins briefly described previous SRB approvals for increases lo the size of wall or canopy signs at Randhurst Jewel/Osco, Menard's, and the Big K store next door to the subject site and in the same plaza. He stated that those previous approvals were based on the large size of the fa~:ades and the distance of those fagades from the right of way. He then described the rationale for staff's recommendation as based on the ratio of sign size to canopy size and showed the SRB exhibits showing the comparative appearance &the five and six foot signs. Mr. Stephenson asked when the K-Mart sign was approved. Mr. Perkins stated that it was approved late in 1998. Mr. Rogers inquired as to the height of the approved K-Mart sign. Mr. Perkins stated that the "K" was approved at l0 feet in height and that the overall width &the sign was 36.5 feet in width. Mr. Rogers stated that he remembered that the SRB had also previously approved a 6' sign at OfficeMax, based on setback from the right-of-way and size of the facade. The SRB briefly discussed the location of the subject faqade from the K-Mart canopy. ign Review Board December 20, 1998 Meeting Adelaide Thulin, Chairperson Page 2 Mr. Rogers stated that, although he did not have a particular problem with the proposed six-foot sign, he felt that the five-foot sign was better proportioned to the canopy and was more aesthetically pleasing. Mr. Perkins agreed with his assessment and reiterated the fact that staff had based its recommendation on the ratio of sign to signable area (55%) from the K-Mart approval. The SRB discussed the size of the sign in comparison to overall building size for the subject property and previously approved signs. Mr. Perkins stated that the requested sign was similar in overall size to signs approved for K-Mart, Manard's, and Jewel/Osco. Mr. Rogers pointed out that those structures and fagades are all considerably larger than the subject site. Ms. Thulin stated that she favored the proposed six foot sign to improve its visibility from the street. Ms. Luxem agreed that stores at this end of the plaza have had problems with visibility, but stated that the six foot sign was a little crowded on the fagade. Mr. Rogers agreed with that assessment and inquired if the applicant would consider a five-and-one-half foot sign. Mr. McDonald stated that they probably would. Mr. Stephenson asked if anything had been fabricated. Mr. McDonald stated that, to his knowledge, nothing had been fabricated, but that the sign fabricator may have the six-foot letters in stock. Mr. Rogers moved to approve a Variation for a Hobby Lobby canopy sign five feet in height and a maximum of 250 square feet in area. Mr. Stephenson seconded the motion. After a brief discussion of the merits of a five-foot sign, rather than a six-foot sign, the Sign Review Board voted 3-1 (AYES - Stephenson, Luxem, Rogers NAY - Thulin) to approve a five-foot tall, 250 square foot canopy sign. Mr. Stephenson made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Ms. Luxem seconded the motion. Motion carried by voice and the meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m. ins, lanner H:\GEN\PLNG\SRB\SRB 1999\SRB-7-99 Minutes (Hobby Lobby).doc MAYOR ~ VILLAGE MANAGER Gerald L. Farley ~ MichaeI E. Jan(mis TRUSTEES VILLAGE CLERK Timothy J. Coreoran Velma Lowe Paul Wm. Hoefert Lo storfer Village of Mount Prospect De,mis G. Prikkel Phone: 847/392-6000 Michaele W. Skowron Fax: 847/392-6022 Irvana K. Wilks 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 TDD: 847/392-6064 NOTICE THE WEDNESDAY, APRIL 19, 2000 MEETING OF THE PLAN COMMISSION HAS BEEN CANCELLED. AN AGENDA WILL BE SENT PRIOR TO THE NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING. Dated this 12th day of April, 2000.