The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOW Agenda Packet 04/25/2000 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA Meeting Location: Meeting Date and Time: Mount Prospect Senior Center Tuesday, April 25, 2000 50 South Emerson Street 7:30 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL Mayor Gerald L. Farley Trustee Timothy Corcoran Trustee Dennis Prikkel Trustee Paul Hoefert Trustee Michaele Skowron Trustee Richard Lohrstorfer Trustee Irvana Wilks II. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES OF APRIL 11, 2000 II1. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD IV. FLOOD CONTROL/STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT UPDATE Starting back in the late 1980s, the Village embarked on an aggressive Flood Control/Stormwater Management Program designed to lessen the incidents of flooding within the community. The Village's approach has been comprehensive in nature and includes both "bdcks and mortar" flood control projects and progressive stormwater management regulations. The results of this effort have benefited substantial portions of the Village by significantly reducing incidences of basement as well as overland flooding. Additionally, stormwater management regulations have enabled Village residents to enjoy very favorable flood insurance rates as well as minimize the impact of FEMA Flood Plain Maps on property values and development potential. Tuesday evening's discussion will provide a comprehensive review of the status of component parts of the Program. The following areas will specifically be covered: Weller Creek Weller Creek is severely eroding along approximately 2,500 feet of its channel length between Route 83 and School Street. The length of the Creek between these two streets is almost 3,000 feet. In 1998, a 500-foot section of the Creek was the subject of a Bank Stabilization Project. Staff is currently working with adjacent residences to develop a comprehensive stabilization plan that will protect the remaining portion of this vital watershed asset. NOTE: ANY' INDIVIDUAL WHO WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND THIS MEETING BUT BECAUSE OF A DISABILITY NEEDS SOME ACCOMMODATION TO PARTICIPATE, SHOULD CONTACT THE VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 100 SOUTH EMERSON, MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 60056, 847/392-6000, EXTENSION 5327, TDD #847/392-6064. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM In November of 1990, the Village Board adopted a Stormwater Management Program designed to reduce the magnitude and frequency of flooding in selected areas of the Village. The initial Program included 14 different Flood Control Projects Village-wide at an est[mated cost of $18.3 million. Since its inception, 13 of the 14 Projects have been started and/or completed at a total cost of $15,991,573. Completion of these projects has significantly reduced the incidents of basement and overland flooding. REVISED FLOODPLAIN MAPS AND LEVEE 37 UPDATE The propensity of the Des Plaines River to over[Iow its banks has put the far northern portion of the Village at substantial risk for overland flooding. The Village has been working with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers and other local bodies to establish a viable Flood Control Project that will minimize the risk of future flooding. Substantial progress has been made in that regard with a proposal to construct a floodwall along the eastern edge of River Road receiving a high rating for cost effectiveness. Staff has also been working closely with residents in this area of town to reduce the impact of revised FEMA Floodplain Maps. Our appeal of proposed changes appears to have resulted in modifications that will favorably impact property values in this area. Attached are staff reports, which provide important background information on each of these efforts. Additionally, residents affected by the Weller Creek Bank Stabilization Project have been invited to attend as well as the Village's consulting engineer, Earth Tech. Appropriate Village staff will also be in attendance. All will be on hand to provide background information and facilitate discussion. V. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT VI. ANY OTHER BUSINESS VII. ADJOURNMENT MINUTES COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE APRIL 11, 2000 I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Mayor Gerald Farley. Present at the meeting were: Trustees Timothy Comoran, Paul Hoefert, Richard Lohrstorfer, Michaele Skowron and Irvana Wilks. Absent from the meeting was Trustee Dennis Prikkel. Staff members present included Village Manager Michael E. Janonis, Assistant Village Manager David Strahl and Community Development Director William Cooney. I1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of Minutes from March 28, 2000. Motion made by Trustee Hoefer~ and Seconded by Trustee Lohrstorfer to approve the Minutes. Minutes were approved unanimously. Trustee Corcoran abstained. Ill. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD None. IV. REVIEW STATUS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Mayor Farley stated that the Board periodically reviews the existing Boards and Commissions and also looks at the various missions of the groups to determine if there needs to be any alterations or reconfigurations. The recommendations for consolidation or revision is included with a memorandum submitted to the Village Board for consideration. Mayor's Recommendation #1 The first recommendation is the dissolution of the Business District Development and Redevelopment Commission (BDRRC). He is also recommending the increase in membership from seven to nine for the Economic Development Commission (EDC). General comments from Village Board members included the following items: There was some discussion regarding the completion of the duties of BDDRC. There was also some discussion regarding the additional members to the EDC in an attempt to broaden the membership base. Adelaide Thulin, Four South Owen, spoke. She is the current Chair of the Sign Review Board. She stated she would support disbanding the Sign Review Board as recommended by the Mayor and would consider accepting a transfer of membership to the EDC. Norm Kurtz, Acting Chair of the EDC, spoke. He stated the EDC currently meets five to six times per year and would welcome additional members to enhance the cross-section of interest on the Commission. Consensus of the Village Board' was to disband the Business District Development and Redevelopment Commission and increase the number of members assigned to the Economic Development Commission from seven to nine. It was also recommended that any members from BDRRC would be considered for membership of the EDC along with a transfer of the previous duties assigned to the BDRRC will now fall under the responsibility of the EDC. Mayor's Recommendation #2 The recommendation is to reduce the membership on the Plan Commission from nine to seven members, The primary purpose for this recommendation is to make it easier for a quorum to be convened. Carol Tortorello, Plan Commission member, spoke. She supports the reduction in the number of membership to make it easier to obtain a quorum for meeting purposes. Consensus of the Village Board was to reduce the number of Plan Commission members from nine to seven members. Mayor's Recommendation #3 Delete the Sign Review Board because much of the function has been absorbed by existing staff and the duties for the Sign Review Board could easily be transferred to the ZBA. Arlene Juracek, Chairperson of the ZBA, spoke. She would welcome incorporating the sign review process into the ZBA umbrella and would also welcome any members from the Sign Review Board to the ZBA. Village Manager Janonis stated that he would work with the Village Attorney to incorporate relevant duties of the Sign Review Board into the ZBA functions as spelled out by Village Code. 2 Consensus of the Village Board was to disband the Sign Review Board and transfer the functions to the ZBA. Mayor's Recommendation ~4 This recommendation is to reduce the size of the Solid Waste Commission from nine to seven members and modify the meeting schedule. Again, this recommendation is intended to improve the opportunity for a quorum to be present and to relax the meeting schedule so that the Commission can meet when relevant topics are necessary. Ken Westlake, Chairman of the Solid Waste Commission, spoke. He stated that he would support the proposed changes since the Commission is already down one member and they expect to lose another member due to a relocation. He also is supportive of the change in meeting schedule because of the limited amount of business when the Commission is not considering the Solid Waste Contract. He would also recommend the Village Board consider reconstituting the Commission in the future to an advisory group that would deal with broader issues related to the environment. General comments from the Village Board members included the following items: A number of Board members stated they were supportive of the change in the Commission to address broad environmental issues. Ken Westlake stated that he could draft some possible environmental activities for the Village Board to consider if in fact they want to reconstitute the Solid Waste Commission. Consensus of the Village Board was to alter the Solid Waste Commission by reducing the number of members from nine to seven and modify the meeting schedule. John Korn, Chairman of the Finance Commission, spoke. He suggested that the Village Board also look at cleaning up some of the language in the Finance Commission charter at the same time as these other alterations regarding the Commissions are undertaken. Alicen Prikkel, Chairperson for the Youth Commission, spoke. She requested some language clarification and pointed out possible errors in consistency regarding the Ordinance establishing the Youth Commission. She would also suggest options be considered to remove members for non-attendance. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: 3 There were several comments regarding the need to consider minimal attendance standards for all Boards and Commissions. There was also a comment stating that it is important to review attendance over the course of a year or a period consistent with the meetings of the group to determine whether there are attendance issues. Village Manager Janonis stated the Youth Commission could establish a smaller quorum if necessary in order to conduct business due to the large number of members. Trustee Lohrstorfer spoke. He stated that recent discussions with the Chair and Village staff have led to a strategic planning session in the next couple of weeks and this process should lay the groundwork for future discussion among the Youth Commission. David Schein, 700 Ivanhoe, spoke. He is a member of TAP-Mount Prospect and he related his experience at attempting to get people to show up for the meetings and the need to obtain additional teen members. Village Manager Janonis stated that another issue which should be addressed at the same time as changes to the Boards and Commissions is a change in the resolution providing for a free vehicle stickers for members of the various Boards and Commissions. He also stated that there is a need to clarify language within the Resolution as to how Youth Commission members benefit from a free vehicle sticker when some members may not have access to a vehicle. He suggests that a car be in the Youth Commission member's name in order to trigger the opportunity for a free vehicle sticker. General consensus of the Village Board would be to consider a free vehicle sticker per household for a member of the Youth Commission. V. CONSENT AGENDA DISCUSSION Village Manager Janonis stated that the discussion regarding the Consent Agenda has come up in the past (1978) and most recently in 1998. He stated the use of a Consent Agenda is quite common in other communities as evidenced by the survey material that is submitted with the Agenda. He stated the use of a Consent Agenda would require a change in the Code regarding the Order of Business and the consideration to eliminate the concurrence vote for ZBA cases require only two readings. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: 4 Some Board members felt that it is not necessary that every item be available for full discussion when it is a routine matter. However, several members felt that they would like the option for a citizen to request the removal of an item from the Consent Agenda for discussion purposes. There was also a concern that an alteration to the Consent Agenda format would not allow an open forum for discussion and would allow Trustees to hide behind the Consent Agenda and not be forced to give an opinion on various items. There was also a concern regarding what items would be considered for the Consent Agenda purposes. There was a suggestion that housekeeping items be included as a Consent Agenda item. There was a comment regarding the need to make the meeting value added from a citizen perspective to conduct business in a prudent manner. There was also a suggestion that a citizen be defined for purposes of requesting removal of an item from a Consent Agenda. John Korn, Chair of the Finance Commission, spoke. He felt that the option of a Consent Agenda has merit and would recommend the Board consider controls so that every item is not pulled from Consent and no benefit is derived from Consent Agenda vote. It was also suggested that the Village undertake an extensive public relations campaign to notify the public of the change in business so that they are familiar with the process. Consensus of the Village Board was to consider a Consent Agenda Ordinance and allow a citizen, Trustee or staff member to request an item to be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion purposes. It was also recommended that the concurrence vote be removed from the ZBA vote process. It was also recommended that the Invocation be moved to a position on the Order of Business ahead of the Pledge of Allegiance. Items which the Village Board would consider for Consent Agenda purposes include the following items: Minutes Bills Resolutions Approval of Public Improvements CDBG Approval Second Reading on Non-Controversial Issue Bid Results The Village Board would not like to see the following items on Consent: Levy Ordinance Budget Approval Any ZBA Appeals 5 VI. ELECTED OFFICIAL REIMBURSEMENT POLICY Mayor Farley stated that this item is only presented for clarification purposes for the Village Board to consider a policy that has been unwritten and enforced by the Village Manager in the past. Village Manager Janonis stated that there quite a few official functions that Board members are invited to and the majority of these functions have costs associated with them. He would suggest the establishment of a stipend for the use by individual members for this purpose if, in fact, the general parameters as outlined are acceptable. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: There was a concern that it would be necessary to define a charitable event. There also was a comment regarding the need to encourage participation in events as a representative of the Village. Several members felt that the Celestial Celebration expense should not be considered a reimbursable expense. It was also suggested that the spouse of the Mayor be included as an expense to the Village for these functions due to the unique status of the Mayor as a representative of the entire Village. Hank Friedrichs, 320 West Central, spoke. He stated that he feels it is necessary for the Trustees to make an appearance at employee retirement dinners so the inclusion of these expenses should be considered. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: Some members felt it would be helpful to have a written policy while others felt that elected officials must be responsible to achieve their status as Trustees and there has not been a problem in the past. A comment was made that the burden of enforcement through the policy has fallen to the Village Manager and Mayor and it would be good to have some guidelines for new Trustees. Village Manager Janonis suggested that a single page outline be provided as a guideline for consideration of expenses related to Village Trustee functions. Consensus of the Village Board was to consider a general outline but not institute a formal policy at this time. VII. MANAGER'S REPORT Village Manager Janonis stated the Welcome New Resident event is scheduled from 9:00 a.m. until 11:00 a.m. on April 22 at the Senior Center. 6 III. ANYOTHER BUSINESS None. CLOSED SESSION Motion made by Trustee Hoefert and Seconded by Trustee Skowron to move into Closed Session to discuss Personnel and Litigation. Motion was approved. Meeting moved into Closed Session at 10:15 p.m. Meeting reconvened into Open Session at 11:14 p.m. A discussion took place regarding upcoming meeting schedules. IX. ADJOURNMENT No other business was transacted and the meeting was adjourned at 11:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, DAVID STRAHL Assistant Village Manager DSlrcc H:\GEN\Cow~Minutes\031400 COW Minutes.doc 7 Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFIOE MEMORANDUM T~ crr~ us~ p.,oW TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS FROM: DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: APRIL 20, 2000 SUB J: WELLER CREEK STREAMBANK STABILIZATION PROJECT REACH A2 PROBLEM STATEMENT Waller Creek is severely eroding along approximately 2,500 feet of its channel length between Route 83 and School Street. The length of the creek between these two (2) streets is actually almost 3,000 feet. However, a 500' section of this reach was the subject of a bank stabilization project in 1998. The 500' section repaired in 1998 stretches from the Emerson Street vehicular bridge to a point approximately 100 feet west of the Main Street pedestrian bridge. This section of creek has been identified as Reach A1 The remainder of the creek in this area is called Reach A2. All of Reach A2 is actively eroding. Reach A2 is the primary subject of the proposed streambank stabilization project presented in this memorandum The primary causes of erosion in Reach A2 have been: · Increased runoff due to urbanization of the watershed. · invasion of vegetation unsuitable for bank stabilization. · Mechanical augmentation of the channel depth. · Presence of unstable, sandy, silty, soils. If left unchecked, erosion in this reach will result in continued loss of land as well as increased sedimentation of the creek channel and downstream waters. Similarly, utility disruptions and property damage caused by undermined bank trees falling on utility conduits and private property will also increase. BACKGROUND Waller Creek is an urban stream with headwaters at its intersection with Central Road. The watershed consists of the southeast portion of the Village of Arlington Heights, as well as the northwest side of Mount Prospect. Flows in the project area of Waller Creek vary from 1,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) during a 10-year storm to 2,000 cfs during a 100-year storm. Soils in the area are primarily Sawmill Silty Clay Loam. The Des Plaines River receives all waters from Waller Creek. Before residential development of the watershed, the channel was straightened to facilitate agricultural drainage. Now, due to increased flows caused by urbanization, the Page 2 of 6 Welier Creek Streambank Stabilization Project, Reach A2 April 20, 2000 channel is reproducing its natural meander by eroding adjacent private property and creating steep 12-foot high banks. All of Reach A (including both Reach A1 and Reach A2) dissects a residential neighborhood comprised of single-family homes. The backyards or sideyards of all the homes along the creek extend to the channel bank. We#er Creek Ad Hoc Committee During the summer of 1995, the Mayor and Board of Trustees convened the Weller Creek Ad Hoc Committee as part of an effort to solicit public involvement in the resolution of the Weller Creek streambank erosion problem. This group was comprised of Mount Prospect residents owning property adjacent to the creek. Over the course of ten months, this committee worked with Village staff and channel stability experts from Earth Tech, Inc, a professional consulting engineering firm, to identify the sources of streambank erosion and develop a publicly palatable, environmentally sound, cost effective, plan to stabilize the creek banks. This work included a physical examination of over 2 miles of Weller Creek, from School Street to the headwaters at Central Road, as well as several site visits to observe both bioengineered solutions and "hard engineering" structural solutions. In addition, this group convened several public meetings to discuss the project and made two (2) public presentations to the Village Board. This effort culminated in a final concept report recommending streambank stabilization in multiple phases utilizing non-structural, bioengineering techniques to the greatest extent practical. The Mayor and Board of Trustees received and endorsed this recommendation at a public meeting on June 25, 1996. We#er Creek Streambank Stabilization Project, Reach A 1 Reach A1 was the highest priority identified in the Weller Creek Ad Hoc Committee's final concept report. Repair work in this reach included raising the deck elevation of the Emerson Street vehicular bridge, replacing the Main Street pedestrian bridge, installing a sheet pile retaining wall on the south bank, and stabilizing the north bank with a-jacks and a permanent erosion control blanket seeded with flood tolerant grasses. In addition, monoslab and geoweb pavers were placed to stabilize the creek bottom. These improvements were completed during the 1998 summer construction season at a cost of $1,243,883. $500,000 worth of funding for this project was provided by a grant from the Illinois Department of Natural Resources. Earth Tech provided design engineering and construction engineering services for this project. Illinois First Grant Reach A2 (the balance of Reach A), was identified as the second priority along Weller Creek. Unfortunately, no funding was available to continue bank stabilization work once Reach A1 was completed. Furthermore, staff estimated that no funding would be available for streambank stabilization until at least 2006. As a result, the ad hoc committee went on hiatus and plans for stabilizing the rest of Reach A were placed on a shelf. However, through the efforts of State Representative Carolyn Krause, the Village has recently been able to secure a $1,000,000 grant for Weller Creek streambank stabilization work from the Illinois First program. This grant, combined with Page 3 of 6 Weller Creek Streambank Stabilization Project, Reach A2 April 20, 2000 approximately $1,600,000 of available Flood Control Construction Fund money, now makes it possible to resume streambank stabilization efforts in Reach A2. DISCUSSION On December 21, 1999, the Village Board authorized Earth Tech to perform a pre- design survey in the Reach A2 area. The purpose of this survey was to identify all of the property and right-of-way issues associated with bank stabilization work in this area. Specifically, Earth Tech was charged with accurately identifying the location of the creek and establishing its relationship with existing rights-of-way, easements, and private property lines. Furthermore, Earth Tech was also asked to evaluate existing field conditions and develop a specific plan for stabilizing this section of the creek utilizing streambank stabilization techniques endorsed by the Weller Creek Ad Hoc Committee in their 1996 final concept report. Earth Tech's research revealed that the eastern part of the reach (between Emerson Street and School Street) presents challenges that are very different from those found in the western part of the reach (between Route 83 and Main Street). East Branch To begin with, the creek channel in the eastern part of the reach is basically centered within a 60' wide right-of-way. As such, there are no encroachments upon private property and there is no need to acquire additional right-of-way. Furthermore, though the banks are steep and high in this part of the reach, the channel has enough width that it is possible to stabilize the banks by installing a-jacks to firm up the toe and then regrading the banks to at least a 1:1-1/2 slope. The ragraded banks would then be covered with a permanent erosion control blanket and seeded with flood tolerant grasses. In order to perform this work, and promote the growth of bank grasses, the tree canopy in this part of the reach will have to be removed. West Branch The creek channel in the westem part of the reach runs through a 30' wide creek right- of-way. The existing creek channel, however, is easily 60' wide from top of bank to top of bank. For the most part, the south half of the channel runs across a 30' wide drainage easement on the private parcels adjacent to the south bank of the creek. Needless to say, the banks are very sheer in this part of the creek. Stabilization efforts in this area are complicated further by the fact that the banks contain numerous sandy/silty soil seams and there are some homes in close proximity to the banks. To stabilize the banks in the western part of the reach, Earth Tech recommends installing a sheet pile retaining wall along the entire south side of the channel from the Route 83 bridge wing wall to the western terminus of the sheet pile wall installed as part of the 1998 bank stabilization project. In addition, Earth Tech also recommends installing a sheet pile retaining wall along the north side of the channel from the Route 83 bridge wing wall to point just opposite the Village-owned lot at 208 West Hiawatha Trail. Installing a-jacks along the toe and regrading the slope would stabilize the remainder of the north bank. A permanent erosion control blanket would then be placed on the north bank and the entire slope would be seeded with flood tolerant grasses. The installation of the sheet pile retaining walls and the need to get sunlight on the north Page 4 of 6 Weller Creek Streambank Stabilization Project, Reach A2 Apd120, 2000 bank grass would also necessitate the removal of the tree canopy in this part of the reach as well. Estimated Project Cost Earth Tech estimates that the total cost to stabilize the banks in both the east part and west part of Reach A2 is approximately $2,200,000. This estimate does not include any fees for design engineering or construction engineering. Staff Recommendations Staff recommends that the any bank stabilization efforts in the western part of this reach include provisions for cleaning up the complicated property rights issues that affect the creek in this area. Specifically, staff recommends that the Village establish a 50' wide creek right-of-way between Route 83 and Main Street by combining the existing 30' wide right-of-way with an additional 20' of right-of-way created by the donation of land from private property owners adjacent to the creek. For the most part, the additional 20' is land that the creek channel already occupies so the impact on property owners is debatable at best. Most of the property that is needed is on the south side of the channel. However, there is also a need to acquire some property from two (2) homeowners on the north bank in order to mitigate the impact of the creek's bend near 14 West Hiawatha. Homeownem adjacent to the south bank already have a 30' wide easement for the creek platted on their parcels. In return for donating the land, staff recommends that the Village vacate the remainder of the drainage easement thereby relinquishing external interest in 10' of land for the homeowners along the south bank. To sweeten the deal, staff also recommends that the Village accept responsibility for property transfer costs associated with the establishment of the new creek right-of-way. Staff also recognizes that the loss of the tree canopy in this reach will affect the aesthetics of the neighborhood. To compensate, staff recommends that each property owner adjacent to the proposed project area be offered a landscape allowance. Each homeowner could use their allowance to install a landscape screen of their own design along their rear property lines adjacent to the creek right-of-way. Homeowners would pick plantings from a pre-approved list of bushes and Iow growing trees that will support the new habitat created by the streambank stabilization treatments. The plantings would be installed by a single landscape contractor hired by the Village as part of the streambank stabilization project. Finally, staff also recommends that the project be phased over two (2) years. It is not possible to complete all of the work in both the eastern and western parts before the end of the 2000 construction season. Therefore, staff proposes to fix the western part of the reach (between Route 83 and Main Street) this year and the eastern part (between Emerson Street and School Street) in 2001. Following is the project schedule proposed by staff: Award Design Contract May 2, 2000 Bid Opening June 27, 2000 Start Construction in A2 West July 31,2000 Complete Construction in A2 West November 15, 2000 Start Construction in A2 East Mamh 2001 Complete Construction in A2 East October 2001 Page 5 of 6 Weller Creek Streambank Stabilization Project, Reach A2 April 20, 2000 Weller Creek Ad Hoc Committee Earth Tech's findings and staff's recommendations were presented to the Weller Creek Ad Hoc Committee on March 22, 2000. A copy of the minutes of that meeting are attached for your reference. In summary, the ad hoc committee agreed with Earth Tech's proposed concept design and endorsed staff's recommendations. Resident Meetings On April 3, 2000 a public meeting was held at the Public Works Facility to explain the proposed improvements to Weller Creek residents living between Route 83 and Main Street. A similar meeting was held on April 5, 2000 for residents living between Emerson Street and School Street. Flyers publicizing the meetings were hand-delivered to affected residents prior to both meetings. 23 homes were notified prior to the April 3 meeting and 17 residents attended. 32 homes were notified prior to the April 5 meeting and 22 residents attended that meeting. Although there was some apprehension about tree loss, the consensus opinion of residents attending these meetings seemed to support the project as defined herein. PROPOSAL Since funds are available and there appears to be substantial public support for this project, staff recommends proceeding with bank stabilization efforts along Weller Creek. The next step in the process is to prepare detailed construction drawings, bid specifications, and contract documents. There is also a need to arrange plats of subdivision and other documents necessary to establish the new creek right-of-way. Finally, there is a need to review received bids and make an award recommendation. Staff has requested and received a proposal from Earth Tech to perform all of these tasks. Earth Tech's fee for this work is an amount not to exceed $166,725. RECOMMENDATION Earth Tech has been the engineer on this project since it's inception in 1995 and, to date, the results of their recommendations and designs have accomplished our goal to stabilize the banks of Weller Creek. Earth Tech provided both design engineering services and construction inspection services for the Weller Creek Streambank Stabilization Project, Reach A1 in 1998. The Village received three (3) separate awards for that project recognizing its unique blend of hard engineering solutions (sheet pile retaining wall) and bioengineering treatments. More importantly, the 1998 project has been well received by Weller Creek residents and we continue to receive compliments on the project to this day. Furthermore, Earth Tech's fee for design is consistent with the industry norm for the design of specialized civil engineering projects. Typically, we expect design fees for these types of projects to be approximately 10% of the estimated construction cost. Earth Tech's fee of $166,725 is approximately 7-1/2% of the estimated construction cost. It is the opinion of staff that Earth Tech's fee is competitive, responsive, and indicative of their desire to continue working with the Village to complete the Weller Creek streambank stabilization projects. age 6 of 6 Weller Creek Streambank Stabilization Project, Reach A2. April 20, 2000 Therefore, it is my recommendation that we accept Earth Tech's proposal to perform design engineering for Reach A2 of the Weller Creek Streambank Stabilization Project for a fee not to exceed $166,725. Funding for this proposed expenditure is available in account number 5907704-690101 ($171,500) and account number 5907704-690102 ($2,420,000) on Page 287 of the current budget. With your approval, it is our intention to solicit Village Board concurrence with this position at the May 2, 2000 Village Board meeting. ~ Sean P. Dorsey~ I concur. Gler~ R An~'ler -- ' Director of Public Works Cc: Director of Public Works Glen R. Andler SPD/spd C:\CREEKS\WELLER\PHASE 2\PHASE 2 DESIGN MEMO TO MJ,DOC Village of Mount Prospect Weller Creek Ad Hoc Committee Meeting of March 22, 2000 PRESENT: Peter Hegel, 204 W. Hiawatha Trail (Ad Hoc Committee) Elizabeth Hegel, 204 W. Hiawatha Trail (Ad Hoc Committee) Dolores Hanvey, I0 W. Hiawatha Trail (Ad Hoc Committee) Susan Wasmund, 200 E. Hiawatha Trail (Ad Hoc Committee) Maureen Majerus, 205 East Berkshire Lane (Ad Hoc Committee) Grace DeVito, 701 South Main Street (Ad Hoc Committee Chair) Mel Buetnter, 503 South Owen Street (Weller Creek Drainage Dist.) Daniel Schnitta, 911 South Lancaster (Weller Creek Drainage Dist.) Fred Thulin, 4 South Owen Street (Weller Creek Drainage Dist.) Kurt Lindstrom - EarthTech, Inc. Melcy Pond - Earth Tech, Inc. Glen R. Andler - Director of Public Works Sean P. Dorsey - Deputy Director of Public Works ABSENT: Scott Davis (Ad Hoc Committee) Phil Johnson (Ad Hoc Committee) CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson DeVito called the meeting to order at 7:10 PM. OLD BUSINESS: A. PRESENTATION OF EARTH TECH SURVEY RESULTS AND FINAL CONCEPT PLANS. Public Works Director Glen Andler explained that Earth Tech has been hired by the Village to perform a pre-design survey of Weller Creek between Route 83 and Main Street and between Emerson Street and School Street. Mr. Andler noted that, pursuant to the 1996 Weller Creek Ad Hoc Committee Final Report, these sections are the next ones slated for rehabilitation as part of the Village's creek streambank stabilization program. Specifically, Earth Teeh was asked to accurately identify the existing location of the creek and how that location relates to property lines, right-of-way lines, and easements in the project area. Earth Tech was also asked to examine the topography and geology of the area and render a concept plan for repairing the channel. Melcy Pond stated that the entire creek channel in the project area can be characterized as a waterway with high, steep, banks covered by invasive, non-native, plants and trees. The bank soils are sandy are not suited for supporting the sheer slopes. In general, erosion along Weller Creek occurs because normal, low flows constantly and consistently undermine the toe of the slopes creating cavities under the waterline. During high flows, the unsupported slopes cannot withstand the hydraulic forces and bank failures occur. In some cases, the failures have been dramatic. Sections of bank and entire trees have slid into the creek channel. Over the years, this type of erosion has Village of Mount Prospect Weller Creek Ad Hoc Committee resulted in significant loss of property, utility disruptions, and the degradation of water quality in downstream waters. Earth Tech's research revealed that the eastern part of the reach (between Emerson Street and School Street) presents challenges that are very different from those found in the western part of the reach (between Route 83 and Main Street). To begin with, the creek channel in the eastern part of the reach is basically centered within a 60' wide right-of- way. As such, there are no encroachments upon private property and there is no need to acquire additional right-of-way. Furthermore, though the banks are steep and high in this part of the reach, the channel has enough width that it is possible to stabilize the banks by installing a-jacks to firm up the toe and then regrading the banks to at least a 1:1-1/2 slope. The regraded banks would then be covered with a permanent erosion control blanket and seeded with flood tolerant grasses. In order to perform this work, and promote the growth of bank grosses, the tree canopy in this part of the reach will have to be removed. The creek channel in the western part of the reach runs through a 30' wide creek right-of- way. The existing creek channel, however, is easily 60' wide from top of bank to top of bank. For the most part, the south half of the channel runs across a 30' wide drainage easement on the private parcels adjacent to the south bank of the creek. Needless to say, the channel is very narrow in this part of the reach and the banks are sheer. Stabilization efforts in this area are complicated further by the fact that there are numerous sandy/silty soil pockets and there are some homes in close proximity to the banks. To stabilize the banks in the western part of the reach, Earth Tech recommends installing a sheet pile retaining wall along the entire south side of the channel from the Rome 83 bridge wing wall to the western terminus of the existing sheet pile wall. In addition, Earth Tech also recommends installing a sheet pile retaining wall along the north side of the channel from the Route 83 bridge wing wall to point just opposite the Village-owned lot at 208 West Hiawatha Trail. Installing a-jacks along the toe, regrading the slope, and seeding the bank with flood tolerant grasses would stabilize the remainder of the north bank. Ms. Pond emphasized that extensive tree removals will be necessary in both the east and west branches of this reach. She explained that tree removals will be necessary as a matter of procedure in order to install the bank stabilization treatments. The contractor will either remove or severely damage most of the bank trees as part of the process of installing the sheet pile wall or regrading the slopes. Furthermore, once the bank stabilization treatments are installed, the bank slopes will need greater exposure to sunlight in order to promote and sustain the growth of flood tolerant grasses. Ms. Pond also explained that Public Works staff has suggested the idea of providing each affected homeowner with a "landscaping allowance". The Village would fund the allowances as part of the project. Each affected homeowner would then be able to design their own landscape buffer by selecting bushes and/or trees from a pre-approved list. The selected trees and bushes would then be installed along the property lines adjacent to the creek right-of-way as part of the Village's project. The pre-approved list of plantings would be established by the Village and will consist primarily of bushes and trees that will provide a top-of-bank visual screen but will not create a dense canopy over the creek channel. The exact amount of the landscaping allowance has not yet been determined. Page 2 of 4 Village of Mount Prospect Weller Creek Ad Hoc Committee Public Works Director Andler stated that if the ad hoc committee endorses Earth Tech's concept plans, staff intends to hold two (2) separate informational meetings to explain the proposed project to affected residents. One meeting will be held on April 3, 2000 and the other on April 5, 2000. The April 3 meeting will primarily concentrate on the improvements between Route 83 and Main Street. The April 5 meeting will hig~hlight the improvements between Emerson Street and School Street. Mr. Andler also observed that it seems unlikely the entire project can be completed in one (1) construction season. Therefore, staffproposes to organize the project along a 2-year timeline. Work on the western branch (between Route 83 and Main Street) will start this year and should be substantially complete by the end of November. Work on the east reach (between Emerson Street and School Street) will start next spring and should be complete by November 2001. Mr. Andler commented that the west branch is the higher priority because erosion in that part of the reach is more severe. Furthermore, there is a need to coordinate the sheet pile wall installation with the reconstruction of the Route 83 bridge currently undexway. Elizabeth Hegel, 204 West Hiawatha Trail. Ms. Hegel asked if the Village would be able to show residents how much private property will be necessary to establish the new creek right-of-way. Mr. Andler responded that part of Earth Tech's contract includes finding all existing property lines and delineating the existing easements. Once this work is completed, Earth Tech will then identify the proposed top of bank for the post-bank stabilization creek channel. The distance between the new top of bank and the property line will identify the private property needed to establish the creek right-of-way. Kurt Lindstrom added that most of the survey work has already been completed and he has already started to mark where the new top of bank will be. He explained that he is using blue paint or blue lathe to denote the top of bank. Peter Hegel, 204 West Hiawatha Trail. Mr. Hegel asked Earth Tech to explain how the height of retaining wall was determined. Melcy Pond and Kurt Lindstrom responded that the designers should attempt to vary both the vertical and horizontal position of the wall. It should rise and fall as well as oscillate in and out. This is done to give the wall a more natural look. Unfortunately, the exact elevation and location of the wall cannot be determined on a lot by lot basis until the project is much further into the design process. Engineers will incorporate a number of factors into the wall design including grade changes and soil geology. However, the final product should resemble the meandering structure erected along the south bank of the creek as part of the 1998 bank stabilization project between Emerson Street and Main Street. Mr. Andler commented that the wall will probably be at one of its highest points near Mr. Hegel's property. Mr. Andler explained that the bank adjacent to Mr. Hegel's property is already very high and sheer. Since the Village is trying to limit the amount of private property needed for the creek right-of-way, the retaining wall will essentially have to match the existing elevations. Susan Wasmund, 200 East Hiawatha Trail. Ms. Wasmund asked if the wall design would incorporate the storm sewer structures that discharge into the creek. Melcy Pond stated that they would. Mr. Andler noted that several storm sewer discharges were incorporated into the design of the existing sheet pile wall. Ms. Pond explained that typically, storm structures are installed behind the wall and discharged through the wall Page 3 of 4 illage of Mount Prospect Weller Creek Ad Hoc Committee via a fabricated hole. The structures are usually designed as "drop" manholes that allow the water to discharge near the creek's normal water level instead of higher up the bank. Discharging near the normal water level reduces the likelihood that the discharge will scour the channel or opposite bank. There being no further questions about the presentation, Mr. Andler asked the committee to indicate whether or not they supported the project. All committee members present made statements expressing support for the project. OTHER BUSINESS No other business was introduced. NEXT MEETING No new meetings were scheduled. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:15 PM. Respectfully Submitted, Sean P. Dorsey Deputy Director of Public Works Page 4 of 4 ¢ Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS FROM: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: APRIL 20, 2000 SUBJECT: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM STATUS REPORT In November of 1990, the Village Board adopted a Stormwater Management Program designed to reduce the magnitude and frequency of flooding in selected areas of the Village. The initial program included 14 different flood control projects Village-wide at an estimated cost of $18,300,000. Aisc included was an erosion control project that dealt with the stabilization of the banks along Weller Creek between Central Road and School Street was added at an estimated cost of $6,000,000. With the aid of special, Iow-interest loans from the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) and sales tax revenue earmarked for flood control projects, the Village started Phase One projects in August of 1991. Since that time, 13 of the 14 projects have been started and/or completed at a total cost of $15,991,573 with $10,288,014 of it funded with IEPA loans. The sole remaining project from the initial program is the Hatlen Heights Storm Sewer Improvements at an estimated cost of $1,900,000. Work on Weller Creek began in 1996 with the award of a contract to perform a study of various bank stabilization methods. Along with that, an annual creek maintenance program was started in 1997 to clean up Village creeks and, in 1998, a section of Weller Creek between Emerson and Main Streets was repaired. To date, a total of $1,504,683 has been spent on Weller Creek. Most of this expenditure, ($1,243,833) was spent stabilizing banks and replacing bridges between Emerson Street and Main Street. An additional $150,000 has been spent dead limbs from trees and clearing debris from the creek channel. The balance ($110,800), was spent on a pre-design bank stabilization study and the Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) study. We have also started design work for the rehabilitation of the reach between School Street and Emerson Street and the reach between Main Street and Route 83. The estimated cost of this project is $2,591,000. $1,000,000 of the funding for this project will come from an Illinois First grant. The balance will come from available Flood Control Construction funds. Work remaining on Weller Creek includes approximately $2,200,000 worth of bank stabilization between Central Road and Route 83 (Reaches B, C, and D). In addition, staff has also identified the need to perform approximately $1,000,000 worth of bank stabilization work on McDonald Creek between the Wisconsin Central right-of-way and Kensington Road. Similar projects, each estimated to cost approximately $1,000,000, have Page 2 of 4 Stormwater Management Program Status Report April 20, 2000 also been identified for Feehanville Creek and Higgins Creek. None of these projects have been sanctioned by the Village Board and are presented here for informational purposes only. I have attached a table detailing all the Stormwater Management projects, their costs, and either actual or projected completion dates. Following is a brief description of each of those same projects. COMPLETED PROJECTS · Clearwater Flooding Area Constructed a new relief storm sewer extending along Busse Road from the Clearwater retention basin to the Mount Prospect Golf Course drainage ditch. Completed July 1992 at a cost of $755,112. · Des Plaines River Backwater Control Valves Installed large backwater control valves on the Village's existing storm sewer that discharges into the Des Plaines River. These valves keep the river from backing up into the Village's system during flood stage. Completed. August 1993 at a cost of $318,803. · Central/Wa-Pella, See-Gwun/Milburn Flooding Areas Constructed a new relief storm sewer extending along Wa-Pella and Can-Dota Streets from Central Road to Weller Creek. Completed January 1993 at a cost of $3,071,156. · Fairview Gardens Sanitary Area Constructed a parallel sanitary relief sewer, a new sanitary lift station, and a wet well from Homer and Central to Thayer and Stevenson. Completed July 1993 at a cost of $656,966. · Prospect Manor/North Main Flooding Area Constructed a combined relief sewer from Forest and Highland to the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District's (MWRD) deep tunnel sewer at business Center Drive and Rand Road. Completed May 1994 at a cost of $4,055,260. · Hatlen Heights Sanitary Area Constructed a parallel sanitary relief sewer from Hatlen and Beverly to the MWRD interceptor sewer at Weller Creek and Lincoln Street. Completed December 1994 at a cost of $1,947,357. · Stevenson/Thayer Flooding Area Constructed a relief storm sewer from Thayer and Stevenson to the Feehanville Drainage Ditch near Wolf Road. Completed October 1994 at a cost of $1,029,927. · See-Gwun/Golf Flooding Area Constructed a relief storm sewer from We-Go and Sunset to Na-Wa-Ta and Lonnquist. Completed September 1996 at a cost of $615,598. · Catalpa/Birch Flooding Area Constructed a relief storm sewer from Catalpa and Birch to Fern and Willow. Completed October 1995 at a cost of $252,561. · See-Gwun/Milburn Sanitary Area Constructed a parallel sanitary relief sewer and new sanitary relief station at Lincoln just east of We-Go to See-Gwun and Milburn; completed April 1998 at a cost of $1,209,330. Page 3 of 4 Stormwater Management Program Status Report April 11,2000 · Maple/Berkshire Sanitary Area Constructed a parallel sanitary relief sewer and new sanitary relief station on Berkshire between Maple and Elm. Project started Mamh 1999 and reached final completion in January 2000. The total cost of the project was $1,802,503 · Weller Creek CSO Study Analyzed the operational parameters of the combined sewer overflows (CSO) along Weller Creek using a computer model of the primary interceptors in the watershed. Project completed in June 1999 at a cost of $55,150. · Weller Creek Bank Stabilization Study Determined methods and estimated costs to stabilize the banks and replace two bridges along Weller Creek between School Street and Central Road. Completed January 1996 at a cost of $55,650. · Weller Creek Bank Stabilization and Bridge Replacements, Reach A1 In the area between Emerson and Main Street, constructed a sheet piling wall along the south bank; installed a monoslab channel bottom; stabilized the north bank utilizing bioengineering solutions; raised the Emerson Street Bridge; and removed and replaced the Main Street pedestrian bridge. Completed October 1998 at a cost of $1,243,833. This project was partially funded with a $500,000 grant from the Illinois Department of Natural Resources. IN PROGRESS PROJECTS · Melas Park/Crumley Erosion Control Install erosion control materials around the spillways in the Crumley and Melas Park Detention Basins. This project is slated for 2000 and final completion is expected by October. The estimated cost is $66,000. · Wedgewood Floodinq Area Install new storm sewer, and regrade drainage ditches. Projected completion date November 2000 at an estimated cost of $210,000. This project was originally scheduled for 2001 but was accelerated due to the receipt of a $200,000 Illinois First grant. · Creek Tree Maintenance Remove all deadwood and trees hanging in flow lines of Village- maintained creeks. Work began on Weller Creek in 1997, with $50,000 budgeted annually. To date, we have completed Weller Creek between School Street and Route 83 and Central Road south to Lincoln Street. The total cost for work to date is $150,000. The remainder of Weller Creek (between Lincoln Street and Route 83), McDonald Creek, Feehanville Creek, and Higgins Creek remain pending. · Weller Creek Bank Stabilization Reach A2 (Route 83 to Main Street and Emerson Street to School Street In the area between Main Street and Route 83 (excluding Reach A1 area), construct a sheet piling wall along the south bank; install a partial monoslab channel bottom; remove trees; and stabilize the north bank utilizing bioengineering solutions. In the area between School Street and Emerson Street, remove trees and stabilize both banks utilizing bioengineering solutions. The project is slated to start during summer 2000 and be completed by November 2001. The total cost is estimated to be $2,591,000. This project was originally slated for the out years beyond 2006 but was accelerated due to the receipt of a $1,000,000 Illinois First grant. age 4 of 4 Stormwater Management Program Status Report April 11, 2000 PENDING PROJECTS · Hatlen Heights Flooding Area Construct a relief storm sewer from Hatlen Avenue and Hatlen Court to the Crumley Detention Basin on Busse Road. This project was originally scheduled for 2001 but was deferred in order to fund Phase II of the Weller Creek Streambank Stabilization Project. This project is now slated for 2006. The estimated cost is $1,900,000. · Weller Creek Bank Stabilization Reaches B, C, and D install bank stabilization material along Weller Creek between Central Road and Lincoln Street and Lincoln Street and Route 83. Estimated cost: $2,200,000. This project does not have a projected construction date. Funding is not available until at least 2006. · McDonald Creek Bank Stabilization Install retaining wall and bioengineering streambank stabilization solutions along both banks of McDonald Creek between the Wisconsin Central Railroad right-of-way and Burning Bush Lane. Reestablish bank toe and regrade banks between Burning Bush Lane and Kensington Road. Estimated cost: $1,000,000. This project does not have a projected construction date. Funding is not available until at least 2006. · Feehanville Creek Bank Stabilization Stabilize banks with sheet pile retaining walls and/or vegetated geogrids at various locations. Reestablish bank toe and regrade banks. Estimated cost: $1,000,000. This project does not have a projected construction date. Funding is not available until at least 2006. · Higgins Creek Bank Stabilization Regrade banks and reestablish bank toe at various locations. Estimated cost: $1,000,000. This project does not have a projected construction date. Funding is not available until at least 2006. GLEN R. ANDLER G P,A/SPD/spd attach. X:\FILES\FRONTOFF~SEWERS\FLOOD_RE\STATUS 2000.DOC Village of Mount Prospect. Illinois Proposed Implementation Schedule for Stormwater Management April 2000 Phase I {19~t -92) Clea m~a:er Flooding Area $755,112 - - - 8-91 9-91 7-92 Des Plaines River BacEwater Valves 318,803 10-92 10-92 Yes 11-93 12~93 1-93 2-93 8-93 Phase I Totals $1,073,91 $ Phase I[ (1992-93) Centra;/Wapella-SeeGwun/MillbumFIo~d $3,07t.156 2-92 2-92 Yes 3-92 5-92 5-92 7-92 1-93 pllase III (1993-94) pcespect Manor/N orih Main FlOOding Area 10-92 10-92 Yes 11-92 I2-92 2-93 3-93 5~4 Fairview Ga tdens Sanita ~ Ama [..,....,.....~..~§~_6.~,~ 10-92 10-92 Yes 11-92 I2-92 2-93 3-93 7~93 Haflen Heights Sanitary Area l' $1,947,357 10,92 10*92 Yes 11-92 12-92 2-93 3-93 12-94 Phase III Totals [ $6'859'583 Phase IV (t994-95) Stewnsonffhayer Flooding Are ............................ .~".i".i"~[~;~9~,~i] $-~4 3-94 3'~4 5-94 ~-94 7-94 7-94 10-94 W~iler C,eek BQ~I¢ SfoEiliz~[on ~tuciy ............................. {iiiiiiiiiiiii~:~]~ili ~-ge - - . Totals t0 88014 11749742 [~"[[i[[i[[i[[~[."[."[~] Proiect$comr~letedunderodctinalbidamountaDproved. INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E..IANONIS ~)~ ~,~ ,,~ DATE: APRIL 20, 2000 ~~..~ SUBJECT: REVISED FLOODPLAIN MAPS AND LEVEE 37 UPDATE Recent information has come to my attention that provides me with an opportunity to give you an update on the Proposed FEMA Floodplain Maps and the Army Corps of Engineers' Levee 37 Project. REVISED FLOODPLAIN MAPS As you recall, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is in the process of revising the floodplain maps for all of Cook County. The Village of Mount Prospect filed an appeal to the maps stating that the floodway limits were incorrect. FEMA has sent a response to our appeal in their March 30, 2000 letter. It is with great pleasure that I present the results of the appeal: · Floodway Limits: FEMA concurred with our request and the a~ea ~fithin the floodway has been mduced and the floodm/ay limi&¢ have been moved closer to the l)es P/aines · Floodplain Limits: In support of reducing the area within the floodplain, the Village submitted aerial maps with ground elevations and individual elevation information for each building shown to be in the floodplain. FEMA agreed to use our aerial map information and individual building elevation information in determining the floodplain limits. By utilizing this information, the area m/ithin the floodl~lain has been reduced. The positive result of the appeal is directly attributable to two things: 1. The Village recognizing the potential problems with the proposed maps and taking action to have them corrected. 2. The technical skill and professional manner in which our consultant Mr. Mike Hughes and his staff at Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc. provided the necessary information to FEMA. The Village also submitted elevation information for many houses that were incorrectly shown to be in the floodplain and requested that a determination be made that they are not within the floodplain. While FEMA has responded to the overall floodplain appeal, their response letter did not provide any information about the individual requests for a Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA). age two ... Floodplain Nap and Levee 37 Update April 20, 2000 ! have reviewed FEMA's letter and have discussed it with Mike Hughes. While the results are all positive concerning FEMA's response, we feel that there are still two minor points of contention that need to be resolved. The items, if FEMA concurs, would effectively reduce the floodway and floodplain limits even more. Mr. Hughes will send a letter to FEMA discussing these two issues within the 30-day response time allowed by FEMA. FEMA is currently resolving appeals from several communities within Cook County. As soon as these appeals have been resolved, they will issue a letter of final determination (LFD) to Mount Prospect which will state that the preliminary Flood Tnsurance Study and Flood Insurance Rate Map for Cook County and incorporated areas are being finalized and will become effective approximately 6 months from the date of that letter. We should schedule residents' meeting following receipt of the LFD to revisit the new maps with the residents. We also would need to present to the Village Board the ordinance changes for the adoption of the new maps. We would then proceed with the remaining Letters of Map Amendment (LOMA's). LEVEE 37 The Army Corps of Engineers presented a project update at the Upper Des Plaines River Advisory Committee Meeting on March 24, 2000. The Phase ! Project Report (planning report) is complete except for the final stage called the Value Engineering Study. The Corps has indicated that they will present the results of that Value Engineering Study to the local municipalities at meetings tentatively scheduled for May. Following approval of that report, the Corps woul# begin preparation of the prelect plans and specit~cations, with a target completion o£ June 2001. It is anticipated that construction would start in 2002, :If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Cc: Glen R. Andler, Public Works Director X:\files\engineer\fema\firmaps\mapupdt2 MAYOR ~ VILLAGE MANAGER Gerald L. Farley ~ Michael E. Janonis TRUSTEES VILLAGE CLERK Timothy J. Corcoran Velma Lowe Pau Wm. Hoef Village of Mount Prospect Richard M. Lohrstorf~r De~ o. ~e~ Community Development Department Phon~:847/818.5328 Michaele W. Skowron Fax: 847/818-5329 Irvana K. Wilks 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 TDD: 847/392-6064 BUSINESS DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION CANCELLATION NOTICE THE MEETING SCHEDULED FOR WEDNESDAY, APRIl, 26, 2000 HAS BEEN CANCELLED. AN AGENDA WILL BE SENT PRIOR TO THE NEXT MEETING. Dated this 20th day of April, 2000. VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT FINANCE COMMISSION AGENDA Thursday, April 27, 2000 7:00 p.m. Village Hall Building 100 South Emerson Street 2~ Floor Conference Room I Call to Order II Approval of Minutes - March 23, 2000 1II Chairman's Report IV Community Development Dept. Pre-Budget Discussion V Discussion Regarding New Village Hall VI Finance Director's Report VII Other Business VIII Next Meeting: May 25, 2000 NOTE: Any individual who would like to attend this meeting but because of a disability needs some accommodation to participate should contact the Finance Director's Office at 100 South Emerson Street, Mount Prospect, (847) 392-6000, ext. 5277, TDD (847) 392-6064. FINANCE COMMISSION Minutes of the Meeting March 23, 2000 Police and Fire Building I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Those present included Chairman John Korn and Commissioners Charles Bennett, John Engel, Vince Grochocinski, Jim Morrison, Tom Pekras, and Ann Smilanie. Commissioner George Busse arrived at 7:05 p.m. Village Manager Michael Janonis arrived at 7:10 p.m. Also present were Finance Director Douglas Ellsworth and Fire Department personnel: Chief Michael Figolah, Deputy Chief John Malcolm, Fire Marshall Paul Valentine, Captain Henry Dawson, Captain Tony Huemann, Captain Buzz Livingston, Firefighter/Paramedic Kevin Wilson and Administrative Assistant Kimbefly Smith. Commissioner Betty Launer was absent. Commissioner Busse left during the presentation by Chief Figolah (Item IV, below). II Approval of Minutes The minutes of January 27, 2000 were approved as submitted. 1II Fire Department Employee Applicants Chief Figolah stated that a new-hire test revision has been arranged. It is expected to have a budget impact for this year of about $5,000. Although there are 300, or slightly more, applications on fi/e, there is frequently trouble getting acceptance of the best qualified to whom offers are made. There is a wide market for qualified applicants. Although being a paramedic is not an application requirement, the objective of the department is that all staff will become paramedics. IV Presentation and Discussion of Fire De_oartment Five-Year Plan Chief Figolah made the presentation. The planning had its start as brainstorming sessions of the entire staff. Those results were then refined by the officers. The stated goal of the department is to provide quick, effective and professional service to the residents and others whom they view as their customers. Assumptions used are that the Village will continue its slow growth, call activity will remain efficiently lean. A survey of 29 communities in the general area shows Mount Prospect as 3~ from the lowest'in number of ftrefighters per 1,000 population; Mount Prospect's total depath~ient staff of 66 was 1.24 per 1,0t30 population compared to an average ratio of 2.14 per 1,000 for the surveyed communities. 89% .of our staff provides direct service; 11.% are suPport staff. One of the most vital statistics of effective operation is response time. Chief Figolah views 51 minutes or less as an objective and6 minutes as critical. Although the department hadan average of 4.32' · minutes in 1998~ andlwas under 5 minutes 78% of the fime~ itwas over 5 minutes 22% of the time.' The department operates one ambulance at each of its three stations, 1 fire engine at each of its 2 branch stations and what is known as a quint at its central station. The quint has most of the equipment of an engine plus a high ladder. The central station also has a squad car. A total of 17 firefighters handle this equipment.., two per ambulance, three per engine, two on the quint, two in the squad car and one senior officer at the central station supervising the entire shift. All of these 17 positions must be staffed 24 hours a day. One of the staff on each engine at each shift and one of the staff assigned to the squad car is an officer. No officer is assigned to the quint. Call volume has gone up substantially in the past few years: Ambulance & Other Year Fire Emergency Total 1990 1,263 2,784 4,047 1998 2,061 3,1 I0 5,171 Staff has not increased during this period. The substantial workload increase has been met by two principal means, viz: increased overtime and increased reliance on arrangements for aid from neighboring communities. In 1998, those communities responded to 879 calls for aid while Mount Prospect responded to only 515 of their calls, collectively. Part of this inequitable reliance on aid from other communities, Prospect Heights in particular (228 aid received by Mount Prospect and 133 given by Mount Prospect) stems from the far east location on Kensington Road of our northside branch. Prospect Heights can reach our northwest areas quicker than we can. The proposed solution or plan to address these major issues takes several steps: 1. Replace the central station rescue squad with a fire engine. This would provide two of the three firefighters (including an officer) needed for the engine. One new ftrefighter per shift (three people) would be needed. One unused engine is already available and on premises. The engine would be of more use than the squad in reducing the need for outside aid in answering calls. 2. Add a third person per shift (three people) to the quint staff, one person per shift would be promoted to an officer. 3. Add one more person per shift (three people) to the remaining staff to reduce overtime demands. 4. A management information officer is needed; this person could be shared with the Police .. Department. 5.. Relocate the easternmost Kensington station to a more central or northwest location. Absent' · a move, substantial work will be needed on the station. If.moved, the companion Fire Department maintenance garage'could be. shifted to Public Works; Public Works shop would · need considerable alteration. 2' The salary and benefit costs of the proposed nine new firefighters would be almost half-funded by reduced overtime costs. The $2,346,000 cost of building a new station and altering the Public Works garage would avoid significant repair-remodeling costs. Discussion: Chairman Korn asked about employee reaction to the proposal for reduced overtime. Firefighter/Paramedic Wilson said that it has been discussed, but he remains confident that it should be done. Korn asked about the effect if the United area in Elk Grove were to become part of Mount Prospect. Figolab said that there would not be a big effect except that Elk Grove Township is now a big net provider of aid trips to Mount Prospect - 389 given by them to us and 44 received by them from us in 1998. Bennett asked about concern over more high rims. Figolah said they they take more response time if the call is from up high, they contain many fire alarms and will create more needless calls or false alarms, the basement garages create a significant need for fast response time if any fire or explosion starts and, f'mally, there will be many seniors and they present more ambulance calls. Bennett also asked about our volunteer fkefighters. Captain Huemann said there are about twenty, a great group that are well trained. Korn asked why DesPlaines has 93 fuefighters compared to our 66 and has two quints to our one. Figolah said we are just more efficient. Smilanic asked whether the voluminous data which we have on many Mount Prospect buildings is now available to the firefighters on computers in the vehicles. Figolah said that it is. Figolah said that he has given much the same presentation to a community group. Their concern in sequence of priority were: 1. Our net dependence on aid from other communities. 2. The need for an additional person on the quint. 3. The 22 % of calls with a response time over 5 minutes. V Chairman's Report Chairman Korn reported on items discussed at the last several Village Board meetings. Discussion ensued about the $900,000 settlement of the police officers' discrimination suit. Village Manager Janonis observed that there appeared to be a consensus among our staff and the insurers that it was the most practical thing to do. VI Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 10:35 p.m. The next meeting is scheduled for April 27, 2000. The Fire Department presentation at this meeting will be discussed and Community Development will make a presentation. The Village Hall proposal will.be updated and discussed, if warranted. Respectfully submitted James R. Morrison MAYOR ~ Gerald L. F~rlcy VILLAGE MANAGER Michael E. Sanonis TRUSTEES Timothy J. Corcoranpaul Wm. HoefertVillageof MountProspect VILLAGE CLERKvelmaLowe Richard M. Lohrstoffer o. Community Development Department Pho.e: 847/818-5328 Michaele W. Skowron Fax: 847/818-5329 Irvana K. Wilks I00 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 TDD: 847/392-6064 AGENDA MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING LOCATION: MEETING DATE & TIME: Senior Center Thursday 50 South Emerson Street April 27, 2000 Mount Prospect, IL 60056 7:30 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Minutes of March 23, 2000 1. ZBA-04-2000 / Kensington Restaurant / 305 Kensington Road 2. ZBA 06-2000 / McGough Residence / 204 S. I-Oka Avenue 3. ZBA-07-2000 / C.V.S. Pharmacies / 1 E. Rand Road 4. ZBA-09-2000 / Fernandez-Fear Residence / 416 S. Nawata Avenue IV. OLD BUSINESS V. NEW BUSINESS A. ZBA-08-2000 / VOMP / Text Amendments to the Zoning Code Section 14.1702 and 14.311. NOTE: This Case is Village Board Final B. ZBA-10-2000 / Duffy Residence / 507 S. Wille St. / Variation to permit the construction ora 672 s.f., 2-ear detached garage. NOTE: This Case is Zoning Board Final C. ZBA-11-2000 / Weglarz Residence / 1108 Robert Dr. / Conditional Use to permit addition of a covered front porch encroaching 4' into the required 30' front yard setback. NOTE: This Case is Village Board Final D. ZBA-12-2000/VoiceStreamWireless/1500 E. Eu¢lid/Variationto permit construction of a 120' monopole personal wireless communication facility. NOTE: This Case is Village Board Final E. ZBA-13-2000 / VOMP / Text Amendment to Seetinn 14.2219 of the Zoning Ordinance. NOTE: This Case is Village Board Final F. ZBA-14-2000 / VOMP / Text Amendment to Section 14.203 of the Zoning Ordinance. NOTE: This Case is Village Board Final VI. QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS VII. ADJOURNMENT Any individual who would like to attend this meeting, but because of a disability needs some accommodation to participate, should contact the Community Development Department at 100 S. Emerson, Mount Prospect, IL 600:56, 847-392-6000, Ext. 5328, TDD g847-392-6064. MJ[NUTES OF TH~ REGULAR MEETING OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CASE NO. ZBA-06-2000 Hearing Date: March 23, 2000 PETITIONER: James and Deborah MeGough 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. MEMEERS 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: James and Deborah McGough James Tinaglia Chairperson Arlene Juraeek 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 hearing one ease under Old Business, Ms. Juracek introduced Case ZBA-06-2000, 204 S. I-Oka. Michael Blue, Deputy Director of Community Development introduced the case, stating 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 also has a non-conforming side setback of approximately 4.5' imm 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 pomhes, a driveway extension, and a paver-block patio. The garage and driveway will meet all setback requirementS. The building addition and the two pomhes 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 the'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 primarily related to the aesthetics of the proposed structure. The VariatiOn request is based on the petitioner's desire to not leave "dead space" behind th~ .garage and having safety concerns about that area. As for review findings regarding the proposed Conditional Use,.'Mr. Blue noted that the'poroh would enhance the Some and-the.surroundingarea, ~/t tl~..t the.propo*al did m~et.all.other zon~.mg requirements e~cept lot C~veragv. 'for the variafiO[h' where ~. har~...hlp unkiu, to the prol~rty m.~ be sliovnl, tt yeas n0te~..fl~at While the r~quest ~vould-- 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 case. 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 bemuse 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 Floros 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. Floros 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;Oka; Mr. Youngquist seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Cotten, Floros, ¥oungquist,.Rogers, and Juracek NAYS: None. Moti was appr°ved ' oning Board of Appeals ZBA-06-2000 Arlene Juraeek, 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. Cotten seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Cotten, Floros NAYS: Youngquist, Rogers, and Juracek Motion was denied 3-2. At 9:20 p.m., a~er two more eases were heard under New Business, Mr. Floros 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 Community Development MINUTEs 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. Zeremha 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 censtruetion of a 10,880 s.f. Drug Store with drive-through and asseeiated Variation MEMBERS PRESENT: Merrill Cotten Leo Floros Richard Rogers Keith Youngquist Arlene Juraeek, Chairperson 1VIEMBERS ABSENT: Elizabeth Luxem STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Blue, AICP, Deputy Director of Community Development I]~-TERESTED PARTIES: John Wojtila, P.E. ~: Camille Sehofidd Susan Weems Steve Grabowski Vic Giovannini 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 oorrections. At 8:25, after hearing one case under Old Business and one ease 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 ceruer of Kensington Road and Elmhurst Road, and contains a vacant commercial structure (the former Heilig Meyers store). The applicant proposes to construct a 20,880 square foot retail structure to oontain 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 property line, ~reates the need for a oonditional use. Mr. Blue described how the subject site is in the B-3 Community Shopping District. "Drug ~o~s" are listed as permitted uses in the B-3 dish'iet. "Dfive-flu~oUgh and drive in nstablishments~' are listed'as Conditional.Uses in th~ B-3 dis~et. The.proposed drag .sto~'e with 'drive,through will require a: Conditional Use approval bythe VillageBoard. Also, a Varlation.i~ requested for a required land~eape setback' on ~e west aide of .the property. ' ' ' · · . -' ' ' ..' · , Zoning Board of Appeals ZBA~07-2000 Arlene Juracak, 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 structure as a 20,880 s.f. retail building that would be constructed primarily of a brown brick and include a hriek 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 f~r 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 commemial 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' fi.om 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-thrbugh 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 spanes and stacking. Regarding the on-site circulation, it w~ noted that traffic flow .in the' one-way drive hlong .the south side of the building should remain west to east. The staff repbrt recommends changing' the dlredtion;' However, additional information, provided by the applicant and further review by staff indicates that the fl0w is appropriate as proposed and staffreeommendatlon number seven (reversing the flow) shoul~ be deleted f~ora, the. list'of.. approval eonditibns. - .. Zoning Board of Appeals ZBA-07-2000 Arlene Juracok, 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 circulation. 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 of a pharmacy with drive-through at I 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 to 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 if the area included landscaping and if the petitioner was willing to work with the Village to provide additional landscaping at the north end of the site. Mr. Wojtila said they would be willing to do that. Mr. Floros asked about the history of CVS stores. Mr. Wojtila said the firm'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 inthe 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. Jurncek 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..l'uracek asked if anyone in the audience wanted to sp~k. Bob Boles came forWard and explained he was the next door 'neighbor to the property. He saiit he had spoken with his other neighbor, the owners Of the 303 Cab Co. .. neither.they nor he bp. Ye any objeetio~ to.thi~ 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 tbr discussion. Mr. Flores asked thc 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 curbeuts and the one additional curbeut would be key to the entire layout and has IDOT approved. Mr. Blue said staff had not been in touch with IDOT but agreed the additional curbcut 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-to the Village Board for a Conditional Use and associated Variation to permit construction of a 10,800 s.f. drug store with drive-through and I0,000 s.f. of retail space with the six conditions listed in Staffs memo to the Board, with the elimination of Condition #7. Leo Flores seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Cotten, Flores, Yoangqtiist, ROgers, and Suracek NAYS: None Motion was approved 5-0. At 9:20 p.m., after one more case was heard under New Business, Leo Flores 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 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE 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 1VIEMBERS PRESENT: Merrill Cotten Leo Flores 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. Juraeek introduced Case ZBA-04-2000, which had been postponed from the meeting of Fehruary 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 subdivision. 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 accented with green and white' awnings, and includes a parapet wall to screen rooftop, mechanical equipment. Therefore, the building generally reflects the policy established by th~ Village Board and .ZBA of requiring brick conslmefion 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 I0 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, Staffrecommends that the ZBA reqommead ~pproval of the proposed Conditional Use to permit the establishment of a 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. Flores 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 staiued 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, m~d 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~t, Rogers , NAYS: Cot~en, Flores; 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 ora 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 Juracek NAYS: None Motion was approved 5-0. At 9:20 p.m., after 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. ~3arbara Swiatek, Planning Secretary Michael:Blue ~ Deputy Director of Community Development MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CASE NO. ZBA~09-2000 Hearing Date: March 23, 2000 PETITIONER: Fernandez / Fear SUBJECT PROPERTY: 416 S. Nawam PUBLICATION DATE: March 8, 2000 DAILY HERALD REQUEST: Fence 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 I/NTERESTED PARTIES: Pedro Fernandez Elizabeth Fear Mark Peterson 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 9:05, after hearing one case under Old Business and two cases under New Business, Ms. Juracek introduced Case ZBA-09-2000 for a fence Variation at 416 S. Nawata. Michael Blue, Deputy Director of Community Development introduced the case, stating that notice had been provided in the newspaper, mailed notices, and through signage on the property. He indicated this request was for a variation to allow construction of a 5' fence approximately 5' off the side property line Mr. Blue provided background on the variation request. He indicated that the subject site was an existing home. Both this house and the neighboring property have five foot setbacks from the side property line. The subject property's rear yard is partially enclosed by existing fences. Mr. Blue continued that the applicant proposes to complete the enclosure of the rear yard by building a fence from the southeast comer of the neighbor's fence to the northeast corner of the house. This would place the fence five feet off the property line -the zoning ordinance requires that all fences be located on the property line. As reason for the request, the petitioner states that maintenance problems for them and their neighbor would be created by locating the fence on the property line. It was noted that the neighbor concurs with that concern and supports the proposed variation. Considering the variation request in light of the hardship requirements of the zoning ordinance, Mr. Blue noted alternatives to the requested fence location existed that would be permitted by code. The fence could be built on the south side of the existing hedge and adjacent to an existing patio (as a privacy fence built within the buildable area of the lot) or located on the property line. Although the parcels do have small side yard setbacks and locating the fence on the property line may create maintenance problems, the request does not meet the standards for variation as defined in the zoning ordinance. oning Board of Appeals ZBA-09-2000 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 2 Therefore, based on the lack of a finding of hardship, Mr. Blue presented staffs recommendation to deny a variation to accommodate a fence 5' off the side property line at 416 S. Nawata Avenue. He noted that the Zoning Board's decision is final for this case. Ms. Juracek asked if the petitioner wanted to speak. Pedro Fernandez and Elizabeth Fear, owners of the property, were sworn in. Mr. Fernandez explained they have a dog and want to enclose the back yard. By tying to the existing fence at their neighbor's house, they would need to come all around to the corner end of the garage. By putting down a fence on the property line, they would split the space between the two houses into two unmanageable areas, particularly since the patio is surrounded by a very old yew hedge. They are proposing putting the fence along the right side of the hedge. It would be a green fence, blending into the old yew hedge, and would make a 90-degree turn to connect with the neighbor's fence. The problem with puttiug it on the patio side of the hedge is they would have to cut up the hedge, which would present another problem because there is a change of height at the back end of the patio, about a two step drop, and the soil would fall apart. By staying on the side of the yew hedge with the fence, they would not disturb the landscaping. He said it would be best to uot disturb the landscaping. Mr. Rogers agreed the land does slope off quickly to the rear. To keep the same height as the neighbor's fence, the petitioner would only have a three or three and a half foot fence at his house because of the drop in the ground. Mr. Fernandez said the fence along the hedge would be five feet. Ms. Juracek asked if any audience members wished to be heard. Mark Peterson, the Fernandez' neighbor, came forward and was sworn in. He said he was in favor of granting the Variation because putting the fence on the property line would make it difficult for him or tbe Femandezes to maintain their property due to his window well, a large lilac bush and the sloping land. Ms. Juracek said the maintenance issue was understandable. She pointed out there were no property line disputes and the neighbor wanted the fence where the petitioner proposed placing it. She said she would entertain a motion to approve the request. Richard Rogers made a motion to grant approval for a Variation to construct a five-foot fence five feet off the side property line Keith Youngquist seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Cotten, Floros, Youngquist, Rogers, and Juraeek NAYS: None Motion was approved 5-0. Zoning Board of Appeals' decision is final in this case. At 9:20 p.m., Leo FIoros made motion to adjourn, seconded by Keith Youngquist. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Deputy Director of Community Development