HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/12/2006 COW minutes (workshop)
MAYOR
Irvana K. Wilks
VILLAGE MANAGER
Michael E. Janonis
TRUSTEES
Timothy J. Corcoran
Paul Wm. Hoefert
A. John Korn
Richard M. Lohrstorfer
Michaele Skowron
Irvana K. Wilks
Michael A. ZadeI
Village of Mount Prospect
Community Development Department
50 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056
VILLAGE CLERK
lVI. Lisa Angell
Phone: 847/818-5328
Fax: 847/818-5329
TDD: 847/392-6064
MINUTES
Comprehensive Plan Workshop
Committee of the Whole Joint Meeting with Planning and Zoning Commission
Board Room, Village Hall
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
6:30 p.m.
A meeting to discuss the Village of Mount Prospect Comprehensive Plan Land Use Update was held on
Tuesday, September 12, 2006 in the Board Room of Village Hall, 50 South Emerson Street, Mount
Prospect, Illinois.
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Irvana Wilks called the meeting to order at 6:38 PM and welcomed everyone to the
planning workshop, a joint meeting between the Village Board Committee of the Whole and the
Planning and Zoning Commission. She welcomed attendees from those two groups as well as
members of the community and the Press that were in the audience. She stated that planning
documents are very important for government and for Mount Prospect as a community:
"Looking at the plan we can see what we've done in the past, what we can improve on, and how
other planning documents meld with our land use planning." She acknowledged that after these
early meetings the Planning and Zoning Commission will play the major roll in moving the plan
forward. She encouraged the public to download documents from the Village web site and to
provide input.
II. ROLL CALL
In lieu of roll call, Mayor Wilks asked the attendees to introduce themselves and their affiliation
with the Village. Attendees were as follows:
Village Board
Mayor Irvana Wilks
Michaele Skowron
John Korn
Paul Hoefert
Planning and Zoning Commission
Chairman Arlene Juracek
Mary Johnson
Keith Youngquist
Ron Roberts
Marlys Haaland
Comprehensive Plan Workshop
Committee of the Whole Meeting
Page 2 of7
September 12, 2006
Joseph Donnelly
Leo Floros
Richard Rogers
Village of Mount Prospect Staff
William Cooney, Community Development Director
Judith Connolly, Senior Planner
Stacey Dunn, Administrative Assistant
Jason Zawila, Long Range Planner
Ellen Divita, Deputy Director, Community Development
III. INTRODUCTION TO THE COMPREHENSNE LAND USE PLAN
Community Development Director William Cooney provided an introduction to the
Comprehensive Land Use Planning process. Mr. Cooney stated that the Planning and Zoning
Commission is responsible for the process which will continue through next year. The process is
open to the public. He stated that at this meeting the attendees will break into small groups and
those members of the community in attendance can join a group discussion if they choose. Staff
will scribe during the small group discussions and create minutes from the meeting. There will
be a lot of dialogue over the many months to come discussing specific issues, especially relating
to the commercial and industrial corridors of the communities. He stated that there are several
redevelopment projects underway throughout the Village right now. The Comprehensive Land
Use Plan is a guide which helps us review these projects and that the Plan is the foundation
leading to a favorable or not favorable decision. He said in the case of an unfavorable decision
where the owner should appeal to the court, the courts look at the Comprehensive Land Use Plan
and how zoning and other decisions are reviewed.
Mr. Cooney said the full plan was reviewed 10 years ago, which is standard for a mature
community like Mount Prospect. In that time, however, three sub-area plans have been created
for Central Road, Rand Road and Downtown. Mr. Cooney discussed what makes a
Comprehensive Plan: it is generalized, comprehensive and long term. He said the plan is not just
looking five years out, but 20 years into the future. He stated that 20 years seems a long time, but
in reality it is not; just consider how much the community has changed in the past 20 years.. .. and
how much it will change in the coming 20 years.
Mr. Cooney stated that the Plan is a policy guide; at times a different decision is made when an
actual development proposal is reviewed, but the review always starts with "what does the plan
say?" He said the plan is a tangible representation of what the community wants to be. The
Comprehensive Land Use Plan is not the zoning map. He said it is not just the Land Use Map;
the Land Use Map identifies land uses which may relate to more than one zoning classification,
for example low density housing can include one of several zoning districts.
Mr. Cooney stated that the Comprehensive Plan guides us when considering requests to change
zoning, expansion of major infrastructure, location of new infrastructure, annexation and when
considering major public or private investments where essential supporting facilities such as
access roads and parking are needed.
IV. TIMELINE AND PROCESS TO BE UNDERTAKEN
Mr. Cooney said the first part of the planning process is the "Situational Analysis - where are we
now?" He stated that this process has been on going for several months. Staff has been
reviewing trends and looking at where the market is trying to take us. Staff has been holding
Comprehensive Plan Workshop
Committee of the Whole Meeting
Page 3 of7
September 12,2006
focus groups and meeting one-on-one with key stakeholders such as owners of Randhurst, Mount
Prospect Plaza, and other commercial and industrial properties. He said Staff has also been
talking to the Chamber of Commerce, downtown Merchants Group, and the Economic
Development Commission. Mr. Cooney said staff is now in the stage of "Goal Setting;" asking
what issues the community sees. He stated once possibilities have been determined, staff will
look at where we can realistically go. Staff is also setting short-term and long-term strategies to
get there. At the next meeting we'll look at a map identifying land parcels of interest which staff
thinks may be of interest to the development community.
Mr. Cooney stated that data gathering will include what the community wishes to see as
redevelopment continues. He said staff will be reviewing and setting implementation strategies
and then creating the Final Plan. It will contain an Official Land Use Map and Document text.
He indicated that late this year the Planning and Zoning Commission will begin hosting Public
Meetings & Public Hearings. Staff hopes to see a plan referred to the Village Board in spring of
next year for adoption. He stated that the plan will include four elements: Housing, Economic
Development, Infrastructure and Transportation, and Public Facilities and Open Space. The
attendees broke into groups to discuss issues and opportunities for each element.
V. GOALS FOR THE EVENING:
The attendees divided into four groups with one Trustee at each of the four tables set around the
room. Planning staff was assigned to each group to scribe the discussion. The group broke into
small groups at 6:45 p.m. Discussion questions were assigned to each group.
VI. BREAKOUT GROUPS
The four groups met individually discussing the 5 questions posed by planning staff.
VII. BREAK
A short break was taken with the group reconvening at 7:50 p.m.
VIII. REPORTING BACK
Group 2, which had discussed Economic Development reported back first, was represented by
John Korn. Trustee Korn presented feedback from Group 2's first discussion question which
was - What are the economic engines in the Mount Prospect economy?
. Major shopping plazas (including Randhurst Shopping Center, DiMucci properties, Mount
Prospect Plaza);
. Kensington Business Center;
. Light industrial businesses and potential developments in south Mount Prospect;
. Transportation systems (including Metra, Pace, and alternative transportation).
Trustee Korn presented feedback from Group 2' s second discussion question which was - What
trends do you see in the general economy?
. Retail businesses appear to be offering less a selection of goods in Mount Prospect than
other communities;
. "Life-Style Center" developments in other communities;
. Mount Prospect has a more diverse population to serve goods and services;
. People appear to be buying more goods online or through mail-order;
. People appear to be dining out more.
Trustee Korn presented feedback from Group 2's third discussion question which was - What
issues face the Mount Prospect Business Community?
Comprehensive Plan Workshop
Committee of the Whole Meeting
Page 4 of7
September 12,2006
. The Village lacks a "critical mass" of businesses. For example - the downtown has a small
footprint;
. The Village lacks "destinations;"
. The Village has a problematic traffic flow, especially downtown and near Randhurst;
. The parking in downtown is inadequate;
. The configuration of Randhurst Shopping Center is difficult to navigate;
. Mount Prospect is not a "self contained" community, neighboring communities affect what
types of development could occur in the Village;
. Housing sales are slowing down.
Trustee Korn presented feedback from Group 2's fourth discussion question which was - What do
you like best about availability of goods and services in Mount Prospect?
. The Village offers a good variety of goods and services;
. The Village is convenient to navigate for goods and services;
. There are several breakfast dining options.
Trustee Korn presented feedback from Group 2's fifth discussion question which was - What
unmet needs and/or business opportunities do you see for Mount Prospect?
. There is a need for more upscale dining options;
. There is a need for destination retail stores; i.e. the community could use more upscale
shopping, "outlet" retail, "lifestyle centers" and electronic stores.
Group 4, which had discussed Community Facilities and Open Space reported back next and was
represented by Rich Rogers. Mr. Rogers presented feedback from Group 4' s discussion. Mr.
Rogers stated that Group 4's first two questions were closely related: What are the strengths of
the Community Facilities in Mount Prospect and what are the strengths of the Parks and Open
Space in Mount Prospect?
. Even with divided districts, they work well together. There is great coordination with the
schools;
. There is a good selection of facilities and open spaces available.
Mr. Rogers presented feedback from Group 4's third discussion question which was - What do
you like best about the Community Facilities, Parks and Open Space found in Mount Prospect?
. Work well with other districts and schools;
. Clean, safe and well maintained;
. Membership reciprocity between the park districts;
. User friendly websites.
Mr. Rogers presented feedback from Group 4's fourth discussion question which was - What
issues face the Mount Prospect community in maintaining healthy community facilities and a
wide variety of parks and open space?
. Rising energy costs could put a damper on maintenance. For example - fuel cost for
mowing grass and heating/cooling facilities;
. A leveling-off or decrease in the housing market decreased revenue for maintenance and
operations;
. Lack of parking at some ofthe parks and facilities;
. The amount oflocker theft that occurs at the recreational centers.
Comprehensive Plan Workshop
Committee of the Whole Meeting
Page 5 of7
September 12,2006
Mr. Rogers presented feedback from Group 4's fifth discussion question which was - What
unmet needs (and/or opportunities) do you see for new community facilities. parks or open
space?
. The wave pool is starting to show it's age and may need repair;
. There are enough facilities per-se, but need more bike paths/interconnectivity between
parks/facilities;
. An outdoor in-line skating rink for hockey;
. An outdoor ice skating rink with warming house;
. More challenging golf courses;
. There was general discussion about the practicality of "pocket parks."
Group 1, which had discussed Housing, was represented by Trustee Micheale Skowron. Trustee
Skowron presented feedback from Group l's first discussion question which was - Why do people
move to Mount Prospect?
. Location;
. Schools;
. Expressway;
. NW Metra line;
. Stability of property taxes;
. Distance to Chicago;
. Residents liked the size of Mount Prospect in the 1960s;
. Affordability of Mount Prospect - compared to neighboring communities, such as Arlington
Heights (however the pricing gap is becoming smaller);
. A majority of Mount Prospect is served by Lake Michigan Water;
. Sound infrastructure (still a need to upgrade sanitary).
Trustee Skowron presented feedback from Group l's second discussion question which was-
What trends do you see in the housing market?
. Homes are becoming larger with additions and teardowns;
. Several houses are being upgraded with improvements, such as landscaping, new doors,
windows, and driveway installations;
. Development of new condominiums;
. Condominium conversions from apartment buildings;
. Homes with one car garages - construction of additional spaces for vehicles (permitted and
not permitted);
. Dramatic slow down in home purchases over $300,000;
. Residents "down-sizing"/moving out oftheir single family homes - due to retirement,
increased mortgages, over-speculation of home prices, maintenance, and a need for first
floor master bedrooms.
Trustee Skowron presented feedback from Group l's third discussion question which was - What
housing issues face the community?
. Affordability of all housing types - becoming too expensive;
. Quality of the housing stock - becoming functionally obsolete;
. Age and maintenance of homes;
. Small homes are being purchased for major upgrades, rather than new homes further out or
are purchased for tear down and rebuild - ultimately raising the housing prices. Younger
families are purchasing further away from Mount Prospect because of cheaper housing
prices elsewhere;
Comprehensive Plan Workshop
Committee of the Whole Meeting
Page 60f7
September 12,2006
. The Village does not offer housing for multi-generational families;
. There is not a large variety of housing styles;
. The Zoning code does not allow for housing mixes in neighborhoods;
. Village departments need flexibility in decision making as it relates to housing;
. There is a lack of parking options for single family housing - due the large amount of one
car garage homes;
. There is the potential for decreases in CDBG funding which could negatively affect lower
income residents in the Village.
Trustee Skowron presented feedback from Group l's fourth discussion question which was -
What do you like best about living in Mount Prospect?
. Good government - fiscally responsible;
. Clean, small, quiet, and pretty;
. Nice Village Hall;
. Walkable;
. Conservative town;
. Deliveries of services are consistent and often taken for granted - including leaf pickup;
. Trees;
. Good schools.
Trustee Skowron presented feedback from Group l's fifth discussion question which was - What
unmet needs and/or housing opportunities do you see for Mount Prospect?
. There is an opportunity for the construction of duplexes;
. There is a need for a grocery store downtown;
. There is a need for a sanitary system upgrade;
. There is a need to expand the first time buyer program and the availability of affordable
mortgages.
Group 3, which had discussed Infrastructure and Transportation reported back next, represented
by Judy Connolly. Ms. Connolly presented feedback from Group l' s first discussion question
which was - What are the strengths of our transportation systems in Mount Prospect?
. The commuter train system is cost effective, makes it easy for city residents to reverse
commute, and attracts residents;
. The Village is centrally located, making it easy to travel to other communities.
Ms. Connolly presented feedback from Group l's second discussion question which was -What
are the strengths of our infrastructure systems in Mount Prospect?
. Well maintained streets;
. Sewer, sanitary, and stormwater systems are well maintained and are offered at a nominal
fee.
Ms. Connolly presented feedback from Group l's third discussion question which was - What do
you like best about the infrastructure services and the transportation networkfound in Mount
Prospect?
. Public Works Deparhnent is quick to respond to service emergencies such as snow removal,
water main breakages, and bridge repair;
. The good infrastructure services and transportation network provide a positive
image/perception ofthe community.
Comprehensive Plan Workshop
Committee of the Whole Meeting
Page 7 of7
September 12,2006
Ms. Connolly presented feedback from Group l's fourth discussion question which was - What
issues face the infrastructure and transportation systems in Mount Prospect?
. There needs to be better/safer connectivity at major arterial streets - specifically Mount
Prospect Plaza, and Randhurst Shopping Center and its surrounding area;
. The Village has a poor bus system - there is a need for more stops, better advertising and a
local shuttle service to businesses is needed;
. The bike path system is poorly defined;
. Crossing the downtown railroad tracks is problematic;
. The Village cannot control maintenance of State and County roads.
Ms. Connolly presented feedback from Group l' s fifth discussion question which was - What
unmet needs and/or opportunities do you see for Mount Prospect's infrastructure and
transportation systems?
. There is an opportunity to increase the bus service, including shuttle service;
. There may be an opportunity to change control over certain county and state roads;
. There is a need for better signal coordination, especially at major intersections;
. There is a need to improve the bike path system in the Village;
. There may be an opportunity to move the train station or better coordinate vehicle traffic
and train movements;
. There may be an opportunity to create cut-through roads near the Rand/Kensington/Route
83 intersection;
. There is a need for better connection of shopping centers - perhaps through frontage roads.
IX. QUESTIONS AND ADJOURN
There was general discussion regarding the number of single family homes versus multi-family
units. Mayor Wilks stated that according to the information provided by staff, there is a total of
21,900 dwelling units in the Village with 15,400 being owner-occupied and 6,100 being renter
occupied.
Mr. Cooney asked for further questions or comments. Hearing none, the meeting was adjourned
at 8:55 p.rn.
Respectfully submitted,
Stacey Dunn, Administrative Assistant
Community Development Department