Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4. OLD BUSINESS 11/01/2005 MEMORANDUM Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: OCTOBER 14, 2005 SUBJECT: PZ-32-05 - V ARIA TIONS (EXTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK & DRIVi WIDTH) 90 E. MILBURN AVE. CHERYL AXLEY - APPLICANT The Planning & Zoning Commission transmits their recommendation to approve Case PZ-32-05, a request to construct a patio in the exterior side yard and a request for a 33' wide driveway, as described in detail in the attached staff report. The Planning & Zoning Commission heard the request at their September 22, 2005 meeting. The Subject Property is located at the northwest comer of Emerson Street and Milburn Avenue, and contains a single-family residence with related improvements. The Subject Property is zoned RA Single Family Residence and is bordered on all sides by the RA District. Although the residence is entered/exited along Milburn Avenue, the Zoning Ordinance defines the Milburn Ave. frontage as the exterior yard and the front yard is Emerson Street. The Planning & Zoning Commission discussed the request at their August meeting. However, the case was tabled to allow Staff time to research the Commissioners' questions and provide a history on the permit that was initially issued to the Petitioner. Bill Cooney, Director of Community Development, attended the September P&Z Meeting and said that after meeting with Staff and the Petitioner, he concluded the Petitioner did the work in what she believed was in accordance with the permit that was issued by the Building Division. He said he believed she acted in good faith and did not intentionally do work outside of the scope of the permit. He said that in light of the many miscommunications discovered during his interviews of Staff and the Petitioner, current permit submittal requirements are being evaluated. The Commission discussed the Petitioner's project. Several Commissioners stated that the traffic volume in the area necessitated a wider driveway. Also, the area the patio would be located in was adequately screened. Therefore, the 6' setback as proposed on the Petitioner's exhibit would not adversely impact the character of the neighborhood. The Planning & Zoning Commission voted 5-2 to recommend that the Village Board approve Variation requests to locate a patio 6' from the exterior lot line and to allow a 33' driveway as shown on the Petitioner's exhibits, for the residence at 90 E. Milburn Ave., Case No. PZ-32-05. ' Please forward this memorandum and attachments to the Village Board for their review and consideration at their October 18, 2005 meeting. Staff will be present to answer any questions related to this matter. ~f:]~on~ 1 i\II~UTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLAN~ING & ZOJl\ING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-32-0S Hearing Date: August 25, 2005 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 90 E. Milbu1l1 PETITIONER/PROPERTY OWNER: Cheryl Axley, 90 E. Milburn, Mount Prospect, IL 60056 PUBLICATION DATE: August 10,2005 PIN #: 08-12-120-023-0000 REQUEST: Variation (Side Yard Setback) MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Rogers, Acting Chairman Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Ronald Roberts Keith Youngquist MEMBERS ABSENT: Chair Arlene Juracek Marlys Haaland STAFF MEMBERS PRESEr\T: Judith Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner Jason Zawila, Long Range Planner Ellen Divita, Deputy Director, Community Development INTERESTED PARTIES: Cheryl Axley, Stuart Wolf, Riner Warner Acting-Chairman 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 Floras and Keith Youngquist abstaining from the vote. At 8: 15 PM Mr. Rogers introduced Case No. PZ-32-0S a request for Variation for Side Yard Setback for 90 E. Milburn. He said that this case would be Village Board Final. . Senior Planner Judy Connolly summarized the case. The Subject Property is located at the northwest comer of Emerson and Milburn, and contains a single-family residence with related improvements. The Subject Property is zoned RA Single Family Residence and is bordered on all sides by the RA District. Although the residence is entered and exited along Milburn Avenue, the Zoning Ordinance defines the Milburn. frontage as the exterior yard and the front yard is Emerson Street. The Subject Property has a typical rectangular shape and the existing house is currently set back approximately 15 feet from the south lot line, which is the exterior property line, and approximately 71' from the east lot line, which is the front property lot line. Ms. Connolly said that the Petitioner is in the process of, and actually has completed most of the improvements to the existing patio and driveway. She said the Petitioner's exhibits illustrate the proposed improvements and the exhibit notes the proposed patio extension. The Petitioner is seeking approval for a 14' x 29' patio, intended to accommodate a brick fire pit, to encroach into the exterior yard. However, the Zoning Ordinance requires a 20- foot exterior side yard setback; therefore the Petitioner is requesting a Variation. Richard Rogers, Acting Chair Planning & Zoning CommIssion Meeting August 25, 2005 PZ-32-05 Page 2 Ms. Connolly reported that the Petitioner's application provided an in-depth description of the request as the patio relates to the character of the neighborhood. She said that the narrative states multiple times that the area in question is heavily screened and the proposed encroachment would have minimal impact on the character of the neighborhood. The Petitioner's narrative also provides an overview of events leading up to the requested Variation. Ms. Connolly said several discrepancies were identified when information in the Petitioner's narrative was compared to information in Village files during the Staff review of the request. In an effort to resolve the discrepancies, Staff met with the Petitioner and her attorney. As a result of this meeting, it appears there was a misunderstanding regarding the scope of the work approved for the permit issued in June 2005. Although the permit information indicates a 20' setback is required along Milburn Ave., this requirement was not explained in a manner that was made clear to the Petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner started excavation in the required exterior side yard. The Petitioner applied for a Variation when she was made aware that the proposed project did not meet the zoning regulations and that the permit issued did not authorize work in the exterior side yard. However, the discrepancies and amount of work completed, whether or not it was authorized, are not standards, as defined by the Zoning Ordinance, to grant a Variation. Therefore, the Staff Report will not focus on this aspect of the Petitioner's request and will instead just address the Variation request itself. Ms. Connolly said that the existing home does not comply with the Village's zoning regulations because the house encroaches approximately 5-feet into the exterior setback. However, this situation is a legal nonconformity and is allowed to remain. The proposed patio in the exterior side yard is new construction and is required to meet current Village Code requirements. Therefore, the patio requires relief from the RA District's bulk regulations to allow a 6' exterior side yard setback when the Zoning Ordinance requires 20'. The standards for a Variation are listed in the Zoning Ordinance and include specific findings that must be made in order to approve a Variation. They relate to: . A hardship due to the physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of a specific property not generally applicable to other properties in the same zoning district and not created by any person presently having an interest in the property; . Lack of desire to increase financial gain; and . Protection of the public welfare, other property, and neighborhood character. The Petitioner is proposing to expand the patio to accommodate a brick fire pit. Regardless of the intended use, the Zoning Ordinance requires a 20-foot exterior side yard. The Subject Property has a regular shape and normal topography. The manner in which the house is located on the Subject Property does create challenges for locating a patio that meets current zoning regulations. However, the same size (square footage) patio, but a different configuration, could be constructed east of the existing patio and still meet the required setbacks. The Petitioner states in the attached application that the patio would be screened by mature landscaping and a fence. Therefore, the request would have minimal impact on the character of the neighborhood. However, the request fails to meet the standards for a Variation because there isn't a hardship as defined by the Zoning Ordinance that prohibits them from complying with the required 20' setback. The Zoning Ordinance defines a hardship as "a practical difficulty in meeting the requirements of this chapter because of unusual surroundings or condition of the property involved, or by reason of exceptional narrowness, shallowness or shape of a zoning lot, or because of unique topography, underground conditions or other unusual circumstances". Although the site is a comer lot and could be described as having two' front yards', this condition exists throughout the surrounding neighborhood and Village of Mount Prospect; therefore it is not unique to this property. Richard R:)gers, Acting Chair Planning & Zoning CommIssIon ~,leeting August 25, 2005 PZ-32-05 Page 3 :Ms. Connolly said that although the proposed patio may be constructed in an attractive manner, its location is extremely close to the lot line. She said that Staff can appreciate the intent of the Petitioner's request, however, locating a patio that includes a fire pit 6-feet from the sidewalk is a significant deviation from zoning regulations. The Petitioner has other alternatives that would meet zoning regulations and the request is not essential, but more of a convenience. Based on this analysis, Staff finds that the request does not meet the Variation standards listed in the Zoning Ordinance and recommends that the P&Z deny the following motion: "To approve a Variation to allow a 6' exterior side yard for the proposed patio for the residence at 90 E. Milburn Ave., Case No. PZ-32-05." Ms. Connolly said that as the amount of the Variation exceeds 25% of the Zoning Ordinance requirement, the Village Board's decision is final for this case. Joseph Donnelly asked if they were to put a new fence up in what is now the front yard (east part of the house), would the zoning ordinance allow them to fence in this whole area proposed for the patio. Ms. Connolly clarified that the fence would need to be out of the 30' setback, it is currently about 10' back, so it would have to be shifted 20' west out of the front yard, per code. The code does look at what is happening on neighboring properties; if it is an exterior yard, the setback should back the adjacent properties. Calling the external side yard a "transitional side yard," Chairman Rogers asked if the fence along the side yard on the southern lot line could be rebuilt "as is." Ms. Connolly clarified that per changes to the code last year, that fence along the exterior side yard (southern property line) would need to be at least a foot off the property line . and would need to be relocated a little to allow a site triangle. The southern lot line is an exterior side yard, the western lot line would be considered transitional as it borders a neighboring house. Noting a new concrete curb cut, Chairman Rogers asked the driveway width, stating it appeared to be about 30 feet. Ms. Connolly indicated that field drawings would be needed to confirm the width. A permit was granted to modify the driveway but it would still need to be within code. The Conunission confirmed that Emerson is the front yard and Milbourn should be considered as a side yard. The Petitioner, Chel)'l Axley, 90 E. Milburn Ave., 'was sworn in. She opened her remarks by stating she's lived in the home 20 years and is raising 3 teenagers. She started the project to extend what is existing and to put in a pennanent fire pit, which would be safer than the temporal)' pit now used. She believes her home has unusual surroundings: I) traffic is high from cut through traffic which is avoiding Route 83, 2) the western portion of her lot is virtually unusable due to lack of privacy, traffic lights, and noise, 3) the front yard is too narrow, 4) her lot is unlevel with a slope from north to south that has a 4 foot taper so that south side is most logical place to put pavers in. She also stated that to dig elsewhere would be a hardship, and that her sewer line runs in the area where the Village Code says she has to put the patio. She believes the logical place to put the extended patio is where she has outlined it. She continued that her home is extensively screened by landscaping and a fence which was put up by permit 14 years ago. No one objects to this and she has some letters of support from neighbors which she would like to add to the record. She mentioned a similar project close by in the neighborhood, stating it was allowed by the Village so it would be fair to allow her project. She brought photos to share with the Commission. Richard Rogers, Acting Chalr Planning & Zoning Commission Meetmg August 25, 2005 PZ-32-0S Page 4 Stuart Wolf, 3345 N. Arlington Heights Road, Arlington Heights, IL, attorney for the Petitioner was sworn in. Mr. Wolf said he was at the meeting as an attorney and was here to further explain the matter. He said h1s associate Riner Warner would assist with photos. He thanked the Commissioners for coming to view the property . Mr. Wolf showed a series of photographs of the property which captured in his opinion: o how landscaping blocks the view of the yard completely o the area left to be worked on, indicating it is 14' x 16' o the view from the homeowner to the north showing the fence, tree line and slope rising to the northeast o a view of some of the completed work that demonstrates the sloping in the yard, the shrubbery and the fencing that prohibits a view of the yard. o unique topography and significant slope between the property and the home to the north boundary line o the area of the yard where the sewer line runs Mr. Wolf next showed photographs of a property he stated was 123 S. Elmhurst A venue, which he characterized as a similar home on a similar lot except that the lot is flat and doesn't appear to have the same topography issues. He stated this was recent construction with improvements in the front yard and there is not the lush landscaping and density of trees or fencing to block the views from the street. With a large retaining wall swooping in front of the home, certainly a more extensive variance than they are seeking on the behalf of Ms. Axley. Leo Flores clarified the location of the home asking if the front of the home is on Evergreen next to the Church. Mr. Wolf continued that there is precedent "by fact of approval of a more significant project" to approve what was being requested tonight. He showed more views of this home. Chairman Rogers clarified where the retaining wall was and Ms. Axley clarified it was a sunken patio. Mr. Wolf continued that the retaining wall is clearly visible, clearly way in front of the structure, and over the building line, coming up almost to the fence line that would appear to be on the boundary line of the property. And that construction, he stated, they believe was done this spring. Chairman Rogers asked if this was in the front yard. Mr. Wolf replied it was a comer lot with a similar situation to Ms. Axley's home. Mr. Flores and Keith Youngquist stated the home was on Evergreen. Staff was asked if this patio was built in the side yard setback with benefit of a permit. Ms. Connolly replied that this is the first she had learned of this example, if this was built last year, she was sure this was not done with benefit of a variation. She did note that an existing non-conforming patio can be rebuilt without complying to the setback as long as they meet lot coverage, but new construction must meet lot coverage. As this was the first Staff was hearing about this example, she said research time is needed. Mr. Wolf showed some drawings of the property at 90 E. Milburn stating that one or two of them had appeared in the packet but he wanted to point out a couple of other things. He stated that the first drawing shows the original plan. Gesturing to the area next to the driveway he stated that all of the work in the area had already been completed and area to southeast is the area in question. He stated the project is even with a walk and patio already in place, it is consistent with the fence, is aesthe.tically appropriate, it is all hidden by the fence and the shrubbery. He states this is the most functional use of the property and most functional design that could be furnished. To come up with an alternate would require coming into the yard with inherent risks involved with the sewer line and excavation. He stated his next drawing is the plan "that was part of the building permit that was issued," also remarking this is what was approved and what was assumed to be approved by the homeowner. He continued, "There are no notations "as to subject to variance," "variance needed" in order to accommodate the building line. Richard Rogers, Acting Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting August 25, 2005 PZ-32-05 Page 5 Referring to the drawing, he stated, all of the highlighting was done by the Building Department and the work done was consistent with what the Building Department approved so the homeowner continued, subject to what she was given by the Building Department. The Commission questioned the fact that the drawing "clearly says 20' setback and 21' maximum for driveway." Ms. Axely replied that she had written those notations herself. Mr. Wolf stated that, however, in a subsequent approval after the work was stopped, "the Building Department then came out and did approve the work in yellow, including the driveway in question. Again, the highlighting was done by Village Staff from the Building Department." Mr. Wolf stated he believed Mr. Cooney was present; Ms. Axley clarified it was Mr. George. The drawing, which was not the pennit approved Job Copy, showed a .different plan with a notation by Building Commissioner Bill George, which read: "Yellow approved to be built." Mr. Youngquist asked for clarification for the width of the driveway on the drawing, noting 2 numbers. Mr. Wolf said the driveway would appear to be 24' wide with an additional 9', therefore Mr. Roger's estimate of34 feet would be correct with the two added together. Mr. Wolf pointed out that the homeowner worked in accordance with the permit and the directive of Building Department. He said the only alternative noted in the Staff report would destroy the yard and run the risk of 2-3 feet of excavation not knowing where sewer line is, and not providing same aesthetic of the original plan. He said they wanted to submit a packet of letters from Don Wood, Contractor for the project, and all of the neighbors who would be affected by the possible impact of the project - all asking the Commission to move in favor of a variance. He noted the only neighbor with a view, the neighbor to north, submitted a letter of support. In reviewing the Village's list of standards from the code, which would support the variance, Mr. Wolf noted they believe the homeowner has met all of the 7 points and made these points: o Relating to the specific hardship, the alternative is not feasible due to the unknown risk of excavating and the slope issues for drainage, they believe this is the only alternative; and, based upon amended plan approved by Village, the homeowner has extended significant money and now to drastically change the plan would cost additional monies. o This is a unique situation due to the topography; this is not a simple flat land corner lot, this is a situation not generally found with other properties. o This is not being done for financial gain. o Homeowner did not create the hardship; she worked in accordance to plans given by the Building Department. o 5,6, and 7 relating to whether the project is injurious to the public, the project has complied with these. o All standards have been met for the variance In summarizing his comments Mr. Wolf stated: o He does not believe the Village has an adequate view of the situation, noting the Staff summary eliminates reference to hardship and the uniqueness of property. o He believes the variance should be approved because the homeowner has met all the requirements. Topography may not make it impossible, but makes it pretty darn hard. There is an unknown on what this would do to drainage for the yard given the slope from 2 different directions to the house. We acknowledge the property presents some challenges and the homeowner has met those challenges. o He continued that there certainly is no desire for financial gain. The area in question that has been excavated is 14' x 16' not 29' x 14' and therefore they believe is a much lesser impact than might have gotten from reading the summary. With recommendation of staff the proximity of firepit, not that he thinks it matters, is 13' not 6' making it less visible from the street given the dense landscaping. They think the project is a natural extension of Jines of the home, request is essential, not a whimsy or convenience, but is appropriate use of yard space. Richard Rogers. Acting Chalr Planning & Zoning CorrumsslOn Meeting August 25, 2005 PZ-32-0S Page 6 o This usage won't diminish property values if anything wi]] enhance values, is not injurious to anyone's use of property, and will not have any negative impact on character of the neighborhood, nor will it influence anyone else's use of their own property. o Variances come into play where desired use is prohibited under ordnance and when standards for requesting a variance are met. What's proposed is not inconsistent with neighbor and is justified by practical difficulties, hardship and uniqueness of the property. We think that fairness would require and request that the commission allow the petitioner to complete the project, especially where the homeowner relied on information from the building department and not suffer a further financial detriment due to the miscommunications. He referred again to the standards for variance summarizing his belief that the project met each. Mr. Donnelly asked who designed the patio. Mr. Wolf replied that in their packet was a letter from the company, Krugel Cobbles Inc. Mr. Wolf confirmed they had done the drawings. Mr. Donnelly asked if, when the contractor was doing the drawings, had they been advised a variance was needed? Ms. Axley came to the podium and said that when she first applied for the permit, "they told me to draw all the building lines on the survey and she said that part may not be approved, you may need a variance." She continued, "So I said, well let me apply for it and I'll get all the paperwork because she said it takes a long time to get a variance. I thought I'd get a head start in case it didn't go through. So I talked with Judy and she said you're probably going to need a variance, here's the procedure, she gave me all the paperwork. I checked back a week later to see how the permit was coming and I went in and they had approved the whole job. And I asked the lady, I was real excited because I didn't have to go through the variance procedure. I said, does this mean I can proceed on the whole job, and she said yes, just make sure they come out for the two inspections, one at the end and one in the middle and you're good to go. So, I went." Asked by Mr. Donnelly about a drawing they gave her that was marked with a 20 foot setback, Ms. Axley said she put that that on there. Mr. Donnelley asked if this was the case on the notation for the 21 foot driveway width, noting it looked like it was put in by the Village. Ms. Axley said she drew all of that on there when she applied for the permit because she was told to. Mr. Donnelly asked if whoever took the permit drawing to do the design drawing had asked about the notation for the setback and driveway. After clarifying he was referring to her contractur, Ms. Axley and Mr. Wolfe both said, "No." Mr. Donnelley stated he didn't understand, the drawing showed a 6'1" setback and asked if the first time she found out she was within the 20' setback was when the Inspector came out and said she had a problem. Ms. Axley replied, "No, when I applied for the permit they told me there was a setback line, so I knew when I applied for the permit that the line was, I drew the line on the survey myself." Mr. Donnelly asked when the Contractor drew his drawings: did he know there was a 20' setback requirement and did he advise her she was in the 20' setback of the need for a variance? She stated "No, he didn't advise her of any zoning issues. I told him we might have to hold up a portion of the job to get a variance and then when I got the permit, I didn't think I needed a variance. " Mr. Donnelly said he sees a discrepancy between the fact that she got approval to proceed with a 20' setback and the guy who designed it designed within that 20' setback without telling you; he's got a problem. Mr. Wolfe said that he thinks what Ms. Axley is saying is that when she got the permit, she was instructed, "draw these lines in." She then applied for it and received it back, that was one of the drawings that we showed you. Mr. Donnelley interjected, "which clearly shows that the whole patio should be within the buildable space." Mr. Wolf continued, "Yes, but the Building Department had highlighted the entire whole project as approved, including that portion of the project over the 20' setback line. When Ms. Axley questioned the two women in the Building Department whether a variance was still required, the answer was "no, you can proceed." " RiC'hard Rugers, Acting Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting August 25,2005 PZ-32-05 Page 7 Mr. Donnelly asked to see the drawing \\'hich showed that the Village had approved it within the 20' setback. Mr. Wolf referred to the approved building permit drawing and Mr. Donnelly replied that drawing clearly showed the need for a 20' setback. Mr. Wolf respectfully disagreed, stating it showed a highlighted portion over the setback line and said the highlighting was done by the Village. Mr. Donnelly stated he didn't see it that way, but o.k. Ms. Axley said that was the problem she has, because they were saying... Commissioner Donnelly interjected, that the guy drawing the plans should have noted the discrepancy as he was actually building stuff within that 20' setback and I'm hearing that he never told you that. Ms. Axley replied, "they didn't discuss the zoning, no." Mr. Youngquist clarified to Ms. Axely, "You indicated you put those numbers on there for a 20' setback?" Ms. Axley and Mr. Wolf replied yes she had, the Building Department had told them to write that on there. Regarding the 21' max on the driveway width, Mr. Youngquist clarified it was Ms. Axley's handwriting as well and she replied yes. He asked how it was that the driveway is now 33' wide. She replied "that it's always been long; it's always been extra wide. But, they were telling me what the restrictions were...." Mr. Youngquist interjected, "but that's not what this site plan shows, it doesn't show a 33' wide curb cut. I can tell just by Jooking at it, unless the surveyor is .... wacky." Chairman Rogers stated it appeared to him that the curb cut is brand new. Mr. Youngquist stated, "well that's absolutely wrong." Ms. Axley said it was being extended; they took down a huge tree a few years ago and before that the drive.... Mr. Youngquist stated the maximum driveway width on a huge lot is 26', it's 21' on these 50' lots and to have a 33' driveway curb cut out there, it's just not right. Chairman Rogers asked Ms. Connolly to clarify for the Commission on what happened at the Building Department. Ms. Connolly replied that she wasn't there at the Building Department during transactions on this permit; she herself can look at these sheets and see the setback or width is marked. She said that when you submit multiple copies, one's the job copy that needs to be on site for the contractor to follow, one's an inspector copy, and one's a file copy. Chairman Rogers summarized that it was clear that the 20' setback and 21' driveway are part of the permit no matter who colored In with yellow. Mr. Donnelley said they were allowed to build, based upon a 21' driveway and a 20' setback. But, stated, Chairman Rogers, somehow the project was built with a 33 'driveway, a 6' side yard instead of the 20' side yard. Putting a drawing of the project on the overhead screen, Mr. Wolf said, that was where they had demonstrated that Bill Ge9fge and Mr. Cooney had signed off on the expanded project; we call it the 31' driveway. Chairman Rogers responded that without them being here, we don't really know what happened. All we can see is what's on the original copy. Chairman Rogers said the drawing being shown was a sketch; not the permit drawing. Mr. Wolf said, but you can see their signatures here and the words, "yellow area approved for completion, 7/25/05, initialed by William George, with signatures by Mr. George and Mr. Cooney." Ms. Connolly and Mr. Youngquist stated that those signatures were not made by either Bill George or Bill Cooney. Ms. Axley confirmed she had written the names of Mr. George and Mr. Cooney on the drawing. Mr. Wolf apologized and did confirm that it was indeed Mr. George's initials next to the words "approved for completion." The Commissioners turned their attention to the 1\\'0 highlight areas on the drawing, one area being the driveway, and one area being a small piece of patio to the east of the driveway. The Chairman noted that the portion of the patio in yellow was allowed, but it was basically larger than would nOlmally be allowed and the drawing did not have the remainder of the patio (including the firepit) marked "as approved," according to the note. Richard Rogers, Acting Chair Planmng & Zonmg CommissIOn Meeting August 25,2005 PZ-32-05 Page 8 Mr. Wolf said that's why they're saying that viewed in light of what was approved and what was originally approved, the new patio area was in its logical place. Mr. Rogers stated that one of the problems the Conunission bad was that if they allowed this on their side yard, the next person will come in and ask for the same. Just the same way they were saying that it had been allowed on the other house and we don't know what happened there but we don't want to get into that situation. He continued, "We don't want to get into a situation where somebody does something that's illegal, and I have to careful here, I know you're an attorney.... We don't want to get into a situation where someone does something that's not correct and we accept that and all of a sudden that becomes the precedent for other requests." Mr. Wolf replied that he thinks they could go back to hardship and topographical issues that he's been addressing: the fact of the topographical slope of the yard from the east and the north, the excavation, the fact that this isn't as described in the staff report a typical comer lot, but there are topographical issues that really restrict what Ms. Axley can do with the property and that makes it more unique than the average comer property. Chairman Rogers said there could also be a raised patio constructed that would eliminate the problem of having to do the excavation and the sewer is normally 3.5 feet below grade so he doesn't see that as becoming a major factor. There are several ways to solve the other problems without creating a precedent in the Village for future side yard variations. Mr. Wolf said he understands and respectfully disagrees because to do the extension that he's suggesting perhaps to the east, within the lines destroys a good portion of what remains of the grassy portion of the yard. He thinks that where you might have to go 3 feet plus or minus in excavation and we hope the sewer is 3 feet deep, you are getting mighty risky as to where that bobcat has to go before it hits the sewer line. If the sewer line is a little bit higher than where it should be, you have a risk involved. He thinks there are some good arguments here to go with the variance without setting a precedent and to go with this plan instead of alternate plans suggested. Chairman Rogers said he didn't know who suggested those plans but if those plans were legal alternatives he thinks the homeowner should explore those alternatives. And again, it could be a raised patio; the patio doesn't have to be dug down into the ground and then the water from next door would fall on that patio. You'd be better off to raise that patio and avoid the water problem altogether, avoid the sewer problem and you wouldn't be setting the precedent we're talking about. Chairman Rogers asked if there were any other questions for the Petitioner. He asked if there was anyone else in the audience who wished to address this. Hearing none, he closed the public portion of the hearing and brought it back to the Board. Mr. Donnelly had a question for Ms. Connolly asking what would happen under the new fencing code, what would happen if the Petitioner applied for a new fence today, would the fire pit area be outside the fenced area? Ms. Connolly replied yes, she thought so. Mr. Roberts asked, "Did the Village approve or not approve the existing already built portion of the patio that is 7' 1" from the south lotline?" It seems to me that all the Petitioner is seeking is to build a firepit; the column would go only be 6 'I" from the lot line. I'm not an architect, some of these guys are. He sees that if this has been approved already at 7' I inch from lotline he doesn't see a bi tissue to go 1 more foot. She does have special circumstances. He sees this as a transitional neighborhood, this is downtown, it's one block from the downtown, I drive this everyday on my way to the train. There are special circumstances in addition to the topography. Ms. Connolly said she could not locate a permit for the patio in the exterior side yard, and could only find a permit for a 4' service walk only in the exterior side yard; she doesn't see approval for the patio east of the service walk. Mr. Roberts asked how far from the south line the service walk would be. Ms. Connolly replied Richard R8gers, Acting Chalf Planmng & Zoning Conunission Meeting August 25, 2005 PZ-32-05 Page 9 that the service walk was approved to be 4' in width. Chainnan Rogers clarified it would be from the public sidewalk, which is allowed. Chairman Rogers said he was concerned because he's seeing a driveway put in well beyond the dimensions specified, a patio put in beyond a walk that was approved, and there appears to be a disregard to building codes unless Bill George or someone else has approved this and we don't see evidence of this tonight. Ms. Connolly said she doesn't have enough information and can only go on the microfilm information for the permit history. Mr. Youngquist said he was disappointment that the permit was approved based on a site plan with a few marks and not a drawing with actual dimensions. The sketch has the Petitioner's 0....'11 writing with notations for 2 I-feet, "on it; you don't come up with 21' out of your head, somebody said that was the width - it's an odd dimension. 20' on the setback - it's clearly marked on there as well and those are the only 2 things on that drawing that stand out to me as something realistic and written in stone. This must be 21', this must be a 20' setback. They didn't pay any attention to this; the contractor must have not even looked at that drawing, never questioned it - "I'm not digging until we get this resolved, I'n not cutting this curb until I get answers." Mr. Roberts stated that maybe one answer was to get more facts. It might be to the Petitioner's advantage to withdraw until we know more. He noted he'd read through letters form neighbors and all were very positive. One stood out to him, from Mary Johnson, 215 Emerson Street: "it is very concerning that given that rules are broken for other projects all around us." Mr. Youngquist said he understands what he's saying, but this is residential and it's not a transitional area. Property improvement is fantastic but in this situation it seems somebody turned the other way and said we're going to do what we're going to do and if we get caught, we get caught. I love to see beautiful improvements. Chairman Rogers agreed it was a beautiful home and an attribute to community, but you can't do what you want to do, that's why we have the rules we do have. Mr. Donnelly said that there are alternative solutions. Even though there are construction issues there are no technical issues that would create a hardship. Plus, to build in this area that would later be in. front of a fence line; we're trying to open up the yards. Mr. Flores asked where the Building Department was in this, how can this happen 2 blocks away from Village Hall. Ms. Connolly noted the project was stopped when the inspection occurred. In regard to the driveway, she'd have to check on the approved width and would do so first thing tomorrow. Mr. Flores stated he was in agreement with Mr. Roberts and supported the Petitioner; her facts could be described as hardships. He's disturbed by comments and would like further explanation from the Building Department as to how these things can happen and no one is aware of them. He'd like to hear from Cobble Kugles as well. Mr. Donnelly noted that the fence is a non-conforming fence now even though it's been there for years. He said he'd like to hear from Bill George. Mr. Youngquist noted this is a bad situation. He said we get beautiful drawings from people wanting to come in for a variation to put on a 5' porch and here with a potentially more technically complicated project we're working from no drawings at all. Mr. Donnelly noted that the architectural drawing from the designer they did have wasn't part of the building pennit application. It was noted it the Barrington surveyor drawing was provided after the fact. It was detennined that Bill George would be asked to come to the next meeting or provide a written response. The Petitioner was asked if she was willing to continue this to the next meeting. Ms. Axley came to the podium and said she'd done ever)'thing that was asked of her and nothing was done on the sly: Bill George approved the driveway, he approved all the whole yellow area and everything was done with the Village approval. She didn't know she had to get this variance, she thought with the permit she wouldn't need the variance, that's why the area was excavated. She didn't finish that area, she's there asking for the variance now. Richard Rogers, Acting Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting August 25, 2005 PZ-32.05 Page] ') Chairman Rogers suggested the item be tabled until they got more facts because he feared that she might not get the variance. He asked that someone from the Permit Department attend the meeting and provide facts. Mr. Donnelly made a motion to table the case until September 22, 2005; the motion was seconded by Mr. Roberts. The motion was approved 5-0 at 9:01 PM. Chairman Rogers stated, "So this was tabled, she will lose a month's time; it will be brought up under old business at the next meeting, September 22. It remains Vlllaf;e Board fina1." After hearing discussing 2 more items and the topic of Circular Driveways, Joseph 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. ~ ( ~ Ellen Divita, Deputy Director H:\PLAN\Planning & Zoning COMM\P&Z 2005\Minutes\PZ.32-05 90 E. Milburn - V AR . Exl Side yard (JMC version).doc l\UNUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANl'IING & ZONING COMMISSIOl'l CASE NO. PZ-32-0S Hearing Date: September 22, 2005 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 90 E. Milburn PETITIONER/PROPERTY OWl\'ER: Cheryl Axley, 90 E. Milburn, Mount Prospect, IL 60056 PUBLICATION DATE: August 10, 2005 PIN #: 08-12-120-023-0000 REQUEST: Variation (Side Yard Setback & Driveway) MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Arlene Juracek Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Marlys Haaland Ronald Roberts Richard Rogers Keith Youngquist MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Jill Baty, Planning Intern Judith Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner BiIl Cooney, AICP, Director, Community Development Ellen Divita, Deputy Director, Community Development INTERESTED PARTIES: Stuart Wolf, Ronald Nelson Chairperson Arlene Juracek called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Richard Rogers moved to approve the minutes of the August 25, 2005 meeting and Ronald Roberts seconded the motion. The motion was approved 5- 0; Marlys Haaland and Chairperson Juracek abstained from the vote. At 8:00 pm, Chair Juracek introduced Case No. PZ-32-05, a request for Variations to allow a patio to encroach 14' into the required exterior side yard and to allow a 33' wide driveway. She said that the case was heard at the August 25, 2005 meeting, but was tabled because the Commission asked for additional information. A motion was made by Richard Rogers to place this case back for discussion, seconded by Joseph Donnelly. The motion was approved 7-0. Chairman Juracek said that the Village Board's decision was final for these requests. Bill Cooney, Director of Community Development, stated that he was at the meeting to provide more background information. It is clear there was miscommunication or misunderstanding over this permit at 2 key points. The initial false start was when the Petitioner came in, met with Staff, and was advised that a Variation was needed for the both the patio in the side yard and for the width of the driveway, if she wanted to proceed as proposed. The Petitioner submitted the permit drawings for the overall project to the Building Division and they were routed to the other divisions for review. The permit was issued with the notations the Commission has seen for 21' on the driveway width and a 20' setback for the patio. There was an understanding by Staff that the permit was being issued, as notated on the plan that was part of the file. In discussing with Ms. Axley, she walked away from the issuance of the permit believing the project was approved as submitted and that what was submitted could be built. That was the first false start. Arlene Juracek, Acting Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting September 22, 2005 PZ-32-05 Page 2 \Vhen the Building Inspector went out and reviewed the site, he saw the work being installed didn't meet the approved permit. Then Ms. Axley came in and met with Building Commissioner Bill George and from that meeting there was the highlighted exhibit shown at the last meeting. Mr. George has indicated that at the meeting with Ms. Axley his intent was to see what could be done at that point to get the project moving without the Variation so that she could at least get moving on a portion of the project. Bill George indicated that the drawing he wrote on during that meeting was not part of the permit file, did not have dimensions, and was considered by him to be a design conception. He highlighted the driveway, the patio area behind the house that was set back 20', and the sidewalk connecting the two areas. Again the misunderstanding was Bill's belief that what he was doing was agreeing that these portions of the project could be done within code, going back to the permit drawing that was approved with the notation for 21' driveway and 20' setback for the patio. Ms. Axley took the drawing and went back and probably showed the contractor, and it was installed. Unfortunately, what is shown here in this drawing, if scaled out, is what exists today; the dimension of the driveway apron is approximately 33', the driveway itself at its widest point is 28-29'. In hindsight, from an administrative standpoint, the Petitioner went through this process in good faith, not in any back-handed manner, or on the sly. She did apply for a permit, she did call for her inspections, she did meet with Staff throughout the whole process, and she really did try to comply with the Village Code. We have reviewed this situation internally to determine how we can improve our process. Discussions have identified that in the future we should not be approving any plans that aren't drawn to scale or that are hand drawn without accurate dimensions because that's where the beginning of the problem started. Second, we need to cross out any areas that wouldn't meet Village Code regulations. Even though we wrote dimensions on the drawing, we should cross out areas that are not approved. And, finally in regards to the drawing from Mr. George, which I saw for the first time last month, we should not be approving or writing on plans that are not part of the permit file. Mr. George indicated that he did it in an attempt to help the Petitioner, but again, we should not be writing on plans that are not part of the permit file. Again, I wanted to come explain in greater detail to the Commission, that things were done in good faith on both sides, and I ask that you consider this Variation request based on the facts of the property. Comm. Rogers clarified this was an honest mistake in the process. Comm. Donnelley asked who typically takes out a permit, the contractor or the homeowner. Mr. Cooney indicated there is no "nonnal," that some contractors want the homeowners to get the permit while others will handle the permit themselves. Comm. Roberts asked if the Staff visits every property prior to issuing a permit, which might help avoid these types of problems. Mr. Coqney stated that this only occurs if there are questions up front about compliance. Chairman Juracek asked if the fence could be rebuilt in the future without a variance and if the firepit would be inside a permitted fence. The answer is no, the fence there now would not be allowed without a variation. The yard is unique in that the front yard as defined by Village Code, is acting as the rear yard and the home is set back 71'. On comer lots the fence must be in line with the building in the front yard. Typically on a comer lot, the home is flush with other homes on the street (Emerson in this case), but here the home is set back. Comm. Donnelly asked why the home has a Milburn address and not an Emerson address. The home is approximately 20-30 years old. The Zoning Ordinance defines front yard as the narrowest side of lot and addressing tends to follow that convention as well. If this were subdivided today, the address would be Emerson, but it was built with a Milburn address. The front yard setback is 70'; though required setback is 30'. This home could be added onto an additional 40 feet to the east if all other codes were met. Chairman Juracek noted as an aside that she had visited several homes in the general area of this home. She felt the 123 S. Elmhurst property was particularly attractive. In the future the Village may want to consider allowing Arlene Juracek, Acting Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting September 22, 2005 PZ-32-05 Page 3 patios in exterior side yards as a Special Use because of the open feel it lends to a neighborhood - which she observes is better than a solid wood fence. She noted this for future consideration as a means to preserve the character of neighborhoods. Comm. Rogers noted that this would be a tough thing to enforce without an appearance review of those requests. As there were no more questions from the Commission, Chairman Juracek asked if the Petitioner had anything to add to the record. Stuart Wolf, 3345 N. Arlington Heights Road, said he was appearing as the Petitioner's attorney. He wanted to point out that the original drawing included highlighting south of the boundary line. Additionally when work was stopped in July and Ms. Axley met with the Building Commissioner there were no measurements made as to the width of the driveway. If necessary, Mr. Nelson, who was with the Petitioner at several of the meetings is here this evening and available for questions. The Petitioner had only completed the work highlighted by the Building Department which included the entire driveway; he noted the driveway being replaced was 26' not 21'. He believes there are many unique features of this property which support the variance request. The Petitioner would run the risk of drainage problems and hitting a sewer line were she to move the patio. He noted she has expended sizable dollars on this project. If there had been just one mistake that would be her problem to deal with but with the multiplicity of mistakes she shouldn't be required to remove work already done. He believes that all factors required for a variance have been met and it has been established that there was no flagrant disregard for Village Code. He doesn't believe a precedent will be set. All of the neighbors affected by the project support it. He summarized that the uniqueness of the property, the hardship to the Petitioner, meeting Village Code requirements, meeting with Village Staff, the good faith effort to meet the code, along with the enhancement to the property all support the request. Chairman Juracek asked if he was able to give testimony for the Petitioner. He said no, he was making a statement as her Attorney but Ronald Nelson would. Mr. Nelson, of 200 N. Arlington Heights Road was sworn in, stating he was a close personal friend of Ms. Axley and had participated in several of the meetings. Comm. Donnelly asked Mr. Nelson if he thought Building Commissioner Bill George knew the dimensions of the drawing he had signed was 31'; Mr. Nelson said yes, it was his impression Bill George did know dimensions and there was discussion on the flare of the driveway to match the driveway width north of the sidewalk. The driveway above the sidewalk and the service walk north of the sidewalk was a replacement of existing; the garage is 27-29' wide. The apron was widened; it is Mr. Nelson's opinion that this was clearly known. Chairman Juracek clarified if the Commission should be discussing the driveway as public notice for the case had been for the patio section. Mr. Cooney replied that Village Attorney Buzz Hill had been consulted that he advised that the Commission could take action on both variations as notice had been given to surrounding property owners that variations were being sought. Comm. Roberts said he feels the Petitioner should be able to complete her project. The Commission asked Sr. Planner Judy Connolly if she was aware of the dimensions of the driveway at the meeting when Mr. George signed the drawing. She replied that she came in at the end of the meeting and does not recall dimensions being discussed when she was present. There being no further questions for the Petitioner or comment from the audience, at 8:31 the hearing was closed. Comm. Roberts stated he sees this as a transitional neighborhood; the privacy is there; the neighbors are for it; it's an attractive home; he supports the project. Comm. Rogers said he was opposed based on the fact that the work is in side yard and this is an extra wide driveway that is not allowed for others. He understands the Village's complicity in this item but this isn't a project he'd normally vote for. Comm. Donnelly said that at 6' off the sidewalk the firepit is built in an area that wouldn't be fenced if the fence is replaced; he has a concern for people walking down the street. He does believe there's an economic hardship on Milburn with the amount of cut through traffic the street sees so he can support the variance for the driveway but not for the patio area. Arlene Juracek, Acting Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting September 22, 2005 PZ-32-0S Page 4 Comm. Flores says we need to look beyond the misconununication and consider the facts of the lot in question. He thinks this is a good development which wil1 benefit the property and the area and he has no problem supporting. Comm. Haaland said the neighbors are comfortable with the project, the fence and hedge are in place, the Petitioner acted in good faith and she can support. Comm. Youngquist said the Petitioner acted in good faith; regarding the apron, there was an existing tree there and he can understand the expansion of the driveway. He has less issue with the firepit as it will always be protected from view. This is unfortunate that the project is being discussed after construction has begun and the Petitioner needs to finish it as conceived and developed so far. Replacement of the fence was discussed and Mr. Cooney confirmed that if more than 50% of the fence was to be replaced at one time a Variation would be needed, but maintenance on smaller sections is al1owed. The fence is a legal non-conforming use and there was a permit for the original fence. Chairman Juracek summarized that the Commission had learned that the driveway north of the sidewalk was a legal nonconforming use that could be replaced in kind, which makes it an unusual situation. The apron was symmetrical with the area to the north. Having lived on Emerson she understand the traffic in the area and to move the patio to the northeast would put it higher and closer to traffic, resulting in less privacy. She is comfortable with the proposal. A motion was made by Richard Rogers and seconded by Keith Youngquist to approve a Variation to allow a 6' exterior side yard for the proposed patio and a 33' wide driveway at the curb cut, as shown on the Petitioner's exhibits, for the residence at 90 E. Milburn Ave., Case No. PZ-32-05. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Floras, Roberts, Youngquist, Haaland, Juracek, NAYS: Rogers, Donnel1y The motion was approved 5-2. The case will go before the Village Board on October 18,2005. Richard Rogers made a motion to adjourn at 9:00 p.m., seconded by Keith Youngquist. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. irector H:\PLAN\PI:uming & lenin! COMM\P&.Z 200~\MinUlrs\PZ.J2.0.s 90 E Milburn. V AR . EXl Side yard (Scpl M~1inK) doc September 25, 2005 Bill Cooney Directory of Community Development Village of Mount Prospect 50 South Emerson Street Mt. Prospect, IL 60056 Re: PZ-32-05! 90 E. Milburn Ave., (variations for side yard set back and driveway width) Dear Mr. Cooney: Please consider this letter my written request to have the Village Board waive the second reading and take final action on the above noted matter on October 18th. I will not be available to attend the Village Board meeting, but will send my friend and counsel, Stuart Wolf. Yours truly, G~QG..~"c Che~lef Cc: S. Wolf -.', -.... .-.--.~ r-;'p" SEP 28; '...... . __.....,..~.':'""<....r...,.,'- "C".", Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department CASE SUMMARY - PZ-32-05 LOCA TION: 90 E. Milbum Avenue PETITIONER: OWNER: PARCEL #: LOT SIZE: ZONING: LAND USE: REQUEST: Cheryl Axley Cheryl Axley 08-12-120-023-0000 0.18 acres (7,800 square feet) RA Single Family Residence Single Family Residential Variation (Side Yard Setback) LOCA nON MAP ll,ls,e ,\VI'Il11C ~'~"1I II , 'll$.109 'O'I'g ... ::. 11,11 :.J lU ... rr. 1ft! ~i OJ '" ... ;j ~ ::!.IlS 210 !f)tl 212 III 2.4 21] 212 211 216 2.5 214 213 218 217 216 15 22u 219 217 22% 221 218 2.Q 224 221 226 u> JO. ]110 c;j Jill JII2 .lll~ .1114 C .; Jtl7 ~n6 ~ ltl9 lOX ~ HI ) 10 lD JI2 JlS .'1 .,. JI4 JI~ LJ Lincoln StE"t't'1 CASE SUMMARY - PZ-32-0S 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: PZ-32-05 - V ARIA TION (EXTERlOR SIDE YARD) 90 E. MILBURN AVE. (AXLEY RESIDENCE) Background A public hearing has been scheduled for the August 25, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting to review the application by Cheryl Axley (the "Petitioner") regarding the property located at 90 E. Milburn Avenue (the "Subject Property"). The Petitioner is seeking a Variation to allow a patio to encroach 14-feet (approximately) into the required exterior side yard when the Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum setback of 20 feet. The P&Z hearing was properly noticed in the August 10,2005 edition of the Journal Topics Newspaper. In addition, Staff has completed the required written notice to property owners within 250-feet and posted Public Hearing signs on the Subject Property. Property Description The Subject Property is located at the northwest comer of Emerson Street and Milburn A venue, and contains a single-family residence with related improvements. The Subject Property is zoned RA Single Family Residence and is bordered on all sides by the RA District. Although the residence is entered/exited along Milburn Avenue, the Zoning Ordinance defines the Milburn Ave. frontage as the exterior yard and the front yard is Emerson Street. (The Zoning Ordinance defines the front yard as having the narrowest frontage.) The Subject Property has a typical rectangular shape and the existing house is currently set back approximately 15.37' from the south (exterior side yard) lot line and approximately 71' from the east (front) lot line. Summary of Proposal The Petitioner is in the process of making improvements to the existing patio and driveway. The attached exhibits illustrate the Petitioner's proposed improvements and the exhibit notes the proposed patio extension. The Petitioner is seeking approval for a 14' x 29' patio, intended to accommodate a brick fire pit, to encroach into the exterior yard. However, the Zoning Ordinance requires a 20-foot exterior side yard setback; therefore the Petitioner is requesting a Variation. The Petitioner's application provides an in-depth description of the request as the patio relates to the character of the neighborhood. The narrative states multiple times that the area in question is heavily screened and the proposed encroachment would have minimal impact on the character of the neighborhood. The Petitioner's nalTative also provides an overview of events leading up to the requested Variation. During the Staff review of the Petitioner's Variation request, several discrepancies were identified when information in the Petitioner's PZ-32-05 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting August 25, 2005 Page 2 narrative \-vas compared to infon11ation in VJ!lage files. In an effort to resolve the discrepancies, Staff met with the Petitioner and her attorney. As a result of this meeting, it appears there was a misunderstanding regarding the scope of the work approved for the June 2005 permit. Although the pennit infOlmation indicates a 20' setback is required along Milburn Ave., this requirement was not explained in a manner that was clear to the Petitioner. Therefore, her contractor started excavation in the side yard. The Petitioner applied for a Variation when she was made aware that the proposed project did not meet zoning regulations and the permit issued did not include work in the exterior side yard. However, the discrepancies and amount of work completed, whether or not it was authorized, are not standards as defined by the Zoning Ordinance, to grant a Variation. Therefore, the Staff Report will not focus on this aspect of the Petitioner's request. GENERAL ZONING COMPLIANCE The existing home does not comply with the Village's zoning regulations because the house encroaches approximately 5-feet into the exterior setback. However, this situation is a legal nonconformity and is allowed to remain. The proposed patio in the exterior side yard is new construction and is required to meet current Village Code requirements. Therefore, the patio requires relief from the RA District's bulk regulations to allow a 6' exterior side yard setback when the Zoning Ordinance requires 20'. The following table compares the Petitioner's proposal to the RA Single Family Residence District's bulk requirements. RA Single-Family District Minimum Requirements Existing Proposed SETBACKS: Front 30' 51' from patio (east) 42.74' Interior 5' 3' (north) No change Exterior 20' 15.37' from house (south) 6' I" (from patio) Rear 25' 25' (west) No change LOT COVERAGE 50% Maximum 38% 42% VARIATION STANDARDS The standards for a Variation are listed in Section 14.203.C.9 of the Village Zoning Ordinance and include seven specific findings that must be made in order to approve a Variation. The following list is a summary of these findings: · A hardship due to the physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of a specific property not generally applicable to other properties in the same zoning district and not created by any person presently having an interest in the property; . Lack of desire to increase financial gain; and · Protection of the public welfare, other property, and neighborhood character. The Petitioner is proposing to expand the patio to accommodate a brick fire pit. Regardless of the intended use, the Zoning Ordinance requires a 20-foot exterior side yard. The Subject Property has a regular shape and normal topography. The manner in which the house is located on the Subject Property does create challenges for locating a patio that meets current zoning regulations. However, the same size (square footage) patio, but a different configuration could be constructed east of the existing patio and still meet the required setbacks. PZ-32-05 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting August 25, 2005 Page 3 The Petitioner states that the patio would be screened by mature landscaping and a fence. Therefore, the request would have minimal impact on the character of the neighborhood. However, the request fails to meet the standards for a Variation because there isn't a hardship as defined by the Zoning Ordinance that prohibits them from complying with the required 20' setback. The Zoning Ordinance defines a hardship as "a practical difficulty in meeting the requirements of this chapter because of unusual surroundings or condition of the property involved, or by reason of exceptional narrowness, shallowness or shape of a zoning lot, or because of unique topography, underground conditions or other unusual circumstances". Although the site is a comer lot and could be described as having two 'front yards', this condition exists throughout the surrounding neighborhood and V illage of Mount Prospect; therefore it is not unique to this property. RECOMMENDATION Although the proposed patio may be constructed in an attractive manner, its location is extremely close to the lot line. Staff can appreciate the intent of the Petitioner's request, however, locating a patio that includes a fire pit 6- feet from the sidewalk is a significant deviation from zoning regulations. The Petitioner has other alternatives that would meet zoning regulations and the request is not essential, but more of a convenience. Based on this analysis, Staff finds that the request does not meet the Variation standards contained in Section 14.203.C.9 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends that the P&Z deny the following motion: "To approve a Variation to allow a 6' exterior side yard for the proposed patio for the residence at 90 E. Milburn Ave., Case No. PZ-32-05." As the amount of the Variation exceeds 25% of the Zoning Ordinance requirement, the Village Board's decision is final for this case. I concur: P, Director of Community Development H\PLAN\Planning & Zonmg COMM\P&Z 2005\StaffMemo\PZ.32-05 MEMO (90 E. Milbum. V AR . Exterior Side yard).doc 'V JLLAGE OF l'vl0UNT PROSPEC1-' COMM1JNlTY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT - Planning Division 50 S. Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 Phone 847.818.5328 FAX 847.818.5329 Variation Request The Planning & Zoning Commission has final administrative authority for all petitions for fence variations and those variation requests that do not exceed twenty-five (25%) of a requirement stipulated by the Village's Zoning Ordinance. PETITION FOR PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION REVIEW Village Board Final , Z Case Number I 0 PZ - - 05 I ..... E-< <~ Development Name/Address ~"2 00 ~ ~ Date of Submission Zl.=: ......... xS2- ~ Hearing Date Cl Z ..... Common Address(es) (Street Number, Street) 90 E, Milburn Ave. , Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 Tax J.D. Number or County Assigned Pin Number(s) 08-12-120-023 Z 0 family situated the of Frnerson & l\1ilburn ..... a single home on corner E-< ~ Legal Description (attach additional sheets if necessary) Lot 15 in h'aldemar Krause's Addition to Mount Prosoect, in the east 0 ~ half ( 1/2) of the Northwest Quarter (1/4) of Section 12, Township Z ..... ~ E-< 41 North, Range 11, East of the Th ird Principal Meridian, in Cook - en County, Illinois. Z Name Telephone (day) 0 Cheryl Axley 847 506-0909 .... E-< < Corporation Telephone (evening) i 847 394-3227 01 r:.;. ~ Street Address Fax Z f3 .... .- 90 E. Milburn Ave, 847 506-3585 ~o. ~< City State Zip Code Pager 01 Mt. Prospect IL 60056 ~ U ~ Interest in Property U < 20 year owner of property ~ ~ .... !-< -< @ ~ 9 s: 20 .... ~2 z; ~ ~ 0 0",'" N~ G1 ~ U < ~ Z 81 ~ '" <(;l ~ .~ oJ! ~ z e ....P-. c.l 'i:: z ~ ;:l i=: o g. ~C3 Co) ;. ~Q UI < ~ L Corporation Cheryl JI.xley Street Address 90 E. Milburn Ave. City State Mt. Prospect IL Developer Name Address A ttoruey Name Address Zip Code 60056 Dan Woods Krugel Cobbles jjj/ W. Herwyn Lake Dluff, IL 60044 Surveyor Name Barrinqton Enqineering 215 Northwest Highway #202A Address Engineer Name Address Architect Name Address Barrington, IL Landscape Architect Name Address Mount Prospect Department of Conununity Development 50 South Emerson Street, Mount Prospect Illinois, 60056 2 847 506-0909 Telephone (evening) 847 394-3227 Fax: 847 506""".3585 Pager Telephone (day) 847 234-7935 Fax 847 785-9202 Telephone (day) Fax Telephone (day) 847 382- 6 337 Fax Telephone (day) Fax Telephone (day): Fax Telephone (day): Fax Phone 847.818.5328 Fax 847.818.5329 TDD 847.392.6064 ~ ,- 11 Code-Swion(s)-for which VariJ.tion(s)-ls (are) Requested ~ Encroach onto exterior side vard II ~ ~=-;;.._....,....--.-~_.- ----~-===~...,.---==--==-==,,=) Ii II I' II Summary and Justification for Requested Variation(s), Relate Justification to the Attached Standards for Variations II *This requested variance is for the completion of a brick paver and 1 landscaping project that is approximately 80% complete. Permit for I 'the r.omp1eh~ projpr.t was grantpn hy the Villi'l<}e. npon initii'll i inspection by the Village, "after excavation anc;_prepara tion of the ii' area with gr~vcl an~ b~ce ~aterialbut p~ior to the ~c~ual laying o~ pavers,the Vlllage lndlcated that a portlon of the ?ro]ect could .1 tIoL Le cO.ll}-'leLed uHLil a IIcl.L.LalH,;e lld.J Lt:ell uLLd..LJleJ. Balcul\.;e u[ Lhe project has been completed. Variance is for the remaining 20% of the jol *The home islocated'on a side lot, on the corner of Emerson Street ~nd ~Hlburn ,?\'v'cnue. Hbmcmmer i:J .J. 20 YC.J.r rC3idcnt of~1t. Pro:Jpcc-ql, and said project is not in preparation of home sale. Homeowner is "clesiL uus uf cuntinuing her lung teLlIl L esidency in Muunt P L uspect. * The area' which has - yet to be'completed:Is entrrely 6bstnictedfrom --any.'publlC Vlew on '.the south by ~a '5.J '.~'lhlte plcketctence ;~ahd _by-. mature landscapinq!busnes} ~he area is further.obstr.ucted from PUhl~c view on the east by a 51 white picket fence and by mature landscaping. Annitinni'll li'lnn~ri'l~inq hi'l~ neen pli'lnten rerently on the interior of Lhe east fenceline which would further obstruct public view in the future. Ncighboro on the north fcnccline h.J.ve no objcction to the paver project Q[" to the granting of the variance. The two story .le::;.i.Jell\.;e .L::; b.LLuaLeJ Ull Llle wesL or Llle projecL alld LLe area is obstructed from public view by the driveway and the 5 ' picket fence. (see additional sheet) J vIi th pavers o ~ .... ~tn O~ ><p ~O' <~ :;~ ~~ PO m.... E-< U < Please note that the application will not be accepted until this petition has been fully completed and all required plans and other materials have been satisfactorily submitted to the Planning Division. It is strongly suggested that the petitioner schedule an appointment with the appropriate Village staff so that materials can be reviewed for accuracy and completeness prior to submittal. In consideration ofthe information contained in this petition as well as all supporting documentation, it is requested that approval be given to this request. The applicant is the owner or authorized representative of the owner of the property. The petitioner and the owner of the property grant employees of the Village of Mount Prospect and their agents pennission to enter on tbe property during reasonable hours for visual inspection of the subject property. I hereby affirm that all information provided herein and in all materials submitted in association with this application are true and accurate to the best of my knowle~ge, n APPIicm'. CY(\~~: Dol, July 29, 2005 If applicant IS not property owner: I hereby designate the applicant to act as my agent for the purpose of seeking the Variation(s) described in this application and the associated supporting material. Property Owner Date Mount Prospect Department of Community Development 50 South Emerson Street, Mount Prospect Illinois, 60056 3 Phone 847.818.5328 Fax 847.818.5329 -.w' TDD 847.392.6064 "" (continued from application) The brick paver-landscaping project was properly initiated under a Village permit obtained in June, 2005 by the homeowner. In reliance on the issuance of the permit, the homeowner designed the project with professionals, contracted for the total project and in fact, the job has been substantially completed. If the variance is not granted, the unfinished portion of the project which has been and is currently excavated a depth of approximately 13 II and prepared with gravel/sand, etc will not be finished. The design elem~nt of the total. project calls for the construction of a brick fire pit and finishing the retaining wall and sister column on the unfinished portion of the project. The retaining wall currently runs across the yard up to the point where the variance is requested, and suddenly stops. The design aspect of the project cans for the sister column to be constructed in the unfinished area, and for the construction of a fire pit for which there is no other reasonable location. Denial of a project will greatly diminish the entire design element of the project and cause the unfinished area to be unusable,. unsafe and unsightly_ What would result would be an unexplained, excavated cavity in the yard with a base of with sand and gravel. Additionally, because the retaining wall suddenly stops and the sister column is missing, the design appears very non-symmetrical. The non-completion of this part of the job will diminish the homeowners' property value and will create an area the family home, which is unsightly and unusable. Also, the unfinished area is significantly below grade than the rest of the yard and because of this an unsafe condition exists. Without the retaining wall in this area, eventually erosion will occur from the higher ground into the excavated cavity. There will be no adequate remedy and at no fault of the owner. Pursuant to the pre-application meeting with Village staff in mid-July, staff disclosed that the permit was erroneously issued to the homeowner. Staff has been very accommodating since this mistake was discovered, however, it is only fair and reasonable that the variance is issued to enable the unfinished portion of the project and subsequent landscaping be completed. Some flexibility should be given to homeowners for making normal home improvements when the home lies on a corner lot. There is a difference between what is obviously the front of the home in a normal course of events and what is the front of the home under zoning gUidelines for corner lots. Building lines and lot restrictions which are reasonable for a regular lot are very confusing for all involved (leading to the issuance of the permit in the first place) and overly restrictive for corner lots. If this home were located on anything other than a corner lot, there would be no need to request a variance because the project would be in the rear of the property. For this property, the rear of the property is 6 feet, making the project only feasible on the east side yard. This project is not able to rest on the north, west or south side of the house. In this instance, the project consists of brick pavers, which certainly is not injurious to the public welfare or any other property in the neighborhood. The area in question is completely masked by a 5' white picket fence along the perimeter of the side yard, very mature landscaping, and newly planted landscaping. There is no drainage problem created by the project. The project does not alter the nature of the neighborhood, does not affect the supply of light, air to surrounding homeowners, increase congestion, endanger the public safety, diminish property values, create a nuisance, is not detrimental to the public welfare or do anything except beautify the property and vastly increase the use and enjoyment of it by the family, friends and neighbors. In the event anyone on the committee would like to view the project, they are certainly welcome. BY 3/01/2005 2,983.26 2004 First Installment Property Tax Bill Property Intlex Number (PIN) Volumr. Cotle Tax Yr.ar (Payahle In) ELK GROVE 049 16016 2004 (2005) 08-12-120-023-0000 IF PAID LATE 3/02/2005.4/01/2005 $ 3,028.01 IF PAID LATE 4/02/2005 - 5/01/2005 $ 3,072.76 BY STATE LAW, LATE PENALTY IS 1.5% PER MONTH. YOU MAY USE THIS BILL TO PAY AT ANY BANK ONE IN CHICAGOLAND THROUGH 5/01/2005. Property localion and classification for Ihis PIN 90 E MILBURN AVE MOUNT PROSPECT IL 60056 Property Classification 2-78 Dear Fellow Taxpayer, As a result of recent re-bidding. Bank One is now the official property tax collection center for Cook County. You now will need to pay your property tax bill at Bank One if you paid at a LaSalle Bank in the past. Bank One is now under contract for this service. The Cook County Treasurer's Office has entered an exciting partnership with Bank One that will save taxpayers money and nearly double the number of convenient payment locations _ more than 250 across Chicagoland. Visit cookcountytreasurer.com or see the enclosed brochure to find the Bank One nearest to you. If you prefer to pay taxes in person, just bring an original payment coupon and your payment to any Bank One location in Chicagoland. This service is available to all taxpayers without a fee. ~v~ Maria Pappas k County Treasurer Coo Obecnie moga panstwo dokonywac wplat rachunkow w kazdym oddziale' BANK ONE. Usted puede pagar este recibo de impuestos en cualquier banco BANK ONE. 1111:1,',[1" n, t 11 r. ", III III Township I TRXCALCULRTOR ~ 2003 TOTAL TAX 5,966.52 2004 ESTIMATE X 50% 2004 1ST INSTALLMENT DUE MARCH 1, 2005 = 2,983.26 Cook County Treasurer coo kcou ntytrea surer. co m 312.443.5100 CHF:RYL AXLEY gO E MILBURN AV MT PROSPECT IL 60056-3211 L Affidavit of Ownership COUNTY OF COOK ) ) ) STATE OF ILLINOIS I, Cheryl Axley --1L- the sole an an authorized officer of the [J , under oath, state that I am ) ) owner of the property ) commonly described as 90 E. Milburn Ave. Mount Prospect, IL 60056 and that such property is owned by Cheryl Axley as of this date. Subscribed and swop to before J f\)~ me this . )! day of ,July--.\ / , 20'D:~. I ; II D ~\, " 't-\- '\ ro I ~ ,) o ~\\ Notary PubIic OFFICIAL SEAl SUZANNE M GERVAIS NOTARY PUBLIC. STATE OF ILLINOIS MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: 03-14~7 Mount Prospect Department of Community Development 50 South Emerson Street, Mount Prospect Illinois, 60056 , 1 . ...----- :::-...... 4 '-'. " ~.~ \ ".t. " {/ "' . : ~(\ "'-., _>Z.~ .IT': ~, <--- ' Signature \.. Phone 847.818.5328 Fax 847.818.5329 TDD 847.392.6064 ATG MORTGAGEE FORM Schedule A Policy No.: 50413205 File Name: AXLEY Date of Policy: March 29, 2004 Amount of Insurance: $57,000.00 1. Name of Insured: to come Irwin Mortgage Corporation, Its successors and/or assigns as their interests may appear. 2. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Schedule and which is encumbered by the insured mortgage is a fee simple (if other, specify same) and is, at the effective date hereof vested in: Cheryl L.~xley, divorced and not since remarried. 3. The Mortgage, herein referred to as the insured mortgage, and the assignments thereof, if any are described as follows: Mortgage dated March 15, 2004 and recorded March 29, 2004, as document number 0408940022, executed by cheryl L. Axley, an unmarried woman, and given to Irwin Mortgage Corporation to secure a note in the amount of $57,000.00 and such other sums as provided therein. 4. The land referred to in this policy is described as follows: See Legal Description Attached. ISSUED BY: 121 S. Emerson Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 847-506-0909 Member No. 1892 OMC 10517126 ATG MORTGAGEE FORM Schedule A - continued Policy No.: 50413205 4. Legal Description: Lot 15 in Waldemar Krause's Addition to Mount Prospect, In the East Half (1/2) of the Northwest Quarter (1/4) of Section 12, Township 41 North, Range 11, East of the Third Principal Meridian, in Cook County, Illinois. PERMANENT INDEX NUMBER: 08-12-120-023 Member No. 1892 OMC 10517126 SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY ATG MORTGAGEE FORM Schedule B MPA No.: 50413205 File Name: AXLEY This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and ATG will not pay costs, attorneys' fees or expenses) that arise by reason of the following exceptions: 1. The lien of taxes for the year 2004 and thereafter. Permanent Index Number: 08-12-120-023 First Installment 2004 taxes $ 2860.23 has been paid. second Installment 2004 taxes is not yet' due or payable. 2005 General real estate taxes are not yet due or payable. 2. Subject to Annual Assessment Repair Weller Creek Drive. Di~trict 40014-LAW. Paid in Full. 3. Subject to building lines and building restrictions as shown in Deed registered as Document No. 2482423. 4. This property has been deregistered from the Torrens System of filing by Document No. 92-288345. END OF SCHEDULE B Member No. 1892 OMC 10517126 SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY Site Plan prepared July 28, 2005 by Daniel Wood Krugel Cobbles 3337 W. Berwyn Ave. Lake Bluff, IL 847-234-7935 Lot 15 Waldemar Krause's Addition to Mount Prospect, in the East half of the Northwest quarter of Section 12, Township 41 North, Range 11, East of the Third Principal Meridian, in Cook County, Illinois. PIN: 08-12-120-023 Common Address: 90 E. Milburn Ave., Mount Prospect, IL ~ ~e: ..,:, e 1..,_. "'''-....-_-..J_ .... I I I i :: I L--..'f' VJ o In \1 - J~ I 1 I ~ fWD ill r- Cl.. to Axley Residence 90 Milburn Ave. Mount Prospect; Illinois Sco.le: 1 II == 10' r :J CD Proposed new po. tic extension I I I . l 1 I I / I Proposed new seo. t wo.ll TO\,./ + 18' frOM po. tic _ gro~de_ 20' BLdg Line r 116 i i 42/-S1S, 16 -- grc..de Proposed new COl~lr'''W1 -2S'x2Yx30' 6/l' 5/7~" / / \ \ \ \ \ _..~..--..:..~---~~-=-.-- r _uuu.... ~---JU[ -0 .--m - o N ~ ! . 1 ~ ~ ~ ~l h .,;' t };>I E t ~ l\I ~~ -0 ~ III +' V iii U. c>Q/O QJ <{ ~l\l :a COli ~ ~.t:~ ~ I' Qi ?:-~ c.. ~ .:J ~ ~~~~ (~- ..:";:'. :::"" Ho' T... Axley Resider,ce 90 Milbur-n Ave, Mount Prospect, Illinois Sco.le: 1 n = 10 I P~opOSE'd nE'W po-l;io extension ProposE'd new seo.t ",oLl fO\J -+18~ fr-ot'", pa.tic gr-ode 42'-S!t'- Proo::lsl?d new firE' pit TO'" +10' o.boy:, pc. tic grade ProposE'd new coluMn 25'x2';:'x30' PLAT OF SURVEY LOT '51N WALOEMAR KRAUSE'S ADDITION TO MOUNT PROSPECT, IN THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 4 I NORTH, RANGE I I, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IN COOK COUNTY, IlliNOIS. 90 E MilBURN AVENUE. MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS. ~ I -.. Neighbor's Orilieway : ~ ~ iS1.75'N'~ ' lI.l ~ -' ~ Bilumlnous Driveway Fenc~ i~., : '. . '. 6- . .. . 110 S. . .' . ~ '8.20'.W.: I.. '66' R.OW. ---"Fence Is 0.38'W, ~- a:0 ..~ ';0 jltl 'V 3 . a: '. .~ 'E ,<1 .... '" .. '" Fence is 073'N,\ 0.33'W, .' Found CrOll 2.89'S. Found Cross 2.34' S. .', ,. MI~BU~N' '25' ~jwmlnous ~O~d mla 10/11/05 jc/bh 10/11/05 mla 9/19/05 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE GRANTING VARIATIONS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 90 EAST MILBURN AVENUE WHEREAS, Cheryl Axley (hereinafter referred to as "Petitioner") has filed a petition for Variations with respect to property located at 90 East Milburn (hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property") and legally described as follows: Lot 15 in Waldemar Krause's Addition to Mount Prospect, in the East half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 12, Township 41 North, Range 11, East of the Third Principal Meridian in Cook County, Illinois Property Index Number: 08-12-120-023-0000; and WHEREAS, the Petitioner seeks Variations to allow for the expansion of an existing brick patio, with a six foot (6') exterior side yard setback, and a thirty-three foot (33') wide driveway; as shown on the attached Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held on the request for the Variations being the subject of PZ-32-05 before the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 22nd day of September, 2005, pursuant to proper legal notice having been published in the Mount Prospect Journal & Topics on the 10th day of August, 2005; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has submitted its findings and positive recommendations to the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect; and WHEREAS, the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect have given consideration to the request herein and have determined that the same meets the standards of the Village and that the granting of the proposed Variations would be in the best interest of the Village. f\ 90 E. Milburn Page 2/2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, ACTING IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR HOME RULE POWERS: SECTION ONE: The recitals set forth hereinabove are incorporated as findings of fact by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect. SECTION TWO: The President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect do hereby grant the Variations, as provided in Section 14.203.C.7 of the Village Code, to allow for the expansion of a brick patio, with a six foot (6'), exterior side yard setback, and a thirty-three foot (33') wide driveway, as shown on the Site Plan, the expansion shall be installed only in strict accordance with Exhibit "A". SECTION THREE: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of October, 2005. Irvana K. Wilks Mayor ATTEST: M. Lisa Angell Village Clerk HIGENlfileslWINIORDINANCIVariation,90eastmilburndrivewayIsideyard,octt05.doc t::W"e~.':.~__O~!. t' toJ, - ..... [ ~ - '"0 ....J ---fB '0 N . 1 t .. -! f lot ~ tIn - \1\ o g QI .v uAiU. c> IIIQ Q/ <[ lit l\J :ai:OII Ill.. L.. O!: ;) ~ .~ .II >>;=1; ," (, Q/ X c: .,. _ :J d ~~~~ ~xhibit A "- \ , ro If) \ " > ~ (. - ~ .D - - -s ..-- N" Not to 5cale :55.9::/ = "" T.... I. Axley Residence 90 Mitbur-n Ave. Mount pr-ospect, IlUndls Scc.le: 18 :::: 10' Proposed new seo.t wo.ll 10'-' +18' Fro!", po. tic grc.de 2'-815, ffi- Proposed new coLUMn 25'xZ:=:'x30' ... I I .1 J I I I i I I ~xhibit All INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM Village of l\lount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS FROM: ASSISTANT VILLAGE MANAGER DATE: SEPTEMBER 28,2005 SUBJECT: APPENDIX A - VILLAGE CODE Attached is a copy of Appendix A for consideration by the Village Board on October 18. The document is quite long so staff felt it was worthwhile to provide the Village Board additional time to review the document prior to the meeting to consider adoption. The Appendix A document is the culmination of over three years of work by staff to identify and consolidate all Village Code sections that relate to fines or fees. The purpose of this effort was threefold and described below. · Complete review and enhancement of the Village fee and fine schedule. · Confirm the consistency of the extensive rewrite of the Development and Building codes. · Correction of any errors in the general text of the Village Code with respect to the existing Appendix A. During the review of the fees and fines some items had not changed in 50 years and the associated fees were so low as to be meaningless and the administrative effort far outstripped the revenue collected. For example, staff could not investigate, cite, and prosecute a violation for less than $100 and many times the actual costs are much higher. So in order to bring the cost of enforcement closer to the actual cost of providing the service or response several minimum mandatory penalties were increased (the draft lists the old fees and fines in the left hand margin beginning on page 12). Applicable Departments reviewed sections of AppendixA that were pertinent to their operation. Staff did not modify any taxes, user fees or license fees. Such items remain the exclusive responsibility of the Village Board. However, in the future when such changes are considered, the use of Appendix A will be the only document that will need to be revised and the body of the specific ordinance including the fee, fine or tax can remain unchanged. APPENDIX A - VILLAGE CODE September 28, 2005 Page 2 The other objectives have been accomplished over this extensive review period. If the Board would prefer to first discuss this item at a Committee of the Whole meeting, please advise. It could be scheduled for October 11. If there are any questions, please contact me. ~ stfJJ David Strahl H:\VILMIVillage Clerk\Appendix A Cover Memo.doc LA I,V OFFICES KLEIN, THORPE AND JENKINS, LTD. Patrie!; A, Lucalls!;)' E. Kenllelh F, i!;er Geml'd E, Dempsey Terrence M. Ban,icl~ BI'"ce A. Zollla .lames P. 13ar1le)' Michael J. Duggall Thomas P. Bayer Dellnis G. Walsh Seoll F. Ulller Everelle M, Hill. Jr. Jallel N. Pelsche James V. Fel'olo M,eh.., T. Jur",ik Thomas !\1. Mdody Suite 1660 20 North Wacker Drive Chicago. Illinois 60606-2903 Telephone (312) 984.6400 Facsimile (312) '184-6444 (312) 606-7077 Rinda Y. Allisoll La,,,e C. Mah"a Kalhleell T. Henll Jolm R. Wiklol' George A. W" gllel' Jalll.s G. W.1:go Suzanne M. Fitch r"'lichael A. Mans Shawn P. Lee Orlalld Park Office 150 I 0 S. Ravima Avellue. SllilC 17 Orland I',,,k, IL 60<162-3 1(,2 Telephone (708) 349.3888 Facsimile (708) 349-1506 or Counsel Richard T. Wimm.r Wrile, ~s Direcl Dial (312) 98<1-6<120 Wriler=s E-Mail emhdl(dklilleleofll MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Michael E. Janonis, Village Manager Village of Mount Prospect FROM: Everette M. Hill, Jr. DATE: July 14, 2003 RE: New Appendix A - Bonds, Salaries, Fees and Fines Attached find an ordinance updating Appendix A of our Village Code. We had three objectives with respect to this update: 1. An exhaustive review and enhancement of our fee and fine schedules. 2. Assurance of consistency with the recent extensive rewrite of our Development and Building Codes_ 3. Correction of any errors in the general text of our Village Code with respect to Appendix A. With respect to Objective #1, we have reviewed every fine and fee within our Code. As a matter of historical perspective, some of our fines are currently as low as $2.00 per offense. Some have not been updated in 50 years. Our primary goal with respect to fines was to assure that the Village is able, to the extent possible, to visit the cost of enforcement on the violator. As a rule of thumb, it is impossible for our staff to investigate a violation, cite the violator and prosecute the violator for less than $100.00. In many instances, the costs are much higher. Those expenses were foremost in our thinking in setting out our mandatory minimum penalties. Each of the fine and fee updates has been reviewed by the department which administers that particular regulation. The staff ideas and comments have been considered and most are included in this proposed Ordinance. Please keep in mind that none of the financial matters which are politically sensitive or within the exclusive purview of Mr. Michael E. Janonis July 14, 2003 Page 2 the Village Board have been changed. Such financial matters include taxes, use fees and license fees. With regard to Objective #2, we are confident that the new Appendix A is completely consistent with the changes to the new Development and Building Codes adopted by the Board in 2002. As to the final objective, this has been accomplished by the first section of the attached ordinance. In achieving this objective, no substantive changes have been made to our Code. This first section simply assures that all references to bonds, fees and fines are accurately cross-referenced to Appendix A. We have highlighted new Code language and new fees and penalties. With respect to changes in existing fees or penalties, the current amounts are written in the margins for comparison purposes. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me. LA It' OFFICES KLEIN, THORPE AND JENKINS, LTD. Patrick A. Lucansky E, Kellnelh Friker Gerard E. Dempsey Terrence M. Bamiele Bruce A. lolna James P. Banley Richard T. Wimmer Michael 1. Duggan Thomas P. Bayer Dermis G. Walsh Scott F. Uhler Everette M. Hill, Ir. Jallet N. Petsche lames V. FeroJo Michael T. Iurusik Suite 1660 :20 North Wacker Drive ChicagJ, Illinois 60606-2903 Telephone (312) 984-6400 Facsimile (312) 984-6444 (312) 606-7077 r r-r':'I:"'E' "'l,g""!f-ll"-'-\~-" l~ll:t~~~l,~~lt;~~ I t !-.,----,-------1]:1~11 Malina \' I '~I r .~. I Kat I r Henno Id',!: I u' I ,'. . I' ; " - r -.. nn ,\\ Ikwr I ", , .. "I \ 1 , ~ I, ~ ; ~. ;- '.~ 1 ...;' 'd.'..... Gear ':"Wagnem , . '. I \ .. I ~ I"~ ..... i ~ames G.I Wargo \ I , ______. S\lZarme r.!l. Fitch L__._-..._..___...__'_'" , M,ch..e .A: Marrs \". 1 t, rr r.! Cf'>:.C ':~ (':t F l fJ I L'.~~-~-~:-'-.~ ,- .\~:': ~-.'. :.' .:. .:~....:~.~~-_..-- ..J Orland Park Office 15010 S. Ravinia Avenue, Suite 17 Orland Park, lL 60462-3162 Telephone (708) 349-3888 Facsimile (708) 349-1506 Wriler=s Direct Dial (312) 98';.6420 Wriler=s E-Mail emhlll.ll:ktlnetculll MEMORANDUM TO: Mike Janonis, Dave Strahl, and All Department Heads Village of Mount Prospect FROM: Everette M. Hill, Jr. DATE: April 18, 2002 RE: Fees and Penalties As you are all aware, last year we adopted legislation moving all fees, bond amounts and penalties to a separate Appendix A in our Village Code. Our primary purpose in doing this was to make it easy to conduct a regular review of these dollar amounts. In the past we've missed adjusting some of these fees and fines to the point of absurdity as you will see when you review the attached document. In orderto get our first such review moving forward, I have attached Appendix A which contains my handwritten recommended increases in certain fees and penalties. Because we've done a better job of keeping up with inflation and recognizing our actual costs with respect to fees, most of my recommended changes involve increasing the fines and penalties. My objective was to make the fines as high as I believe the Courts will bear. We all know that the Village will never collect enough fines over the course of a year to cover our enforcement costs. Nonetheless, as you review this Appendix A, bear in mind that we'd like to get as close to that objective as possible. Since it will save us considerable money with our Codifier if we can submit our changes with the engineering department's redraft of the Development Code, a quick turnaround would be appreciated. Derb/rclinger 10/28/05 bhill 10/25/05 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE VILLAGE CODE OF MOUNT PROSPECT. COOK COUNTY. ILLINOIS BE IT ORDAINED by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois, acting in the exercise of their home rule powers: SECTION 1: The following Chapters and Sections of the Village Code of the Village of Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois, shall be amended as follows: CHAPTER 2 - GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 2.206, ENFORCEMENT OF DECORUM, paragraph B shall be deleted and replaced with the following: B. Any person found guilty under this Section shall be fined in an amount as set forth in Appendix A, Division III. CHAPTER 4 - APPOINTIVE VILLAGE OFFICERS Section 4.103, POWERS AND DUTIES, paragraph H shall be deleted and replaced with the following: H. To negotiate, award contracts for and purchase all materials, supplies and equipment for which funds are provided in the annual budget. All contracts for public works or improvements which are not to be paid for in whole or in part by special assessment or special taxation when the expense exceeds the amount set forth in Appendix A, Division I, and, except as provided below, all purchase orders or contracts for labor, materials, equipment or supplies when the expense exceeds the amounts as set forth in Appendix A, Division I made by or on behalf of the Village shall be awarded to the lowest qualified bidder pursuant to due advertisement for sealed bids in a newspaper published and having a general circulation within the Village (which advertisement shall state that such contract shall be let to the lowest responsible bidder, that the right is reserved in the Village Board to reject all bids or waive bid technicalities and the place, time and date when sealed bids shall be opened; said date being not less than 7 days after publication of the advertisement), and after the successful bid proposal has been submitted to the Village Board for approval. Section 4.103, POWERS AND DUTIES, paragraph H, subparagraph 4 shall be deleted and replaced with the following: 1 13 4. Competitive bidding shall not be required for any contract when the expense is less than the amount set forth in Appendix A, Division I, or when the Village exercises the option of purchasing with the State or other governmental unit (as authorized under 30 ILCS 525/1 et seq.) or when the Village pursuant to its home rule powers enters into a joint purchasing contract for materials, supplies or equipment with another entity which has conducted competitive bidding for such matellals, supplies and equipment. Section 4.504, DUTIES OF DIRECTOR, paragraph L shall be deleted and replaced with the following: L. To negotiate and contract for the sale of personal property owned by the Village when in the reasonable discretion of the Finance Director such personal property is no longer necessary or useful to the Village and the market value does not exceed the amount specified in Appendix A, Division I. Pursuant to the Village's home rule powers, all personal property ofthe Village with a market value not in excess of the amount set forth in Appendix A, Division I, may be sold at the discretion of the Finance Director without Village Board approval. All other sales of personal property shall require the approval of a majority of the corporate authorities of the Village. Section 4.507, SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FUNDS, paragraph C, shall be deleted and replaced with the following: C. If, after full payment of the improvement and all bonds, vouchers and interest coupons issued therefore, there is a surplus remaining in any special assessment, such surplus shall be first applied by the Treasurer to reimburse the public benefit fund for any amounts paid from such fund on account of the improvement, if any, and any surplus amount remaining thereafter shall constitute a rebate and shall be paid by the Treasurer to the current owners of record of each lot or parcel ofland included in the special assessment in the pro rata propOliion to which such properties were originally assessed, after first deducting five percent (5%) of said surplus amount to cover the costs and expenses incurred by the Village in making said rebate. However, in the event that the amount available for rebate is less than the amount set forth in Appendix A, Division I, or the number of properties involved in the special assessment is such that in dividing such properties by the said amount, less Village expenses, the resulting net rebate for each property would be less than the amount set forth in Appendix A, Division I, then in lieu of such rebate, the Treasurer shall instead transfer said amount to the public benefit fund, ifin existence, and ifnot, then to the general corporate fund to be used for capital improvements. Section 4.1012, APPROPRIATION; LEVY OF TAXES, shall be deleted and replaced with the following: The President and Board of Trustees of the Village may budget for ESDA purposes in the manner provided by law, and may levy in addition for ESDA purposes only, a tax as set forth in Appendix A, Division II, on the assessed value of all taxable property in addition to all other taxes, as provided by "The State ESDA Act of1975"; however, that amount collectable under such levy shall in no event exceed the amount as specified in Appendix A, Division II. 2 CHAPTER 6 - TELECOMMUNICATIONS CODE Section 6.1 08, PENALTIES, shall be deleted and replaced with the following: Any person found guilty of violating, disobeying, omitting, neglecting orrefusing to comply with any of the provisions ofthis Chapter shall be fined as set forth in Appendix A, Division III for each offense. A separate and distinct offense shall be deemed committed each day on which a violation occurs or continues. Section 6.720, SECURITY FUND, the first paragraph shall be deleted and replaced with the following: Each grantee shall establish a permanent security fund with the Village by depositing an amount as set forth in Appendix A, Division I with the Village in cash, an unconditional letter of credit, or other instrument acceptable to the Village, which fund shall be maintained at the sole expense of the grantee so long as any of the grantee's telecommunications facilities are located within the public ways of the Village. CHAPTER 8 - VILLAGE GOVERNMENT MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS Section 8.818, PENALTY FOR VIOLATION, a new Section 8.818 shall be added to Chapter 8 as follows: In addition to the remaining provisions of this Chapter, any person found guilty in a court of competent jurisdiction of violating, disobeying, omitting, neglecting or refusing to comply with or resisting or opposing the enforcement of any provision of this Chapter shall be punished by a fine in the amount set forth in Appendix A, Division III. (Ord. 3833, 9-1-1987) Section 8. I 308, VIOLATIONS, the first sentence shall be deleted and replaced with the following: Any owner, operator and/or licensee found guilty of violating, disobeying, omitting, neglecting or refusing to comply with or resisting or opposing the enforcement of any provision of this Article, except when otherwise specifically provided, shall be subject to a fine in the amount set forth in Appendix A, Divisions I and III, for each offense. Section 8.1904, COLLECTION OF TAX, paragraph A(3), shall be deleted and replaced with the following: 3. The public utility will be entitled to withhold from tax collections a service fee as set forth in Appendix A, Division II, on the amounts collected and timely remitted to the department. CHAPTER 9 - PUBLIC UTILITIES, PAVEMENT AND TREE REGULATIONS Section 9.507.1, SEWER CONSTRUCTION FEE, shall be added to Article V, Sanitary Sewer System as follows: Sec. 9.507.1 SEWER CONSTRUCTION FEE: A. Fee Required 3 1. Sewer construction fees for all Village sewer users within the corporate limits of the Village having a direct or indirect connection with the Village sewer and water mains or pipes shall be as set forth in Appendix A, Division II of this Code. 2. Sewer construction fees for all Village sewer users within the corporate limits of the Village having a direct or indirect connection with the Village's sewer mains or pipes and not with the Village water mains or pipes shall be as set forth in Appendix A, Division II of this Code. 3. Sewer construction fees for all Village sewer users outside the corporate limits of the Village having a direct or indirect connection with the Village's water and sewer mains or pipes shall be as set forth in Appendix A, Division II of this Code. 4. Sewer construction fees for all Village sewer users outside the corporate limits of the Village having a direct or indirect connection with the Village's sewer mains or pipes, but not with village water mains or pipes shall be as set forth in Appendix A, Division II of this Code. B. Expiration This fee requirement shall lapse, and the fee will no longer be collected upon the earlier to occur of the following: 1. January 1,2016; or 2. Upon the Village's making of final payment to the final contractor for the Combined Sewer Rehabilitation Project as approved on October 18, 2005. Section 9.718, PENALTY, shall be deleted and replaced with the following: 9.718: PENALTY: Any person violating any provision of this Article shall be fined the full amount of any mitigation costs incurred by the Village. In addition, unless otherwise set forth herein, any person violating any provision of this Article shall be fined an amount set forth in Appendix A, Division III of this Code. Violations are as follows: Marking a public tree in any way Attaching a sign or other object to a public tree Driving any object into a public tree Planting a tree on public property without a permit Paving over previously open root zone of a public tree Substantially changing the soil grade of a public tree Injuring or removing bark or limbs from a public tree Cutting or pruning a public tree without a permit Placement of potentially damaging materials near a public tree Topping a public tree Injuring or cutting roots of a public tree without a pennit, or in violation of a permit 4 Continuing work in violation of, or after suspension or revocation of penn it Failure to install or maintain required snow fencing around a public tree Placement of excessive soil, mulch or other fill material around the trunk/root collar of a public tree Backfilling within a public tree drip line without the required root inspection Failure to keep a required written tree protection plan posted on the job site Excavation within drip line of public tree without approval of the Forestry Division Equipment operation within drip line of public tree Failure to comply with a written tree protection plan Installation of sprinkler head within drip line public tree In addition, any person who injures any public tree shall be held responsible for the cost of repairs, if, in the opinion of the Director of Public Works, the injured tree will not die as a result ofsuch injuries. In addition, in the case of unauthorized destruction or removal of such public trees, the person committing the offense shall be held responsible for the cost of removal and replacement of trees. Such cost shall be calculated by multiplying the rate set forth in Appendix A, Division III of this Code, times the inches of trunk diameter of the tree that was destroyed or removed. A separate offense shall be deemed committed on each day during or on which a violation occurs or continues (Ord. 5253, 5-21-2002; amd. Ord. 5260, 6-18-2002). CHAPTER 11 - MERCHANTS, BUSINESSES, OCCUPATIONS AND AMUSEMENTS Section 11.202, LICENSE FEES, shall be deleted and replaced with the following: Auctioneers shall pay the fees as set forth in Appendix A, Division II. Section 11.1402, LICENSE FEES, shall be deleted and replaced with the following: Florists and nurseries shall be designated as Class I establishments and shall pay the annual fees as set forth in Appendix A, Division II. Section 11.2302, LICENSE FEES, shall be deleted and replaced with the following: A. The annual fee to be paid for the exclusive franchise license for residential dwellings or dwelling units created in subsection 11.2301A of this Aliicle shall be as set forth in Appendix A, Division II. B. The annual fee to be paid for such other licenses set forth in subsection 11.2301 B of this Article shall be as set forth in Appendix A, Division II. C. Transfer stations for refuse disposal shall be designated as Class II establishments and shall pay the annual fees as set forth in Appendix A, Division II. Section 11.3406, HIGH HAZARD SURCHARGE, shall be deleted and replaced with the following: 5 A. Any Class I or Class II business which uses hazardous materials and/or processes in operation of said business shall pay a surcharge as set forth in Appendix A, Division II on the business' annual fee as applicable. B. Any Class I or Class II business, after paying the high hazard surcharge, shall be entitled to an increase as set forth in Appendix A, Division II, in the inspection limit as set forth in subsection B of Sections 11.3404 and 11.34.05, respectively. C. A "high hazard business" shall be defined by the standards in the BOCA Basic National Building Code, Use Group H - High Hazard Buildings, or by order of the Fire Chief. Section 11.3407, MID-YEAR FEE REDUCTION, shall be deleted and replaced with the following: Any Class I or Class II business license issued to a business opening after June 30 shall pay the annual fee as set forth in Appendix A, Division II and as set forth in subsection A of Sections 11.3404 and 11.3405, respectively. Such business shall also have the inspection fees, as set forth in subsection B of Sections 11.3404 and 11.3405, respectively, reduced as set forth in Appendix A, Division II. Section 11.3411, LATE PAYMENTS, paragraphs A through F shall be amended to refer to Appendix A, Division II, instead of Division I. CHAPTER 13 - ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS Section 13.137 , PENALTIES; GENERAL, the fourth sentence shall be deleted and replaced with the following: If the court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be better served by requiring community service ofthe violator or a combination of a fine and community service, the fine may be mitigated as set forth in Appendix A, Division III. CHAPTER 14-Z0NING Section 14.204, ZONING FEES, shall be added to Article II, Administration and Enforcement, of Chapter 14, Zoning, which shall read as follows: Section 14.204 ZONING FEES. The fees for actions sought pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance shall be as set forth in Appendix A, Division II. CHAPTER 18 - TRAFFIC Section 18.204, FLEEING OR ATTEMPTING TO ELUDE POLICE OFFICER, paragraph A shall be deleted and replaced with the following: A. Any driver or operator of a motor vehicle who, having been given a visual or audible signal by a peace officer directing such driver or operator to bring his vehicle to a stop, willfully fails or refuses to obey such direction, increases his speed, 6 extinguishes his lights or otherwise flees or attempts to elude the officer, is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be fined as set forth in Appendix A, Division III. Section 18.409, FALSE REPORTS, shall be deleted and replaced with the following: Any person who provides information in an oral or wlitten report required by this Article with knowledge or reason to believe that such infonnation is false shall, upon conviction, be fined in an amount set fGlih in Appendix A, Division III. Section 18.503, RECKLESS DRIVING, paragraph B, shall be deleted and replaced with the following: B. EvelY person convicted of reckless driving shall, upon a finding of guilty, pay a fine as set forth in Appendix A, Division III. Section 18.504, DRAG RACING, shall be deleted and replac~d with the following: Any person who, as an operator of a motor vehicle, is found guilty of being a participant in drag racing shall be fined as set fGlih in Appendix A, Division III. Section 18.1305, VIOLATION OF P ARKING REGULATIONS; LEASED VEHICLES, paragraph B shall be deleted and replaced with the following: B. A person found guilty of violating this subsection shall be fined as set forth in Appendix A, Division III, notwithstanding any other sections or subsections in this Chapter to the contrary. Section 18.1322, PAY PARKING ZONE, paragraph J(1), shall be deleted and replaced with the following: 1. Any person who violates subsections H and I of this Section shall be subject to a fine in the amount as set forth in Appendix A, Division III of this Code. Section 18.1322, PAY PARKING ZONE, paragraph L(2), shall be deleted and replaced with the following: 2. Such collector or collectors shall be only such employees as are now or may hereafter be duly bonded in a sum, as set forth in Appendix A, Division I of this Code, for the faithful performance of their duties. Section 18.1324, HANDICAPPED PERSONS; PARKING PRIVILEGES, paragraph E shall be deleted and replaced with the following: E. Any person who violates this Section shall be subject to a mandatory minimum fine as set forth in Appendix A, Division III for each offense in addition to any costs or charges connected with the removal or storage of any motor vehicle found to be in violation of this Section. Section 18.1534, TRACTORS, TRACTION ENGINES AND MOTOR TRUCKS; OPERATION ON HIGHWAYS; TURNING ON HIGHWAYS DURING F ARMING OPERATIONS; VIOLA nONS, paragraph B shall be deleted and replaced with the following: B. Any person who operates any motor vehicle over and along any public street ofthis Village, which has been oil treated in violation of the provisions ofthis Section shall be fined as set forth in Appendix A, Division III. 7 Section 18.1540, SCHOOL BUSES; SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS, paragraph K shall be deleted and replaced with the following: K. Liability Insurance: No school bus or motor vehicle owned by or used for hire by and in connection with the operation of private or public schools, day camps, summer camps or nursery schools shall be operated for such purposes unless the owner thereof shall carry an amount of personal injury liability insurance as set forth in Appendix A, Division I. Section 18.1907, VEHICLE IMMOBILIZATION AND IMPOUNDMENT FOR VIOLATIONS, paragraph I, shall be deleted and replaced with the following: I. It shall be unlawful to relocate or tow any vehicle restrained by an immobilizing device without the approval of the chief of police or his designee. The unauthorized removal of an immobilized vehicle shall be subject to a penalty as set forth in Appendix A, Division III. CHAPTER 20 - ANIMALS Section 20.302; PENALTIES, paragraph E(1) and (2) and F, shall be deleted and inserted as follows: E. 1. In the event that said payment is made prior to the mailing by the Municipality or by the official of a final notice, a final settlement as set forth in Appendix A, Division III, shall be accepted. 2. In the event that payment has not been paid prior to the mailing of such final notice, and in fact notice has been mailed, settlement as set forth in Appendix A, Division III, shall be accepted. CHAPTER 21 - BUILDING CODE Section 21.209, USE OF STREETS FOR BUILDING PURPOSES, shall be amended by adding the following sentence as follows: In the event that sufficient warning lanterns are not provided or properly maintained around such material, excavation or building that is being moved, the Department of Public Works may place and maintain the required lanterns, charging for this service at a rate as set f01th in Appendix A, Division II. This charge shall be deducted from deposits as required in Section 21.312 of this Chapter. Section 21.312, RESTORATION DEPOSIT, shall be deleted in its entirety and the following new Section 21.312 entitled, CONSTRUCTION NUISANCE ABATEMENT DEPOSIT, shall be as follows: 21.312: CONSTRUCTION NUISANCE ABATEMENT DEPOSIT: No permit shall be issued until the applicant has deposited with the Village the nuisance abatement deposit in accordance with subsection 15.802B of this Code. (Ord. 5339,6-17-2003). CHAPTER 23 - OFFENSES AND MISCELLANEOUS REGULATIONS Section 23.206, OBSCENE AND HARASSING TELEPHONE CALLS, paragraph B shall be deleted and replaced with the following: 8 B. Penalty: Any person violating any provision of this Section shall be fined as set forth in Appendix A, Division III. Section 23.401, DAMAGE, POSSESSION AND REMOVAL OF VILLAGE PROPERTY OR STRUCTURES OR INSTALLATIONS ON VILLAGE PROPERTY, paragraph C shall be deleted and replaced with the following: C. Any person violating any provision of this Section shall be fined as set forth in Appendix A, Division III. Section 23.402, DUMPING IN WELLER CREEK AND OTHER PLACES, paragraph B, shall be deleted and replaced with the following: B. Any person violating any provision of this Section shall be fined as set forth in Appendix A, Division III. A separate offense shall be deemed committed on each day during or on which a violation occurs. Section 23.404, VANDALISM, paragraph B, shall be deleted and replaced with the following: B. Any person found guilty of a violation of any provision of this Section shall be tined as set forth in Appendix A, Division III. Section 23.405, THEFT OF RECYCLABLES, paragraph B shall be deleted and replaced with the following: B. Any person found to be in violation of this Section shall be fined as set forth in Appendix A, Division III. Section 23.501, GAMBLING PREMISES, paragraph B shall be deleted and replaced with the following: B. Suppression: It shall be the duty of all members of the Police Department to give information to the Chief of Police about each house, room or Olherplace within the Village wherein games or devices or tables or other instruments or things for the purpose of gaming are, or may be set up, kept or maintained; and such police officers shall take all lawful means to suppress and prevent the playing at the table, games or devices aforesaid, and for this purpose, when and as often as anyone of them shall have reasonable cause to suspect that any such table, game or device is set up, kept or maintained, as aforesaid, he or she shall forthwith make complaint thereofbefore the Circuit Court, and obtain a warrant authorizing entry of such house or place or any room within the same, and such police officer shall thereupon have authority to demand entry therein, and any person or persons who shall refuse or neglect to open the door or entrance to such house, yard, place or any room within the same upon the application of any police officer having such warrant, shall forfeit and pay a fine as set forth in Appendix A, Division III. Section 23.502, GAMBLING DEVICES, paragraph D, shall be deleted and replaced with the following: D. Seizure and Destruction: It is hereby made the duty of every member of the Police Department to seize any table, instrument, device or thing used for the purpose of gaming; and all such tables, instruments, devices or things shall be destroyed. Any person or persons obstructing or resisting any member of the Police Department in 9 the perfonnance of any act authorized by this Section shall be subject to a fine as set forth in Appendix A, Division III. Section 23.612, MAINTAINING PUBLIC NUISANCE, Paragraph C(2), the second to last sentence shall be deleted and replaced with the following: Provided that an owner, lessee or other occupant may use such place if the owner shall give bond with sufficient security or surety approved by the Court, in an amount as set forth in Appendix A, Division I, payable to the Village, and including a condition that no offense specified in subsection A of this Section shall be committed at, in or upon the property described and a condition that the principal obligor and surety assume responsibility for any fine, costs or damages resulting from such an offense. Section 23.614, PENALTIES, Paragraph A shall be deleted and replaced with the following: A. A separate offense shall be deemed to have been committed on each day during or on which a violation occurs or continues. Any fines set forth in this Article shall be assessed regardless of whether the violator is convicted or placed on supervision by the court. If the court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be better served by requiring community service of the violator or a combination of a fine and community service, the fine may be as set forth in Appendix A, Division III. Section 23.1103, PENALTY, paragraph A shall be deleted and replaced with the following: A. Every person found guilty of a violation of any of the provisions of this Article shall be punished by a fine as set forth in Appendix A, Division III. Section 23.1714, CHARGES FOR RESPONSE TO FALSE ALARMS AND REPORTS, paragraph A shall be deleted and replaced with the following: A. If the Village Police Department responds to more than two (2) false alarms in a calendar year at the same premises, the licensee of such alarm system shall pay the Village as set forth in Appendix A, Division II. CHAPTER 24 - FIRE PREVENTION CODE Section 24.111, UNIFORM FIRE GUARDS, paragraph D shall be deleted entirely and paragraph E shall be re-lettered accordingly. Section 24.116, PENALTY, shall be added to Article I, Purpose; Adoption and shall read as follows: Sec. 24.116 PENALTY. Any person violating any provisions of this Article shall be fined an amount set forth in Appendix A, Division III of this Code, for each offense; and a separate offense shall be deemed committed on each day during or on which a violation occurs or continues. Section 24.1302, DISCHARGE OF FIREWORKS; PERMITS, paragraph A(1) shall be amended by adding the following at the end of paragraph (A)(l): Such permits may be granted upon application to and approval by the Fire Chief based upon the regulations of this Article XIII. In addition, the applicants shall file a bond and insurance in the amount set forth in Appendix A, Division I of this Code. 10 CHAPTER 25 - THE VILLAGE CODE Section 25.104, PENALTIES, paragraph A shall be deleted and replaced with the following: A. Whenever in this Code a minimum but not maximum fine or penalty is imposed, the Court may in its discretion fine the offender any sum exceeding the minimum fine or penalty but not exceeding the maximum amount set forth in Appendix A, Division III of this Code at Section 25.104. Unless otherwise stated, the minimum and maximum fines shall be as set f011h in Appendix A, Division III. Section 25.104, PENALTIES, paragraph C shall be amended by deleting the last three paragraphs and inserting the following new paragraph in its place: Such imprisonment or assignment shall not be subject to suspension nor shall the person be eligible for probation in order to reduce the sentence or assignment. The court may impose a fine less than as set forth in Appendix A, Division III of this Code, only where, after an evidentiary hearing, the court determines that: a) such person is not financially able to pay a fine, as set forth in Appendix A, Division III of this Code, over the course of one year; and b) payment of a fine, as set forth in Appendix A, Division III of this Code, would cause undue hardship to someone dependent upon such person for support; and c) it is in the best interest of justice to impose a fine less than as set forth in Appendix A, Division III of this Code. In any case where a fine less than set forth in Appendix A, Division III of this Code, is imposed, the court shall order such person to perfonn one hour of community service for a dollar amount, as set forth in Appendix A, Division III of this Code, by which penalty amount as set forth in Appendix A, Division III of this Code, exceeds the fine imposed. (Ord. 3411,3-20-1984; amd. Ord. 2603,2-4-1986; Ord. 2961, 7-19-1988; Ord. 4189, 5-15- 2001) SECTION 2: A new Appendix A shall be created and inserted in the Village Code of the Village of Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois, which shall be and read as follows: APPENDIX A This Appendix A is divided into three divisions as follows: Division I, Bonds, Salaries, Insurance and Miscellaneous; Division II, Fees, Rates and Taxes; and Division III, Penalties and Fines. DIVISION I BONDS, SALARIES, INSURANCE AND MISCELLANEOUS CHAPTER 1 - VILLAGE PRESIDENT Section 1.102, BOND; OATH; SALARY Bond: $3,000.00 (Village President) 11 Salary: $5,500.00 (Village President) (annual) Section 2.102, OATH; SALARY Salary: $2,750.00 (Trustee) (annual) CHAPTER 4 - APPOINTIVE VILLAGE OFFICERS Section 4.103, POWERS AND DUTIES H. Contracts where expense exceeds $10,000.00, purchase orders, contracts for labor materials, equipment or supplies involving amounts in excess of $1 0,000 awarded to the lowest bidder 4. Less than $10,000.00 Section 4.104, BONDS AND COMPENSATION Minimum Bond: $100,000.00 Section 4.504, DUTIES OF DIRECTOR L. Personal property of the Village with a market value ofless than $250.00 may be sold Section 4.507, SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FUNDS C. If amount available for rebate is less than $5,000, or the number of properties involved in the special assessment is such that in dividing such properties by the said amount, less Village expenses, the resulting net rebate for each property would be less than $50.00, then in lieu of such rebate, the Treasurer shall instead transfer said amount to the public benefit fund, if in existence, and if not, then to the general corporate fund to be used for capital improvements. CHAPTER 6 - TELECOMMUNICATIONS CODE Section 6.5.412, LIABILITY AND INDEMNIFICATION C. Minimum Amounts of Comprehensive General Liability Insurance: For bodily injury or death resulting from anyone accident $5,000,000.00 For property damage, including damage to Village property, resulting from anyone accident $2,000,000.00 For all other types ofliability resulting from any one occurrence $2,000,000.00 During any period of construction Adequate coverage to Meet liability under the Ill. Structural Work Act Workers' compensation insurance Within statutory limits 12 Employers' liability insurance Not less than $1 00,000.00 Deductible cannot be in excess of: $250,000.00 D. Sureties in the penal sum of: $200,000.00 Amount of the bond or letter of credit reduced to: $50,000.00 E. Cash escrow or letter of credit: $10,000.00 Section 6.717, GRANTEE INSURANCE A. Comprehensive general liability insurance with limits not less than: $5,000,000.00 for bodily injury or death to each person $5,000,000.00 for property damage resulting from one accident; and $5,000,000.00 for all other types of liability. Automobile liability for owned, non-owned and hired vehicles with a limit of three million dollars ($3,000,000.00) for each person and three million dollars ($3,000,000.00) for each accident. Workers' compensation within statutory limits and employer's liability insurance with limits of not less than one million dollars ($ I ,000,000.00). Comprehensive form premises-operations, explosions and collapse hazard, underground hazard and products completed hazard with limits of not less than three million dollars ($3,000,000.00). Section 6.720, SECURITY FUND Deposit $50,000.00 in cash with the Village CHAPTER 7 - SIGN REGULATIONS Section 7.620, INDEMNIFICA nON A. 2. Liability insurance (if sign extends more than one foot into light of way): Limit of liability not less than $500,000.00. B. Bond (for persons engaged in the business of erecting, repairing or maintaining signs); $10,000.00. CHAPTER 8 - VILLAGE GOVERNMENT MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS Section 8.116, RULES AND DEFINITIONS B. Definition of "Gift" Market Value: In excess of$50.00 Section 8.513; PROCEDURES AND FEES FOR APPLICATIONS FOR INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROJECT REVENUE BONDS 13 B. 7. k. Judgment: In excess of $250,000.00 Section 8.2006, CREDITS AND REFUNDS Refund Rate: 5% simple interest per year Section 8.2007, VOLUNTARY APPLICATION FOR THE DETERMINATION Application fee: Tax due plus 1 % interest per month Section 8.2009, INTEREST Rate: 1 % per month CHAPTER 9 - PUBLIC UTILITIES, PAVEMENT & TREE REGULATION Section 9.903: BOND REQUIRED (Subsidewalk work) Surety Bond: $10,000.00. CHAPTER 11- MERCHANTS, BUSINESSES, OCCUPATIONS AND AMUSEMENTS Section 11.102 RULES AND DEFINITIONS: B. Definition of "Private Employment Agency": 1. a. Compensation: Not less than $15,000 per year. Section 11.203: BOND (Auctioneer) Surety Perfonnance Bond: $1,000.00. Section 11.602: APPLICATION PROCEDURE: Subsection D (2): Certificate of Insurance: $ 100,000.00 for anyone person $1,000,000.00 for anyone accident, and $ 25,000.00 for property damage. Section 11.603: SIDE SHOWS, PARADES AND CONCESSIONS, SUB-SECTION B: B. Bond: $10,000.00. Section 11.1105: INSURANCE REQUIRED (Taxicabs) $100,000.00 for bodily injury to anyone person; $300,000.00 for injuries to more than one person which are sustained in the same accident; and $ 50,000.00 for property damage resulting from anyone accident. Section 11.1403: GENERAL OPERATING REQUIREMENTS (Christmas Tree Sales) Cash Bond: $100.00. Section 11.1701: LICENSE FOR HOTEL OR MOTEL: APPLICATION THEREFOR AND ISSUANCE B. Bond: $1,000.00 14 Section 11.2003: BOND (Outdoor Advertisers) Surety Bond: $10,000.00 $ection 11.2303: GENERAL OPERATING REQUIREMENTS FOR SCAVENGERS C. Insurance: 2. Automobile Liability Insurance: Not less than $100,000.00 each person $300,000.00 each accident bodily injury liability; and $100,000.00 each accident for property damage liability. 3. General Liability: At least $100,000.00 each person; $300,000.00 each accident bodily injury liability; and $100,000.00 each accident for property damage liability. Section 11.2803: BOND (Solicitors) Bond: $1,000.00. Section 11. 3004: APPLICATION FOR LICENSE (Raffles) B. 7. Fidelity bond: $1,000.00 Section 11.3006: CONDUCT OF RAFFLES A. $50,000.00 B. $50,000.00 C. $ 250.00 CHAPTER 13 - ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS Section 13.103, APPLICATION FOR RETAILER'S LICENSE Surety bond: $2,500.00 Section 13.11 L COMPENSATION, POWERS AND DUTIES OF LOCAL LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSIONER Compensation for Local Liquor Control Commissioner: $3,000.00 annually CHAPTER 14 - ZONING Section 14.311. OUTDOOR SALES AND STORAGE INSURANCE B-2-f: Minimum Coverage: $1,000,000.00 for general liability and $30,000.00 for Dram Shop Insurance Section 14.313. REGULATIONS FOR PERSONAL WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES M. Insurance: Not less than $1,000,000.00 N. Compliance: Fine: Not less than $1,000.00 each day that the violation continues. 15 CHAPTER 15 - SUBDIVISION, DEVELOPMENT AND SITE IMPROVEMENT PROCEDURES Section 15.802, CONSTRUCTION GUARANTEES AND FEES A.l: Amount of Guarantee: 115% of the total cost of public improvements, including but not limited to engineering, inspection, materials and labor as detennined by the Village Engineer. B.l: Amount of Nuisance Abatement Deposit: 10% of the total cost of the project. Section 15.809, SURETY BOND Surety Bond: $500,000.00. CHAPTER 18 - TRAFFIC Section 18.1322: PAY PARKING ZONES L. Application of Proceeds: 2. Sum not less than $1,000.00 Section 18.1540, SCHOOL BUSES: SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS Liability Insurance: $250,000.00 for anyone person in anyone accident $1,000,000 for two or more persons injured Section 18.1813, VEHICLE SEIZURE AND IMPOUNDMENT Section B Cash Bond: $] 50.00 plus fees for towing the vehicle. CHAPTER 21 - BUILDING CODE Section 21.311, SURETY BOND Bond: See Section 15.809 Section 21.3] 2, RESTORA nON DEPOSIT Cash Deposit: See Section 15.802B Section 21.318 DEMOLITION AND MOVING OF BUILDINGS: FEES AND BONDS A. Cash Deposit: $2,000.00. B. Bond: 1. 2. For structures not exceeding three (3) stories in height: $20,000.00. F or structures of four (4) or more stories: $40,000.00. Section 21.321, PARKWAY TREE FEES See Section 15.802 CHAPTER 23 - OFFENSES AND MISCELLANEOUS REGULATIONS Section 23.612, MAINTAINING PUBLIC NUISANCE (Abatement) C. 2. Bond: Not less than $10,000.00 with sufficient security or surety approved by Court 16 Section 23.905, BOND (Assemblies and Gatherings) C. Bond: Not less than $50,000.00 nor more than $300,000.00 Section 23.1302. DISCHARGE OF FIREWORKS: PERMITS A. 1. Cash Bond: $2,500.00 Certificate of Insurance: $ 500,000.00 for anyone person $1,000,000.00 for anyone incident; and $ 50,000.00 for property damage. 17 DIVISION II FEES, RATES AND TAXES CHAPTER 4 - APPOINTIVE VILLAGE OFFICERS Section 4.1012: APPROPRIATION: LEVY OF TAXES (ESDA) Tax not to exceed five ($.05) per one hundred dollars of assessed value CHAPTER 6 - TELECOMMUNICATIONS CODE Section 6.202, REGISTRATION FEE Registration Fee: $25.00 Section 6.602, APPLICATION AND REVIEW FEE Application and Review Fee: $2,000.00 or 1 % of the estimated cost of applicant's proposed telecommunications facilities, as certified by the applicant's professional engineer, whichever is greater. Section 6.606, CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FEE Construction Permit Fee: $250.00 or .6% (six-tenths percent) of the estimated cost of constructing the telecommunication facilities, as certified by the applicant's engineer and approved by the Village, whichever is bTfeater. Section 6.607, ANNUAL FEES Annual Fee: $1,000.00 CHAPTER 7 - SIGN REGULATIONS Section 7.610, PERMIT FEES A. Minimum nonrefundable deposit: $25.00 Sign Structure/Fee Freestanding signs (except temporary signs): $100.00 Temporary signs: $50.00 Wall, mansard signs: $75.00 Directional signs: $25.00 Off-premises advertising signs: $200.00 Awning and canopy signs: $50.00 Special event (balloon, searchlight) signs: $50.00 Section 7.705, NOTICE REQUIREMENT Fees: . Appeal $250.00 Variation $200.00 Special use $200.00 Text amendment $250.00 18 CHAPTER 8 - VILLAGE GOVERNMENT MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS Section 8.802, LOCAL REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX IMPOSED Real Property Transfer Tax: $3.00 for every $1,000.00 value or fraction of $1 ,000.00. Exemption Seal: $ I 5.00 Section 8.804, APPLICATION FOR REBATE $2.00 for each one thousand dollars of the purchase price, so long as all of the requirements of this Section are met. Section 8.807, EXEMPT TRANSACTIONS Actual Consideration: Less than $5,000.00. Section 8.902. IMPOSITION OF TAX 1 % of purchase price of food and beverages. Section 8.1003, FEE ESTABLISHED (Ambulance Service) A. Fee: $200.00 B. Fee: $200.00 Section 8.1102. IMPOSITION OF TAX Home Rule Retailers' Occupation Tax: Three quarters of one percent (0.75%) of gross receipts of tangible personal property Section 8.1202. IMPOSITION OF TAX Home Rule Municipal Service Occupation Tax: Three quarters of one percent (0.75%) of gross receipts of sales of service Section 8.1302. IMPOSITION OF TAX Hotel/Motel Use Tax Three percent (3 %) of gross rental receipts from rental, leasing or letting Section 8.1402. PROPERTY TAX RELIEF GRANT Grant: $100.00 maximum. Section 8.1502, TAX IMPOSED (Telecommunications) A. Rate: 6% of gross charge B. Rate: 6% of gross charge Section 8.1601, GROSS RECEIPTS TAX IMPOSED (Utility Tax) A. 1. Rate: 3.204% of the amount of gross receipts 2. Rate: 3.204% of the amount of gross receipts B. Rate: 1.942% of gross receipts Section 8.1802. TAX IMPOSED (Motor Fuel) Rate: $0.0 I per gallon. 19 .'. -------.-.-".~"-".""',,,.'^.,"C..."""''''',.,,'''.<C.'~=.71''';..'''=.cr__'7~,'..'?;',"'~~r:"'''''''~-_._--~_~.'''"''''._=,,'V'''..,.'~~~._~"__~~,______.._.... Section 8.1901, TAX IMPOSED (Gas Use) A. 1. Rate: $0.0147 per thenn. 2. Rate: $0.0090 per thenn. Section 8.1904(A)3. COLLECTION OF TAX Fee: Not to exceed 3% of the amounts collected Section 8.2003. INTEREST ON OVERDUE PAYMENTS Interest Rate: 1 % of the amount due for each month or part of a month the tax remains unpaid CHAPTER 9 - PUBLIC UTILITIES, PAVEMENT AND TREE REGULATIONS Section 9.302(D)6. PLACEMENT OF WARNING LANTERNS Fee: $100.00, plus the Village's labor and equipment rental costs Section 9.302(F)L STREET OBSTRUCTION PERMIT Fee: Fee for street, alley or parkway $25.00/mo. or portion of a month for each 25 feet or portion of25 feet of frontage. The minimum fee shall be $50.00. Section 9.302(F)4. RENEWAL FEE Fee: Fee for renewal ofpelmit $50.00 per 25 feet or fraction of25 feet (each month orpOliion of a month. Section 9.302(F)5. STREET OPENING PERMIT FEE Pennit Fee: $100.00 Section 9.304. DRIVEWAYS Fee: $25.00. Section 9.406. RESTRICTIONS ON USE OF WATER A. Fee: See Section 9.410, except $100.00 minimum shall apply C. Construction Water Use deposit: $200.00 Section 9.409. WATER METERS A.2. Fee for turning on water following disconnection of service: $50.00 D.2 Deposit: $100.00 Section 9.41 O. WATER RATES A. All Village water users within the Village, having a direct or indirect connection with Village water mains or pi pes: $4.09 per I ,000 gall ons of porti on of 1 ,000 gallons of water consumed. All Village water users outside the corporate limits ofthe Village having a direct or indirect connection with Village water mains or pipes: $8.18 per 1,000 gallons or portion of 1,000 gallons of water consumed. 20 All Village water users located outside the boundaries of Special Service Area Number 5 shall pay an additional monthly availability charge based upon the size of the water meter as follows: 5/8 inch meter 3/4 inch meter 1 inch meter 1-1/2 inch meter 2 inch meter 3 inch meter 4 inch meter 6 inch meter 8 inch meter $ 10.00 15.00 30.00 50.00 90.00 150.00 250.00 475.00 990.00 B. Hook up charge for water furnished by the truckload: $10.00 Section 9.412. DELINQUENT AND UNPAID ACCOUNTS A. Fee for late payment: 10% ofthe total amount of such charges shall be due in addition to the charges for such services. B. Fee for shutting off and turning on the water: $50.00 Section 9.414, CROSS-CONNECTIONS PROHIBITED J. Cross Connection Control Program Administrative Fee: $10.00 Reconnection Fee: $10.00 K.2 Reconnection Fee: $50.00 Section 9.507, SEWER RATES C. All Village sewer users within the corporate limits of the Village having a direct or indirect connection with the Village's sewer and water mains or pipes: $1.32 per 1,000 gallons or portion of 1,000 gallons of water consumed. All Village sewer users within the corporate limits of the Village having a direct or indirect connection with the Village's sewer mains or pipes and not with the Village water mains or pipes: $3.53 per month per dwelling unit. All Village sewers outside the corporate limits of the Village having a direct or indirect connection with the Village's water and sewer mains or pipes: $1.32 per 1,000 gallons or portion of 1,000 gallons of water consumed. All Village sewers outside the corporate limits of the Village having a direct or indirect connection with the Village's sewer mains or pipes, but not with Village water mains or pipes: $3.53 per month per dwelling unit. 21 Section 9.507.1. SEWER CONSTRUCTION FEE 1. All Village sewer users within the corporate limits of the Village having a direct or indirect connection with the Village sewer and water mains or pipes: $5.00 per account, per month; subject to Section 9.507.1(B) Expiration. 2. All Village sewer users within the corporate limits of the Village having a direct or indirect connection with the Village's sewer mains or pipes and not with the Village water mains or pipes: $5.00 per month per dwelling unit; subject to Section 9.507.1 (B) Expiration. 3. All Village sewer users outside the corporate limits of the Village having a direct or indirect connection with the Village's water and sewer mains or pipes: $5.00 per account, per month; subject to Section 9.507.1(8) Expiration. 4. All Village sewer users outside the corporate limits of the Village having a direct or indirect connection with the Village's sewer mains or pipes, but not with Village water mains or pipes: $5.00 per month per dwelling unit; subject to Section 9.507.1 (B) Expiration. Section 9.905. FEE Annual Fee: $50.00 for each 4,000 cubic feet or fraction thereof. Section 9.906, CONVEYANCE OF PREMISES Fee: $50.00. CHAPTER 11 - MERCHANTS, BUSINESSES, OCCUPATIONS AND AMUSEMENTS Section 11.202, LICENSE FEES See Section 11.3410 of this Division II Section 11.604, LICENSE AND PERMIT FEES~ Carnivals and Circuses A. Fee: $150.00 per day for each day of operation Minimum Fee: $450.00. 1. Fee: $10.00 per day shall be charged for each concession operated in conjunction with a carnival. 2. Fee: $10.00 per day shall be charged for each concession and/or side show operated in conjunction with a circus. B. Fee/Rate: $45.00 per hour. ARTICLE VIII - GAME ROOMS Section 11.1102, APPLICATION Nonrefundable Fee: $10.00 22 Section 11.1] 20, CHAUFFEUR LICENSE APPLICATION A. Nonrefundable Applicable Fee: $] 0.00. Section 11.1136, SENIOR CITIZEN/HANDICAPPED SUBSIDIZED TAXICAB RATE PROGRAM: A. 1. Rate/Maximum Amount: $3.00 2. $0.50. Section 11.1402, LICENSE FEES See Section 11.3404 of this Division II Section 11.2302, LICENSE FEES See Section 11.341 O(k) of this Division II Section 11. 3004, APPLICATION FOR LICENSE (Raffles) B. 7. Fidelity bond: $10,000.00 C. Nonrefundable Application Fee: $25.00 Section 11.3404, CLASS I ESTABLISHMENTS (General Business) Gross Floor Area In Square Feet Annual Fee o - 999 $ 60.00 1,000 - 4,999 75.00 5,000 - 9,999 100.00 10,000 - 19,999 125.00 20,000 - 29,999 175.00 30,000 - 39,999 225.00 40,000 - 49,999 275.00 50,000 - 74,999 350.00 75,000 - 99,999 425.00 100,000 and over 600.00 For any inspection taking place after midyear, the fee shall be reduced by 50%. Section 11.3405, CLASS II ESTABLISHMENTS Gross Floor Area In Square Feet Annual Fee o - 999 1,000 - 4,999 $135.00 150.00 23 5,000 - 9,999 175.00 10,000 - 19,999 200.00 20,000 - 29,999 250.00 30,000 - 39,999 325.00 40,000 - 49,999 400.00 50,000 - 74,999 500.00 75,000 - 99,999 600.00 100,000 and over 700.00 For any inspection taking place after midyear, the fee shall be reduced by 50%. Section 11.3406, HIGH HAZARD SURCHARGE A. Surcharge: 150% of the business' annual fee B. Surcharge: 150% increase in the inspection limit Section 11.3407, MID-YEAR FEE REDUCTION 50% of annual fee Section 11.3408, TRANSFER OF LICENSE Fee: $20.00 Section 11.3410, OTHER FEES A. B. Auctioneers Camivals and circuses c. Concessions and side show D. Coin-in-slot devices: 1. Amusement devices/pinball/ electronic games 2. Tobacco vending machines 3. Juke boxes 4. 1 to 10 cent candy, gum and nuts 5. All other coin-in-slot or reverse coin devices E. Contractors: 1. All contractor licenses 2. Electrical contractor certificate $150.00 annually; $50.00 per month for any period less than one year; $25.00 per day, for any period less than one month. $150.00 per day, with a minimum fee of $450.00 plus $45.00 per hour ride inspection fee $7.50 per day associated with a camival or CIrcus $150.00 per machine annually $150.00 per machine annually $35.00 per machine annually $5.00 per machine annually $20.00 per machine ,mnually $35.00 annually $35.00 annually 24 F. Food service vehicles $150.00 per vehicle annually $50.00 per day $175.00 annually See Class I Establishments H. Golf courses/golf driving ranges/miniature $150.00 annually golf courses G. Gold and silver merchants: 1. Itinerant 2. Permanent buyer, trader or exchanger 3. Pennanent seller only 1. Outdoor advertisers J. Parking lot employee identification card K. Scavengers and secondhand dealers: 1. Exclusive Residential license 2. All other scavenger or secondhand dealer licenses L. Towing services/wreckers M. Shooting galleries N. Over-the-counter tobacco sales O. Itinerant merchant/vendors: 1. Itinerant merchant, hawker, peddler, or transient or vendor 2. Vending machine company 3. Itinerant retailer registration P. Promotional events Q. Public passenger vehicles: 1. Taxicab company: 2. Taxicab vehicle: 3. Livery vehicles: 4. Chauffeurs: $225.00 annually $5.00 per card annually $100.00 annuall y $300.00 annually $30.00 per towing truck annually $150.00 annually $50.00 annually $150.00 annually $75.00 per month for any period less than one year; $10.00 per day for any period less than one month $100.00 annually $20.00 per registration $20.00 per penn it $50.00 annually $35.00 annually $50.00 annually $15.00 annually 25 Section 11.3411 , LATE PAYMENTS A. Fee: 110% of the annual license fee B. Fee: 125% of the annual license fee C. Fee: 150% ofthe annual license fee D. Fee: 175% of the annual license fee E. Fec: 200% of the annual license fee Section 11.3608, FEES (Business Inspectors) Gross Floor Area In Square Feet Annual Fee o - 999 1,000 - 4,999 5,000 - 9,999 10,000 - 19,999 20,000 and over $30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 75.00 Section 11.361 L TRANSFER OF CERTIFICATE Fee: $20.00 CHAPTER 13 - ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS ARTICLE I - GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 13.103, APPLICATION FOR RETAILER'S LICENSE Nonrefundable application fee: $250.00 Section 13.104, MANAGEMENT ENTITIES Nonrefundable application fee: $250.00 Certification fee: $750.00 Section 13.106, TERM; PRORATING FEE Administrative fee: $100.00 Section 13.107, LICENSES AND PERMITS License Classification Fee Class A Class B Class C and C 1 Class D $2,500.00 annually 2,000.00 annually 2,000.00 annually 750.00 annually 26 Class E 2,000.00 annually 100.00 daily 2,000.00 annually o 2,000.00 annually 2,500.00 annually 2,500.00 annually 750.00 annually 1,750.00 annually 2,000.00 annually 2,500.00 annually 2,500.00 annually 1,500.00 annually 1,500.00 annually 2,500.00 annually 2,000.00 annually 750.00 annually (same as certification fee) Class F Class G Class H Class K Class M Class MH Class P Class R Class Sand S 1 Class T Class V ClassW Class XX Class Z Management entity Section 13.116, CONSUMPTION ON PREMISES Permit fee: $25.00 per day Section 13.] 34. OPERATION OF A MOTOR VEHICLE BY UNDERAGE PERSONS WITH AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE IN OR ON THE VEHICLE Administrative fee: $150.00 for Redeeming Vehicle CHAPTER 14-Z0NING Section 14.204. ZONING FEES Conditional Uses 1. All individual lot single family requests 2. Other properties less than one (1) acre 3. Other properties greater than one (1) acre and less than five (5) acres 4. Other properties greater than five (5) acres and less than ten (10) acres 5. Other properties greater than ten (10) acres and less than fifteen (15) acres 6. Other properties greater than fifteen (15) acres Variations 1. All individual lot single family requests 2. Other properties less than one (1) acre 3. Other properties greater than one (1) acre Map Amendments (Rezoning) 1. Properties less than one (1) acre 2. Properties greater than one (1) acre and less than five (5) acres 3. Properties greater than five (5) acres and less than ten (10) acres 4. Properties greater than ten (10) acres and less than fifteen (15) acres 27 100.00 250.00 500.00 1,250.00 1,500.00 2,500.00 100.00 250.00 500.00 250.00 500.00 1,250.00 1,500.00 5. Properties greater than fifteen (15) acres 2,500.00 Other Requests 1. Text Amendment 2. Appeal 3. Modification to an approved PUD requiring P&Z approval 4. Special Hearing Fee (all requests) 5. Zoning Compliance Review Fee a. All individual lot single family requests b. All other 500.00 250.00 250.00 500.00 50.00 150.00 Section 14.311. OUTDOOR SALES AND STORAGE B-2-C Annual Special Pennit Fee: $100.00, plus $0.50 per square foot Section 14.2305. RIGHT OF WAY LANDSCAPING Fee for planting in public parkway: As scheduled from time to time by the Village Manager. This shall also apply to B(5). CHAPTER 15 - SUBDIVISION, DEVELOPMENT AND SITE IMPROVEMENT PROCEDURES Section 15.309, FEES Fees: See Section 15.801 of this Division II below Section 15.406, FEES Fees: See Section 15.802 of this Division II below Section 15.503, FEES Fees: See Section 15.802 of this Division II below Section 15.603. FEES Fees: See Section 15.802 of this Division II below Section 15.702. INSPECTION PROCEDURES: D.3 Reinspection Fee: $100.00 Section 15.801. SUBDIVISION PLAT AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW FEES Preliminary Plat and Final Plat (total) $500.00 ($250.00 each) Resubdivision which consolidates existing lots Vacation plat Plat of easement Site plan review Appeal Development Code exception per 150.00 200.00 200.00 250.00 plus $25.00/acre 350.00 28 site plan 250.00 Section 15.802, CONSTRUCTION GUARANTEES AND FEES C. Development Review Fees: 3% of the cost of total site improvements for the development, less the costs of mass grading and buildings. All fees for parkway tree planting shall be in addition to this 3% and shall be assessed according to the requirements of Section 14.2305 of the Village Code. Section 15.803, CURB CUT FEE Fee: $25.00 Section 15.804, TV INSPECTION OF SEWERS $2:50 for each lineal foot of sewer Section 15.805, STREET OPENING PERMIT FEE Fee: $100.00 Section 15.806~ CONNECTION FEES A. Water connection tap-on fee: The "water connection tap-on fee" shall be based upon the size of the water tap made into the water system. The schedule of taps and charges shall be as follows: Size of Tap Charges 1 inch 1-112 inches 2 inches 3 inches 4 inches 6 inches 8 inches 10 inches $ 330.00 425.00 500.00 990.00 1,650.00 2,475.00 3,300.00 4,125.00 In the event any building or premises contains more than one dwelling or commercial unit, an additional pennit fee of $150.00 shall be made for each such multiple permit. B. Chlorination fee: A chlorination fee of$75.00 shall be assessed for each water main and fire main system for up to two tests. Any additional tests shall be $75.00 each. D. Sewer Connection Tap-On Fee: $175.00 for each separate building connection which contains not more than 10 water outlets or floor drains discharging to the sanitary sewer system. For each additional water outlet or floor drain contained in said premises in excess of 10 outlets there shall be an additional sewer connection tap-on fee for said connection of$25.00 per water outlet or floor drain. 29 Section 15.807, VILLAGE DONATION VILLAGE DONATION BY TYPE OF DWELLING UNIT Type Of Unit Detached single-family Attached single-family (Townhouse, row house, quadruplex, etc. Apartments Fee $1 ,450.00/per unit 1 ,350.00/per unit 850.00/per unit Section 15.808: PARKWAY TREE FEES Village cost as established from time to time by Village Manager Subparagraph 5 provides for additional costs. CHAPTER 16 - SITE CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS Section 16.401, GENERAL (Water Distribution System) B.I. Permit Fee: See Section 15.806 Section 16.407, WATER SERVICES 1. Water Connection Tap-On Fee: See Section 15.806A Section 16.501. GENERAL (Sanitary Sewer System) B.1. Pennit Fee: See Section 15.806 Section 16.505, INSPECTION AND TESTING A.I. Public Sewer Fee: See Section 15.804 Section 16.506, SANITARY SEWER SERVICES A. Sewer Connection Tap-On Fee: See Section 15.806C Section 16.604, INSPECTION AND TESTING A. Public Sewer Fee: See Section 15.804 CHAPTER 17 - VEHICLE LICENSES Section 17.103 LICENSE FEES A. First Division vehicles, excludin Class Type of Vehicle Annual License Fee 30 Annual Class Type ofVehic1e License Fee W Passenger Automobiles $36.00 The annual fee for a noncommercial vehicle license for a vehicle owned and operated by a resident of age sixty five (65) or older shall be twelve dollars ($12.00). Only one age sixty five (65) or older rate per family shall be allowed. Additional vehicles shall licensed at the rated set out above. B. Mo torcyc es,l11otor nven cye es an motor lCYC es: Annual Class License Fee M $24.00 d' d b' C. Second division vehicles: 1. Motor trucks, tractor -semi-trailer units and motor buses that do not beard a State of Illinois license plate with the "School Bus" designation: Gross Weight In Pounds of Annual Class Vehicle Plus Its Maximum Load License Fee B 8,000 or less $ 54.00 0 8,001 to 12,000 78.00 F 12,001 to 16,000 78.00 H 16,001 to 26,000 120.00 J 26,001 to 28,000 120.00 K 28,001 to 32,000 120.00 L 32,001 to 36,000 120.00 N 36,001 to 40,000 150.00 P 40,001 to 45,000 150.00 Q 45,001 to 50,000 180.00 R 50,001 to 55,000 180.00 S 55,001 to 59,500 180.00 T 59,501 to 64,000 180.00 31 Gross Weight In Pounds of Annual Class Vehicle Plus Its Maximum Load License Fee V 64,001 to 73,280 210.00 X 73,218 to 77,000 210.00 Z 77,001 to 80,000 210.00 (a) A self-propelled vehicle operated as a tractor and one semi-trailer shall be considered as one vehicle in computing the above license fees, and not additional license fee shall be required for said semi-trailer so used. (b) The owner of each vehicle who has elected to pay a mileage weight tax to the State of Illinois shall be required to be licensed as provided in this Chapter. 2. Motor buses with State ofIllinois license plated designating "School Bus" owned and operated by a commercial ente1l1rise shall pay an annual fee of twelve dollars ($12.00) for each such vehicle bearing said "School Bus" designation. 3. Motor buses with State of Illinois license plate designation "School Bus" owned and operated by any governmental agency or not-for-profit organization shall have the annual license fee waived. 4. A Class W passenger automobile with State of Illinois license plate designation "CV" owned and operated by any not-for-profit organization shall have the annual license fee waived; provided, however, that nor more than one such license fee shall be waived for said not-for-protit organization in any given licensing year. (Ord. 3269,10-5-1932; Ord. 3495,2-5-1985; Ord. 3669, 6-17-1986; Ord. 4101,10-17-1989; Ord. 4617,1-18-1004, eff. 2-1-1994; Ord. 4875, 7-15-1997, eff. 2-1-1998) Section 17.105, DEALERS' LICENSES A. Annual Fee: $36.00 effective 1-1-1998 through 1-31-2007 Section 17.1 08. PLATES AND WINDSHIELD STICKER Section B Additional fee charge for replacement: $2.00 Section 17.109. TRANSFER Section C Transfer fee: $2.00 Transfer fee for the newly acquired vehicle: $2.00 CHAPTER 18 - TRAFFIC 32 Section 18.406. DUTY TO REPORT ACCIDENT Dollar amount: 100.00 Section 18.413, FURNISHING COPIES, FEES Copy of traffic accident report: $5.00 for each copy Section 18.1322, PAY PARKING ZONES Section C-1, subsection b, Parking Within Municipal Parking Lots Deposit: $1.50 Section C-2, subsection b, parking On Specified Public Roadways Deposit: $2.00 Section 0-1, Parking Meters Deposit of Coins Equal to Parking (Except Pennies) Time Limit $0.05 1/2 Hour 0.10 1 Hour 0.15 11/2 Hours 0.20 2 Hours 0.25 21/2 Hours 0.30 3 Hours 0.35 31/2 Hours 0.40 4 Hours 0.45 41/2 Hours . 0.50 5 Hours 0.55 51/2 Hours 0.60 6 Hours 0.65 61/2 Hours 0.70 7 Hours 0.75 12 Hours 33 Section 18.1326, TOWING AND STORAGE OF IMPROPERLY PARKED VEHICLES Section D 1. A towing fee of sixty dollars ($60.00) for passenger automobiles and eighty dollars ($80.00) for trucks or vehicles other than passenger automobiles. 2. A fee of up to twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for any necessary work perfonned by the Village in order to pennit the vehicle to be towed. 3. A fee per day often dollars ($10.00) for outside storage and fifteen dollars ($15.00) for indoor storage of the vehicle towed. Section 18.1327, LEASED PARKING ZONES Section C 1. Annual rental fee: $90.00 Section C 2. Annual rental fee: $240.00 Section 18.1423, PROHIBITIONS ON SNOW REMOVAL~ OBSTRUCTION OF SNOW REMOVAL: TOWING AND STORAGE OF VEHICLES: FEES~ PENALTIES Section E 1. Towing fee: $60.00 for passenger automobiles Towing fee: $80.00 for trucks or vehicles other than passenger automobiles 2. Fee: $25.00 for any necessary work perfonned in order to pennit the vehicle to be towed 3. Fee: $10.00 per day for outside storage of the vehicle towed Fee: $15.00 per day for indoor storage ofthe vehicle towed Section 18.1701, LIMITED WEIGHT STREETS~ TRUCK ROUTES E. Special load permits: 2. One way permit: $35.00 Round trip pennit: $70.00 Multiple routing pennit: $150.00 Continuous operation for one year: $500.00 Administrative fee: $10.00 Section 18.1813, VEHICLE SEIZURE AND IMPOUNDMENT Administrative fee: $150.00 in addition to the fees for the towing and storage of the vehicle Section B Cash Bond: $150.00 plus fees for towing the vehicle. 34 Section C Administrative fee: $150.00 plus fees for towing and storage of the vehicle. Section 18.1907, VEHICLE IMMOBILIZATION AND IMPOUNDMENT FOR VIOLATIONS F. 2. b. Fine: $500.00 or 50% of the total fines for outstanding citations, whichever is less. H. Immobilization fee: $60.00 CHAPTER 19 - HEALTH REGULATIONS Section 19.521, LICENSE FEE (Health Spa) License Fee: $60.00 Section 19.528, HEARING REGARDING LICENSE SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION (Health ~ G. Deposit Fee: $2.00 per page Section 19.603, AMENDMENTS, DELETIONS AND MODIFICATIONS (Swimming Pools) B, Art II (2) License Fee: $75.00 B, Ali II (15) Deposit Fee: $2.00 per page CHAPTER20-ANIMALS Section 20.202 LICENSE APPLICA TION~ FEE: Section C. License Fee Section 1 Annual License Fee: $5.00 Semi-Annual License Fee: $2.50 Section 2 Annual License Fee: $2.50 Semi-Annual License Fee: $1.25 Section 20.206 IMPOUNDMENT PROCEDURES, Paragraph C , Section 1 Dog or cat impounded as unlicensed stray: $25.00 plus mandatory licensing within ten (10) days. Dog or cat impounded as licensed stray: $15.00. Horse impounded as stray: $150.00. Any species of animals other than dog, cat or horse: $25.00 plus mandatory application for permit to own if species is covered by any other protective law. CHAPTER 21 - BUILDING CODE Section 21.103 BOCA NATIONAL BUILDING CODE ADOPTED, Section A Subsection 8 Amount: $1,000.00 Subsection 9 Amounts: $100.00 and $1,000.00 35 Section 2] .209. USE OF STREETS FOR BUILDING PURPOSES Rate: $25.00 per day or fraction of a day Section 21.303 BUILDING PERMIT FEES Cost ofthe work authorized by said pennit does not exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000.00): $25.00 Cost of the work exceeds one thousand dollars ($1,000.00): $25.00 for the first one thousand ($1,000.00) of cost, plus ten dollars ($1 0.00) for each additional one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) of cost or fraction thereof. Section 21.304 ELECTRICAL PERMITS Minimum permit fee shall be twenty five dollars ($25.00) For the inspection of original installation of a one- or two-family dwelling, the fee shall be: o to 1,000 sq. ft. $30.00 1,001 to 1,599 sq. ft. 35.00 1,600 to 2,399 sq. ft. 40.00 2,400 to 2,999 sq. ft. 45.00 3,000 sq. ft. and over 50.00 In addition to the foregoing, an electrical service fee shall be paid in accordance with schedule for new service fees, and a charge of twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for power-consuming devices such as, but not limited to, alc units, heat pumps and solar devices. Conversions of single-family residences, such as garages, recreation rooms, dormers, etc., the permit fee shall be computed as: minimum fee, twenty five dollars ($25.00), with a maximum of two (2) circuits. For more than two (2) circuits, consult the circuit fee schedule 73. Commercial and industrial remodeling: minimum fee plus fee from circuit schedule and fee from service schedule. The fee for the inspection of electrical motors or power-consuming devices of one-half (2) hp or more other than lighting circuits: Base fee for each motor: Plus each horsepower or kilowatt over 2: $10.00 $ 1.00 Circuit count schedule: Circuits 2 And 3 Wire Circuit 1 $ 5.00 2 10.00 3 15.00 36 Circuits 2 And 3 Wire Circuit 4 20.00 5 25.00 6 30.00 7 35.00 8 40.00 9 45.00 10 50.00 11 54.00 12 58.00 13 62.00 14 66.00 15 70.00 16 74.00 17 78.00 18 82.00 19 86.00 20 90.00 21 94.00 22 98.00 23 102.00 24 106.00 25 110.00 26-50 inclusive 3.50 each additional 51-75 inclusive 3.25 each additional 3.00 37 Circuits Over 75 :2 And 3 \Vire Circuit each additional For the inspection of a four (4) wire circuit, the fee shall be three (3) times the amount of a two (2) wire circuit. The fees for examination of plans when plans are submitted that are not in conjunction with construction or plumbing shall be twenty five dollars ($25.00). For the inspection for new services, the fees shall be as follows: 60 ampere service one meter $ 15.00 100 ampere service one meter 20.00 200 ampere service one meter 25.00 400 ampere service one meter 30.00 600 ampere service one meter 35.00 800 ampere service one meter 40.00 1,000 ampere service one meter 45.00 1,200 ampere service one meter 50.00 1,400 ampere service one meter 55.00 1,600 ampere service one meter 60.00 1,800 ampere service one meter 65.00 2,000 ampere service one meter 70.00 3,000 ampere service one meter 90.00 4,000 ampere service one meter 115.00 5,000 ampere service one meter 140.00 6,000 ampere service one meter 165.00 7,000 ampere service one meter 190.00 8,000 ampere service one meter 215.00 9,000 ampere service one meter 240.00 38 60 ampere service one meter $ 15.00 10,000 ampere service one meter 265.00 Each additional meter all service levels 5.00 For service ampere ratings other than those listed, the fee is to be that provided for the next larger size as established by this subsection. When inspections are called for and reinspection is required, a reinspection fee oftwenty five dollars ($25.00) will be deducted from bond or deposit fees. For feeders installed or increased in amperage and additional subpanels, installations for commercial and industrial occupancies only as a separate installation: One Feeder $25.00 Section 21.305, PLUMBING PERMITS Minimum Fee: Minimum pennit fee shall be twenty five dollars ($25.00) New Fixtures: Replacement or installation of new fixtures shall be twenty five dollars ($25.00) plus eight dollars ($8.00) per fixture. Alterations: Alterations or a plumbing system shall be twenty five dollars ($25.00) plus eight dollars ($8.00) for each fixture replaced or installed. Water Connection Tap-On Fee: The "water connection tap-on fee" shall be based upon the size of the water tap made into the water system. The schedule oftaps and charges shall be as follows: Size of Tap Charges 1 inch $300.00 12 inches 375.00 2 inches 450.00 3 inches 900.00 4 inches 1,500.00 6 inches 2,250.00 8 inches 3,000.00 1 0 inches 3,750.00 39 In the event any building or premises contains more than one dwelling or commercial unit, an additional pennit fee of one hundred fifty dollars ($150.00) shall be made for each such multiple permit. All applicants for water service shall provide and pay the costs of construction, both labor and material, of the water service from the main to the premises to be served. This construction work in connection with the water service shall be perfom1ed by a licensed plumber who has filed with the Village a properly executed bond. The water meter shall be fumished by the Village and a charge made to cover the cost of such meter. For the connection charge, the Village will inspect the water service to detennine that the construction thereofis in accordance with specifications established by the Village for the regulation of the water and sewer system. Chlorination Fee: A chlorination fee of forty dollars ($40.00) shall be assessed for each water main and fire main system. Section 21.306, GAS PIPING PERMITS Fee: Fifteen dollars ($15.00) per inch (J.D.) plus an additional eight dollars ($8.00) on each twenty five (25) lineal feet or fraction thereof. Section 2 1 .307, AIR CONDITIONING AND REFRIGERATOR PERMITS Single family residences: $25.00 Other users: $10.00 plus $5.00 per ton or fraction thereof. Section 21.308, MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION PERMITS Mechanical equipment permit fees other than air conditioning, refrigeration, combustion, elevators and fire protection systems: $25.00 for the first $1,000.00 of valuation, plus $6.00 for each additional $1,000 of cost or fraction thereof. Fire protection system fees shall be as follows: Automatic sprinkler systems: Number of new or relocated sprinklers Fee 1-20 $ 75.00 21- 1 00 100.00 101-200 125.00 201-300 150.00 301-400 1 75.00 401-500 225.00 Over 500 an additional $25.00 40 Number of new or relocated sprinklers Fee per 100 or fraction thereof Standpipes: $50.00 for each standpipe system. Fire pumps: $75.00 for each pump, regardless of size. EXCEPTION: Jockey pumps. Fire alann system: $75.00 for any system (manual or automatic). Miscellaneous: Other Suppression Systems: $50.00 Kitchen Hoods: $50.00 Underground Tanks (install/remove) $35.00 Section 21.309. SEWER PERMIT FEES Sewer Connection Tap-On Fee: $150.00 for each separate building connection which contains not more than ten water outlets or floor drains discharging to the sanitary sewer system. For each additional water outlet or floor drain contained in said premises in excess of ten outlets there shall be an additional sewer connection tap-on fee for said connection of $25.00 per water outlet or floor drain. In the event any building or premises contains more than one dwelling unit or commercial unit, an additional pennit fee of $150.00 shall be made for each such multiple unit. Additional Fee: 1. Two percent (2%) of the construction cost of the improvements when such cost is fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00) or less. 2. One and five-tenths percent (1.5%) of the construction cost of the improvements when such cost is over fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00). Section 21.310. STREET OBSTRUCTION PERMIT FEES See Section 9.302(F) Section 21.312. CONSTRUCTION NUISANCE ABATEMENT DEPOSIT See Section 15.802(B) Section 21.313. WATER METER RENTAL FEES. CONSTRUCTION WATER USE FEES AND CROSS-CONNECTION CONTROL FEES Construction Water Use Fee: $200.00 Cross-Connection Control Program Administrative Fee: $25.00 Section 21.314. ELEVATOR. ESCALATOR AND DUMBWAITER PERMIT AND INSPECTION FEES 41 1. Pennit Fees: 1. For each elevator servicing a building up to and including three (3) floors: $50.00. 2. Each additional floor in excess of three (3) floors: $10.00 per floor. 2. Semi-Annual Inspection Fees: $35.00 Section 21.315, PLAN EXAMINATION FEES For single-family homes: $50.00. For garages, nonnal accessory buildings for single-family homes, and miscellaneous plans: $25.00. For all other alterations, construction or repair of buildings and structures, the following system shall apply: The fee for plan examination is related to the complexities of the work involved. The fee is based on: 1. The size of the building (Base Fee). 2. The type of construction (Base Fee Multiplier). 3. The use group (Base Fee Multiplier). 4. The type of mechanical plans (Mechanical Plans Multiplier) included in the submittal. The quotation is as follows: Plan Exam Fee - (Base Fee) x (Base Fee Multiplier) x (Mechanical Plans Multiplier) Example: Use Group C (mercantile) Floor area 5,000 square feet Height - 2 stories, 20 feet Type Il-C construction Plans include building, mechanical and plumbing The volume of the building is 5,000 square feet x 20 feet = 100,000 cubic feet The base fee is $200.00 The base fee multiplier is 0.9 The mechanical plans multiplier is 1.40 Plan Exam Fee = 200.00 x 0.9 x 1040 = $252.00 Base Fee Building Volume (cubic feet) Plan Exam Base Fee o to 20,000 $ 70.00 20,000 to 40,000 90.00 40,000 to 80,000 145.00 80,000 to 150,000 200.00 150,000 to 200,000 235.00 Over 200,000 235.00 42 Base Fee Plus 2.35 per Each 10,000 cubic feet Over 200,000 cubic feet Tvpe of Construction Use Group I II lIe III mc IV A Hazardous B Storage D Industrial 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.8 C Mercantile 1.2 1.1 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.9 E Business F Assembly 1.5 1.3 1.1 1.2 1.1 1.0 H Institutional 2.1 2.0 1.7 1.8 1.7 1.6 L Residential 1.4 1.3 1.1 1.2 1.1 1.0 Mechanical Plans Multiplier Plans Submitted Multiplier Mechanical 1.25 Plumbing 1.15 Electrical 1.10 Mechanical and plumbing 1.40 Mechanical and electrical 1.35 Plumbing and electrical 1.25 Mechanical, plumbing and 1.50 electrical To calculate plan review fee: 43 Fee = Base Fee x Base Fee Multiplier x Mechanical Plans Multiplier. A preliminary plan review fee shall be 0.50 times the regular fee. Automatic sprinkler/standpipe systems - $50.00. In all instances where the plans submitted for review are required to be examined by the Health Division for compliance with rules, regulations and specifications under its jurisdiction, there shall be additional fees charged as follows: Plan review - multiple-family use Plan review - restaurant and food store uses Plan review - all other uses Plan compliance inspection fee $20.00 $35.00 $25.00 $40.00 In all instances where the plans submitted for review are required to be examined by the Fire Department for compliance with rules, regulations and specifications under its jurisdiction, there shall be an additional fee of $35.00. EXCEPTION: Those plans submitted for review of items covered in Section 21.308. Section 21.316. GASOLINE STORAGE TANK PERMITS Fee: $125.00 Section 21.317, BUILDING REINSPECTION FEES Reinspection Fee: $25.00 Section 21.318 DEMOLITION AND MOVING OF BUILDINGS; FEES AND BONDS C. Demolition Permit Fee: $200.00 plus a fixed fee computed at a rate of $1 0.00 for each ten feet (10') of height of such building or structure above ten feet (10') in height. D. Minor Demolition Permit Fee: $50.00. E. Moving Building Permit Fee: $1,000.00. Section 21.319. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY Final Fee for residential buildings: $50.00 for each dwelling unit. Fee for other uses: $100.00 Section 21.320, FENCE PERMITS Fee: $40.00. Section 21.322, DRIVEWAY PERMIT FEES Village cost as established from time to time by the Village Manager. Section 21.605. EXTERIOR OPENINGS IN VACANT STRUCTURES B. 1. Pennit fee: $50.00 Section 21.607. ENFORCEMENT FEES Monthly Enforcement Fee: 44 For properties with 1 to 4 dwelling units that are not in $50.00 compliance within a particular complex For properties with 5 to 20 dwelling units that are not in $100.00 compliance within a particular complex For properties with more than 20 dwelling units that are not in $150.00 compliance within a particular complex Section 21.608. EXCEPTIONS TO ENFORCEMENT FEES C.1. Fee: $600.00 2. Fee: $600 - $1,500.00 3. Fee: $1,500.00 CHAPTER 23 - OFFENSES AND MISCELLANEOUS REGULATIONS Section 23.701. LICENSE REQUIRED, FEE For the use or operation of any radio receiving $100.00 for any day or part of a day for which set, talking machine, amplifier or other similar licensee desires to be licensed hereunder device to be operated from a fixed location and not in a moving vehicle For the use or operation of any radio receiving $25.00 for any day or part of a day for which set, talking machine, amplifier or other similar licensee desires to be licensed hereunder device to be used in a moving vehicle along the streets Section 23.903. APPLICATION FOR PERMIT (Mass Gatherings) Application Fee: $100.00 Section 23.1612. CONDOMINIUM CONVERSIONS-OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATES. INSPECTIONS AND FEES Fee for inspection of the common areas: $100.00 Fee for inspection of each unit: $10.00 Section 23.1704. LICENSE FEE (Alarm Systems) Annual License Fee: $10.00 If fee received after February 1 of the year the license is required: $20.00 Section 23.1714, CHARGES FOR RESPONSE TO FALSE ALARMS AND REPORTS 3rd response $10.00 4th response $20.00 5th response $50.00 45 6th response $60.00 7th response $75.00 8th response $75.00 9th response $ 75.00 10 or more responses $100.00 per response Section 23.1813. LICENSE TO OPERATE MULTI-FAMILY RENTAL STRUCTURES License Application Fee: $31.00 per unit Section 23.1814. INSPECTIONS BY VILLAGE Additional Inspection Fee: $50.00 per unit Section 23.2103. RETURN OF ABANDONED SHOPPING CARTS Fee to reclaim abandoned cart: $50.00 per cart Removal and disposal charge: $50.00 CHAPTER 25 - THE VILLAGE CODE SECTION 25.304, SALE OF COPIES Fee: $100.00 for each copy Additional Sum: $50.00, per year, in advance. 46 DIVISION III PENALTIES AND FINES CHAPTER 2 - GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 2.206, ENFORCEMENT OF DECORUM Fine: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $500.00 CHAPTER 4 - APPOINTIVE VILLAGE OFFICERS Section 4.912. PENALTY (Fire Department) Fine: No less than $100.00 nor more than $500.00 for each offense CHAPTER 6 - TELECOMMUNICATIONS CODE Section 6.1 08, PENALTIES (Telecommunications) Fine: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $750.00 Section 6.5.607, SERVICE, ADJUSTMENT AND COMPLAINT PROCEDURE Section G, subsection 8 Penalty: $200.00 per day Section 6.5.712, PENALTIES (Cable TV) B. The following penalties apply for each of the following acts or omissions by the grantee. Each penalty is a dollar amount per day for each day, or part thereof, that such act or omission occurs or continues. 1. For failure to activate the system in accordance with the franchise agreement, unless the Village approves the delay: $200.00 2. For failure to complete system construction, in accordance with grantee's franchise, within the primary service area, unless the Village approves the delay: $200.00 3. For failure to provide data, documents, reports or information or to cooperate with the Village during any performance evaluation session provided for in Section 6.5.404 ofthis Article: $50.00 4. For failure to test, analyze and report on the performance ofthe system following a request by the Village: $50.00 5. For failure by grantee to modify the system or provide additional services within forty five (45) days after required by the Village: $200.00 6. For failure by grantee to comply with construction, operation or maintenance standards within forty five (45) days following notice from the Village: $200.00 C. Fine: $500.00 for each offense. 47 Section 6.907, PENALTIES (Telecommunications Infrastmcture Maintenance Fee) Fine: Not less than $1,000.00 for each day that a violation continues. CHAPTER 7 - SIGN REGULATIONS Section 7.640, ILLEGAL SIGN (BOTH TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT) Fine: Not less than $50.00 or more than $200.00 per day of violation. CHAPTER 8 - VILLAGE GOVERNMENT MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS Section 8.111. L USE OF BADGES OF OFFICE Fine: Not less than $200.00 nor more than $1,000.00 for each violation. Section 8.115, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Fine: Not to exceed $500.00 and/or removal from office. Section 8.117, PENALTY (Officers; Employees) Fine: Not to exceed $500.00, and/or removal from office. Section 8.206, PENALTY (Defacing Village Lockup) Fine: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $500.00 for each offense. Section 8.303, NUMBERS ON HOUSES Fine: $5.00 for each day during or on which a failure to so number continues. Section 8.503, INJURY TO PUBLIC PROPERTY Fine: Not less than $200.00 nor more than $1,500.00 for each offense. Section 8.516, PENALTY FOR NSF CHECKS Penalty Fee: $20.00. Section 8.605, STRIKES Fine: Not less than $100.00, or more than $500.00 for each such violation, and each day a violation is found to exist shall constitute a separate violation. Section 8.606, PENALTIES (Employee Organization) Fine: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $1,000.00. Section 8.818, PENALTY FOR VIOLATION Penalty and Fine: Not less than $500.00 Section 8.909, PENALTY (Operating Food or Liquor Facility After Notice of Revocation or Suspension) Fine: Not less than $200.00 per day. Section 8.1308, VIOLATIONS 48 Fine: Not less than S200.00 nor more than $1,000.00 for each offense. Section 8.2010. PENALTIES (Failure to Pay/Local Government Taxpayers Bill of Rights) A. Rate: 5% on the amount of tax due B. Rate: 5% on the amount of tax due CHAPTER 9 - PUBLIC UTILITIES, PAVEMENT AND TREE REGULATIONS Section 9.103. CITATION AND PENALTY (Improper Use of Public Facilities) Fine: Not less than $200.00 nor more than $1,500.000 for each offense. Section 9.407. PENALTY (Water Usage) Settlement of Claims Schedule a. In the event that payment is made prior to the mailing by the Village or by the official of a final notice, the following amounts shall be accepted as settlement: Improper taking of water from any fire hydrant $100.00 Watering and/or sprinkling during prohibited hours $15.00 Watering and/or sprinkling during prohibited hours upon declaration of an emergency $25.00 b. In the event that payment has not been paid prior to the mailing of such final notice, and in fact, final notice has been mailed, the following amounts shall be accepted as settlement: Improper taking of water from any fire hydrant Watering and/or sprinkling during prohibited hours $150.00 $25.00 Watering and/or sprinkling during prohibited hours upon declaration of an emergency $35.00 c. In the event that payment is not made within the time prescribed in the final notice, and a notice to appear has been served and a complaint filed in the Circuit Court of Cook County, payment of any fine and costs shall be in such amounts as may be determined and established by the Circuit Court of Cook County pursuant to Chapter 9, Article IV, Section 9.407F of this Code. F. Fine: Not less than $150.00 nor more than $1,000.00. Section 9.412. DELINQUENT AND UNPAID ACCOUNTS (Water) A. Penalty for late payment: 10% of the total amount of such charges shall be added thereto and shall be due in addition to the changes for such services. B. Penalty for shutting off and turning on the water: $50.00. Section 9.414. CROSS CONNECTIONS PROHIBITED 49 K.4. Penalty: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $1,500.00 for each offense. Section 9.509, PENALTY (Illegal Sewage or Septic Systems) Fine: Not less than $500.00 or more than $1,500 for each violation. Section 9.713, DUTCH ELM DISEASE CONTROL H. Fine: Not less than $500.00 nor more than $1,500.00 for each offense. Section 9.718, PENALTY (Iniury to Trees) Violations Marking a public tree in any way Attaching a sign or other object to a public tree Driving any object into a public tree Planting a tree on public property without a permit Paving over previously open root zone of a public tree Substantially changing the soil grade of a public tree Injuring or removing bark or limbs from a public tree Cutting or pruning a public tree without a permit Placement of potentially damaging materials near a public tree Topping a public tree Injuring or cutting roots of a public tree without a permit, or in violation of a pennit Continuing work in violation of or after suspension or revocation of permit Failure to install or maintain required snow fencing around a public tree Placement of excessive soil, mulch or other fill materials around the trunk/root collar of a public tree Backfilling within a public tree drip line without the required root inspection Failure to keep a required written tree protection plan posted on the job site Excavation within drip line of public tree without approval of the Forestry Division Equipment operation within drip line of public tree Failure to comply with a written tree protection plan Installation of sprinkler head within drip line of public tree Rate for destroyed or removed trees: $150.00 per inch of trunk diameter. Section 9.802, PENALTY (Utility Work) Violations Fines $ 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 100.00 100.00 150.00 150.00 150.00 300.00 400.00 500.00 300.00 100.00 500.00 100.00 500.00 100.00 300.00 100.00 Fines Non-emergency work progressing without a permit 500.00 Non-emergency work being performed inconsistent with approved penn it 500.00 Emergency work progressing without proper oral notification and approval 500.00 50 A written pennit has not been submitted after the oral approval of emergency work Continuing work after suspension or revocation of pennit Failure to backfill excavated area after inspection by the Forestry Division Failure to remove tree after being directed by the Forestry Division Tree protection violation (See Art. V of Ch. 9 of Code) 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 A separate offense shall be deemed committed on each day during, on or which, a violation occurs or continues. Section 9.912, PENALTY (Subsidewalk Work) Not less than $100.00 nor more than $1,500.00 for each offense. CHAPTER 10 - LICENSES AND PERMITS Section 10.402, NOTICE OF ACTION AGAINST LICENSEE~ PROCEDURE FOR HEARING E. Fine: Not less than $200.00 nor more than $1,000.00 per day. Section 10.404, OPERATING WITHOUT A LICENSE~ PENALTY Fine: Not less than $ 100.00 or more than $ 1 ,000.00 for each day of operation without a license. CHAPTER 11- MERCHANTS, BUSINESSES, OCCUPATIONS AND AMUSEMENTS Section 1 1.708, PENALTY~ SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION OF LICENSE (Amusement Devices) Fine: Not more than $500.00 for each such violation. Section 1 1.809, PENALTY (Game Rooms) Fine: Not more than $500.00 for each such violation. Section 11.905, PENALTY (Contractor Licensing) Fine: Not less than $50.00 nor more than $500.00 for each offense Section 11.1141, PENALTY FOR VIOLATION (Taxicab Violations) Fine: Not less than $500.00 nor more than $2,500.00. Section 11.2827. PENALTY (Vendors, Solicitors and Others Engaged in Retail Sales and Services) Fine: Not less than $200.00 nor more than $ 1 ,000.00 Section 11.2912 , PENALTIES (Jewelry Merchants) Fine: Not less than $250.00 nor more than $1,500.00 per day. Section 11.3502. PENALTIES FOR MISDEMEANORS (General Penalty) B. Fine: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $2,500.00 per day. Section 11.3613, LATE PAYMENT (Business Certificates) A. Renewal Received 51 After December 3 1 January 31 Last day of February March 31 May 31 But Before February 1 March 1 April 1 May 1 July 1 Fe~ 110% of annual fee ] 25% of annual fee ] 50% of annual fee 175% of annual fee 200% of annual fee B. Penalty: Not less than $25.00 nor more than $500.00 per day. Section 1] .3710, SUSPENSION; REVOCATION OF LICENSE, FINES, COSTS (Tobacco Sales- Administrative) A. Fine: Not less than $200. nor more than $500.00 for each violation. Section 11.37]2, PENALTIES (Tobacco Sales - Circuit Court Fines) Fine: Not less than $200.00 nor more than $500.00 for each offense. Section 11.3806, PENALTY (Newspaper Vending Machines) Fine: Not less than $250.00 per day for each day that the violation occurs. CHAPTER 12 - FOOD CODE Section 12.401, FINES Fine: Not less than $250.00 nor more than $1 ,500.00 for each offense. CHAPTER 13 - ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS Section 13.112, PENALTIES UPON HEARING BEFORE THE LOCAL LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSIONER Fine: Not less than $500.00 nor more than $2,500.00 Section 13.123, FIGHTING PROHIBITED; LICENSEES CONDUCT Fine for fighting: Not less than $250.00 Failure to give immediate notification to the Police Department or failure to file a report with the Liquor Control Commissioner: $500.00 Section 13.129, REGULATIONS WITH RESPECT TO UNDERAGE PERSONS Display of Card: UNDERA GE DRINKING If you are under 21, you are subject to a mandatory fine of$500.00 if you purchase any alcoholic beverage. If you misrepresent your age for the purpose of purchasing or obtaining any alcoholic beverage, you will also be subject to restricted driving privileges within the Village of Mount Prospect and a loss of your Illinois Drivers License. {r you buy for or deliver an alcoholic beverage to an underage person, you will be subject to a mandatOlY fine of$1,000.00. 52 Penalty: $500.00 Section 13.130, CONSEQUENCES OF FACILITATING THE USE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES BY UNDERAGE PERSONS Penalty: $1,000.00 Section 13.131, USE OF FALSE IDENTIFICATION Mandatory Fine: $500.00 Section 13.136, PENALTY FOR VIOLATING DRIVING RESTRICTION Penalty: $500.00 Section 13.137, PENALTIES; GENERAL Fine: $250.00 for the first offense and $500.00 for each subsequent offense or community service at a rate of one hour of community service for every $10.00 of mandatory fine. CHAPTER 14 - ZONING Section 14.312, ELIMINATION OF UNPERMITTED SECOND HOUSEKEEPING UNITS Paragraph] Mandatory fine: Not less than $100.00 Mandatory fine: $1,000.00 (violation of Subsection A5) Section 14.313, REGULATIONS FOR PERSONAL WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES Each day that violation continues: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $500.00 CHAPTER 15 - SUBDIVISION, DEVELOPMENT AND SITE IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS Section 15.105, ENFORCEMENT, PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION R1. Fine: Not less than $200.00 nor more than $1,000.00 per offense per day. CHAPTER 16 - SITE CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS Section 16.107, ENFORCEMENT, PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS Section B, Violation And Penalties Fine: not less than $200.00 nor more than $1,000.00 per offense per day. CHAPTER 17 - VEHICLE LICENSES Section 17.110, VIOLATION, CITATIONS 53 E. The violation claim described in the citation to be issued pursuant to the tenTIS of this Chapter, may be settled, compromised and paid in the respective amounts set forth in the following schedule: 1. In the event that said payment is made prior to the mailing by the Village of a notice of nonpayment, thirty six dollars ($36.00) shall be accepted as payment. 2. In the event that payment has not been paid prior to the mailing of such notice of nonpayment and in fact a notice of nonpayment has been mailed, fifty four dollars ($54.00) shall be accepted as settlement. 3. In the event that payment has not been paid within the time prescribed in the notice of nonpayment and a final notice has been mailed, ninety dollars ($90.00) shall be accepted in settlement. 4. In the event that payment is not made within the time prescribed in the final notice and a notice to appear has been served or a complaint filed in the Circuit Court of Cook County, payment of any fine and costs shall be in such amount not less than ninety dollars ($90.00) nor more than three hundred dollars ($300.00) as may be determined and established by the Circuit Court of Cook County for any such offense. F. Effective February 1, 2007, the violation claim described in said citation to be issued pursuant to the terms ofthis Chapter, may be settled, compromised and paid in the respective amounts set forth in the following schedule: 1. In the event that said payment is made prior to the mailing by the Village of a notice of nonpayment, thirty dollars ($30.00) shall be accepted as payment. 2. In the event that payment has not been paid prior to the mailing of such notice of nonpayment and in fact a notice of nonpayment has been mailed, forty five dollars ($45.00) shall be accepted as settlement. 3. In the event that payment has not been paid within the time prescribed in the notice of nonpayment and a final notice has been mailed, seventy five dollars ($75.00) shall be accepted in settlement. 4. In the event that payment is not made within the time prescribed in the final notice and a notice to appear has been served or a complaint filed in the Circuit Court of Cook County, payment of any fine and costs shall be in such amount not less than seventy five dollars ($75.00) nor more than three hundred dollars ($300.00) as may be detennined and established by the Circuit Court of Cook County for any such offense. (Ord. 2509,7-2-1974; Ord. 3205,4-20-1982; Ord. 3539,6-4-1985; Ord. 4756,9-5-1995; Ord. 4875, 7-15-1997, eff. 2-1-1998). CHAPTER 18 - TRAFFIC Section 18.204, FLEETING OR ATTEMPTING TO ELUDE POLICE OFFICER Fine: Not less than $500.00 nor more than $2,500.00 Section 18.409, FALSE REPORTS Fine: Not less than $500.00 nor more than $2,500.00 Section 18.501.3, DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED, TRANSPORTING ALCOHOLIC LIQUOR AND RECKLESS DRIVING~ PENAL TIES Fine: up to $2,500.00 but not less than $1,000.00 54 The court may impose a fine less than $1 ,000.00, only where, after an evidentiary hearing, the court detennines that a) such person is not financially able to pay a fine of $1,000.00, over the course of one year; and b) payment of a fine of$1 ,000.00 could cause undue hardship to someone dependent upon such person for support; and c) it is in the best interest of justice to impose a fine less than $1,000.00 In any case where a fine less than $1,000.00 is imposed, the court shall order such person to perform one hour of community service for each $10.00 by which $1,000.00 exceeds the fine imposed Section 18.502, TRANSPORTATION OF ALCOHOLIC LIQUOR; PENALTY E. Fine: not less than $100.00 nor more than $500.00 Section 18.503, RECKLESS DRIVING Fine: Not less than $500.00 nor more than $2,500.00 Section 18.504, DRAG RACING Fine: Not less than $500.00 nor more than $2,500.00 Section 18.1102, PUNISHMENT (Operation of Motorcycles) Fine: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $1,000.00 Section 18.1305, VIOLATION OF PARKING REGULATIONS: LEASED VEHICLES Fine: At least $25.00, but not to exceed $100.00 Section 18.1321, OBSTRUCTING FIRE LANES Fine: Not less than $25.00 nor more than $500.00 Section 18.1322, PAY PARKING ZONES Section J, Special Penalty 1. Fine: not less than $25.00 nor more than $200.00 Section 18.1324, HANDICAPPED PERSONS; PARKING PRIVILEGES Fine: Minimum of $1 00.00 for each offense, maximum fine of $500.00. Section 18.1534, TRACTORS, TRACTION ENGINES AND MOTOR TRUCKS; OPERATION ON HIGHWAYS; TURNING ON HIGHWAYS DURING FARMING OPERATIONS; VIOLA TIONS Fine: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $500.00 for each offense Section ]8.1614, PENALTIES (Bicycles) Fine: Not less than $25.00 nor more than $50.00 Section 18.1701, LIMITED WEIGHT STREETS, TRUCK ROUTES (Overweight Trucks) H. 1. Special Load Pem1its: Failure to obtain special load permit: $1,000.00 per trip 2. Modification to Special Load Permits: Failure to obtain written approval of modification: $1,000.00 per trip 55 3. Excessive weight penalties on Village streets: Overweight fine: Not less than $500.00 nor more than $1,500.00 per each violation. Section] 8.1814, PENALTIES (Abandoned Vehicles) Section A Fine: Not less than $200.00 nor more than $1,000.00 Section 18.1905. PENALTIES (General Traffic) Section A Fine: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $1,500.00 Section C 1. Payment: $20.00 for Article XIII violations; $50.00 for other violations 2. Payment: $30.00 for Article XIII violations; $75.00 for other violations 3. Payment: $50.00 for Article XIII violations; $100.00 for other violations Section 18.1907, VEHICLE IMMOBILIZATION AND IMPOUNDMENT FOR VIOLATIONS Section F 2-b. Fine: $500.00 or 50% of total fines for outstanding citations, whichever is less. 1. Not less than $1,000.00 CHAPTER 19 - HEALTH REGULATIONS Section 19.1 07. PENALTY (Violating Quarantine) Penalty: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $1,500.00 for each offense. Section 19.205, ENFORCEMENT, Section B. Penalty, Paragraph 5 (Garbage) Payment made prior to the mailing by the Municipality or by the official of a final notice, the following amount shall be accepted as settlement: $50.00 Payment has not been made paid prior to the mailing affinal notice, and in fact, final notice has been mailed, the following amount shall be accepted as settlement: $100.00 Section 19.206, PENALTY (Garbage and Refuse) Fine of not less than $100.00 nor more than $1,000.00 for each offense. Section 19.209, FAILURE TO PAY GARBAGE COLLECTION BILL A. Interest Penalty: Equal to 20% ofthe unpaid portion of the bill Section 19.31 L PENALTY (Health Code Violations) Fine of not less than $500.00 nor more than $1,500.00 for each offense. Section 19.407 , PENALTIES (Beauty and Barber Shops) Fine: Not less than $200.00 nor more than $1,000.00. Section 19.530 PENALTY (Health Spa Sanitation) Fine of not less than $200.00 nor more than $1,000.00 for each offense. 56 Section 19.603, AMENDMENTS, DELETIONS AND MODIFICATIONS. Article It Permits, paragraph 19 (Swimming Pools): Fine of not less than $100.00 nor more than $1,000.00 for each offense. Section 19.704 PENALTIES AND ADDITIONAL LEGAL, EQUITABLE AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (Tattoos) Fine of not less than $200.00 or more than $2,500.00 for each offense. CHAPTER 20 - ANIMALS Section 20.302. PENALTIES (Enforcement) . E.1. $25.00 2. $50.00 F. Fine: Not less than $50.00 nor more than $150.00 for the first offense. Not less than $100.00 nor more than $300.00 for the second offense Not less than $200.00 nor more than $500.00 for the third offense CHAPTER 21 - BUILDING CODE Section 21.103, BOCA NATIONAL BUILDING CODE ADOPTED, Section A Subsection 8 Amount: $1,000.00 Subsection 9 Amounts: $100.00 and $1,000.00. Section 21.216, RIGHT TO ENTER PREMISES Fine: Not less than $250.00 nor more than $1,000.00 Section 21.223, SUMP PUMPS AND DOWNSPOUTS A. Fine: Not less than $200.00 nor more than $1,000.00 for each offense. Section 21.403, PENALTIES (Building Violations) Penalty: Not less than $250.00 or more than $1,500.00 Work commenced without receipt of a pennit: minimum penalty $250.00, maximum penalty $1,500.00 for each and every category where the unauthorized work has begun. Section 21.603, INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE ADOPTED; AMENDMENTS Fine: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $1,500.00 CHAPTER 22 - FLOOD PLAIN REGULATIONS Section 22.113 PENALTY (Failure to COlTect Violations) 57 Fine: Not less than $] 00.00 or more than $2,500.00 for each offense CHAPTER 23 - OFFENSES AND MISCELLANEOUS REGULATIONS Section 13.103. MARIJUANA Fine: Not less than $150.00 nor more than $1,000.00 Section 23.115, CONTROL OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES AND INSTRUMENTS USED FOR INHALING OR INGESTION OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES Fine: Not less than $200.00 nor more than $1,500.00 Section 23.116. PENALTY (General Offenses) Fine: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $1,500.00 for each offense Section 23.205. PROSTITUTION Fine: Not less than $1,000.00 nor more than $2,500.00 for each offense Section 23.206. OBSCENE AND HARASSING TELEPHONE CALLS B. Penalty: Not less than $500.00 nor more than $2,500.00 Section 23.303. PENALTY (Trespass) Fine: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $1,500.00 Section 23.401, DAMAGE, POSSESSION AND REMOVAL OF VILLAGE PROPERTY OR STRUCTURES OR INST ALLA TrONS ON VILLAGE PROPERTY C. Fine: Not less than $250.00 nor more than $1,000.00 for each offense Section 23.402, DUMPING IN WELLER CREEK AND OTHER PLACES B. Fine: Not less than $250.00 nor more than $1,000.00 for each offense Section 23.404, VANDALISM B. Fine: Not less than $250.00 nor in excess of $1 ,000.00 for each offense Section 23.405, THEFT OF RECYCLABLES B. Fine: Not less than $250.00 nor in excess of$I,OOO.OO for each offense Section 23.501. GAMBLING PREMISES B. Fine: Not less than $1,000.00 nor more than $2,500.00 for each and every offense Section 23.502, GAMBLING DEVICES D. Fine: Not less than $1,000.00 nor more than $2,500.00 for each offense Section 23.504, PENALTY (Illegal Lotteries) Fine: Not less than $250.00 nor more than $2,500.00 for each offense Section 23.606, FIREARMS REGULATION \VITH RESPECT TO SCHOOLS AND MINORS Fine: Not less than $1,000.00 58 Section 23607. VANDALISM Penalties: Violation of subsection 23.607 A of the Code Not less than $200.00 nor more than $1,000.00 for each offense Violation of subsection 23.607B1 of the Code Not less than $500.00 nor more than $1,000.00 Violation of subsection 23.607B2 and B3 of the Not less than $500.00 nor more than $1,000.00 Code Violation of subsection 23.607B4 of the Code Not less than $100.00 nor more than $500.00 Section 23.609. LOITERING FOR THE PURPOSE OF ILLEGALLY USING. POSSESSING OR SELLING OR BUYING CANNABIS OR CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES IS PROHIBITED Fine: Not less than $250.00 nor more than $1,000.00 for each offense Section 23.612. MAINTAINING PUBLIC NUISANCE Fine: Not less than $500.00 Section 23.614. PENALTIES (Public Nuisances) Fine: Not less than $200.00 nor more than $1,000.00 for each offense. Or if the Court detennines, a fine and community service (1 hour for every $10.00 of mandatory fine) Fee to Settle the Violation Claim: $100.00 Fee to Settle the Violation Claim if the claim is not settled within the first period of1 0 days: $150.00 Section 23.705, PENALTY (Sound Amplifiers) Fine: Not less than $50.00 nor more than $200.00 for each offense. Section 23.804, UNIFORMED FIRE AND POLICE GUARDS (Failure to Employ) Fine: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $500.00 for each offense. Section 23.806, PENALTY (Violating Public Gathering Standards) Fine: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $500.00 for each offense. Section 23.910. FAILURE TO COMPLY; PENALTY (Violating Mass Gathering and Demonstration Standards) Fine: Not less than $250.00 nor more than $2,500.00 Section 23.11 03, PENALTY (Failure to Disclose Land Trusts When Required) Fine: Not less than $250.00 nor more than $1,000.00 Section 23.1206. PENALTY (Housing Discrimination) Fine: Not less than $1,000.00 nor more than $5,000.00 for each violation. Section 23.1307. PENALTY (Fireworks) 59 Fine: Not less than $500.00 nor more than $2,500.00 Section 23.1404, PENALTY (\Veedsl Fine: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $1,000.00 for each offense. Section 23.1505, PENALTY (Solicitation on Streets} Fine: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $1,000.00 for each offense. Section 23.1615, PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION (Condo Conversion) Fines: First offense Not less than $500.00 nor more than $1,000.00 Second and each subsequent offense with a Not less than $1,000.00 nor more than 180 day period following the first offense $2,500.00 Any offense in excess of 3 committed within May be punishable by incarceration for a term a 180 day period not to exceed 6 months under the provisions of section 1-2-1.1 of the Illinois Municipal Code, Ill. Rev. Stat., 1977, ch. 24 sec. 1-2-1.1 Section 23.1718, PENALTIES (Alam1 Systems) Fine: Not less than $50.00 nor more than $500.00 for each offense. Section 23.1811, BREACH OF OCCUPANCY RIGHTS BY LANDLORD AND TENANT Fine: Not less than $200.00 nor more than $1,500.00. Section 23.1819, PENALTIES (Landlord/Tenant) Fine: Not less than $200.00 nor more than $1,500.00 for each offense. Section 23.1906, PENALTY (Garage Sales) Fine: Not less than $50.00 nor more than $500.00 for each offense. Section 23.2007, PENALTY (Hazardous Materials) Fine: Not less than $1,000.00 nor more than $5,000.00 for each offense. Section 23.2106, PENALTY (Shopping Carts) Fine: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $500.00 Section 23.2209, PENALTY (Theft) Fine: Not less than $200.00 nor more than $1,000.00 Section 23.2307, PENALTY (Retail Theft) Fine: Not less than $200.00 nor more than $1,000.00 CHAPTER 24 - FIRE PREVENTION CODE 60 Section 24.116, PENALTY Fine: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $500.00 for each offense; and a separate offense shall be deemed committed on each day during or on which a violation occurs or continues. Section 24.502, PENALTY FOR RESPONSE TO FALSE ALARMS B. 6th false response $100.00 7th false response 200.00 8th false response 300.00 9th false response 400.00 10th or subsequent false response 500.00 per response. Section 24.504. PENALTIES (Fire Suppression Violations) Penalty: Not less than $50.00 nor more than $500.00. CHAPTER 25 - THE VILLAGE CODE Section 25.104; PENALTIES (General Breach of Code) A. Minimum: $100.00 Maximum: $2,500.00 B. Fine: Not less than $100.00 nor more than $2,500.00 Supervision hourly rate: $10.00 per hour 61 SECTION 3: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of ,2005. Irvana Wilks, Village President ATTEST: M. Lisa Angell, Village Clerk C:\MyFiles\Mp\ORDS\AppendixA.creationUpdale I 0-] 3-05ord.doc 62