The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOW Agenda Packet 09/27/2005 I~~:'~~~~~~((Q / ;;:'v0'/.<~-~~\ \ ! f.lik\ ,~l t.l \\1 \ \ _D;'~"'jl. ~ ~iUIlg& Dr~~nt lIr1!lpt: ~ L-T\P--~- . 7-~ , ~ ",ijl \, . ~/ 'q]J / COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA Meeting Location: Mount Prospect Village Hall 50 South Emerson Street Meeting Date and Time: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 7:00 p.m. I. CAll TO ORDER - ROll CAll Mayor Irvana K. Wilks Trustee Timothy Corcoran Trustee Richard Lohrstorfer Trustee Paul Hoefert Trustee Michaele Skowron Trustee John Korn Trustee Michael Zadel II. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES OF: COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF AUGUST 9, 2005 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE-SPECIAL BUDGET WORKSHOP OF SEPTEMBER 13, 2005 III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD IV. CIRCULAR DRIVEWAYS Requests for circular driveways have increased, most recently in conjunction with property owners either tearing down an existing home and building a larger home or building a significant addition. Since 1996, there have been nine Conditional Uses granted for circular driveways though others do exist in the Village, that were likely built before the Village required Conditional Use approval. Historically, the requests that were approved by the Board have been primarily for properties where there was a safety issue that the circular driveway resolved. At their August meeting the Planning & Zoning Commission discussed circular driveways and held consensus that the 1) requests are trending to be for aesthetic reasons, rather than safety, 2) requests will increase, 3) neighborhood character is created through open space, construction materials, and landscaping - not outside parking of vehicles, 4) lot width is an important consideration and, 5) standards to use when reviewing these requests would be desired. Similar to unenclosed porches, circular driveways may not be critical to the Subject Property but the design is integral to the aesthetics of the home. Staff will be on hand to present lot configuration scenarios that illustrate the impact of circular driveways and help identify where they would be appropriate and to facilitate discussion of whether new standards for approving circular driveways should be used when reviewing requests. NOTE: ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO WOULD LIKE TO A TTEND THIS MEETING BUT BECAUSE OF A DISABILITY NEEDS SOME ACCOMMODATION TO PARTICIPATE, SHOULD CONTACT THE VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE A T 50 SOUTH EMERSON, MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 60056, 847/392-6000, EXTENSION 5327, TDD #847/392-6064. V. OUTDOOR LIGHTING FIXTURES The Village adopted lighting regulations in 2000 to address concerns relating to lighting levels. These regulations have been successfully applied to several recent developments. Mount Prospect's regulations are in keeping with, if not ahead, of other communities' regulations. While our current regulations have been effective, several Trustees have requested that Staff investigate furthering these regulations to require fully recessed/shielded fixtures to reduce glare. International Dark-Sky Association, a non profit organization with a primary goal of stopping the adverse environmental impacts of light pollution, defines glare as intense and blinding light that never helps visibility. Consequently, it can suddenly and significantly impact a driver's ability to see the road, or a pedestrian crossing the street. Or glare can simply be an annoyance when it affects an adjacent property owner. That is why it is important that one see the effect, not the source of light. The Zoning Ordinance's lighting regulations were written in accordance with industry standards and designed to minimize glare where ever possible, yet ensure there is sufficient lighting to complete a task. Light fixtures have since been modified and are continuing to be improved in an effort to create the most economical, energy efficient lights that minimize light pollution. Staff will be on hand to present research on various lighting applications including full cut off fixtures, flat and dropped lens lights, recessed bulbs, wall packs, and task focused lights. VI. RESIDENTIAL PARKING REGULATIONS - DOWNTOWN DISTRICT As the Village continues to implement its Strategic Plan for Downtown Redevelopment, Staff was asked to confirm whether the parking ratio of 1.4 parking spaces per residential dwelling unit continues to be appropriate for future mixed-use developments. The adequacy of this parking ratio was brought into question after the Village received several complaints from purchasers of condominiums in the Village Centre development. Mount Prospect is fortunate to have a 383 space municipal parking deck centrally located in its downtown. Currently, free parking, up to 4 hours, is available. Valet service has been offered at peak times. Overnight parking is currently not allowed, although Staff is currently reviewing a plan to allow short-term, overnight guest parking. The intent has been for street surface spaces to provide short-term parking and long-term parking to occur in the municipal parking deck. While it appears that additional parking would be used if it is provided, additional parking increases the cost of a development, which is then passed on to the purchaser. Also, the parking requires more land, which is not readily available downtown. Staff believes the current parking regulations are adequate for downtown Mount Prospect because the train is in such close proximity to the developments, downtown developments are designed for people that rely less on automobiles, there is a 383 space municipal parking deck, and additional spaces for future developments could be required through Conditional Use of Planned Unit Developments. Staff will be on hand to facilitate discussion and answer questions. VII. FERAL AND STRAY CAT CONTROL During the last several years residents have requested the Village impound stray and feral cats. The problems experienced by these residents are noise, feces in flower beds and gardens, odor from the feces and spraying, and killing of birds, particularly songbirds. Suggestions from residents to remedy this problem include licensing cats to fund animal control; returning to past policies where the Village lent traps to capture stray and feral cats and the Village paid for impoundment; and a trap, neuter, and release program such as Rolling Meadows has adopted. As the Village Board considers this matter it would be appropriate to update the Village's Animal Control regulations so the code is consistent with State and County regulations. These updates would include modifications to language, definitions, and rabies vaccination requirement for cats. After the Village Board considers this subject and makes their recommendations the animal code would be amended as requested and a draft ordinance prepared for further review. Staff will be on hand to discuss the various options and the resources required for each. VIII. PROPERTY CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE NUISANCE ABATEMENT Because of the large amount of residential construction and the violations related to vacant building and property maintenance over the past several years, Staff has reviewed current department polices and Village Code that oversee residential construction and property maintenance. Stronger and swifter control of property maintenance on construction sites is needed because of the frequency of complaints and the amount of time it takes to receive a court order to allow the Village to abate a nuisance. Staff is proposing strengthening measures in order to reinforce current code and policy for residential construction and property maintenance. These measures will protect the neighborhood character and strengthen Mount Prospect's commitment to maintaining safety and respect for neighbors during construction and development activities. Staff will be on hand to discuss this proposal. IX. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT X. ANY OTHER BUSINESS XI. ADJOURNMENT CLOSED SESSION LITIGATION 5 ILCS 120/2 (c) (11). "Litigation, when an action against, affecting or on behalf of the particular public body has been filed and is pending before a court or administrative tribunal, or when the public body finds that an action is probable or imminent, in which case the basis for the finding shall be recorded and entered into the minutes of the closed meeting." . '~"'v~''''__'.__~.~."",."""".".."=.,..,,,,,"-,,,,,,,...=,",,,,,,~,=...~=~.,,..<..,,'""'_~~O'''~~'''''''''~''_''''_''''''"''-'_''~'''''''''''''=;.;I,''.'_':-.'Y~;~'":<7'.''''''.~V"O;::<':='"'!''',',tt=,,,.",,=,,,-=,,,,~,,,",,,,,--,--_______'~,~"..'"""'-""""'",_""""".,.',.=""'_'.,..~~,_."...,.,,,.~'""-,"'v,-.T_-,",''"'.''''-'''''''''''''''''''''''''"___M~~___,~__.~~._,~~_~~_"_._ MINUTES COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AUGUST 9, 2005 I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:08 p.m., in the Village Board Room of Village Hall, 50 South Emerson Street, by Mayor Irvana Wilks. Present at the meeting were: Trustees Paul Hoefert, John Korn, Richard Lohrstorfer, Michaele Skowron and Michael Zade!. Absent from the meeting was Trustee Timothy Corcoran. Staff members present included: Village Manager Michael Janonis, Assistant Village Manager David Strahl, Finance Director David Erb, Deputy Finance Director Carol Widmer, Community Development Director William Cooney, Public Works Director Glen Andler, Deputy Public Works Director Sean Dorsey, Public Works Administrative Superintendent Jason Leib, Village Clerk Lisa Angell, Police Chief Richard Eddington, Fire Chief Michael Figolah and Human Services Director Nancy Morgan. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of Minutes from June 14, 2005. A Motion was made by Trustee Hoefert and Seconded by Trustee Zade!. The Minutes were approved. Approval of Minutes of July 12, 2005. A Motion was made by Trustee Korn and Seconded by Trustee Skowron. Minutes were approved. Trustees Hoefert and Lohrstorfer abstained. III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD None. IV. SOLID WASTE CONTRACT RENEWAL DISCUSSION Village Manager Janonis stated the Village Board had previously authorized staff to begin negotiations with ARC Disposal, the current waste disposal provider. At this time, staff is requesting authorization to waive bids and negotiate with other vendors to ensure that the Village can obtain the best deal possible among waste hauling vendors. He also stated that based on the changes in the industry, staff would likely be requesting consideration to move away from the modified two container program that currently exists. 1 Public Works Director Glen Andler stated that initial discussion and negotiations with ARC dealt with a variety of options for consideration but due to the complexity of these options it is recommended that the overall waste program be simplified for general negotiations. He stated that there is a significant trend in the waste hauling business moving toward an automated toter system to reduce personnel costs for vendors. He stated there likely would be an option for a 95, 65 or 35 gallon toter. He stated the toter would allow unlimited pick-up while maintaining the brush, loose leaf and recycling program. He stated the elimination of the stickers and retaining the yard waste sticker program would be the only carry-overs to the new program. He also stated that it is likely that a longer term contract would be proposed of five to ten years based on the life cycle of the toters. He also stated that with the revision to the program with the toters there would be no need for unlimited pick-up weeks and residents could order different size toters based on their particular needs. If negotiations are successful, he would recommend a spring start up to the toter program with a separate recycling container toter. Brooke Beal, Executive Director of the Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) spoke. He stated the typical waste hauling contract is regularly set for beyond five years. Dr. George Luteri, Chairman of the Solid Waste Commission, spoke. He stated that even though there are a number of changes that will likely occur with a new program, the anticipation of the type and number of complaints should not deter the change. He stated there will be complaints to any program that changes. Consensus of the Village Board was to authorize staff to waive the bid process in the best interest of the Village and authorize staff to negotiate with other vendors in order to obtain the best pricing available in the area. V. 2005 MID-YEAR BUDGET REVIEW AND 2006 PRE-BUDGET WORKSHOP Finance Director Dave Erb spoke. He stated that he would focus on the General Fund in his presentations. He stated revenues are slightly up across the board and there are no extraordinary expenditures expected in 2005. He stated the final Village Hall transfer is slated for 2006. He stated that if the trend continues, there would be a slight budget surplus for 2005 and based on that surplus, the forecast deficit for 2006, which was originally projected at $1.2 million, has been reduced approximately $280,000. He also stated the General Fund balance would be reduced to 21.8% after 2006 which is below the Village Board benchmark of 25% of the General Fund. He stated the projected surplus for 2005 is approximately $789,000 and stated Property Tax receipts are expected to be short by 3%. He stated intergovernmental revenue sources have increased along with a slight increase in Sales Tax. He stated the CIP still needs a permanent funding mechanism and there are issues relating to the Water and Sewer Fund management along with pension returns coming in below estimates which will need to be made up with additional contributions. The Finance Commission had recommended several revenue options. Those options include an ambulance fee which was estimated to generate $896,000, a local Motor Fuel Tax of an additional one cent per gallon which would generate $225,000 and an increase in the Utility Tax of 1 % which could generate approximately $465,000. He stated the issues that will need to be discussed include water and sewer fund, a facility needs study for Police and Fire Departments and possible impact on the Public Works Department. 2 Also, CIP funding needs to be addressed in the near future since the CIP Fund will be drawn down completely by 2006. Village Manager Janonis stated there are a number of pent up demands which have been pushed back over the years that are still yet to be addressed and the budget for 2006 just maintains the current service levels and does not address any of these other demands. Consensus of the Village Board was to schedule a Budget Workshop instead of a Committee of the Whole meeting on September 13. VI. AND SEWER RATE STUDY AND COMBINED SEWER PROJECT FUNDING Finance Director Dave Erb stated that the water and sewer rates should be periodically reviewed to ensure that revenues keep up with capital costs. He stated the fund has been operating at a deficit for several years and had been drawing down fund balance for the last three years. He stated that water rates are subsidizing sewer expenses and the need to establish a funding mechanism for the combined sewer rehabilitation and rebuilding is necessary. He stated the annual increases of 4% that the Board has approved previously does not capture the total operating expenses that are necessary. He stated the capital estimates for the combined sewer run approximately $1 million annually. He is recommending an initial increase of 20.5% in the rate for 2006 with a 5% annual increase or a minimum based on the capital funds necessary. He stated that such an increase would impact the average resident approximately $148. He is recommending a $5.00 sewer service fee, an increase to $5.41 for 2006 on the sewer rates and a 5% annual increase effective January 1. He stated there are no Federal funds available to assist in repairing the combined sewer system. He stated that the worst areas would be addressed first and the investment life span would be approximately 50 years. Ann Smilanic, 409 Can-Dota, spoke. He stated the Finance Commission had recommended the $5.00 customer service fee to be effective September 1 and felt that the funding recommendations will assist in addressing the combined sewer funding needs. Consensus of the Village Board was to establish a sewer service fee of $5.00 per month, increase the combined water and sewer charge from $4.49 to $5.41 as of January 2006. Increase the water/sewer rate of 5% every January 1 thereafter. It was also noted that once Special Service Area #5 sunsets in 2017, there will be a need to address the capital funds generated from that property tax. VII. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT Village Manager Mike Janonis stated that Coffee with Council is scheduled for August 13 from 9:00 a.m. to 11 :00 a.m. in the Community Center Room. VIII. ANY OTHER BUSINESS None. 3 IX. ADJOURNMENT DS/rcc There being no further business to discuss, the Committee of the Whole meeting adjourned at 9: 17 p.m. ~ Respectfully submitted, . / (J 0~~W DAVID STRAHL Assistant Village Manager ~ 4 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE SPECIAL BUDGET WORKSHOP SEPTEMBER 13, 2005 The meeting was called to order at 6:15 p.m., in the Mount Prospect Village Hall Community Center, 50 South Emerson by Mayor Irvana Wilks. Present at the Workshop were: Trustees Timothy Corcoran, Paul Hoefert, John Korn, Richard Lohrstorfer, Michaele Skowron and Michael Zadel. Staff members present were: Village Manager Michael Janonis, Assistant Village Manager David Strahl, Finance Director David Erb, Deputy Finance Director Carol Widmer, Fire Chief Michael Figolah, Deputy Fire Chief John Malcolm, Police Chief Richard Eddington, Deputy Police Chief Michael Semkiu, Public Works Director Glen Andler, Human Services Director Nancy Morgan and Community Development Director Bill Cooney. Finance Commission members present were: Chairman Chuck Bennett, Ann Smilanic, Vincent Grochocinski, John Kellerhals and Lee Williams. Village Manager Janonis provided a general overview relating to the order of discussion for this evening. 1. Water Rate/Combined Sewer Plan Confirmation Staff has previously recommended a sewer construction fee of $5.00 per customer, per month along with a rate increase based on expenditure needs for the combined sewer repair and ongoing operations. Staff had suggested first year rate increase of approximately 20.5%, then 5% annually thereafter. He suggests that the sewer construction fee increase be put in place as soon as possible so that the repair work can be commenced early next year and the water rate increase information can be communicated to the residents in a timely manner. Consensus of the Village Board was to direct staff to put the sewer rate increase on a Village Board meeting for consideration along with the $5.00 sewer construction fee per customer, per month. 2. Property Tax Levy - Order of Priority Debt Service Pensions Refuse General Fund Village Manager Janonis stated the increase in demands of debt service, pensions and refuse continues to shrink the amount of Property Tax Levy that goes to the General Fund. 3. General Fund Issues General Fund deficit was projected at $1.4 million. The mid-year revision lowered that deficit to $745,000, however, by 2007, the projected deficit is back to $1.5 million. 4. Overview of Finance Commission Recommendations The Commission has suggested: $.01 increase Motor Fuel Tax (MFT) charged on gasoline sales 1 % increase in the Utility Tax Initiate Ambulance billing based on the Medicare schedule for acceptable payment level. The implementation of these additional revenues will lower the deficit for 2006 to $67,000, lower the projected deficit for 2007 to $592,000 and lower the projected deficit in 2008 to $1.77 million. 5. Review of Demand Issues as Part of Staff Discussion Proiected Additional Staff · Help Desk TechnicianITrainer - IT Division · Three (3) Firefighters - Fire Department · Four (4) Police Officers, 1 Police Sergeant for Traffic Unit - Police Department The position in IT slated as a help desk position was requested to be reviewed and additional justification presented for consideration. There was also discussion of the needs of IT and how this position would benefit operations. All positions were recommended for inclusion in the 2006 Budget at this time are with the understanding that the additional cost for these staff people would be an additional $750,000 of expenses. 6. Revenue Discussion The recommendations from the Finance Commission generated approximately $1.8 million in additional revenue. There was a discussion regarding the direct charge for garbage and utilizing the portion that is currently dedicated for garbage on the Property Tax Levy for General Fund purposes. Consensus of the Village Board was to consider the creation of an Ambulance Fee based on insurance reimbursement amount and consider direct garbage charge with the implementation of the toter system in 2006 in combination with the elimination of the vehicle sticker. The Workshop adjourned at 9:10p.m. ~ ;:;:--6tY DAVID STRAHL DS/rcc Assistant Village Manager MEMORANDUM Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 23,2005 SUBJECT: CIRCULAR DRIVEWAYS Circular Drivewavs The Village has received an increased number of requests for circular driveways. The most recent requests have been in conjunction with property owners either tearing down an existing home and building a larger home or building a significant addition (termed "top-off'). The attached memo from the August Planning & Zoning Commission meeting provides details on circular driveways approved by the Village Board since 1996. Historically, the requests that were approved by the Board have been primarily for properties where there was a safety issue the circular driveway resolved. Safety issues include the need to exit onto a major arterial road or where there was a substandard street width that made it difficult to negotiate exiting onto the street. The Planning & Zoning Commission discussed circular driveways at the August meeting. The Commission found that: o Circular Drives should continue to be a Conditional Use; o Lot width should be considered when approving the request; o Landscaping in the front yard should be required; and o Circular driveways should be constructed of decorative materials. The Commission also raised the issue of whether to restrict overnight parking or the number of vehicles, but there were concerns on how to enforce the regulations. As there are several options to approaching the situation, Staff prepared exhibits that depict circular driveways on various lot widths. The following exhibits are intended to illustrate the impact of circular driveways and help identify situations where a circular driveway would and would not be appropriate. The objective is to ascertain whether new standards for approving circular driveways should be used when reviewing requests. Based on the Village Board's findings, circular driveways could: a) be allowed on lots that are 75-feet or greater in width; b) be allowed if there is less than 35% lot coverage in the front yard; c) require perimeter landscaping and the use of brick pavers; and d) remain a Conditional Use that would require Village Board approval, or be final at the Planning & Zoning Commission level, or even allow circular driveways as a permitted use. Lighting Regulations Committee ofthe Whole Meeting September 27,2005 Page 2 Summary As stated in the attached e-mail from the Planning & Zoning Chair, Arlene Juracek, circular driveways are comparable to unenclosed porches: the use itself may not be critical to the Subject Property, but the design is integral to the aesthetics of the home. If the Village Board determines circular driveways are appropriate for some properties, based on the popularity and successful results of unenclosed porches, Staff recommends the driveways meet the criteria listed above, but be final at the Planning & Zoning Commission level. The Conditional Use process is simplified for the home owner, but ensures a quality driveway will be constructed. w~~J~ H:\PLAN\PliUlning & Zoning COMM\P&Z 2005\MEJ Mcmos\COW Memo. Sept 27 circular drivewilys.doc: CIRCULAR DRIVEWAY SCENARIOS - PAGE 1 of 4 Front Yard Setback (40 FT) Front Yard Setback (40 FT) Front Yard Setback (40 FT) Scenario la: Lot Width: Main Driveway Max Width: Circular Driveway Width: Front Yard Area (PYA): Main Driveway Area in FY A: Circular Driveway Area in FYA: Pavement Area in FYA: % of Pavement in FY A: Reduction needed for 35%: Scenario lb: Lot Width: Main Driveway Max Width: Circular Driveway Width: Front Yard Area (PYA): Main Driveway Area in FY A: Circular Driveway Area in FY A: Pavement Area in FY A: % of Pavement in FYA: Scenario 2: Lot Width: Main Driveway Max Width: Circular Driveway Width: Front Yard Area (PYA): Main Driveway Area in FY A: Circular Driveway Area in FY A: Pavement Area in FY A: % of Pavement in FYA: Reduction needed for 35%: ~-----~-""'''''~~;~==-=''"^'...,..,--- -"'-~----~==-",="-....,,.~=~----- 100 Feet 26 Feet 9 Feet 4,000 (S.P.) 1,040 (S.F.) 747 (S.P.) 1,787 (S.P.) 45% 387 (S.F.) 100 Feet 26 Feet 9 Feet 4,000 (S.P.) 616 (S.F.) 747 (S.F.) 1,363 (S.F.) 34% 100 Feet 26 Feet 12 Feet 4,000 (S.P.) 1,040 (S.F.) 1,013 (S.P.) 2,053 (S.F.) 51% 653 (S.F.) CIRCULAR DRIVEWAY SCENARIOS - PAGE 2 of 4 Front Yard Setback (40 FT) Front Yard Setback (40 FT) Front Yard Setback (40 FT) Scenario 3a: Lot Width: Main Driveway Max Width: Circular Driveway Width: Front Yard Area (FYA): Main Driveway Area in FYA: Circular Driveway Area in FY A: Pavement Area in FYA: % of Pavement in FY A: Reduction needed for 35%: Scenario 3b: Lot Width: Main Driveway Max Width: Circular Driveway Width: Front Yard Area (FYA): Main Driveway Area in FYA: Circular Driveway Area in FY A: Pavement Area in FY A: % of Pavement in FYA: Scenario 4a: Lot Width: Main Driveway Max Width: Circular Driveway Width: Front Yard Area (FY A): Main Driveway Area in FYA: Circular Driveway Area in FY A: Pavement Area in FYA: % of Pavement in FYA: Reduction needed for 35%: 100 Feet 21 Feet 9 Feet 4,000 (S.P.) 840 (S.F.) 794 (S.F.) 1,634 (S.P.) 41% 234 (S.F.) 100 Feet 21 Feet 9 Feet 4,000 (S.P.) 599 (S.F.) 794 (S.P.) 1,393 (S.P.) 35% 100 Feet 21 Feet 12 Feet 4,000 (S.P.) 840 (S.F.) 1,056 (S.F.) 1,896 (S.P.) 47% 496 (S.F.) CIRCULAR DRIVEWAY SCENARIOS - PAGE 3 of 4 Front Yard Setback (40 FT) Front Yard Setback (40 FT) Front Yard Setback (40 FT) Scenario 4b: Lot Width: Main Driveway Max Width: Circular Driveway Width: Front Yard Area (PYA): Main Driveway Area in FY A: Circular Driveway Area in FY A: Pavement Area in FYA: % of Pavement in FY A: Reduction needed for 35%: Scenario 5: Lot Width: Main Driveway Max Width: Circular Driveway Width: Front Yard Area (PYA): Main Driveway Area in FY A: Circular Driveway Area in FY A: Pavement Area in FY A: % of Pavement in FY A: Reduction needed for 35%: Scenario 6a: Lot Width: Main Driveway Max Width: Circular Driveway Width: Front Yard Area (PYA): Main Driveway Area in FY A: Circular Driveway Area in FY A: Pavement Area in FY A: % of Pavement in FYA: Reduction needed for 35%: 100 Feet 21 Feet 12 Feet 4,000 (S.P.) 521 (S.P.) 1056 (S.F.) 1,577 (S.P.) 39% 177 (S.F.) 75 Feet 26 Feet 9 Feet 3,000 (S.P.) 1,040 (S.P.) 536 (S.P.) 1,57 (S.P.) 53% 526 (S.F.) 75 Feet 21 Feet 9 Feet 3,000 (S.P.) 840 (S.P.) 576 (S.P.) 1,416 (S.F.) 47% 366 (S.F.) CIRCULAR DRIVEWAY SCENARIOS - PAGE 4 of 4 Front Yard Setback (40 FT) Front Yard Setback (30 FT) Front Yard Setback (30 FT) Scenario 6b: Lot Width: Main Driveway Max Width: Circular Driveway Width: Front Yard Area (FY A): Main Driveway Area in FY A: Circular Driveway Area in FY A: Pavement Area in FYA: % of Pavement in FY A: Scenario 7: Lot Width: Main Driveway Max Width: Circular Driveway Width: Front Yard Area (FYA): Main Driveway Area in FY A: Circular Driveway Area in FY A: Pavement Area in FYA: % of Pavement in FY A: Reduction needed for 35%: Scenario 8: Lot Width: Main Driveway Max Width: Circular Driveway Width: Front Yard Area (FY A): Main Driveway Area in FY A: Circular Driveway Area in FY A: Pavement Area in FYA: % of Pavement in FY A: Reduction needed for 35%: 75 Feet 21 Feet 9 Feet 3,000 (S.P.) 474 (S.P.) 576 (S.P.) 1,050 (S.F.) 35% 75 Feet 21 Feet 9 Feet 2,250 (S.P.) 630 (S.P.) 507 (S.P.) 1,137 (S.F.) 51% 350 (S.F.) 65 Feet 21 Feet 9 Feet 1,950 (S.P.) 630 (S.P.) 365 (S.F.) 995 (S.F.) 51% 313 (S.P.) CIRCULAR DRIVEWAY SCENARIOS SUMMARY In 1 100 40 26 R-X 9 4,000 1,040 747 1,787 45% la 100 40 26 R-X 9 4,000 616 747 1,363 34% 2 100 40 26 R-X 12 4,000 1,040 1,013 2,053 51% 653 3a 100 40 21 R-X 9 4,000 840 794 1,634 41% 234 3b 100 40 21 R-X 9 4,000 599 794 1,393 35% A1read 35% or Below 4a 100 40 21 R-X 12 4,000 840 1,056 1,896 47% 496 4b 100 40 21 R-X 12 4,000 521 1,056 1,577 39% 177 5 75 40 26 R-X 9 3,000 1,040 536 1,576 53% 526 6a 75 40 21 R-X 9 3,000 840 576 1,416 47% 366 6b 75 40 21 R-X 9 3,000 474 576 1,050 35% Alread 35% or Below 7 75 30 21 R-A or R-l 9 2,250 630 507 1,137 51% 350 8 65 30 21 R-A or R-l 9 1,950 630 365 995 51% 313 H:\PLAN\ Tea-rDowns and TopOffi\Circular Driveway Scenarios \Circular Driveway Scenarios.doc MEMORANDUM Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department TO: MOUNT PROSPECT PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ARLENE JURACEK, CHAIRPERSON FROM: JUDY CONNOLLY, AICP, SENIOR PLANNER DATE: AUGUST 18, 2005 HEARING DATE: AUGUST 25, 2005 SUBJECT: CIRCULAR DRNEW A YS BACKGROUND The Village has received an increased number of requests for circular driveways. The most recent requests have been in conjunction with property owners either tearing down an existing home and building a larger home or building a significant addition. The following is a list of circular driveways approved by the Village Board since 1996: 1002 Meadow Lane (PZ-01-03) 904 Edgewood Lane (PZ-02-03) 805 E. Prospect Avenue (PZ-06-02) 115 S. Busse Road (PZ-27-02) 922 S. Na Wa Ta Avenue (PZ-30-02) 600 Kensington Road (ZBA-12-01) 305 S. Douglas Avenue (ZBA-17-0l) 303 S. Douglas Avenue (ZBA-29-0l) 1006 Isabella Street (ZBA-16-0l) The requests that were approved have been primarily for properties that had oversized front yards and the driveway did not cover a significant portion of the front yard. In many cases, circular driveways were approved because there was a safety issue the circular driveway resolved, i.e. exiting onto a major arterial road or there was a substandard street width which made it difficult to negotiate exiting onto the street. However, the approved driveways were designed in a manner that minimized that amount of pavement in the front yard and incorporated decorative materials such as brick pavers in the design. The most recent requests for circular driveways have been for properties that did not front onto a major arterial road, but were oversized lots (20,000+ sq. ft.) located in the RX Single Family zoning district. The RX district requires a minimum lot size of 17,500 square feet. One of the reasons cited for not approving some recent requests was the fact that the driveway was not needed to resolve a safety issue. However, the circular driveway would not necessarily look inappropriate because the lot was larger than most lots in the Village. Consequently, Staff conducted a drive-around inspection of the Northwest Meadows and Wedgewood Subdivisions and found several driveways that did not obtain Conditional Use approval. Based on condition of the driveway, it is reasonable to conclude the driveways were installed when the property was originally developed, possibly under County regulations, or before the Village required Conditional Use approval. The following properties in these subdivisions have circular driveways: Circular Driveway Discussion Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting August 25,2005 Page 2 Address Wedgewood Subdivision 1120 Meadow Lane 1109 Meadow Lane 1104 Meadow Lane 1011 Meadow Lane 1001 Meadow Lane 1002 Meadow Lane Condition Old Old Very old Old Old New (CD approval 2003) Northwest Meadows Subdivision 401 Mac Arthur Boulevard 902 Gregory Street 303 Dale Avenue 1006 Isabella Street 212 Mac Arthur Boulevard Old Old Old New (CD approval 2001) Old Staff was requested to present information on circular driveways for discussion purposes at the August P&Z meeting. A resident, who attended the July P&Z meeting and is also a local realtor, contacted Staff via e-mailed and requested his e-mail be distributed to the Commissioners and Village Board Trustees. Attached is his e-mail as well as responses to his e-mail. Staff received feedback that circular driveways may be appropriate when they are: . Constructed using a decorative material (paver bricks, stamped concrete); . Do not cover a significant amount of the front yard (concerns about creating a parking lot in the front yard); and . Not used as a permanent parking area - possibility prohibiting commercial vehicles from parking on the circular portion of the driveway. Chairperson Juracek compared circular driveways to unenclosed porches in that the Village supported the improvement as long as it was done in character with the house and the neighborhood. As you recall, the Village Code has been amended to make it easier for existing houses to have unenclosed porches encroach up to 5' in the in front yard, but a certain level of review is still required to ensure a high quality project. Based on input from Commissioners and Trustees, it seems the Zoning Ordinance may need to be modified to allow circular driveways when the driveway is designed in an aesthetically pleasing manner, using decorative materials, and when the lot size is large enough to accommodate the additional pavement. In response to another e-mail inquiry, Staff has not received complaints from residents that neighbors are parking in the circular portion of the driveway. The typical driveway complaint Staff receives is due to the vehicle being parked on the grass or that the vehicle blocks the sidewalk. However, the complaints did not specify whether there was a circular driveway. It is Staffs understanding that circular driveways will be discussed at an upcoming Committee of the Whole meeting. Staff is in the process of preparing exhibits that would show circular driveway on various lot sizes as well as various sizes of circular driveways. The exhibits are intended to illustrate the impact of circular driveways and help identify situations where circular driveway would and would not be appropriate. Staff will notify Commissioners when the COW meeting date is determined and will forward the supporting documents. Please plan to discuss your thoughts at the August P&Z meeting and let us know if there is other information or specific examples you would like included for the COW discussion. Ijmc H:\PLAN\Planniug & Zoning COMM\P&Z 200S\StaffMemo\Memo regarding circular driveways.doc -----Original Messagem-- From: Connolly, Judy [mailto:JConnoll@mountprospect.org) Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 8:16 AM To: Arlene J ; Joe Donnelly; Keith Youngquist; Marlys Haaland; Rich Rogers; Ron Roberts Cc: Cooney, Bill; Divita, Ellen Subject: FW: Circular drives Hi, I'm forwarding an e-mail from Tom Zander re: circular drives. Also, I understand from Ellen that the P&Z expressed an interested in a workshop on circular driveways. Please let me know (e-mail is fine) what information you'd like Staff to include and we'll start organizing the workshop. Thanks for your time - Judy -----Original Message----- From: Tom Zander [mailto:zander@picketfencerealty.com) Sent: Wednesday, August 03,20054:49 PM To: Connolly, Judy Subject: Circular drives Judy, Thank you for processing my thoughts through to the appropriate parties: To: Village Trustees & Planning & Zoning Commissioners From: Tom Zander, Broker/Owner, Picket Fence Realty - Mount Prospect, and a Mount Prospect resident for 22 years (208 N. Forest Ave.) Re: Circular Driveways I am both a resident of Northwest Meadows and a real estate broker in Mount Prospect, and wish to share my thoughts on the circular drive issue. I was in attendance at the July 28,2005 P&Z meeting at which the proposed circular drive at 109 MacArthur was discussed. I was there for the A-frame issue on behalf of the downtown merchant's association, and did not want to confuse my purpose by sharing my thoughts on the circular drive topic. As a real estate broker, I believe circular drives are one of the many desirable amenities associated with upscale homes, in the same category as large walk-in closets, luxurious master baths with fireplaces and both tubs and showers, and in-home theaters. I foresee requests for circular drive increasing sharply as teardowns increase, especially given the size and price of homes being constructed on these lots. My suggestion is that consideration be given to changing the village code as a natural progression in the life-cycle of a community. We now have property owners standing before the village with plans for $lMillion+ homes. It seems to me that circular drives will reasonably be on the wish lists of many of them. A side note: I believe Mount Prospect is seen as an established community with good schools and services. As a result, our property values have been very strong. We are currently in an enviable position, but one that we should not take for granted. Mount Prospect's proximity to the city (Metra) yet suburban setting, makes it an ideal location for young families making the transition from single life in the city to a more family-friendly environment like Mount Prospect. Due to rising costs of our homes, we are attracting the more affluent portion of that demographic. I believe the buyers of our homes have high expectations when it comes to the amenities and services of Mount Prospect. They will also spend significant dollars locally if presented with businesses meeting those expectations. Thank you for your time, Tom Zander Tom & Mary Zander - Picket Fence Realty 113 S. Main Street, Mount Prospect, IL 60056 office:(847)259-8600 fax:(847)259-8681 -----Original Message----- From: Keith Youngquist [mailto:kyoung@avpc.com] Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 8:45 AM To: 'Connolly, Judy'; Juracek, Arlene A.; 'Joe Donnelly'; 'Marlys Haaland'; 'Rich Rogers'; 'Ron Roberts' Cc: 'Cooney, Bill'; 'Divita, Ellen'; zander@picketfencerealty.com Subject: RE: Circular drives Judy, Thanks for forwarding Tom's email. The Trustees are concerned about the circular drives becoming "parking lots" and obviously the front yard lot coverage issue as well. I have generally supported the circular drives in situations where safety is a concern, but I have also supported them where I believe the lot is large enough and the development is substantial. In the case of 109 MacArthur I believe the RX lot can support this and without a doubt the investment the homeowners are making is very substantial(million +). Tom is right and we will see more of these requests as the larger lots are redeveloped. Is there any information you may have regarding complaints from neighbors about circular drives being used as "parking lots"( any more so than a normal driveway)? In my neighborhood, we have a few circular drives and I would not catagorize any of them as being a parking lot. I would like to know if this is a real issue or limited to large households with multiple drivers and cars, etc. Thanks Judy! Keith Keith E. Youngquist, AIA, NCARB Aumiller Youngquist, P.c. 208 S. Jefferson St., First Floor Chicago, IL 60661 P-312-377-8109 ext.108 F-312-377-8191 www.rethinkevervthing.com -----Original Message----- From: arlene.juracek@exeloncorp.com [mailto:arlene.juracek@exeloncorp.com] Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 9:20 AM To: kyoung@aypc.com; Connolly, Judy; jpdpe@comcast.net; mdhaaland@earthlink.net; Acm2build@ao1.com; ronald.j .roberts@accenture.com Cc: Cooney, Bill; Divita, Ellen; zander@picketfencerealty.com Subject: RE: Circular drives I concur with both Keith and Tom. That is why we need to workshop. These are the new unenclosed front porches. I think we need a more permissive code that spells out specific rules as to when circular drives are allowed without needing to go to the zoning board, with conditional use or variances for requests that exceed those requirements. As a minimum, we need to codify our 35% of the front yard rule of thumb. Would like to see what other municipalities say about front yard lot coverage. Also, would like to specify that these must be brick pavers or other non-concrete material, although stamped concrete would probably work. Massive expanses of white concrete could be a visual issue. So materials would be important. Our driveways are already parking lots, circular drives won't be any worse. I suggest we ban parking of commercial vehicles on the circular portion of the drive, except for cases of tradesmen doing work inside the home on a temporary basis. From: ACM2BUILD@ao1.com [mailto:ACM2BUILD@ao1.com] Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 11 :55 AM To: Connolly, Judy Subject: Re: FW: Circular drives Judy; I am against cicular drives. I truly believe that they take up to much of the front yard and look like a parking lot even ifthere are no cars parked there. Ifwe are going to consider allowing then we should have: 1. no overnight parking 2. driveway to be brick pavers or other similar material ( NOT concrete) 3. adequate landscaping around the drive to sheild the streetscape and neighbors 4. max front yard coverage (35%) 5. front yard width of 75'-0" or greater to qualify 6. no paved strips to circumvent the 35% rule. Richard Rogers .........-..._._------_..."...-...-~--_............. From: arlene.j uracek@exeloncorp.com [ma ilto:a rlene.ju racek@exeloncorp.com] Sent: Friday, August 26,20058:34 AM To:kyoung@aypc.com; Connolly, Judy; jpdpe@comcast.net; Leoandlil@msn.com; mdhaa land@earthlink.net; Acm2build@aol.com; renald.j. roberts@accenture.com Subject: RE: FW: Circular drives , will assume these e-mails are in the nature of workshop discussions. With that, the conditions proposed make sense to include in a circular drive ordinance. -----Original Message----- From: Keith Youngquist [mailto:kyoung@aypc.com] Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 7:43 AM To: 'Connolly, Judy'; Juracek, Arlene A.; 'Joe Donnelly'; 'Leo Floras'; 'Marlys Haaland'; 'Rich Rogers'; 'Ron Roberts' Subject: RE: FW: Circular drives Thanks, Judy. I concur with Richard's 6 conditions on circular driveways and the overnight parking restrictions should also be applied to those driveways already in existence otherwise we will have a real mess on our hands with any kind of real-life enforcement of the ordinance. Keith Keith E. Youngquist, AlA, NCARB Aumiller Youngquist, P.C. 208 S. Jefferson St., First Floor Chicago, lL 60661 P-312-377-8109 ext.108 F-312-377-8191 www.rethinkeverything.com -----Original Message----- From: Connolly, Judy [mailto:JConnoll@mountprespect.org] Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 10:51 PM To: Arlene J ; Joe Donnelly; Keith Youngquist; Leo Flores; Marlys Haaland; Rich Rogers; Ron Roberts Subject: FW: FW: Circular drives I'm sorry - I forgot to include Rich's e-mail in the packet. MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 25, 2005 PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DISCUSSION ON CIRCULAR DRIVEWAYS TOPIC: Circular Driveways MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Rogers, Acting Chair Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Ronald Roberts Keith Youngquist MEMBERS ABSENT: Chair Arlene Juracek MarIys Haaland STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner Jason Zawila, Long Range Planner Ellen Divita, Deputy Director, Community Development Acting Chair Richard Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Joseph Donnelly moved to approve the minutes of the July 28, 2005 meeting and Ronald Roberts seconded the motion. The motion was approved 3-0 with Leo Floros and Keith Youngquist abstaining from the vote. At 9:24 p.m. Mr. Rogers introduced the topic of Circular Driveways. Discussion that evening would allow the Commission to discuss this topic without an actual case being before them. The Village Board will discuss the topic at a Committee of the Whole Meeting in September and would appreciate understanding the Planning and Zoning Commissioners' thoughts on the topic. Chairman Rogers noted that his comments on circular driveways had not been included in the Commissioners' packet; Ms. Connolly confirmed they would be included in the Village Board packet. Chairman Rogers said he would like to see a workshop that would help establish guidelines for situations where a circular driveway may be approved. Joseph Donnelly stated that he had concerns that circular driveways had been approved based on the premise that the driveway resolved a traffic conflict on or near major roads. He said he noticed that some circular driveways were used only to park cars on and that people still backed out of the driveway. He stated that the reason the Village Board granted Conditional Use approval was to provide an alternative to backing out of the driveway and allow for a safer entry onto a busy street. He said that it is difficult to enforce how people use their driveways and cited an example in his neighborhood where he counted 11 vehicles parked in the driveway. Chairman Rogers stated that he thinks a drawback to allowing circular driveways is that the driveway may come to serve as a parking lot. He added that circular driveways pave a significant portion of the front yard and that installing landscaping in a manner that minimizes the impact of the driveway should be required as part of the Conditional Use approval permit. Mr. Rogers said that landscaping would minimize the effect of a parking lot in the front yard and if the Village decides to approve circular driveways, then the driveways should be done in aesthetically pleasing manner. Ronald Roberts said that the materials the driveway is constructed of affects the impact the driveway has on the property. He said that requiring decorative materials would improve the aesthetics of the driveway. He suggested requiring the owner to use brick pavers or stamped concrete, but not allowing shiny concrete, for the driveway. He asked that a landscape plan be required as part of the review process. Also, he said that they have discussed the lot coverage policy of no more than 35% of the front yard being covered. He said that 35% of paving may be appropriate for lots in the RX district, but the lot coverage should be proportionate to the size of the front yard. Mr. Roberts said that lot coverage should be considered when approving the driveways because drainage may impact neighborhoods differently and may be more important in some areas of the Village. Planning & Zoning Commission August 25th Workshop Page 2 Mr. Donnelly noted that the request for circular driveways may be based on the belief that the driveways make an impressive front yard. He said that part of this curb appeal, however, is that several cars are not parked in front and that the landscaping is visible. He added that enforcing a ban on overnight parking on the circular portion of the driveway would be problematic. Mr. Donnelly also stated that several requests for circular driveways have been for new construction homes and that designing the house differently would have eliminated the need for a circular driveway. He said that some of the requests were made because the owner did not want to push the house back or the driveway was located on the 'wrong' side of the lot, right next to the main road. He said that he would prefer the owners appear before the P&Z Commission with their proposed design, when the house is still being designed, and before a foundation is poured. Mr. Roberts asked whether the Village can limit the number of vehicles allowed to park in the driveway. He said that too many vehicles are an eye sore. There was discussion about other vehicles permitted to park in driveways; it was clarified that recreational vehicles and campers are permitted to be parked on an approved surface, as described in the Village's Development Code. Mr. Youngquist noted the parking recreational vehicles, pop up campers, boats, cars being worked on, and multiple cars are situations that already exist throughout the Village and that the restrictions are the same with, or without, a circular drive. He said that people may want circular drives because of an aesthetic issue. He stated that the Commission can discuss the safety issue further, but considering the larger style homes currently being built, it is reasonable to believe circular driveways are wanted for aesthetic reasons. He said that on 100' or 150' wide lots that have a 100' or 80-90' wide home, homeowners may want a circular drive so guests can enter through the front door instead of the through the side loaded garage that is typically built on such homes. He said that circular driveways made sense and were a reasonable request for situations such as this. He noted that since overnight street parking is prohibited in Mount Prospect, people may look to the circular driveway as a way to resolve a parking conflict. He said that from an enforcement perspective, the Village has the authority to write the rules and ban parking on the circular driveway, but the restriction would most likely only be enforced on a complaint basis. Chairman Rogers and Leo Flores expressed concern that the rights of those in large homes on large lots be balanced with the rights of those on smaller lots. They posed the question of "How do you legislate a compromise?" The Commissioners agreed that lot coverage and lot width are important factors to consider when reviewing a request for a circular driveway. The Commissioners discussed whether a 70' or 80' lot width should be the minimum lot size to consider for a circular driveway request. Mr. Younquist remarked that the Commission and Village Board went through this process with sheds and that the maximum size of a shed relates to the size of the property. He said that in the RX district, technically a 200 square foot shed is permitted. He said he hopes circular driveways have a similar equitable solution. Mr. Donnelly remarked he has seen circular driveways used for RV parking and not used for auto circulation. The cars are on the original part of the driveway, and the homeowner never has to move the R V. He asked whether the Village should put restrictions on the circular portion of the driveway. Judy Connolly summarized the Commissioners' concerns and thoughts on circular driveways: 1. Circular Drives should continue to require Conditional Use approval; 2. Lot width of the Frontage should be considered 3. Landscaping should be required 4. Decorative materials should be used for the driveways 5. There are still questions on enforcement such as whether to restrict overnight parking or the number of vehicles Planning & Zoning Commission August 25th Workshop Page 3 Mr. Donnelly remarked that circular driveways are not an issue when the entire circle is located behind the required setback, in the buildable area. He cited a home on Busse Road as an example of a circular driveway that met this criteria. He stated that he has an issue with new construction houses that locate the home at the front setback and then request the circular driveway in the front yard when they have the ability to locate the house further back and construct most of the circular portion of the driveway behind the required front setback. Mr. Youngquist noted that circular driveways are more in scale on the larger lots where the homes can be set further back. He added that including landscaping is critical. He said that he is not so concerned about overnight parking on the driveway because the driveway is usually vacant during the day, when it is most visible. Ms. Connolly reminded the Commission that this topic will come up at a forthcoming Committee of the Whole meeting. She said she will advise the Commission of the date when it is scheduled. Mr. Donnelley made a motion to adjourn at 10:40 p.m., seconded by Ronald Roberts. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. --, ~'D~ Ellen Divita, Deputy Director H'IF'LAN\Planning & Zoning COMM\P&Z 2()()5\MinutcsIDlscussion minutes Aug 2505 Circular Dri\"esdoc MEMORANDUM Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 23, 2005 SUBJECT: LIGHTING REGULATIONS Outdoor Li2htin2 Fixtures The Village adopted lighting regulations in 2000 to address concerns relating to lighting levels throughout the Village. These regulations have been successfully applied to several recent developments and have enhanced the nighttime appearance throughout town. While our current regulations have been effective, several Trustees have requested that Staff investigate furthering these regulations to require fully recessed/shielded fixtures to reduce glare. Proper lighting is important because it brings substantial benefits such as improved visibility, and savings of money, energy and resources. Also, quality lighting improves the appearance of our communities, returning a sense of balance to the night and giving a more attractive appearance to towns and cities. Currently, Sec. 14.314 of the Zoning Ordinance requires lighting fixtures in nonresidential districts to be full cutoff luminaries. A cutoff fixture is a fixture that provides a cutoff (shielding) of the light emitted; a full cutoff fixture is a light fixture which cuts off all upward transmission of light. The Zoning Ordinance requires that light fixtures be installed at no more than a 90 degree angle. Requiring a 90 degree angle ensures the bare source (the bulb or lamp) is not visible. The picture below on the left is an example of a full cutoff light. (It was obtained from the International Dark Skys web site; Dark Skys is a nonprofit organization whose primary goal is to stop adverse environmental impacts of light pollution.) The picture shows there is essentially no glare, that all of the light is used and not wasted (going up into the sky), and that there is a uniform distribution of light. Example of Full Cutoff Fixture Example of improper lighting In comparison, the example above on the right, also obtained from Dark Skys, illustrates a type of fixture that creates light pollution and creates glare. The light fixture is not at a 90 degree angle, so the source of the light (bulb) is visible, which tends to create glare. Also, the light levels are not uniform. When there is uneven illumination, 'dark pockets' are created, which makes it difficult for eyes to adjust and see properly. Lighting Regulations Committee of the Whole Meeting September 27,2005 Page 2 Lighting regulations vary among communities. However, Staffs recent research confirmed that Mount Prospect's regulations are in keeping with, if not ahead, of other communities' regulations. When the Village originally adopted lighting level regulations in 2000, contractors objected to the regulations implying that they were too strict, too difficult to implement, and too expensive. Contractors typically employ lighting engineers or designers to create the required photometric plan. The plans document compliance with Village light level regulations (brightness), that the site will have uniform lighting levels (no dark pockets), and that light pollution is minimized. Details on light fixtures are required as part of the photometric plan submittal. Light fixtures are critical components to photometric (lighting) plans. The type of fixture impacts how light will be distributed and affects the aesthetics of the community. For example, the following picture shows two light standards. Both are full cutoff, 90 degree angle lights, but one fixture uses a drop lens where the lens extends past the housing. The other fixture uses a flat lens and the lens does not extend past the plane of the housing. The difference between a dropped lens and a flat lens is a flat lens eliminates or minimizes glare and there is no upward throw of light. The bulb cannot exceed the horizontal plane of the fixture, meaning the bulb cannot be seen or would be 'exposed' because it is installed horizontally. However, the bulb used in some styles of fixtures that use a drop lens can be designed using a vertical bulb installation. This design would allow the bulb to extend past the horizontal plane of the fixture and the bulb can be seen, which may create glare. It is important to note that not all drop lens fixtures are designed this way, but modifying the Zoning Ordinance to require a flat lens design will ensure glare is minimized because the bulb cannot exceed the plane of the fixture when flat lens are used. Flat Lens Dropped Lens The bulb is visible Another type of lighting fixture is a 'wall pack' light. A wall pack light is typically mounted flush to a building and, ifnot shielded properly, light will project 'out' in various directions. The yellow arrows in the picture below indicate the direction light may travel from an unshielded wall pack. A wall pack fixture casts light in multiple directions. The source of the light (bulb) is visible to the eye; therefore, most likely, creating glare. Lighting Regulations Committee ofthe Whole Meeting September 27, 2005 Page 3 Since wall packs create glare, which conflicts with the Village's regulations that prohibit glare, new developments cannot use the 'exposed' style of wall pack. Instead, a fixture that directs the light down and does not create glare must be used. Example of a Full Cutoff wall pack light Example of Code complaint Full Cutoff light Dark Skys defines glare as intense and blinding light that never helps visibility. Consequently, it can suddenly and significantly impact a driver's ability to see the road, or a pedestrian crossing the street. Or glare can simply be an annoyance when it affects an adjacent property owner. That is why it is important that one see the effect, not the source of light. The Zoning Ordinance's lighting regulations were written in accordance with industry standards and designed to minimize glare where ever possible, yet ensure there is sufficient lighting to complete a task (drive, pump gas, etc.). Light fixtures have since been modified and are continuing to be improved in an effort to create the most economical, energy efficient lights that minimize light pollution. One industry change that has occurred since the Village adopted our initial lighting regulations is using task focused lights. This type of light is used to direct more light to a specific area needed to complete a specific task. For example, someone may need more light when pumping gas than when driving through the gas station parking lot. Therefore, a light like the one shown below may be a more appropriate choice than the traditional lights installed on a gas station canopy. -~ \\:~\ \ "':>"1" 1 '."," \. "5 ~''\~~\ \ ~P"'\ \ \ " \ "\ \ 'N "- ". '\; \ \, "'~1.i' \.. \ -f.) \" \ 'I \ , \ " \ , " \, \\. \\ .. \ \ " " '\~ D Same fixture as it extends from the canopy Light installed in a canopy, at a gas station pump Close up of same fixture, but from the inside of the canopy Lighting Regulations Committee of the Whole Meeting September 27,2005 Page 4 Another type of fixture uses a recessed bulb. These are typically installed in ceilings or canopies, not parking lot light fixtures. 'q. ~----l1P : t ..J ,; ;, J i' . , I . I' ' ,. 'T,.J !l! l . .' ~ . rLL....--.-............. '\., U,- '""I H It. ~ \ Jfl ;1 " '. ; '"l '__~f ll~!_ I .. I This is an example of a fixture installed in a canopy. The red line indicates the plane of the canopy This is the "insides" of a fixture that uses a recessed bulb Based on the above research, it appears that full cutoff fixtures installed at a 90 degree angle are an effective tool to minimize glare and properly light a parking lot, roadway, etc. However, if the Village Board wants to further restrict the Zoning Ordinance, they may require that only flat lens fixtures be used. The Zoning Ordinance could further be modified to specifically state that wall pack lights must be fully shielded. Staff suggests the Village Board consider allowing 'task focused lights' when requested for gas stations, banks, or similar uses. The fixture will extend past the plane of the canopy; however it will be directed in a manner that would not create light spillage or glare. Therefore, additional lighting may be provided without creating adverse impacts on the environment (light pollution) or adjacent properties (glare). ~~ Ijme H:\PLAN\Planning & Zoning COMM\P&Z 2005\MEJ MemoslCOW Memo.. Sept 27 ""'door liglning rcgulation~doc MEMORANDUM Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 23, 2005 SUBJECT: DOWNTOWN PARKING REGULATIONS Residential Parkin!! Re!!ulations - Downtown District As the Village continues to implement its Strategic Plan for Downtown Redevelopment, Staff was asked to confirm whether the parking ratio of 1.4 parking spaces per residential dwelling unit that has been required for recent developments would continue to be appropriate for future mixed-use developments in the downtown district. The adequacy of this parking ratio was brought into question after the Village received several complaints from purchasers of condominiums in the Village Centre development. After investigating their concerns, the Village found that Norwood had advised Village Centre residents that they could park overnight in the Village lot immediately south of their development. This misinformation persuaded several individuals to purchase units with less parking than they needed since they believed they could park in the municipal lot overnight. Recent mixed-use and residential condominium developments constructed in downtown Mount Prospect were approved as Planned Unit Developments (PUD). A PUD is a parcel of land, or contiguous parcels of land developed as a single entity. The plan does not necessarily correspond in lot size, bulk, type of dwelling, use, lot coverage or required open space to the site's designated zoning district classification. However, the site may be planned and developed as a whole in a single development or in stages. Since a PUD is a Conditional Use, the Village Board may attach certain conditions, such as providing a certain amount of parking specific to the development that becomes a requirement specific to that development. The following table lists the parking information (residential use only) provided for recent downtown developments. It is important to note that the downtown developments are in close proximity to the train station and that the developments are geared to an end user interested in downsizing their living space and/or who utilizes public transportation to commute to work. Downtown Developments # # Parking Spaces Parking Units Ratio Clocktower 139 210 1.54 spaces/unit Village Centre 205 287 1.4 spaces/unit Lofts & Shops 34 48 required; 55 provided on-site 1.4 spaces/unit The Emerson 52 72 1.4 spaces/unit (7 spaces located in Lofts were used to meet the parking requirement) Downtown Parking Regulations Committee of the Whole Meeting September 27,2005 Page 2 Currently, the Zoning Ordinance's parking requirements are based on the number of bedrooms. The following table lists the parking requirements for residential developments in the B5 District (downtown). Efficienc and I bedroom 2 bedroom 3 bedroom I s ace er unit 2 spaces per unit At the request of Village Staff, the Northwest Municipal Conference sent a parking survey to surrounding communities. The intent was to obtain a better understanding of other communities' parking regulations and determine if Mount Prospect should employ different ratios to better serve its residents. A copy of the survey is attached to this memo. To date, Staff has received feedback from some residents that they would have liked the developer to have provided more parking for their development. They have reported that Guest Parking is an issue and that they would like the ability to acquire an additional parking space in the future. Based on these residents' feedback and information obtained from other communities, it appears that additional parking would be used if it is provided. Unfortunately, providing additional parking will increase the cost of a development, which is then passed on to the purchaser. Also, providing more parking requires more land, which is not readily available downtown. Mount Prospect is fortunate to have its municipal parking deck centrally located in its downtown. Currently, free parking, up to 4 hours, is available to shoppers, people going to area restaurants and/or conducting business downtown, and guests of people who live in downtown Mount Prospect. Overnight parking is currently not allowed, although Staff is currently reviewing a plan to allow short-term, overnight guest parking. The Village has taken great strides to promote the use of the 383 space deck and has partnered with Norwood Builders to have a valet service park cars in the deck. The intent was to free up surface spaces to provide short-term parking and have long-term parking in the municipal parking deck. Summary Staff believes the current parking regulations are adequate for downtown Mount Prospect because the train is in such close proximity to the developments, the fact that the developments are designed for people that rely less on automobiles, and there is a 383 space municipal parking deck available in the downtown. If the Village Board wants to change the downtown residential parking regulations, Staff suggests that future developments be required to include provisions for electronic parking lifts. The lifts option provides the owner the ability to have a second parking space at a later date while minimizing costs and working within physical land constraints. Since the Zoning Ordinance requires Conditional Use approval for Planned Unit Developments, the Village Board has the option of reviewing each development and requiring the lifts as a condition of approval for that project. w~lne~ H:\PLAN\Planumg & Zoning COMM\P&Z 2005\MEJ Memos\CQW Memo - Sept 21 downtown parking.doc Parking Regulations Survey Municipality Arlington Hts. Elk Grove What are your parking requirements for retail/commercial developments in a Central Business District or Downtown Area? One space for each 500 square feet in excess of 1,500 square feet. N/A. What are your parking requirements for a residential development in a Central Business District or Downtown Area? One bedroom 1.0 space/unit. Two bedroom 1.25 spaces/unit. Three bedroom 1.5 spaces/unit. N/A. Is the parking requirement different for TaOs and/or mixed-use developments? No. However for mixed uses we allow shared parking concept given different park using for different uses. N/A. The Village of Hoffman Estates does not have a CBD designated area within our municipal boundaries, nor do we differentiate parking regulations by location in the Village. The main reason.is there are no public parking lots used for private buildings. All uses have their own Hoffman Estates I off street parking facilities. Park Ridge Skokie Retail and Office: 1 space per 300 sq.ft. of floor area. Restaurant: 1 space per 200 sq.ft. of floor area. 2 spaces for 2 bedroom and No specific larger residences, 1 1/2 regulations for these spaces for 1 bedroom and in our zoning efficiency units. ordinance. A universal parking 1.0 spaces/efficiency requirement of 1 space per 1.5 spaces/unit for any 400 sq. ft. of net floor area. other unit. Same for TaOS except the commercial parking is based on use types 1/300 s.f. general retail + office, 1/100 s.f. restaurants and medical. May 2005 How is Guest Parking in the in a Central Business District or Have the ratios (for Downtown Area addressed? Is commercial AND it required as part of a residential) proven residential development or do to be sufficient? guests share the spaces Why or why not? intended for shoppers? Commercial yes. Residential not quite. We use in practice 1.5 spaces per unit. The condominium tend to have higher demand then our current code. N/A. The ratios seemed to have worked... most of CBD buildings were built without parking. Guests are allowed to park in the village public garages by purchasing an overnight guest permit. N/A. Guest parking is included in the overall parking ratio. Yes - we have not received any parking/GUests share spaces used for the complaints and lots retail development. There are have vacant space. also village lots in the downtown. Parking Regulations Survey Municipality Streamwood Wilmette What are your parking requirements for retail/commercial developments in a Central Business District or Downtown Area? We do not have a CBD or Downtown areas parking is dependent on use. Please see our website for specifics at www.streamwood.org Retail: 1/200 What are your parking requirements for a residential development in a Central Business District or Downtown Area? No residential allowed in commercial areas. Residential: 1 space/studio or 1 bedroom unit and 1.5 spaces per 2 bedroom or greater dwelling unit. Is the parking requirement different for TODs and/or mixed-use developments? No TOD's. No. May 2005 How is Guest Parking in the in a Central Business District or Have the ratios (for Downtown Area addressed? Is commercial AND it required as part of a residential) proven residential development or do to be sufficient? guests share the spaces Why or why not? intended for shoppers? N/A. IN/A. The standards have not been applied to enough projects to get a good sense, but the projects where the standards have been applied seem to work fine. IGuest parking is not addressed. Parking Regulations Survey Municipality Where do guests park overnight (in the downtown or CBD areas)? If Guest Parking is shared with shoppers, please describe how well this has or has not worked? Arlington Hts. Elk Grove During the daytime public parking is limited to 3 hours. Guests probably park their now, but do need overnight permit for garage. Works fine. N/A. See #5. N/A. May 2005 Is there an auxiliary parking lot (Metra parking lot, municipal lot or garage, etc.) within walking distance of the Central Business District or Downtown Area? If so, are shoppers, residents and their guests permitted to use these lots during non-commuter rush hours? In your professional opinion, what is the ideal parking ratio for residential developments in a Central Business District or Downtown Area? Ves. N/A. Ves. Free, 6:00 pm to and up to 2:00 am. No overnight allowed. N/A. 1.25 for 1 bedroom 1.75 for 2 bedroom. N/A. Hoffman Estates City should provide parking Generally, at the for commercial uses and residential residential should have Park Ridge I development. Not applicable. Ves, several. Ves. "minimum necessary". The current parking requirement works well in an area where there are municipal parking is available. A higher commercial ratio of 1 Skokie I Same locations. IVes. IVes. IVes. Ispace/2505 maybe better in other areas. Parking Regulations Survey Municipality Streamwood Wilmette Where do guests park overnight (in the downtown or CBD areas)? N/A. IN/A. Guest can park at two free lots. IN/A. If Guest Parking is shared with shoppers, please describe how well this has or has not worked? Is there an auxiliary parking lot (Metra parking lot, municipal lot or garage, etc.) within walking distance of the Central Business District or Downtown Area? N/A. IN/A. There are eleven public lots in the Village Center and one additional to just west. IYes. If so, are shoppers, residents and their guests permitted to use these lots during non-commuter rush hours? May 2005 In your professional opinion, what is the ideal parking ratio for residential developments in a Central Business District or Downtown Area? N/A. There are two many factors (size of CBD, amount of public transportation), but if I had to say 1 space per dwelling unit. Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department MOWlt Prospect MEMORANDUM TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: WILLIAM J. COONEY DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 23,2005 SUBJECT: RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION AND PROPERTY MAINTENANCE ITEMS Because of the large amount of residential construction and the violations related to vacant building and property maintenance over the past several years, Staff reviewed current department polices and Village Code for areas that need strengthening. The following areas create the largest problems for staff: (1) violation of construction site regulations; (2) homeowners who act as general contractors for their home construction projects; and (3) general nuisance abatement regulation for residential construction projects and property. The following identifies strengthening measures the staff is proposing the Village of Mount Prospect adopt in order to reinforce current code and policy for residential construction and property maintenance. These measures will protect the neighborhood character and strengthen Mount Prospect's commitment to maintaining safety and respect for neighbors during construction and development activities. I. RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION ITEMS A. CONSTRUCTION SITE MAINTENANCE ISSUES Background Over the past several years the Village has witnessed a significant increase in residential construction activity. This activity includes the demolition and construction of new homes ("tear downs") and significant additions to existing homes ("top-offs"). The following chart illustrates these occurrences: These tear downs and top-offs are occurring throughout the Village, however the neighborhoods east of downtown, near the Mount Prospect Golf Course, and in the Prospect Meadows subdivision (Attachment A) have experienced even greater activity. While this phenomenon increases the Village's tax base and enhances the housing stock, such construction can bring the following externalities: . a change in neighborhood character; · closer neighbors with the potential for more service complaints; · noise and dust disruption for neighborhoods as construction ensues; · safety concerns with lag time between demolition and construction; · increased lot coverage and an associated increase in stormwater discharge; Residential Construction and Property Maintenance Items September 23, 2005 Page 2 . increased demand for utilities as water service sizes are upgraded to service more fixtures in each house; . and tree damage related to driveway widening. Staff researched how surrounding communities and other towns nationally are dealing with this phenomenon. Staff reviewed their codes and/or spoke with their planning staff to identify mechanisms that could be used to control these externalities. Specifically staff wanted to identify how each community handled construction guidelines, especially property maintenance during construction. Attachment B summarizes these findings. In order to enforce and monitor compliance of Village Code and protect adjoining properties from excessive inconvenience stemming from residential construction projects staff is proposing the following measures: Strengthening Measure #1: BUILDING PERMIT AS A LEGAL CONTRACT These following items are the most commonly violated during residential construction projects: . site restoration (Section 16.105) . location of construction vehicles (Section 18.1303) . proper barricading of sidewalks (Section 16.310.B) · sufficient security for preventing public access to construction sites (Section 16.105) · proper location of dumpsters and site access (Section 19.204,23.301) . dust control (Section 16.704) · construction site garbage and debris clean-up (Section 21.603) . tree protection (Section 9.716): . proper landscaping maintenance (Section 23.1402) . erosion and sedimentation control (Section 16.703) . stagnant water control (Section 19.303) . weeds and grass (Section 23.1401.1) Currently, the Community Development Department uses a disclaimer that building permit approval doesn't relieve the holder from meeting all Village Codes. If a violation occurs, the Staff gives notice that describes the violation(s) and specifies a response period during which the property must be brought into compliance. Only through a court decision may the Village abate a nuisance, which may take a minimum of 30 days, but in most cases actually takes between 45 and 60 days. Without court authority the Village is only able to remove garbage/debris, after 48 hours of non-compliance (Section 19.204) and weeds, after 10 days of non-compliance (Section 23.1403). In all instances where abatement takes place by the Village, staff can then charge the responsible parties the cost of abatement and an administrative fee of not more than $200.00 (Section 19.310). Stronger and swifter control of property maintenance on construction sites is needed because of the frequency of complaints and the amount of time it takes to receive a court order to allow the Village to abate a nuisance. Some communities nationwide are considering building permits and notices to be a legal contract and a first notice to control nuisances resulting from construction. The contract is in place as long as the building permit is open. If property is not maintained during construction, the municipality can then give a second and final notice to the building permit applicant to immediately correct the nuisance. If the violation is not corrected within a reasonably set time the municipality has the authority to abate any nuisance and then bill the building permit applicant. Staff recommends that the Village amend our code to make the building permit serve as a legal contract and first notice to control nuisances resulting from construction. This will make the building permit applicant more responsible for property maintenance during construction projects. This will also give the department greater ability to more quickly address property maintenance violations. The new building permit application would Residential Construction and Property Maintenance Items September 23, 2005 Page 3 include a provision stating the applicant's responsibility to control property maintenance on a construction site or the Village will abate the nuisance in a manner proposed later for all property violations. Strengthening Measure #2: CONSTRUCTION SITE MAINTENANCE GUIDE The Community Development Department also plans to distribute a property maintenance guide for new residential construction and additions to help reduce service requests for nuisance abatement. The guide will highlight parts of Village Code that the building permit applicant should be aware of for property maintenance during their construction project. The guide will be handed out to all individuals who apply for building permits for new residential construction and addition projects. Attachment C is a preliminary version of this guide. B. HOMEOWNER AS A GENERAL CONTRACTOR/SUBCONTRACTOR Background A growing trend that is creating problems for the Village is when homeowners act as the general/sub contractor for residential construction projects. These problems include (1) that the homeowner is not always on site, (2) homeowners rely on staff to amend the design of their project to meet Village Code, and (3) work is improperly completed by untrained individuals compromising the structural integrity of the rest of the building. Of the 350 building permits that homeowners acted as the general contractor in the last three years, 15 percent required repeat inspections because of improper workmanship. Strongly related to this situation, there is a great demand on staff time for reviewing residential construction projects that have non-stamped architectural drawings. Often with non-stamped plans, staff is asked to design projects. During the review process they often find wrong sized materials proposed to be used for the wrong function, especially those affecting the structural integrity of a building. Illinois State Code does not require stamped architectural drawings for residential construction with submission of a building permit application (225 ILCS 305/3). However the majority of surrounding communities require an architectural stamp for jobs over a certain value. In order to ensure that individuals performing work in the Village are qualified and that our codes are followed staff is proposing the following measures: Strengthening Measure #3: GENRAL CONTRACTOR TEST One community researched required an open book test for the licensing of homeowners who act as general/sub contractors, at a cost of$125.00. License renewal must be completed every five years. Staff recommends that the Village of Mount Prospect implement a similar requirement for every homeowner that acts as a general/sub contractor on projects that are greater than $10,000 in value. The test would be designed by the Building Commissioner for the Village and would assess an individual's capability to handle the responsibilities of a general contractor. Strengthening Measure #4: REINSPECTION FEE Current reinspection fees are $25.00 (Section 21.317) and have been set at this amount for the last three decades. This amount is not adequate to cover the costs incurred by the Village when repeat inspections take place. Reinspections cost the department triple this amount. Reinspections costs include staff time, vehicle maintenance, fuel, and insurance. The Community Development Department recommends that the Village of Mount Prospect raise reinspection fees to the amount of$75.00, to cover the costs related to reinspections. Residential Construction and Property Maintenance Items September 23,2005 Page 4 Strengthening Measure #5: ARCHITECTURAL STAMP Other communities require that residential construction projects that have a total project cost over a certain dollar amount have to submit plans and specification that are signed and sealed by a licensed architect or structural engineer. Staff recommends that applicants who turn in a building permit application for a residential construction project, that has a total project cost over $10,000, be required to submit plans and specifications that are signed and sealed by a licensed architect or structural engineer. It is the department's opinion that a project over this dollar amount should be planned by a qualified professional. II. PROPERTY MAINTENANCE ITEMS A. VACANT BUILDINGS Background Staff has increasingly encountered problems with vacant property and buildings left unattended with little or no maintenance. These properties are often an eyesore with unkempt landscaping, sites for dumping, and deteriorating exteriors. This makes them obvious targets for vandalism and a visible nuisance where children may be injured or crime may occur. The structures are vacant for a variety of reasons varying from real estate speculation, bankruptcy, and disputes over estates. There are three major problems staff is confronted with when dealing with these properties and their owners: (1) determining the actual owner, (2) getting owners to maintain, rehabilitate, or demolish the structure, and (3) using additional staff time to monitor these properties for compliance with Village health and safety regulations. Staff currently applies the property maintenance code to vacant buildings and takes the necessary actions according to Chapter 21, Article VI of Village Code, when there are violations. In order to ensure that properties stay in compliance with Village health and safety regulations, and nuisances resulting from vacancy are minimized, staff is proposing the following measure: Strengthening Measure #6: VACANT BUILDING ORDINANCE Similar codes were researched from other communities that address vacant property problems. Attachment D is a brief comparison of elements in each municipality's code dealing with this issue. These communities required all responsible parties to register their vacant structure with the municipality after their first violation notice. Upon registration the owner would then have to provide a plan to maintain, rehabilitate, or demolish the vacant structure; and be required to pay registration fee to recover costs to monitor the structures for health and safety violations. Staff recommends that an ordinance be created and Village Code be revised to better control the issues stemming from vacant property and buildings. Attachment E is preliminary text that has been created by Staff and is currently under review by the Village Attorney. B. NUISANCE ABATEMENT FOR ALL PROPERTY VIOLATIONS Background Staff is also proposing amending Village Code to more clearly define what is considered a nuisance; implement a more aggressive nuisance abatement program, and establishing an administrative adjunction process to expedite Residential Construction and Property Maintenance Items September 23,2005 Page 5 the time that it takes to address problems. In addition to these measures, staff is requesting that the Village establish a fund to pay private contractors to mitigate any noted violations. In situations where property owners are not responsive, the Village would hire the private contractor to mitigate the problem and would then lien the property for all costs incurred by the Village. The primary goal with this measure is to eliminate the need to obtain approval of the Courts in order to address nuisance situations. The time involved with the current Court process exacerbates situations and upsets residents that are impacted by these problem properties. These strengthening measures, which are intended for quicker and stronger nuisance abatement, are described in more detail below: Strengthening Measure #7: NUISANCES DEFINED Staff recommends that the Village amend our code to better define the type of nuisances that can occur on a property. As the code is currently laid out there is a weak understanding of the type of nuisances that can occur on properties. Staff is currently working with the Village Attorney on the vocabulary for a text amendment to better define nuisances. The following is the draft of this text currently under review: No owner, agent or occupant of any privately owned lands or premises shall place upon, or permit upon the owner's premises any noxious weeds as are defined in Illinois Complied Statutes, dirt or rubbish, or any swill, offal, garbage (except in authorized containers), ashes, barnyard litter, manure, yard cleanings, dead animals, inoperable vehicle as defined in the property maintenance code Chapter 21, Article 6, or any other foul or unhealthy material, or any other condition on said premises, in such a manner as to constitute a nuisance. Any weeds or grass growing upon any lot or parcel of land in the city to a greater height than eight (8) inches or which have gone or are about to go to seed are hereby declared to be a nuisance condition and dangerous to the health, safety and good order of the Village. Fallen trees, fallen tree limbs, dead trees, dead tree limbs, which in the opinion of the Director of Community Development constitute a health, safety or fire hazard, are declared to be a nuisance condition. Strengthening Measure #8: ABATEMENT OF NUISANCES Staff recommends that the Village implement a more aggressive nuisance abatement program. The following proposes the method the Village should use for nuisance abatement: When there exists on private property a condition which is in violation of nuisances declared by the Village, a notice to remove the offensive matter or correct the nuisance condition will be served by the chief of police, director of inspections, commissioner of health, or their authorized representatives, upon the owner. Such notice may be served personally or may be served by mail. Such notice will describe the matter to be removed and require removal thereof within three (3) days not to include Saturdays, Sundays or holidays following service of the notice. If at the end of said three (3) days following service of such notice the offensive matter has not been removed, or the nuisance condition corrected, the city shall cause the correction or removal and disposition. (Insert Village provisions for billing, liens, and collection) In addition, for every day's continuance of such refusal or neglect, the owner or person interested shall forfeit to the city fifty dollars ($50.00)." "Owner," for the purposes of this proposed nuisance abatement procedure, shall mean the person who is listed as the contact person on the current rental licensing application on file with the city, if any, or, if none, the person listed as owner by the city assessor on the homestead record, or, if none, the taxpayer as shown by the records of the city assessor. In addition to these measures, staff is requesting that the Village establish a fund to pay private contractors to mitigate any noted violations. , Residential Construction and Property Maintenance Items September 23, 2005 Page 6 Strengthening Measure #9: ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUDICATION Finally, Staff recommends that the Village use the process of administrative adjudication to expedite the time it takes to adequately address problem properties. As already stated, the time involved with the current Court process exacerbates situations and upsets residents that are impacted by these problem properties. This process will give the Village a quicker response time for handling violation petitions. Attachment F explains the steps of the administrative adjudication process. It is requested that Village Board (1) discuss the nine strengthening measures proposed for the Village of Mount Prospect to adopt in order to reinforce current code and policy for residential construction and vacant buildings and property and (2) provide direction to Staff regarding the steps necessary for implementation of these measures. ML l-~k William J. Cooney H:\PLAN\TearDowns and TopOffs\Property Construction and Maintenance Items COW Memo.doc , " . .. . - , ." , , ".- .'. ..J III .. . . .... , , - ' - '" . . . . . . Attachment A-I: Residential Construction Projects . . . ... . :... ... II .. II ... ...... . .- .. . ~ ...... ........ II, .,. · .: .. ~ . .. ..- . . . ....... rr ...:. .. ..: ........ .. . ... ... -... ,.. . . . I.. · ... I I .. ... · ~ . -.,- -.,.. I ..~ -. - .....,.. L .: .. . . .. .. . ....... .. . . . . . - .. . . ", . . . ~ - . . . *Areas marked on map are drawn larger than actual parcel size for better map readability. .. .. II . . CD Areas marked RED indicate a location where a Residential Teardown and Rebuild took place between 2003 - 2005 o Areas marked BLUE indicate a location where a Residential Expansion or Second Floor Addition took place between 2003 - 2005. . . , 1.5 2 .:i'vfiles 0.5 1 Attachment A-2: Northeast of Downtown 403 402 403 402 403 \ 400 401 I 400 I 401 400 401 V E GREGORY ST 323 320 321 318 319 318 317 314 600 ./'" EMERSON 321 318 319 312 ~ ,\"" PARK 316 317 316 315 319 316 317 313 310 317 314 315 314 " "'~ 0z 314 315 308 315 312 313 312 311 312 313 306 303\% ~ 313 310 311 310 309 y~ 310 311 304 311 310 311 309 308 307 308 309 302 309 308 309 306 307 306 ~\ 305 307 306 307 306 307 304 305 304 303 V 305 304 305 304 305 302 303 302 303 302 303 302 303 ~ \ 225 224 301 300 301 300 301 300 301 300 222 Z ~ 223 222 E ISABELLA ST 220 r 221 220 Z 222 Z I.........~i...... z r 220 221 218 Z 219 Z );; m 223 s: m (f) 219 218 s: 219 218 s: 220 )> 221 r 0 -u 218 s: 219 () ~ (f) m 216 J: 217 216 ::0 219 218 r 219 (f) .217 m 216 -; 217 216 (Jl m 216 -; 0 z 0 216 (f) 217 214 0 215 214 (f) 214 Z 217 -; 214 215 r 215 215 214 (Jl -; (Jl 214 215 /213 -; 213 212 212 -; 212 213 212 213 212 213 ... e 211 210 210 210 211 211 211 211 210 211 208 209 208 208 209 208 209 208 209 206 207 206 206 207 207 206 207 206 207 206 207 204 205 204 204 205 204 205 204 205 ~ 205 205 204 202 202 203 202 203 202 203 202 203 203 202 201 200 201 200 201 200 201 200 201 200 E THAYER ST 123 122 117 116 117 116 113 114 114 120 119 115 114 115 114 111 112 112 118 BUSSE PARK 117 116 113 112 113 112 109 110 110 114 111 110 111 110 113 112 108 108 109 108 109 108 107 111 110 106 106 109 108 107 106 107 106 105 107 106 104 104 104 105 105 104 105 104 103 102 103 102 103 102 102 103 102 101 100 101 100 101 100 101 100 100 "'" E HENRY ST N 23 22 23 16 15 16 15 A- 14 15 16 21 20 21 19 18 21 14 13 14 13 13 14 " 12 17 16 17 12 11 12 11 11 12 11 I 12 Legend Addition (2003) Tear Down (2003) Addition (2004) .. Tear Down (2004) .. Addition (2005) .. Tear Down (2005) o 210 420 630 840 'Feet 401 400 1m r 401 I 400 I r 401 I 400) f 401 400 I ~ 501 :::~ \" ~ Ir11 403 402 / I 403 / 402 I I 403 !-. 402 ~ 404 1ji 1_403 .[4041 Gl 405 404 I / 405 / 404 405 1P4 401 405 8 ~ ~ 407 406 407 406 () 407 4Q6~ ~I) 406 :I: 407 406 ;:o-i 407 ~8 ::: 409 408:>> "'Q (;i ~...", ::: 409 410 0 f----=- ~ 409 408 Z 409 is' 0 ($><0 ~ ~ 411 410 ~ ~ r ~ 410 < 4'iO ~ 411 410 g ""0 B''o ~ ~ 412 ~ ~ ~ ~ ::: -:- ~ :~: :~~ ~ ~"''I- ~7 on & ~<') ~~...'\~. :~~ 416 - 414 417 416 ~ 417 I 4~ ~'" ~ 421 --;uo 419 418 L--- ~ 60? 414 415 E> ~ 418 '--- GO WANDO AV ~501 500 417 416 ~ ~ 0 \ 505 416 ~19 418 ., 500 500 501 500 803 50 f----so3 f---=:- 507 418 $00 "oft ~ 502 502 503 502 - 504 1 v 500 =~ f-- ~ 505 ~ 509 420 4"1 So<, 504 507:: 507 506 507 508 511 422 <S>~ Y 4 So.1 f-so6 509 508 509 508 509 510 513 424 ~ 505 508 511 510 511 ~ r-srr- 512 ---s:t7 fJIlII> ~~ 507 510 513 -513 ~ 515 514 ~ - /'" rJ>? I----so6- 509 512 .._ 512 ~ 60~ ./'" ~ ..---- f--- 514 517 516 I -=....---./"' 503 J 508 I I 511 514 515 ~ 515 I I---.,-- ~ ~~ ~O 510 513 516 !i~!5q 519 t;:::--' ~ L 523 518 I 802 800) L..:.:.:.- 601 502 ~ 512 ~ 40~ W5HABONEETR'--'-~ 603 504 ~9 514 ~- 803 600 601 602 605 ~ 516 _ 602 603 604 - 508 518 605"6ii4 '605 - ~ 512 ., '.p _'--- 607 606 ~y'4 615 608 ---009 608 611 ~ '-------J 610 611 610 ~.. ~on:1:, J L--- Attachment A-3: East of Mount Propsect Golf Course ::: ~,~1~~~~4~:::"~'~~#:4i1'- /;::~~~I~~: 130 131 126 1"11 '6' ~ <0 ...;: R R R IR ;: 132 ~ 12? '6>"> ~ ... 133 ;:; 128 ~II> ~ ~ jF co '" ... s ~ ~~ -==-13:01 '" f~ -;:: 202 .'9 ... ;: R R R ... ~\ ~ 203 202 201 204 203;: g:... ... on l:l '" ~\ ~\ 205 204 203 206 205 R R ... liil ~ ~ ::: ::: ~ \8 g ~ ~ g ~ g g ~ f:! ~ ~ 12 ~ 217 218 WMILBURNAV 300 (J) 301 300 ~ 8 1ii ~ i;; ~ I~ 21g ii ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 302 s;: _ 302 305 :: ~ m~5 304 =:= 308 ;:0 '" c> '311 1108 1100 ~ 1008 ~ ~ ~ I-- Iml ImI 122 123 122 123 124 125 124 125 12il 127 126 127 12il 129 128 129 130 131 130 131 !li: a~ ~ a~ U ~~~~I~~~ ~4 ~ g S g ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ::,,-- ~ WMILBURNAV ~ (J) 1205 300 1 302 ~_ 302 ~I:~ 305 304 306 j6 3073l!~ :i! 309 308 ~ ~ 311 1200 I ~~: PENDELTON PL J-- c>>~~ao 316 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 301 303 305 307 309 ~ - 700 700 m '" "'1; Ic> c> co c> c> c> co ~ ~ ~ '" '" '" ~ - - W LINCOLN 5T II '" '" I ~ c> c> ~ ~ ~ .... '" ... on "I~ ~I'" '" ., c> - c> c> c> c> ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S! ~ ~ ~ co '" ... I'" .. "'1"'1'" c> ~ ~ ~ ~ co co c> '" ~ - - ~ ~ ~ ., 1\G?1 ~ Ol ... c> - c> c> ~ ~ ~ ~ "'1'" ls Ig :g :g l;g g g en len co co 00 600 I GOLF COURSE 600 ~ - 702 ~ 706 ~N AWA TRAIL 701 /700 '~a c> 703/702 ( O"''''R 705 / 704 705 707 I 706 707 704 _ 708 I 709 706 711 lua 600 600 600 600 708 ~ Legend I........... ,>1 Addition (2003) Tear Down (2003) Addition (2004) .. Tear Down (2004) .. Addition (2005) .. Tear Down (2005) o c> c> ... ~ -m- ,,~ 115 114 11~ 114. 115 114 113 "0 117 n6 1'17 116 117 16 118 119 116 119 116 119 118 115 117~ i!&t~l'Ji1i 120 121 120 121 12~ 1~3 .,.<.< 402 122 123 122 ~ '<VI .<uu 201 200 303 120~ 202 '<v~ ,<v,< 203 202 203 120. 205 204 20~ 204 205 204 ~o~ 204 206 .<UI ;roo 207 ~Ut; 207 _ 213 ~ 209 208 209 208 ~~ ~11 ~lU 211 210 215 1~~4 2.,~ .<"" 213 212 213 2 2 21~ 214 21~ 214 215 21_ 217h'fr 217 216 27 216 217 211 219 I~ 219 ~16 219 ~ ~:e - 220 221 '<~U ~ 221 r-m- .<2~ 222 223 400 344 >SOl WMILBURNAV 303 L~O J 3u1 ~v"- 305 ~2 303 302 303 302 Fi* 311" .~ 305 304 307 306 307 306 309 309 ~ -309 306 313 300 301 311 311 311 ~.,v 3ff 310 ~~~ 313 312 313 312 312 '"U 315 314 m 315 314 ~ 314 r 317 316 317 316 r 317 310 :>> 319 318 ~ 319 iif~f~!\ 319 318 401 403 405 407 409 411 413 415 417 419 309 503 11C~~:i' 507 509 ~ 513 f-- 515 519 519 501 ~.~..s-; .,11>1. ~q, <D od' ., c> co >e. ., ., "0... 7(?" ~ 405 -/ N ~ 703 A : 705 ~ 707 "" 709 7l1ll-- 09 711 710 -/ ....... ~ ~- 705 \ 'eo/0'....J 707 708 ~ ~- ~ 360 720 1,080 1,440 'Feet Attachment A-4: Prospect MeadowsjWedgewood Terrace ~ ~ W EUCLID AV Xo~ ~ "'..'" ~_!'l!'l!'l tt. 1132 1131 r; ~ 1130 ~129. ~ ~^ '0 ~ ~ v~ ~ ~ 1~ ~ "I() '" ~..." ......~ bo 111< ~...... ...o!J) J'J'" ~~... ......<0- ':$ 11' <6>" ~ '" ~":J ;: l 454 ...~~~ 3002 11 ::! CO~Qcnco &t &i ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ '" '" (,0"1 (,Or, 603 ...~~'" ~r; ;J> '" '" ~ &1 ~ ~ ~~ ~'" ~Q ;p ~ ;t ~ ~ ~ '" i' 0(,;.: ~~ '& ~1- ~~ ~9 1?<) bo'?>'). 9~ ~'!> A?!IJ ~~~ BUNTING LN ~~~iii ~ co'" CQNU) &:t&:t lO~~g '-- ALBION LN '" r:-r--, 10 g g - <\ A'/.'O I-- 924 424 - 420 ~J 922 918 914 A'/.1 re '" ~ ~ :2 g l!! l 910 '" l<l '" '" '" cD j I \ 906 ~R~~E~N · · ~~ \ ~ '" '" ~ij'" '" g~~ ~~&:tlO1D~U\ ~ ~-:'~,:~ ~ :;; $ g Q ..! 1)RIOLE LN ,-- TI ~&i ~ &:t ~ ~ ! ~ ~ m (JJ -I ~~i$~isl;~~ i : : :~~ ~: ::.~ ~ .. .. .. ~~ '" ~ '" .. '" '" ~ 0 !'l :: :: :: :: :: '" GO '" ~ '" 0 :: :: :: :: 1108 1116 1114 STRAFORD PL ~ 1111 1112 1110 1109 "'- 1107 1102 ~~ ......~" ..." ~ ~bo ~ ..." ...~'" ... ......~'O 446 316 ...bo '!> ...~ '!> <;>'0 ~ .;t 0<) ~~ ~O 0~ ~~ '" ~ 333 201 211 225 350 350 350 300 250 W KENSINGTON RD 719 718 719 718 719 718 719 718 719 718 ~ I 211 I ~ 717 716 717 716 717 716 717 716 717 716 715 714 715 714 715 714 715 714 715 714 715 714 801 799 713 712 713 712 713 712 713 712 713 712 713 712 711 710 711 710 711 710 711 710 711 710 711 710 709 708 709 708 709 708 709 708 709 708 709 708 707 706 707 706 707 706 707 706 707 706 707 706 Legend Ii ......1 Addition (2003) Tear Down (2003) Addition (2004) .. Tear Down (2004) .. Addition (2005) .. Tear Down (2005) o 280 ~ o U1 '" ~ ~ 7 5 3 1 z m r s: J: C ;;0 (JJ -I ;;0 o 1119 1120 1115 1116 1113 1112 1109 1108 1105 1104 (1101 2 OXFORD PL ~ ~ ~~O; <;>'\ '>- o$i ...~<:>" ~<>. ...bo 0,_ ...~ ~1/ ~...", (1; ~~ ...~ ...~ <;>'0 ...1/$ so~ ...1/$ ~'" ~'b # 200 195 199 13 200 ~ 719 718 717 716 715 714 713 712 711 r!j!li;i't!t~J2~ 709 708 707 706 560 5 o 1 :: 3 1008 1006 1004 <;>'!> o$i o o ~ 150 920 100 o 2 m19 IL~ 7 N A 709 ~ 840 1,120 'Feet Attachment B: Property Maintenance Research Community What are your construction guidelines for residential areas? [1] Neighbor notification for construction or additions? Do you req uire tree protection? [2] Desi.b>tl Guidelines or Appearance review? [3] Arlington Heights Standard + new guidelines under review. Only if public Design (teardown Plans for new structure must be approved hearing No ord. Fall before demo is approved. required Guidelines 2003) Standard Only if public Architectura Des Plaines During demo, dumpster may be placed on No street hearing req'd I Review Elk Grove Standard Only if public Case by case No hearing req' d Standard Glenview Submit plans for new structure wi demo Only if public (Ord. passed application. New construction or site hearing req' d Pub, Priv, Plan No in 2004) restoration must begin w/in 30 days of Posted Sign for required demo completion, weather exceptions Demo allowed. Hinsdale Standard (zoning regs Submit plans for new structure wi demo Demolition Pub, Priv, Plan for infill application. New construction or site only required No restoration must begin wlin 60 days of construction) demolition, weather exceptions allowed. [4] Standard Mount Port-pot may not be placed within Only ifpublic Pub, plan required No Prospect setbacks. Dumpster not required Plywood hearing req'd can secure doors and windows. Niles Standard + By Letter Pub Appearance Site fenced until final gradin Review Prospect Standard + Only if public No Trespassing posted on all street Pub, Priv No Heights exposures. No graffiti on dumpster hearing req'd Park Ridge Standard + (zoning regs No stagnant water Posted Sign Pub, Priv Design for infill Guidelines construction) No wood burning Rolling Standard Demolition Pub No Meadows only Wheeling Standard - Only if public Pub, Priv No No dumpster required hearing Req' d Pub, Priv, Plan required, Wilmette Standard By Letter neighbors' trees No within 15 feet of the ro er line Standard + Only if public Winnetka No construction in single-family residential Pub, Priv No districts on Saturday, Sunday, or Holida s. hearing req'd Notes for Attachment B: Property Maintenance Research The above questions were asked with respect to residential districts only. [1] Construction Guidelines: Standard guidelines include 1) fencing the property until all doors and windows are secure 2) provision of a port-a-pot 3) use of a dumpster on the property for refuse 4) dust abatement through the use of wet saws and spraying down surfaces 5) removal of mud and other debris from all public right of ways 6) No use of the parkway or other public area for storage of the dumpster or building materials In many cases, the same rules exist for residential and commercial sites. [2] Tree Protection: Parkway trees (Pub), private trees (Priv). Required fencing of trees of a given caliper. [3] Design Guidelines: Noted only if a required part of the building permit approval process for new residential construction or additions. [4] Hinsdale Construction Guidelines: Post rules and regulations pertaining to demolition and start date in a prominent place 4 to 7 days prior to demo; allowable hours for construction - 8 AM to 8 PM Mon.-Fri. and 8 AM to 4 PM on Saturday; Delivery of materials allowed 7 am to 8 pm, Mon.-Sat; No fires or open burning; Curb/Gutter or Sidewalk to be traversed by trucks must be protected with planking and damage repaired or replaced at contractors expense; Litter and debris cleaned daily by pre-designated employee. [5] Niles Construction Guidelines: 30 wait after demo permit is issued for rodent and insect extermination. Hours: 7 AM - 7:30 PM Mon - Fri, 7 AM - 5:30 PM Sat, No Sunday ~ "'0 .S ~ ~ t) c: ~ c: ~ ..... c: .a ::E c: o ..;1 t) :3 ~ ..... rn c: o u e- ~ c: .s ..... ...... ~ p... u ..... c: E ..c: t) ~ ..... < Property Maintenance Guide for New Construction and Additions Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department 50 S. Emerson Street Mount Prospect, IL 60056 Phone: (847) 818-5328 Fax: (847) 818-5329 09/05 Village of Mount Prospect Property Maintenance Guide For New Construction and Additions Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department Building a new home or adding to your existing home is a challenging but rewarding endeavor. Mount Prospect is committed to maintaining safety and respect for neighbors during construction. The following guidelines will help you remain in compliance with Village Code throughout the process. · Every effort should be made to protect the surrounding public and private area. All areas disturbed by the construction must be restored to their original condition (16.105). · Dumpsters, portable toilets, and construction materials may not be placed on public property or the neighbor's property. · Dust should be controlled as much as possible (16.704). · Tracking of soil, gravel, or other material onto the streets and public sidewalk is prohibited (9.306). · Affected areas include but are not limited to streets, sidewalks, parkways, trees, bushes, and fences. · The property must remain free of garbage and debris (21.603). · When necessary, a dumpster must be acquired to hold construction debris. · A cover may be required on the dumpster. · The dumpster must be removed immediately upon reaching the fill level. · Trees must be protected during construction. . Construction vehicles may not block access to nearby homes and businesses (18.1303). · When sidewalks are closed, proper barricading is required (16.310.B). · The site of the construction or remodeling must have sufficient security to prevent public access (16.105). . Adjacent properties may not be used for access or storage (23.301). . The placement of guards around trees may be required based an individual assessmen1 by the Public Works Department (9.716). Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department · Grass and weeds must be maintained below eight inches in height on the entire property (23.1402). · Erosion and sedimentation must be controlled (16.703). . Natural vegetation must be maintained whenever possible. · Stagnant water is prohibited (19.303). · Water remaining for more than seven (7) days is considered stagnant. · Open foundations must be covered and drained. For more information on construction and remodeling guidelines, please contact: Building Department (847) 870-5675 For guidelines on general property maintenance, please contact: Environmental Health Department (847) 870-5668 Property Maintenance Guide for New Construction and Additions Attachment D: Vacant Building Research Fee Waivers Statement.of intent Inspection -. . . . When condemned, vacant and unsecured for five days or more, vacant and boarded for more than 30 days, vacant for more than 365 days and there has been a nuisance violation $400 er year Registration is not required for vacant structures where there has not been a nuisance violation for at least 365 days. Plans to maintain, rehab, or demolish the building are required. Required $500 er three months Fee waived for one year if the building is actively marketed at fair market value. Plans to maintain, rehab, or demolish the building are required. Required Attachment E: Preliminary Text Amendment for Vacant Building Regulation ABATEMENT AND REHABILIT A nON OF VACANT BUILDINGS AND DANGEROUS STRUCTURES Statement of Findings and Purpose. (A) Being that there exist in the Village of Mount Prospect structures or buildings that have become dangerous or unsafe and numerous other structures that are vacant, abandoned, and in disrepair, the Village Board of Mount Prospect finds and declares that: (1) Structures that become dangerous and unsafe must promptly be made safe and secure to protect the public safety. (2) Structures that are vacant and not properly secured are dangerous and unsafe in that they are extremely vulnerable to being set on fire by unauthorized persons. (3) Many structures that are vacant, whether secured or not, are a blight on their neighborhoods, cause deterioration and instability in their neighborhoods, and have an adverse impact upon adjacent and nearby properties. (4) Structures that were previously used as residential units and have since become vacant have a significant and detrimental impact on the local housing market. (5) Structures that are vacant and not properly secured attract vagrants and criminals and are prime locations to conduct illegal criminal activities, including arson and drug use. (6) Structures that are vacant and unsecured pose serious threats to the public's health and safety and therefore are declared to be public nuisances. (7) Immediate abatement and rehabilitation of these structures is necessary to abate such public nuisances, prevent unsightly blight and the deterioration of neighborhoods with the consequent adverse impact on the value of adjacent and nearby properties, secure the public safety and to ensure and enhance the vitality and livability of our neighborhoods. (8) Communication between owners of dangerous and vacant buildings and the city is essential for effective allocation of public resources and the maintenance of public health, welfare, and safety in regards to such structures. (B) The purpose ofthis article is to establish the reasonably necessary measures to abate the public nuisances, blight, negative housing market impact, and other harmful effects connected with dangerous and vacant or abandoned buildings and structures, consistent with the authority vested in the Village to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public through the regulation of the construction, maintenance, repair, and alteration of buildings and other structures within the city. Definitions The words and phrases used in this section have the following meanings unless their context clearly indicates otherwise: (1) Director means the director of the enforcement agency or his/her designee. (2) Statement of intent means a form filled out by the owner of a boarded structure which contains specific information from the property owner regarding the structure and the owner's plans for its rehabilitation and maintenance or removal or demolition. (3) Vacant structure means any structure or building that is (A) Condemned; (B) Unoccupied and unsecured for five (5) days or more; (D) Unoccupied and secured by means other than those normally used in the design of the building for thirty (30) days or more; (E) Unoccupied and has multiple housing maintenance, fire or building code violations existing for thirty (30) days or more; (F) Unoccupied for a period of time over three hundred sixty-five (365) days and during which time an order has been issued to correct a nuisance condition pursuant to section XX (4) Dangerous building or structure means a building or structure or part thereof declared structurally unsafe or hazardous by any duly constituted authority, whether it is occupied, unoccupied, or vacant. (5) Substantial rehabilitation means rehabilitation the value of which exceeds fifty (50) percent of the assessed valuation of the building or structure. (6) Owner shall mean any and all owners of record or trustees for such owners. The obligations of owners under this article extend to the agents of such owner(s) or other persons interested in the building or structure. Enforcement Authority The director of the department of Community Development is authorized to administer and enforce the provisions of this article. The director may take such measures as are necessary for the proper administration of the article, including, but not limited to, maintaining lists on the status of vacant buildings or structures. The director may delegate his/her powers and duties under this chapter to an appropriate administrator or any inspector so designated. Obligations of Owners of Dangerous Structures and Buildings (A) A building or structure or part thereof that is or becomes dangerous or unsafe shall be made safe and secure. If the building cannot be made safe or secure, the owner shall take down and remove the building. An owner of such a dangerous or unsafe building or structure who would make safe or would take down and remove a such building or structure pursuant to this section shall comply with all applicable building, fire prevention, zoning ordinances and codes,and any other applicable code or ordinance. No change of use or occupancy shall be compelled by reason of such reconstruction or restoration. (B) The director shall inspect a building or structure upon receiving information that the building or structure or anything attached or connected therewith is in violation of the specifications of all applicable building, fire prevention, and public safety ordinances and codes adopted herein or is otherwise in such unsafe condition that the public safety is endangered. If the director has reason to believe that an emergency situation exists tending to create an immediate danger to the health, welfare, or safety of the general public, the director shall enter and inspect the premises. Absent an emergency situation, if the owner of the vacant building or structure fails or refuses to consent to an inspection, the director shall seek a search warrant from the Cook County Circuit Court for the purpose of determining and ensuring the structural integrity of the building, the repairs necessary to ensure its structural integrity, that it will be safe for entry by police officers and firefighters in time of exigent circumstances or emergency, that the building and its contents will not present a hazard to the public. (C) If, in the director's judgment, the structure or building appears to endanger the public safety, the director shall in his/her discretion elect to commence action to abate as herein provided. To commence an abatement action, the director shall make a careful survey report based on his/her inspection of the premises, or if necessary based on an additional inspection and forthwith notify the owner to remove the condition or building or make the building or condition safe and secure in the time specified for in the notice. If it appears to the director that such structure would be especially dangerous, the director may affix a notice of dangerousness in a conspicuous space upon the structure's exterior walls which shall not be removed or defaced without the director's authority. (D) Any person notified as provided in subsection (C) shall within the time specified commence to secure or remove such structure. If the public safety so requires, the director shall enter upon the premises and cause the structure to be made safe and secure and that passers-by are protected at the expense of the owner or person interested. (E) If the owner continues such refusal or neglects to remove or make the building safe, the director shall cause it to be taken down or otherwise made safe, and the costs and charges incurred shall constitute a lien upon the real estate upon which such building is situated and (insert village provisions for billing, liens, and collection) In addition, for every day's continuance of such refusal or neglect, the owner or person interested shall forfeit to the city fifty dollars ($50.00), to be recovered in a civil action on this article. Any violation of this section is declared to be a nuisance and subject to removal or abatement. (This section must be consistent with our authority as home rule and Illinois State Law to abate a nuisance.) The court shall restrain the construction, alteration, maintenance or use of a building or structure in violation of this section and shall restrain the further construction, alteration or repair of a building or structure reported to be unsafe under a survey authorized by this section. An abatement action under this section is a remedy cumulative to other remedies at law and equity, and in no way pre-empts, supersedes, or bars civil or criminal prosecution for violation of this article, the model building or Life Safety Code or any applicable building, fire prevention, or public safety ordinance, nor is the commencement of an abatement action a condition precedent to the initiation of criminal prosecution or any other remedy. Failure to adhere to the procedure prescribed in this section shall not bar relief or remedy if such failure does not prejudice a person interested and merely constitutes harmless error. (F) An owner or person interested who is aggrieved by an order issued pursuant to this section may appeal to Village Manager. An owner or person interested who is aggrieved by an order of the Village Manager may appeal by instituting relief. Obligations of Owners of Vacant or Abandoned Buildings or Structures (A) The owner of a vacant building or structure shall obtain a vacant building permit for the period during which it is vacant. When a building or structure becomes vacant, as defined by section XX, the owner of the building shall apply for and obtain a vacant building permit and pay the fee, as set forth in section XX. Upon the expiration of a vacant building permit, if the building or structure is still vacant, the owner shall arrange for an inspection of the building and premises with the director and appropriate police and fire officials, pursuant to section XX and renew the permit within ten (10) days of expiration in the same manner as the expired permit. All renewed permits shall be subject to all conditions and obligations imposed by this article or the initial permit unless expressly exempted there from. (B) The owner of a vacant building or structure shall comply with all building, fire, life safety, zoning, and other applicable codes or ordinances and shall apply for all necessary building, fire prevention, and zoning permits upon application for a vacant building maintenance permit. (C) The owner of a vacant building or structure shall immediately remove all combustible waste and refuse there from in compliance with the applicable fire prevention code and shall remove any waste, rubbish or debris from the interior of the structure. The owner of a vacant building or structure shall also immediately remove any waste, rubbish, debris or excessive vegetation from the yards surrounding the vacant building or structure in accordance with the vacant building maintenance standards of this article. (D) The owner of a vacant building or structure shall immediately lock, barricade or secure all doors, windows and other openings in the building or structure to prohibit entry by unauthorized persons, in accordance with the vacant building maintenance standards of this article. The owner of a vacant building or structure shall provide the police department with a list of persons authorized to be present in the building and shall provide notices of trespass to the police authorizing the arrest for trespass of individuals not on the list. The owner shall update the authorized person list as needed. (E) The obligations of owners of a vacant building or structure are continuing obligations which are effective throughout the time of vacancy, as that term is defined in this article. The director shall have continuing abatement authority throughout the time of vacancy. Vacant Building Permit; Inspection; Maintenance Standards; Fees (A) Application by the owner of a vacant building or structure for a vacant building permit shall be made on a form provided by the director. Applicants shall disclose all measures to be taken to ensure that the building will be kept weather-tight and secure from trespassers, safe for entry police officers and firefighters in times of exigent circumstances or emergency, and together with its premises be free from nuisance and in good order in conformance with the vacant building maintenance standards. The application shall include a "statement of intent." The statement of intent shall include but not necessarily be limited to information as to the expected period of vacancy (including the date of vacancy), the plan for regular maintenance during the vacancy to comply with the maintenance safety requirements of this subsection, and a plan and timeline for the lawful occupancy, rehabilitation or removal or demolition of the structure. (B) Upon and at the time of application, the owner of a vacant building or structure shall arrange for an inspection of the premises by the director and the appropriate police and fire officials. The propose of such inspection is to determine and ensure the structural integrity of the building, the repairs necessary to ensure its structural integrity, that it will be safe for entry by police officers and firefighters in time of exigent circumstances or emergency, that the building and its contents do not present a hazard to the public during the time that the building remains vacant, and that the building and structure is in compliance with the vacant building maintenance standards. If the director has reason to believe that an emergency situation exists tending to create an immediate danger to the health, welfare, or safety of the general public, no notification or warrant is necessary and the director shall enter and inspect the premises pursuant to section XX. If the owner of the vacant building or structure fails or refuses to consent to an inspection, the director shall seek a search warrant from the Cook County District Court for the purpose of determining and ensuring the structural integrity of the building, the repairs necessary to ensure its structural integrity, that it will be safe for entry by police officers and firefighters in time of exigent circumstances or emergency, that the building and its contents do not present a hazard to the public during the time that the building remains vacant, and that the building and structure is in compliance with the vacant building maintenance standards. (C) The director, upon inspection, shall issue any order for work needed to: (1) Adequately protect the building from intrusion by trespassers and from deterioration by the weather in accordance with the vacant building maintenance standards set forth in this article; and (2) Ensure that allowing the building to remain will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, will not unreasonably interfere with the reasonable and lawful use and enjoyment of other premises within the neighborhood, and will not pose an extraordinary hazard to police officers or firefighters entering the premises in times of emergency. When issuing such orders, the director shall specify the time for completion of the work. The order shall act as an interim vacant building permit, the duration of which shall be for the time set forth in the director's order. No interim permit shall be effective for a period of more than ninety (90) days. All work done pursuant to this article shall be done in compliance with the applicable building, fire prevention, and zoning codes and ordinances. (D) The director shall issue a vacant building permit upon being satisfied that the building has been inspected and is in compliance with the vacant building maintenance standards set forth in this article, and is adequately protected from intrusion by trespassers and from deterioration by the weather. This permit shall be effective for a period of one year. (E) A vacant building or structure shall be deemed adequately protected from intrusion by trespassers and from deterioration by the weather if it satisfies the following vacant building maintenance standards: (1) Building openings: Doors, windows, areaways and other openings shall be weather-tight and secured against entry by birds, vermin and trespassers. Missing or broken doors, windows and other such openings shall be covered by glass or other rigid transparent materials which are weather protected, and tightly fitted and secured to the opening. (2) Roofs: The roof and flashings shall be sound and tight, not admit moisture or have defects which might admit moisture, rain or roof drainage, and allow for drainage to prevent dampness or deterioration in the interior walls or interior of the building. (3) Drainage: The building storm drainage system shall be functional and installed in an approved manner, and allow discharge in an approved manner. (4) Building structure: The building shall be maintained in good repair, structurally sound and free from debris, rubbish and garbage. The building shall be sanitary. The building shall not pose a threat to the public health and safety. (5) Structural members: The structural members shall be free of deterioration and capable of safely bearing imposed dead and live loads. (6) Foundation walls: The foundation walls shall be maintained structurally sound and in a sanitary condition so as not to pose a threat to public health and safety, shall be capable of supporting the load which normal use may cause to be placed thereon, and shall be free from open cracks and breaks, free from leaks, and be animal and rat-proof. (7) Exterior walls: The exterior walls shall be free of holes, breaks, and loose or rotting materials. Exposed metal, wood, or other surfaces shall be protected from the elements and against decay or rust by periodic application of weather-coating materials, such as paint or similar surface treatment. (8) Decorative features: The cornices, belt courses, corbels, terra cotta trim, wall facings and similar decorative features shall be safe, anchored, and in good repair. Exposed metal, wood, or other surfaces shall be protected from the elements and against decay or rust by periodic application of weather-coating materials, such as paint or similar surface treatment. (9) Overhanging extensions: All balconies, canopies, marquees, signs, metal awnings, stairways, fire escapes, standpipes, exhaust ducts and similar features shall be in good repair, anchored, safe and sound. Exposed metal and wood surfaces shall be protected from the elements and against decay or rust by periodic application of weather-coating materials, such as paint or similar surface treatment (10) Chimneys and towers: Chimneys, cooling towers, smokestacks, and similar appurtenances shall be structurally safe and in good repair. Exposed metal and wood surfaces shall be protected from the elements and against decay or rust by periodic application of weather-coating materials, such as paint or similar surface treatment. (11) Walkways: Walkways shall be safe for pedestrian travel. (12) Accessory and appurtenant structures: Accessory and appurtenant structures such as garages, sheds, and fences shall be free from safety, health, and fire hazards and shall comply with these vacant building maintenance standards. (13) Premises: The premises upon which the structure or building is located shall be clean, safe, and sanitary, free from waste, rubbish, debris or excessive vegetation, and shall not pose a threat to the public health or safety. (F) A fee of five hundred dollars ($500.00) shall be charged for a vacant building permit or interim permit. This five-hundred-dollar fee shall also be charged upon the renewal of such permits. The fee is to be paid at the time of application or renewal. No permit shall be issued prior to payment of the permit or renewal fee. When a building is in need of substantial rehabilitation as determined by the building inspector, to comply with the obligations and standards set forth in this article, no initial vacant building permit fee is required if the owner has: (i) developed and submitted a statement of intent, scope of work which meets the applicable building and housing standards and the obligations and standards set forth in this article, and a reasonable schedule for the completion of the work, approved by the director, and (ii) secured all necessary building and zoning permits. To qualify for a continued exemption upon renewal, the owner must certify that the improvements set forth in the scope of work are being made according to the schedule of work or prove to the director that the schedule will be completed within a reasonable amount oftime. If an owner has secured all the duly required permits to demolish the building or structure, no fee shall be required. Appeals and Variances (A) A party aggrieved by an action of the director shall appeal such action by requesting a hearing to the Village Manager. (B) Any person subject to the provisions of this article may seek a variance from the provisions of this article before the Village Manager in the same manner that an appeal is taken to the Village Manager and subject to the same procedures as an appeal. (C) Where a variance is requested by an applicant, the Village Manager may grant such a variance, and render a decision in favor of the appellant, if the following are found by the board: (1) That there are circumstances or conditions that make strict compliance with the provisions of this article unusually difficult or unduly extensive, or would create an undue hardship: (2) That such a hardship or condition has not been created by the applicant; and (3) That the variance requested will represent the minimum relief necessary and will represent the least deviation possible from the vacant building maintenance standards. (D) In rendering a decision in favor of an applicant, the Village Manager shall attach such conditions to such variance as it considers necessary and appropriate under the circumstances to implement the purposes of this article. Enforcement and Penalties (A) Any person found to be in violation of any provision of this article shall be subject to a fine of not less than fifty dollars ($50.00) and not more than five hundred dollars ($500.00) and/or imprisonment for not more than thirty (30) days pursuant to section xx. Each day's failure to comply with an order of the director shall constitute a separate offense. Prosecution under this section is a remedy cumulative to any and all other remedies at law and equity, and in no way pre-empts, supersedes, or bars prosecution for violation of this article under subsection (b) of this section. (B) Any violation of this article is also declared to be a public nuisance and subject to removal or abatement upon a finding of violation. Again this section must be consistent with our authority as home rule and Illinois State Law to abate a nuisance. An abatement action as contemplated by section XX is discretionary and is not a precondition to criminal prosecution under this section, nor is a survey report by the director pursuant to section XX a prerequisite for prosecution under this section. (C) Any order issued pursuant to this article shall be recorded in the office where the land records are kept, thereby becoming effective against any purchaser, mortgagee, attaching creditor, lienholder or other person whose claim or interest in the property arises subsequent to the recording of the order. Once the violation(s) is certified to be corrected, such orders shall be removed from the record. All fees, costs, or charges assessed pursuant to this article shall be a tax lien upon the real property pursuant to 32 V.S.A. S 5061, so long as the lien is recorded in the office where the land records are kept. Implementation The effective date of the requirements under this article shall be ninety (90) days after city council passage of the article as amended. The existing article shall remain in effect until the effective date of the amended article. Attachment F: Administrative Adjudication Process VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT STEPS IN THE AMINISTRATIVE ADJUDICATION PROCESS 1. Prepare the Notice of Violation. a. The Notice may be issued by a Village officer or employee authorized to exercise Code enforcement authority. b. In order to set out a prima facie case, the Notice of Violation must include all required information as set forth in Municipal Code ~8.2108(B). It must be filled out completely, with no missing information. c. The applicable Section(s) of the Municipal Code that Respondent has violated must be clearly described, along with a specific description of each element of conduct or circumstance that demonstrates the violation(s). 2. The Notice of Violation can include the date of the administrative hearing. a. The matter must be set for hearing "with reasonable promptness," but not less than fifteen (15) days after the date of service in non-emergency cases (i.e., those that do not reasonably constitute a threat to the public interest, safety or welfare). b. In emergency cases, the hearing can be set for a date less than fifteen (15) days after the date of service. c. The "date of service" is the date of personal service, or if served by mail, the date the Notice of Violation is deposited for delivery. 3. Serve the Notice of Violation. The Notice of Violation may be served by any of the following methods of service: a. By first class mail or by overnight or two-day commercial delivery service at the Respondent's last known address or if the Respondent is a business entity, at any address identified for its registered agent or at its principal place of business; b. By personal service; c. By posting upon the property that is the site of the alleged violation(s) when the Respondent is the owner or person in control ofthe property; or d. By any other means permitted by law for service of civil summons. 4. Notify Respondent of the Hearing if Necessary. If the date for the hearing is not included in the Notice of Violation, the Administrative Hearings Supervisor must select a hearing date and give the Respondent written notice of the date, time, and place of the hearing in the manner set forth above and at least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing, except for an emergency case. iManage 157461 1 1 5. Administrative Hearing. a. The hearing must be held on the date set for hearing in the Notice of Violation. b. A continuance. for no longer than two (2) months. may be granted by the Hearing Officer for good cause shown only. Lack of preparation is not grounds for a continuance. c. The Village and Respondent may ask the Hearing Officer to issue subpoenas. d. The Village may be represented by a Village employee, or by an attorney designated by its corporation Counsel but not by an employee or other representative of the Office of Administrative Hearings. However documents prepared by such employee may be presented as evidence. 6. Default Judgment a. If the Respondent or hislher attorney fails to appear at the scheduled time, date and location for the hearing, the Administrative Hearing Officer may enter a default judgment of liability against the Respondent and impose fines and assess costs. b. A copy of the Default order must be promptly served upon the Respondent in the manner set forth above. The Default order should be mailed to the Respondent on the day it is entered, if possible, or as soon thereafter as it may be done. 7. Motion to Set Aside the Default Judgment. a. The Respondent may file a motion to set aside the Default judgment within 21 days of entry of the default judgment excepting Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays, or at any time if a motion is filed on the basis oflack of personal or subject matter jurisdiction. b. The motion to set aside must include the reason that the Respondent failed to appear on the date for the hearing. c. If the Hearing Officer grants the motion, a hearing will be held immediately unless either party shows good cause for a continuance as described above. d. If the Default judgment is set aside, the Hearing Officer may enter an order extinguishing any lien that has been recorded in relation to the Default judgment. 8. Compliance Bond a. Review of the Compliance Bond: 1. If a Compliance Bond has been ordered, the Village Manager may review it and require modifications as to form and amount. iManage 157461 1 2 11. The Village Manager must, upon request of the Respondent, review the bond to determine that it ensures Respondent's timely compliance with an order of compliance, and that the amount of the bond is reasonably related to the cost of compliance. 111. The Respondent may also request judicial review of an order to secure bond. If the Respondent succeeds on this motion, the Village must release the bond and refund any funds drawn against the bond within 30 days of receiving the order from the court. b. Drawing on the Compliance Bond: 1. If the Respondent fails to comply in a timely manner, no earlier than the date set for compliance in the Hearing Officer's Final Determination, then the Village may request that the Hearing Officer issue an order authorizing the Village to draw against the bond in an appropriate amount for the cost of undertaking the remediation or other related expenditure of funds. 11. Prior to allowing the Village to draw on the compliance bond, the Respondent must be given notice and an opportunity to be heard, in the manner set forth above. c. Return of Bond Funds to the Respondent: i. Upon receiving proof of compliance with the Code provision(s) found to have been violated, the Hearing Officer may order the Village to return the bond amount, less the reasonable costs incurred by the Village, to the Respondent. 9. Enforcement of the Judgment a. Failure to pay the fine as ordered: 1. After the time for seeking judicial review has passed, the Respondent must be given Notice of a Final Determination of Liability in the manner for service set forth above in Paragraph 3. The Notice should include reference to the penalty of denial of a license or permit, or renewal of same, etc., as set forth in Section 8.2202. 11. If the Respondent fails to pay the amount of the judgment within fourteen (14) days after service of the Final Determination of Liability: 1. The Village may enforce the judgment by any remedy available by law, including filing a lien and denying issuance or renewal of permits or licenses under Article XXII of Chapter 8 of the Code. 2. The Administrative Hearings Supervisor should notify the Departments that no licenses or permits should be issued or renewed. iManage 1574611 3 3. Upon respondent's application for a license or permit, or renewal of same: a. The responsible Department must notify respondent of his/her ineligibility due to the delinquent debt. The notice must comply with Section 8.2203(B). b. The Finance Department must provide respondent with a written description of the delinquent debt at his/her request. c. Respondent must appeal the denial within 10 business days of the date of the notice in a. above. Appeal is to the Village Manager or designee. The hearing must be held within 15 business days of the appeal request and is based solely upon a review of whether the debt was satisfied and was issued against respondent. The Manager must issue a written order no more than 15 business days after the conclusion of the hearing. His decision is subject to administrative review. b. Failure to remedy the Code violations: i. The Village may petition an Administrative Hearing Officer or an appropriate court to fix the amount of expenses incurred by the Village to enforce the Hearing Officer's order, including but not limited to attorney fees, court costs and costs related to property demolition or foreclosure. 11. Prior to fixing the amount of expenses, the Respondent must be given notice that directs the Respondent to appear at a hearing to determine whether the Respondent has failed to comply with the order, in accordance with Code Section 8.2112(D). iManage 157461 1 4 Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department Mount Prospect MEMORANDUM ~ TO: MICHAEL JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: WILLIAM COONEY, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: SEPTEMBER 22, 2005 SUBJECT: FERAL AND STRAY CAT CONTROL During the last several years residents have requested the Village impound stray and feral cats. Problems experienced by these residents are noise, feces in flower beds and gardens, odor from the feces and spraying, and killing of birds, particularly songbirds. Suggestions from residents to remedy this problem include licensing cats to fund animal control; returning to past policies where the Village lent traps to capture stray and feral cats and the Village paid for impoundment; and a trap, neuter, and release program such as Rolling Meadows has adopted. As the Village Board considers this matter it would be appropriate to update the Village's Animal Control regulations so the code is consistent with State and County regulations. These updates would include modifications to language, definitions, and rabies vaccination requirement for cats. After the Village Board considers this subject and makes their recommendations the animal code would be amended as requested and a draft ordinance prepared for further review. Background Twenty-five years ago Health Inspection staff actually humanely trapped and relocated wild animals at the request of a citizen; however, staff time spent trapping and relocating animals interfered with inspection duties and the program was changed to the lending of humane animal traps for citizens to trap and relocate the animal themselves. Staff lent humane animal traps to residents for feral cats and stray cats when the cats were actually strays and not someone's pet, and the cat would be treated humanely while in the resident's care. In 1995, the lending of traps for wild animals ceased when the conditions of the Cook County Forest Preserve Permit to release wild animals required all animals to be certified disease free by a veterinarian and the condition of the Illinois Department of Conservation Permit to trap animals required the trap and animal to be supervised at all times by the permit applicant, (Village of Mount Prospect). Until approximately seven years ago, the Environmental Health Division did lend humane animal traps to capture feral and stray cats (only and not nuisance wild animals). Upon capture the Police Department impounded the animal. The program ended when budget constraints eliminated the funds for impounding the captured cats. Since the budget to impound stray and feral cats was cut, the traps have been used only in the most extreme situations. The Village has not employed an Animal Control Officer in recent years. The responsibilities for animal control have been shared by the Police Department who handled domestic animal problems (dog and cat problems) and the Environmental Health Division who handled wild animal (feral cats and stray cats), numerous other animals, and unsanitary conditions problems. Current impoundment of animals has been limited to stray dogs, and in one instance for a very severe problem, cats were trapped and impounded under the direction of a court order while working jointly with the Police Department. Feral and Stray Cat Control September 22, 2005 Page 2 of 4 Available Service Request Data Feral and stray cat problems are reported to the Environmental Health Division. So far this year we have received seven (7) service requests of stray and feral cats. The table below is the history since 1999. YEAR NUMBER OF SERVICE REQUESTS 2005 7 2004 10 2003 11 2002 9 2001 4 2000 10 1999 5 Total 56 Many of these requests are of the same problem in the neighborhood: of these fifty-six (56) service requests, the complaints were at about twenty-four (24) separate locations. Current Strategies Current staff efforts by Environmental Health to control stray and feral cat problems are to hold the resident who is feeding and/or harboring the cats responsible. In almost all cases where there is a feral cat problem, a well intentioned resident is feeding and/or providing harborage for the cats. According to state law a person providing harborage and care is the owner of the cats and must meet the Village requirements prohibiting the cats to stray onto others property and limiting the total dogs or cats to three. To assist the responsible resident in reducing the number of cats we have lent them humane traps, so they can capture and relocate the cats to a no-kill shelter at their expense. This tactic has worked well in most instances, and the majority of work and expense of trapping and relocating cats has been done by the offending party. Occasionally, this approach does not completely resolve the problem when all of the feral cats are not trapped and the cats no longer get care from the resident. Surrounding Community Information Last fall, in response to citizen's requests for animal control we investigated surrounding communities' animal control efforts, and reviewed the City of Rolling Meadow's Trap, Neuter, and Release regulations. The Communities initially surveyed were Arlington Heights, Rolling Meadows, and Palatine. Recently we received other relevant survey results conducted by the Northwest Municipal Conference (NWMC). For your convenience the results of the NWMC and our initial survey have been compiled into one table (Appendix 1). Where there are blanks in the table, the community did not respond. An additional NWMC survey requested by staff was returned and is Appendix 4. In summary, fourteen (14) of the thirty-one (31) communities surveyed do license and require proof of rabies vaccination for cats; slightly less impound stray cats. Several of the communities within Lake and McHenry Counties defer to County Animal Control for services. Trap, Neuter, and Release Program (TNR) Rolling Meadows is the first community in the NWMC to partner with an animal welfare organization and permit by code a Trap, Neuter, and Release (TNR) Program. The ordinance (Appendix 2) permits registered locations within the community to accept feral and stray cats that have been trapped, tested for diseases, vaccinated, altered (spayed or neutered) and returned to the location of capture with the permission of the owner. All caregivers of these feral cats must be registered with the City. The registration includes the location of the colony, the current number of cats, the veterinarian of record, and feral cat information. "The Humane Society of the United States Community Approaches to Feral Cats" web page (Appendix 3) describes that TNR programs have been used successfully in the United Kingdom, and are becoming more common in the United States as a more humane and effective control to feral cat populations. When TNR is . Feral and Stray Cat Control September 22, 2005 Page 3 of 4 successful, the birth rate of the feral cat colony declines, noise and spraying (competition for mates) decreases, and the colony defends their territory from intruding cats. The success of each location or cat colony is dependant on the caregiver. The negative side of the program is that neighbors of these colonies will still have stray cats, noise, odor, and killing of wildlife. For some neighborhoods this may not be an acceptable solution. The web address for the above information and handbook is provided below: t.:.t:J"J2_:_LL~w~....:b..::s.!:!.?_.:_()~gLJ:'E_~E3:'..-?!0S~U2_\lb 1 ~_s:_aJ:l.? n s / bJ:l!l.~_~_~l:? 0 o.l<-..::'3..b.~_~JJ~.S2...mm2:l n i _:L"i~12J2 r 0 a c h ~~: 0 feral cats problems alternatives recomrnendations/whos ultimately responsible for f ~ e ~_o9.!!1l.0.9~;_~~__:_E!!!11 Available Options 1. Continue with no change in services. 2. Implement Trap, Neuter, Spay, and Release program. 3. Reinstate the previous policy and lend traps to residents to capture feral and stray cats. 4. Implement an animal control program. Options 2, 3, and 4 will require additional funding. Implementing a Trap, Neuter, Spay and Release program is the most economical. An animal welfare organization that promotes and supports TNR programs have implemented programs for communities in return for humane traps purchased by the community. Four or five humane animal traps would cost $200-$300. However, a TNR program will only be acceptable if the owner where the cats reside will manage the colony, keep the cats on their property; and the neighbors will support the concept, some noise, some bird predation, and realistically some stray cats. Returning to the previous policy of lending traps to capture feral and stray cats will require funding to pay for impounding cats at $10 per day, a $25 donation to Heartland Animal Shelter to accept cats that can be successfully domesticated, and $20 for euthanizing cats that cannot be domesticated. Impoundment is generally for seven (7) days, but can be several more days if the Humane Shelter does not have space available. Besides out of pocket cost, staff time would be used by the Environmental Health Division to lend and maintain traps, and the Police Department to transport cats to Preiser Animal Hospital for impoundment. Based on past history, approximately thirty (30) cats would be impounded annually at an estimated average cost of $1 00 per cat ($3,000 per year). Implementing Animal Control is the final and the most costly alternative. The cost would be dependent on the services provided. In the NWMC survey (Appendix 4), animal control is generally a police department service handled by Animal Control Officers or Community Service Officers. The scope of programs vary from handling only dogs to a more expansive program involving dogs, cats, and nuisance wildlife. Some communities have decided to outsource portions of animal control to private companies. For example a community may lend the humane animal traps to residents, and pay the service to relocate, euthanize, or impound the animal once captured. Private contractor costs are estimated at $75 -175 per animal. In years past, residents have captured in excess of one-hundred (100) nuisance animals per year, and an average of thirty (30) cats per year. Licensing Licensing serves several functions: verifies rabies vaccination, generates revenue for funding animal control (though full costs may not be captured), provides a means of identification to return impounded stray and lost animals, and encourages responsible pet ownership as part of the having animal control code. The success of licensing as an independent measure to encourage responsible pet ownership is debated. Advocates supporting the control of stray cats to reduce nuisances and wildlife damage often encourage cat licensing to promote responsible pet ownership. There are other groups that oppose cat licensing as being ineffective (Appendix 5). Mount Prospect Animal Code already supports responsible pet ownership by prohibiting stray animals, including cats. For Mount Prospect cat licensing would generate possible animal control revenue and encourage rabies vaccination, already a county requirement. Feral and Stray Cat Control September 22, 2005 Page 4 of 4 In communities responding to the NWMC survey, licensing fees are nominal (around $10) with reduced rates for senior citizens, or for spayed and neutered pets. Formulas used by Animal Welfare Groups for communities similar to Mount Prospect estimate an average of 58% of the households have a cat and 38% of the households have a dog. Applying the formula, there are an estimated 12,528 cats and 7,344 dogs in Mount Prospect. During 2004 Mount Prospect licensed 2,125 dogs or less than one third of the estimated dogs. The 2004 dog license revenue was $9,313. Assuming the Village realizes a similar percentage for licensing of cats, the additional revenue generated would be approximately $16,000. Mount Prospect's Dog license fee is $5 and seniors pay $2.50. The fee is low and has not change for many years. Increasing the license fees is an alternative to generate revenue for additional service. Factoring in administrative costs to process the cat licenses leaves little revenue to the cover costs of implementing any type of formalized animal control program. Staff Recommendation Without an adequate funding source, staff cannot recommend increasing services. Staff recommendation is to update the current animal code to be consistent with current Village, state, and county policies. The amendments would do the following: . Require Rabies vaccination for cats · Change "shall" to "may" relating to the capture of stray animals, so the Village is not expected to capture all strays . Update definition and requirements for "dangerous animals" . Define "owner" to be consistent with state codes After the Village Board considers this subject and makes their recommendations the animal code would be amended as requested and draft ordinance prepared for further review. ~~ ]:obLiry Development Director Appendix 1 Do you Do require cats to 'What is 2004 How long are What happens to What is the Municipality license cats have proof of rabies license fee'? Licensing cats unclaimed cats'? maximum number and dogs'? vaccination '? Revenue impounded'? of cats and dogs'? Antioch 3 total for lots < half - - - - - - acre and 4 total> half acre Arlington - - - - - - 4 total animals Heights Bartlett Yes - - $1,000 - - - Buffalo Grove No-kill shelter 4 single family, 2 Yes Yes $10,00 - 5 days apartments or attached unless injured single family Des Plaines - - - - - - - Elk Grove - - - - - - - Evanston $10.00 for neutered!spaye Shelter or Yes - d animals, $40,000 to - humanely - $15.00 for non- $50,000 neutered euthanized animals Fox River Dogs, defers Grove regulation to - - - - - - McHenry County Glencoe - - - - - - 4 total Glenview $3.00 for neutered! spaye Yes Yes d animals, - 5 days - - $5.00 for non- neutered animals Grayslake No, Lake County - - - - 4 total regulates - animals Inverness Dogs No - - <24 hours - - Lake 3 total Barrineton - - - - - - Lake Forest Yes - $10 cat or dog $16,000 - - - Lake in the No, McHenry Hills County - - - - - - requires dog tags Lincolnshire Yes - $3.00 $200 to $225 - - 3 total Mount Prospect $5.00 (21,600 HH) Dogs No $2.50for $9,313 - - 3 total seniors Northbrook $10.00 for neutered!spaye 3 total, but they can - d animals, - - Yes $20.00 for non- $24,000 apply for a hobbyist neutered permit to have more animals Northfield Dogs No One time fee of $960 - - 6 total $20 Palatine* $19,400 for Adoption or (25,518 HH) Yes Yes $5.00 2002 7 days Euthanasia if not 3 total adoptable Park Ridge - - Adoption or Yes Yes 7 days Euthanasia if not 3 total adotable Prospect Only 2 total in multi- Heights Yes Yes - - 3 days Save-a-pet family dwelling No limit in a single family home Rolling $3.00 for Meadows neutered! spaye Dogs - d animals, $5,577 Two weeks to a Adopted - $5.00 for non- month neutered animals Roselle Dogs - - - - - - Schaumburf! Yes Yes $4.00 $22,000 7 days Euthanized 4 total Skokie* $6.00 for Cats are (23,702 HH) neutered!spaye allowed Yes Yes d animals, $17,000 outdoors if the No-kill shelter No limit for cats $12.00 for non- have a collar neutered and current tag, animals if not 5 days Streamwood Yes Yes No fee N/A 7-10 days Euthanized 3 total Vernon Hills No - N/A N/A - - 3 total Wilmette Yes - $5.00 one time $1,800 - - - fee Winnetka Dogs - - - - - - 11:16"2004 TIlE 16:30 FAX S4i 483 0364 CITY OF ROLLING ~IEADOWS Ii] 002 ~ APPENDIX 2 ORDINANCE NO. 04-33 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 14 ENTITLED "ANIMALS," OF TIlE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES OF TJ,IE CITY OF ROLLING MEADOWS. COOK COUNTY. ILLINOIS BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Rolling Meadows, Cook County, lllinois, as follows: SECTION 1. That Chapter 14 entitled "Animals" of the Code of Ordinances of the City ofRollii1g Meadows, as amended, is hereby further amended by adding thereto Article IV entitled "Trap-Neuter-Return (T-N-R) Prqgram." 14-111 + Intent and Legislative Purpose: There is hereby adopted the City of Rolling Meadows Trap-Neuter-Retum (T-N- R) program for feral cats. The program. shall be staffed by volunteer care givers who will trap feral cats, transport the feral cats to a veterinary facility to be exaro.ined for general health and to ensure the feral cats are not infected with. any communicable diseases. The feral cats will also be vaccinated, including a rabies inoculation and spayedJneuter~d. Thereafter. the volunteer(s) shall return "the feral cat( s) to the location where the cats were originally trapped, provided the property owner consents to the cats return. The T -N-R program shall be completely voluntary and no funding will be provided by the City of Rolling Meadows without prior approval of the City Council. 14-112. Definition: For purposes oftbis Article IV, a feral cat shall mean an un-socialized, undomesticat~ free roaming cat iliat has not been diagnosed with a communicable disease, as may be determined by an animal control officer or a veterinarian. 14-113. Registration Requirement - Care Givers of Feral Cats: All care givers of feral cats in the City of Rolling Meadows shall be registered with. the City of Rolling Meadows. Registration shall be on a fonn as provided by the City Clerk, and registration shall be free of charge. The registration form shall include the name and address (If the care giver, contact information for ihe care giver, the location of the colony, the current number of cats in the colony, the veterinarian of record and feral cat ~p information, the name and address of the 11-15-e4 15:a7 TO: FROM:B47 4B3 a354 pa2 11:16:200-1 TUE 16:30 FAX S4i 483 0364 CITY OF ROLLING MEADOWS 141003 trap renter if applicable, and any other information deemed reasonably necessary for the effective control or management of the T-N-R program and to protect the welfare of the community and affected animals. The registration form shall be dated and signed under penalty ofpeIjury. SECTION 2. Section 14-8 entitled "Running at Large," as amended, is hereby further amended to read as follows: 14-8. Running at Large: A. No person o'Wl3ing~ harboring or having 1he care, charge, control or possession of any animal other than domesticated cats or feral cats, as set forth :in Article N of this Chapter shall cause~ permit or allow such animal to be, renlaID, go to or run at large upon any public street, alleyway~ park or unenclosed lot or land within the City. B. Any such animal found to be at large is hereby declared to be a public nuisance and a danger to public health and safety. Nothing in this Section shall prohibit the City and/or its agents or employees, including humane society employees, from issuing traps for the purpose of trapping such animals. including domesticated or feral cats, found to he at large. Nothing in this Section shall prohibit the City and/or its agents or employees, including humane society employees or registered care givers of feral cats, from trapping animals, including domesticated or feral cats, at large. Trappi1lg of feral cats shall be in accordance with the provisions ofthe T -N-R prognm1. c. An animal shall not be considered to be at large if the animal: (1) is attached to a chain or leash not exceeding six feet in length, and held continuously by a person capable of controlling the animal; (2) is upon the property of the person or persons wh~ either own or have control ofthe animal; or (3) is confined within an automobile. . SECTION 3. Subsection (a) of Seen on 14-109 entitled "Capture and Impounding of Cats," as amended, is hereby further amended 10 read as follows: 14-109 (a). Any cat that disturbs the piece and quiet of a neighborhood or that is found to be abandoned in the City shall be deemed a public nuisance. That subsection (b) of Section 14-1;09 shall remain in full force and effect and 11-16-194 15:e7 TO: FROM:847 483 e364 Pl9:3 11,'16/2004 TUE 16:31 FAX 84i 483 0364 CITY OF ROLLING MEADOWS 141 004 unamended by this Ordinal.l.ce. SECTION 4. Any ordinance or portion of any ordinance in conflict with the provisions ofthis Ordinance is hereby repealed solely to the extent of such conflict. SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall be printed and published in pampWet form by order of the City Council of the City of Rolling Meadows, Illinois. SECTION 6. TIris Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval as provided by law. YEAS: WaltOll, Rooney, Adams, D'Astlce NAYS: Staley, Buske, Balek ABSENT: Passed this 22nd d~ of June, 2004. Approved tbis 22n day of June, 2004. zrT: ( / ~~ 7Y/ (flu An ad\. / '"Lisa M. Hinman, City Clerk 11-15-S4 15:S8 TO: FROM:847 483 S354 P04 APPENDIX 3 -ee-Roaming Cats? Page I of3 II [ se;]r<;h ] II Press Releases II Humane Society Magazines and Newsletters . Humane Society Press II Humane Bookshelf IIAnimal House Style Desianino a Harne to Share wiih Yow Pets IICareers with I\nimals IIComrnunity Approaches to Feral Cats: Problems, Alternatives & Recommendations IICruelty to '''lImals and Interpersonal Violence: Readings in Research and Application IIDr Kind Answers Kids' Questions About Animals .Homer for the Holidays ilKIN.o N~ws Boo~. of Cm,er C,ues IIKIND News Book of Critter Views IILoslng Paradise The Growing Threat to Our Animals. Our EnVironment and Ourselves IIf'rotecting All Animals: A Fifty-Year History of rhe Humane Society of t[,e United States .Reptlles as Pets An Examination ot the Trade 111 Live Reptiles in the United States .Souls Like Ourselves Inspired Thoughts for Personal and Planetary Acivancement lIThe Dogs of Ron Burns 1111'16 Humane Society of the UnltCi(J States Complete Guide to Cat Care lIThe Humane Society of the United States Complete Guide to Dcg Care IlIThe Humane Society of tile United States Euthanasia Tlalning Manual lIThe Slate of the Animals Ii: 2003 lIThe State of tile Animals: 2001 llIrhe Use of Animals in Higher Education: Problems, Alternatives. Home >> Press and Publications >> Humane BOQKs.I1l'::lf > >CQmmYJlib'. ApPIQg~hl'::sJoJ:l'::nltCgts_~PIObl,l'::JJ1S" Alt~In<!tiYl'::_s&.Rl'::Q.Qmm~JldgtLons >> Who's Ultimately Responsible for Free-Roaming Cats? .~ Who's Ultimately Responsible for Free- ~S Roaming Cats? ...................................................................................000 ."r' " " . , . - . ,- " .' ~" ., " ...r.).1;fl1U!l.'!:t:r~tJllt:y I'""......',.".I-,~.."J',,'..,.t',.. ",.r "'(..,,~,"";}.,'or, /l" 1::.t.ip"" Va,LL~p:.:J ~. 11 +il f~'.'1{~r:l ~1 ';.J,",~. ~.""""'. Editor's note: Margaret R Slater's Community Approaches to Feral Cats: Problems, Alternatives & Recommendations has just been publiShed by the Humane Society Press. The book looks at cooperative measures between animal care and control professionals anel local residents to manage feral cat populations. Slater is an associate professor of epidemiology in the departments of Veterinary Anatomy and Public Health and Small Medicine and Surgery in the College of Veterinary Medicine at Texas A&M University. ,j, ~l t http://www .hsus.org/press _and -publications/humane _bookshelf/community_approaches _ t... 9/22/2005 . " ."> a"" t .. . Iii ,I. 21 Y: .~. .. :==....." . By Margaret R. Slater You can find them Just about anywhere They may peek out from under a dumpster at your local gas station or food store. They may slink furtively around the perimeter of your home in the country. They may even take up residence under your back porch. They're free-roaming cats, and they inspire a lot different feelings-anger, fear, sadness, maybe even guilt. But they should also inspire something else: action The reason for action is clear, even if the responsibilities that motivate it are not. If people do nothing about free-roaming cats and kittens, many of the young ones will die before their first birthday. Those who survive may have kittens of their own. In a couple of years, two or three cats become five or 10 cats, contributing to an already overpopulated community of cats. So why should you act to save an animal that some people don't even like or perhaps view as merely a creature useful for controlling mice? I would argue that Who's Ultimately Responsible for Free-Roaming Cats? and RecolT1ll1endcltions IlWild Neighbors"":The Humane Approach to Living with Wildlife :: About Us " Donate Now ,: Legislation and Laws :: In the COurt5 :: Publications " PreS5 Room :: International Programs :: HSUS in the Field ;; Animal Channel :: Humane Living " Member Offers ~~"'i'J!'...J""'.'.'Mr!..".'+."I.tv..".'.'.. ~~:!lii~.~f!I"'''4"g.,:~I.. Receive action alerts, tips, news and special offers via e-mail. IFJE~tf\J(!me I~(!S! f\Jalll~ IY()urElllailhere l;Zip.g()~E! . ( JOIN .. .' ) Page 2 of3 as part of living in a civilized society, it is our obligation to look after those who are weak, sick, or powerless, even when they're cats. We as a civilization provide care for the elderly and the children, the mentally ill and the homeless. Part of our responsibility includes our domestic animals whom we took from the wild and made dependent on us. Cats have been domesticated for thousands of years, and they are the responsibility of society Our taxes pay for road clean-up and, in many locations, for animal control. We pay for hospital and doctor care when an animal bites a human as well as for rabies protection after a person has been exposed to the disease. And increasingly, we recognize that non-human animals suffer and deserve care and respect Even people who hate cats sometimes find themselves feeding them or taking them to a veterinarian. These people do it because they recognize their obligation as members of a civilized society-they are willing to take responsibility. So what can you do when you see a free-roaming cat or kitten? First, decide whether they really have an owner or not Talk to your neighbors, check for a collar or microchip. Don't assume that someone owns the cat who shows up for meals on your back porch. Your neighbors may all be assuming the same thing. Second, call your local animal control agency or humane society to file a lost-cat report; cats sometimes stray farther than you might think, and even a timid cat without a collar may be happily owned by someone who lives some distance away from you. That person may be looking for the cat and may visit area shelters to try to find their companion. Third, find the resources in your area that may support stray, abandoned or feral (wild) cats. Ask your local shelter or animal control agency about the kinds of programs, information and services they provide. They will also tell you about any laws that may apply-such as whether it is legal to allow an unsterilized cat to roam outside. Find out if there are any animal rescue groups. What help do they offer? Are they for dogs and cats, cats only, feral cats only? Talk to your veterinarian, the local veterinary association (if there is one) or other veterinarians in the area who may work with animal groups or provide special help themselves. Many veterinary clinics will foster some cats or help you find them a home. Check for local and regional organizations through Internet resources such as Pets911 and Petfinder. See if there is a Petco, PETsMART or other pet supply store that works with local groups to do adoptions. They will be able to put you in touch with people who can help. Now that you know what kind of help is available (or not), you can make some decisions about the cat or kittens you have seen. Your choices become: 1) trying to get them adopted; 2) bringing them to a shelter or veterinarian; or 3) trapping them, getting them spayed or neutered, vaccinated and ear-tipped, and returning them to their original location. Please don't wait for someone else to do something. Many feral cats will never make good pets. That's why they are generally euthanized when brought into shelters or trapped by animal control. Kittens less than about eight weeks of age can be socialized and can become good pets. This takes time and some expertise, but there is a lot of information on the Internet and in books. Sometimes, a cat may seem wild but is just frightened and will calm down with a few days of food and care. Keep in mind that any frightened or angry cat can bite or scratch. And cat bites often become infected, sometimes seriously http://www .hsus.org/press _and -publications/humane _bookshelf/community_approaches _ t... 9/22/2005 This page contains no comments APPENDIX 4 September 2005' Animi Two full-time Animal I Police - Community Arlington Hts. IWardens. Services Bureau. We do not have animal control officers. We have three full-time CSO's that primarily handle our animal complaints and complete any necessary follow Buffalo Grove I ups. Cary I None._u u Community Service Officers provide limited services staff Des Plaines lof 8. Glencoe 11 One full-time Animal Glenview I Control Officer. Hanover Park I N!A. Our CSO's are part of our patrol division. The County handles animal control - McHenry County. Community Service Officers. Public Safety (Police.. Police Department. Police. Live traps and snare poles, tranquilizer gun when applicable. Varies depending on vendor - $8.00 - $20.00 per day. No. We do not set traps. The cats are caught by our complainants and then Our cats are transported The owner is charged We do not have a we will transport to Lake to Lake County, and we $25.00 per day per TNR program County Animal Control. are charged $8.00 per cat animal by us. Theyare through the village. Dogs are caught by leash and an additional $12.00 a also cited for caUdog at The health or snare pole if we are day holding fee. Dogs are large, $50.00 for first department does able to approach them. transported to King's offense, and $100.00 have information However, additional Kennel. They charge us for each additional regarding such resources have been $15.00 per day per animal offense. A citation for programs; howeveri utilized in cases when the and are held at their facility no valid animal license no one has been animal is a threat or for five days before going is $100.00 and no proof referred to one as injured. to Orphans of the Storm. of rabies is $20.00. of this date. Animal traps, animal control poles. A redemption fee of thirty three dollars plus impoundment fees for first offense. Impound fee and any tickets (at large, no registration, etc). Redemption $10.00- Impounding per day $25.00 No. (7) seven dollars a day. $15.00 if registered! $20.00 if not. One time fee not a daily fee. No. No. Noose & traps. Very carefully dogs with leash. Manually with a noose or a trap cage. Dept pays $12.00 Public pays $25.00. $10.00 $35.00 plus daily fee. No. 1 Animal Control Survey September 2005 Hoffman Estates Inverness Lincolnshire Hoffman Estates does not have an animal control unit. Do not have. Community Service Officers handles as part of their normal duties. Morton Grove L1--. We don't have Northfield 1 animal control. Park Ridge Rolling Meadows Roselle The Police Department is responsible for animal control. Residents are to call 911 for animal control and are routed through Northwest Central Dispatch. On Target Wildlife Control responds to wildlife animal evictions and service requests. Police Department. I Live trap or noose. Take directly to "Orphans of the Storm". Whatever Orphans of the Storm charges. I Not at this time. All fees charged to the Police Department plus fines. I No. Police. I By hand, noose. Initial cost is $78.00 + $15.00 per day for 7 days. Not full-time assignment, CSO's perform animal control duties. I Police. Stray cats are caught in humane traps. Dogs captured by hand or share pole. Cats: 2 days max - Total $24.00. City pays for 2 day stay & vet check.! Dogs - $20.00 release; fines $59.00 boarding - lump for ticket(s) issued; sum. $32.00 euthanasia. Animal Hospital fees. No. 5 Roselle does not have an animal control person. Police/CSO's. Leash/heavy duty gloves, sometimes cages. 1$17.00 large dogs. 1$20.00 citations. $25/day; after 3 days they Community Service lare sent to Dupage Officer. County Animal Control. I Boarding fees. No. Yes. Police. ,. If:. Animal Control Survey Municipality Schaumburg If you have animal control, how many staff persons do you have? What fees must a pet owner pay to recover an impounded animal? September 2005 . Do you have a trap, neuter and release program for cats? No we do not have a trap, neuter and release program $10.00 - dogs 1$20.00 if not licensed Skokie 13 Health. Noose pole, leash, traps. 1$7.00 - cats. and $15.00 if licensed. INo. No animal control We do not capture stray Streamwood I officers. Police. animals. 1$20.00 1$15.00 INo. - - --- $20.00 impoundment 5 Community Icommunity Service Icat grabber tool for cats, I Ifee plus $20.00 at large Vernon Hills I Service Officers. Officers. noose for dogs. $20.00 ticket. I No. What department does How do you capture animal control? stray cats or dogs? What is your daily cost to impound an animal? One full time ACO and 8 Community Service Officers who Animal Control works fill in when the ACO out of the Police is not available or off. Department. We have several pieces of equipment such as leashes, nooses, gloves, cat tongs and carriers just to name a few items. $10.00 a day for cats and $11.00 a day for dogs for 7 days required by law. If citations are written when the animal is impounded the owner must either pay them or set them for court. Most citations are $20.00 each. They are also responsible for paying any boarding fees at the kennel. 3 PetPlace.com - Article: Licensing Felines Stirs C~t Fioht Amono Anim::tl Lovers @ PetPlace 5 APPENDIX Licensing Felines Stirs Cat Fight Among Animal Lovers The Debate The debate rages over whether we should be required to license cats much in the same way we license dogs in the United States. Some say it's a meaningless law that can't be enforced. Licensing defenders say it gives felines some long overdue respect. Why do many humane organizations want cats licensed? The answer: To help make people responsible for their pets and to raise the stature of felines in the public's mind. Moreover, licensing could help you find your missing cat. And, if your cat bites someone, health officials will know if he's vaccinated against rabies. The Opposition The opposition fears that animal control departments will use licensing as a route to feral cat roundups and mass euthanasia. Steven Chapman, animal control officer for the town of Sandwich, on Massachusetts's Cape Cod, admits he has little luck reuniting lost cats with their owners. For one thing, too many free-roaming felines look alike. Another problem is that many people fail to call him when their cats don't come home. Enforcement is another problem. Few people feel they have to get their cats licensed. This is why Chapman enjoys telling the story of when, a few years ago, a woman reported her calico, Boots, missing. Chapman kept a lookout for the cat but had no luck. Then, two weeks later, someone called the precinct saying that a cat was crying in distress in nearby woods. After an investigation, Chapman found a frightened calico entrapped in some brier. The cat was dehydrated, lacerated from the bushes and suffering from an injured rear paw. Dangling from her collar was a sight that made Chapman's day: a Sandwich cat license. It was Boots. "When I called the owner up," he says, "she started crying right there on the phone." Boots' owner is, no doubt, a big supporter of cat licensing. But not everyone is sold on the idea. Mere mention of the topic ignites debate among animal lovers from coast to coast. Proponents often meet resistance from their local governments. When a county or town does ask that owners pay a fee for their cats to wear identification, opposition from certain residents can be ferocious. And when laws do pass, compliance tends to be low. The Proponents Despite the problems, supporters say licensing sends an important message about a eat's intrinsic worth. For too long, they say, felines have been an afterthought compared to dogs. Only in recent years have communities begun to mandate that cats be vaccinated against rabies. A big part of the problem is that cats can easily be acquired for free or cheaply. And, many times, when people move, they thoughtlessly leave their cats behind or drop them off at a local shelter. Meanwhile, a large segment of society believes cats belong outdoors. The sad reality is that cats die much younger outside because they're often struck by cars or fall prey to wildlife. "By licensing a cat, you give him value," says Gini Barrett of the American Humane Association office in Los Angeles. "You acknowledge that you own the cat. And you're taking some minimal step in your mind of accepting responsibility. This is the single most valuable tool we have available to move the whole social view of cats forward." http://petplace.netscape.com/articles/artPrinterFriendly .asp?all= 1 &conID= 13 83 8 Page 1 of3 by: Stephen Sawicki 9/15/2005 PetPlace.com - Article: Licensing Felines Stirs Cat Fight Among Animal Lovers Page 2 of3 Is Feline Licensing Taken Seriously? Although it's the law of the land in a growing number of communities, cat licensing seldom gets into the books without a skirmish. Proponents say cat licensing helps animal control workers identify lost or injured cats, easing the burden on already overcrowded shelters. Many towns make rabies vaccination a requirement for receiving a license. Usually, if a potentially rabid animal bites someone, animal-control workers euthanize the animal so its brain tissue can be analyzed for rabies. Should someone be bitten by a licensed and tagged cat, however, authorities can avoid putting him or her down and the person who was bitten can be spared treatment shots. Critics'Views The most vocal critics of cat licensing tend to be those who devote time to feral cats, feeding them, spaying and neutering them and securing veterinary care. They worry that strict laws on ownership make people legally responsible for licensing the animals they've helped and, in some places, this is technically true. Such laws, opponents say, will deter those who care about feral cats. Their biggest fear is that if licenses are required, cats without them will be rounded up and killed. Most animal control officers are skeptical of such claims, saying they're too overextended and understaffed for such enterprises. And virtually all say they'd never round up cats anyway. What does happen, however, is that residents complain about feral cats and animal control often provides traps and takes in the captured cats. 'The lack of licensing then becomes the mechanism by which [animal control] tells the person to stop feeding the cats, even if the person is trapping them to sterilize them," says Nathan Winograd of the San Francisco Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, which vehemently opposes cat licensing. "Or they won't release impounded cats unless they're licensed. When you're talking about someone who's feeding a feral cat colony, those costs are sometimes prohibitive." Education: The Key to Understanding Becky Robinson, executive director of Alley Cat Allies, a feral-cat advocacy group in Washington, D.C., believes that instead of devoting their efforts to cat licensing, humane groups and communities should educate the public and provide help with spaying and neutering and low-cost veterinary care for those citizens trying to help strays. "They don't need laws," she says. "They need programs." The Debate Continues Vet no one says that cat licensing alone is the answer. It's simply a powerful tool for bolstering the public's perception of cats. "Laws serve many purposes," says Barrett. "One is that they give our citizens, our society, guidance on how they should behave. We used to throw trash out of our cars all the time. We passed laws that said you can't do that. "And while there's not a police officer on every corner watching, most people don't throw trash out of their windows anymore. It's about time we used the same technique that has worked on so many other social issues to help save the lives of our animals." Legal Disclaimer If your pet is showing any signs of distress or you suspect your pet is seriously ill, CONTACT YOUR VETERINARIAN immediately. All of the information presented on this website was developed by Intelligent Content Corporation staff members and is the sole responsibility of Intelligent Content Corporation. http://petplace.netscape.com/artic1es/artPrinterFriendly .asp?all = 1 &conID= 13 83 8 9/15/2005 PetPlace.com - Article: Licensing Felines Stirs Cat Fight Among Animal Lovers Page 3 of3 See the L~al t~ms on the website for additional legal terms. Copyright @ 1999-2005 Intelligent Content Corp., All Rights Reserved http://petplace.netscape.com/articles/artPrinterFriendly .asp?all= 1 &conID= 1383 8 9/15/2005